Truth Magazine

By Connie W. Adams

It was with mixed emotions that we returned to Bergen, Norway in February for a gospel meeting. The brethren there are trying to have some men to come for meetings who have previously worked in that country. I hope others will be able to arrange to go should they be invited. Going to Bergen with mixed emotions was not new for me. In 1957 I took my six-months-pregnant wife with me to begin the work in the land of the midnight sun. We knew nobody there. We did not know the language. We had nowhere to live except for a week’s reservation in a hotel. We did not know how we were going to make contacts with people. But somehow, in the Providence of God, that all worked out.

The work was slow and hard. Then, as now, the population was over 90 percent Lutheran, the state church. Then, as now, many bristle at the thought that you have come to evangelize in what they consider a “Christian nation” which sends out missionaries to spiritually darkened areas of the world. They do not consider themselves in that category. Baptizing babies, confirming sixteen year olds, Christmas and Easter observances, weddings, funerals, and a place to be buried, is the major religious life of the vast majority of the people in that land. They are comfortable with it and do not particularly want to be bothered.

Among the dissenters from the state church, the majority are charismatics. These are as difficult to reach as they are here or in other places. Subjective religionists don’t care a hoot about what the Bible says, not if they have to question what they think they have “felt.” Some of these will come to hear you once or twice, long enough to see if you agree with what they already think. The Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses are very active there but their persistent door-knocking has served to aggravate the people.

Added to this situation is the fact that immigration laws have changed and it is very difficult, if not impossible, to gain entry to the country to stay for a long term to preach. People can yet enter on an American passport and stay for six weeks as a tourist.

In such soil the old Jerusalem gospel has not flourished as it has in other places. But over the years there have been some found with good and honest hearts. There have been some heartbreaking events which weakened and all but destroyed what progress had been made. One brother who preached for a while, left the faith to embrace denominational error. Another native preacher and his wife had serious trouble and they ended up going to the world. Others fell away for various reasons. The church in Bergen lost its meeting place by foreclosure and along with it the furnishings, boxes or tracts, song books, Bibles, Bible class literature and all of the files.

In 1980 when Tom and Shirley Bunting and their children came back to Bergen (they had spent two years there in the late 1960s), they had to start all over again. Only this time, it was even harder than it had been for us in 1957, for they had to overcome ill will which some former members had generated and the shame of the unbusiness-like manner in which the property was lost.

The Buntings have stayed. Their son Terrell and his wife Karen are there in Bergen with the intention of spending their lives there. They encountered difficulty getting in to stay. If they leave, it will be mighty hard to get anyone else there to replace them.

The Church in Bergen

We found a small group of eight members. They had worked hard to prepare for the meeting. They could have done more advertising in the newspaper if they only had the funds. They did what they were able to do. Many advertisements were hand-delivered. Two brethren came from the small group near Oslo to be with us the first two days of the meeting. Also a sister and her child from Stavanger came for four days. We had seven non-members to attend the meeting, three of these attending two times. The singing was ably led by a faithful Norwegian brother. While most attending understood English, some did not so the sermons were interpreted. Terrell Bunting did this twice and the rest of the time, Bjorn Ringdal interpreted. Both did their work well. Bjorn is a student in the university and hopes to one day be able to support himself and preach in Norway. He was baptized at Southside in Pasadena, Texas while an exchange student there. He is a most impressive young man. A young woman, who is also still a student, though married and with one child, is also a member. Another member has been in north Norway for a time but hopes to relocate in Bergen.

The congregation had purchased a building which was once a bakery and has made it into a very nice place to meet. It is in an old and very well-known part of the city and easy for locals and visitors alike to find. Their payments are not much more than the rent they had been paying.

We attempted to locate some people we had known many years ago so the brethren there would have these additional contacts with whom to work. We succeeded in finding a few people and managed to get four visitors to the meetings from that. We found two women who were young girls when we lived there and who had attended Bible classes. They came twice.

Needs

It is urgent that the Buntings continue their work. They have shown exceptional patience. The cost of living in Norway is the highest in Western Europe. Housing is especially expensive. Gasoline is $4.50 a gallon. Milk is over $4.00 a gallon. Eating out, even at McDonald’s or Burger King is very costly. A quarter-pounder, fries and soft drink sells for $9.50. Wages are high, though many are unemployed and live off the dole of a socialistic state.

Terrell Bunting and wife have two children and expect their third in the late summer. They are losing $350 a month support by summer. They can ill-afford this. While we were there, Tom Bunting received a letter telling him that he will lose $200 a month support in three months. They can’t afford that loss either. Tom’s wife, Shirley, teaches school now in order to help them stay. Some daylight is being seen in the work. If the Buntings have to come home, who could replace them? Who could even get into the country to stay for longer than six weeks? They are working under the conviction that “we shall reap if we faint not.” We are all thrilled about the opening opportunities in eastern Europe and other places, but we must not allow the light to go out in Norway. These few members there need the prayerful encouragement of brethren everywhere. The Buntings need the patient and understanding support of brethren who do not expect the same kind of results as we have seen in some third world countries and few other fields. If you can help these good brethren, here are their addresses. If you cannot financially help them, could you find the time to write them an encouraging letter?

Thomas Bunting

Adolf Bergsvei 52-D

5030 Landaas

Norway

Terrell Bunting

Brormadalen 89

5071 Loddefjord

Norway

I would also like to encourage brethren from churches which support these men and who are able to do so, to visit Bergen and worship with these brethren. It would do them a world of good. But it would also do the visitors untold good. It would help them to appreciate what they have at home: commodious meeting houses, well-arranged and taught Bible classes at many age levels, abundance of available literature, several good song leaders, elders, and deacons, many Christians from whom to draw strength and who are just a phone call away, and many others besides.

Through it all we have to remember that many souls over the years have heard the truth in Norway. Some did obey it and some died in hope. There are some faithful Christians there now. A diligent search is still being made for good and honest hearts. We just must not forget those who have dedicated their lives to the search.

I keep thinking of all those children who came to Bible classes every Sunday for several years. And I think about two 45-year-old women who were so glad to see us, and who told us they had not forgotten all they learned. They were proud of the fact that they could so easily locate Scriptures during sermons, for we had drilled them as small children on how to find their way around in the Bible. Surely, brethren, it has not all been in vain. Please keep the sowers of the seed in Norway.

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 9, pp. 262-263
May 7, 1992

By Harold Hancock

One must search these verses carefully to obtain the right meaning, but a correct interpretation will not nullify Jesus’ earlier teaching on divorce and remarriage and permit an adulterer to remarry.

After Jesus taught the Pharisees that God joins man and woman together and that whosoever puts away his wife except for fornication and marries another commits adultery (Matt. 19:6,9), his disciples said unto him, “If the case of the man be so with the wife, it is not good to marry” (Matt. 19:10). Jesus answered his disciples, “All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given” (Matt. 19:11). Several ideas about this passage are plausible, but none give a person guilty of adultery the right of remarriage.

The question arises, what is “this saying” that all men cannot receive “save they to whom it is given”? Is it the saying of Jesus – his teachings about divorce and remarriage – or the saying of the disciples – “it is not good to marry”? Lenski comments, “‘This saying’ is Jesus’ own word spoken in vv. 4-9. The fact that ‘not all’ have room for it the Pharisees amply demonstrate. In v. 10 even the twelve show that they do not yet have room in their hearts to submit to this saying and to carry it out in their lives. But this had been their trouble before this time (15:16; 16:8,23; 17:17-20). That is why Jesus elucidates what he has said and admonishes the twelve (v. 12, last sentence) to make room for what he tells them. To men such as the Pharisees it was not given to know the things of the kingdom, but it certainly was given to the disciples (13:11); hence Jesus expects them to measure up to this gift” (St. Matthew’s Gospel, R.C.H. Lenski). Barnes writes, “This saying evidently means what the disciples had just said. . . ” (Barnes Notes, The Gospels, Albert Barnes). Pulpit Commentary also agrees that “This saying” refers to the words of the disciples and explains, “All men cannot receive this saying; i.e. their words, ‘It is not good to marry.’But he endorses these words in a different signification from theirs. Their objection to marriage arose from the impossibility of putting away a wife for any cause. Christ passes over these ignoble scruples, and enunciates the only principle which should lead a man to abstain from marriage. They to whom it is given. They to whom are given the call and the grace to abstain from marriage. These persons’ practice forms an exception of the marriage state. Verse 12 – Our Lord proceeds to note three classes of men to whom it is given to abstain from marriage . . . eunuchs, which were so born . . . which were made eunuchs of men . . . which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake “Clearly, different views are taken about “this saying.”

It seems to me that “this saying” must refer to the disciples’ words – “it is good not to marry.” The saying is something that “all men” cannot receive; only some, only those to whom it is given, can receive it. Jesus’ words about divorce and remarriage is for all. They were spoken to the Pharisees and given to the disciples. Jesus expects all to live by these teachings. However, not everyone has to marry. As Jesus said, some are born eunuchs, some are made eunuchs by men, and some deny themselves the privilege of marriage for the kingdom’s sake. Furthermore, as shown by Pulpit Commentary, the idea that “this saying” is the words of the disciples fits the context well.

To suggest that vv. 4-9 teach that a man commits adultery if he puts away his wife except for fornication and marries another, that v. 10 encourages that man not to marry, but that v. 11 gives him permission to remarry if he simply cannot remain celibate and that he will be all right if God feels this person cannot “stand” to be unmarried, is erroneous and absurd! Such an interpretation would render the words of Jesus (vv. 4-9) useless. It would contradict the instructions given by Paul that one should not depart and that if he departs he should remain unmarried or else be reconciled to his mate (1 Cor. 7:10,11). And how shall we know if God “feels” that we really cannot “stand” being unmarried? Shall one risk his soul by remarrying without a scriptural reason and wait patiently for the judgment to see how God feels about the matter? Shall we excuse other sins because people do not think they can live without their wickedness? God forbid such wresting of the Scriptures!

In Matthew 19:10, the disciples understood Jesus to teach that a man should not put away his wife except for fornication and marry another. They perceived this to be a hard saying and reasoned if that were true, then it was better for a man not to marry. Jesus said not all can receive celibacy (v. 11), only some can (v. 12). If we choose to marry, then we must receive Jesus’ teaching about marriage, divorce and remarriage -man cannot put away his wife except for fornication and marry another without being an adulterer (v. 9).

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 8, p. 243
April 16, 1992

By Thomas G. O’Neal

When Roy Cogdill was in his twenties, he wrote The New Testament Church. At the time, little did he realize the far reaching effects for good it would have. It has been translated into about a dozen foreign languages. The American Braille Society has put it into braille. It has been through more than twenty editions over the last fifty years. It is still in great demand among churches of Christ for Bible classes. Many preachers have found it to be an excellent book of sermon outlines. This book has probably had a greater circulation among brethren than any other single book in this century!

I have been in recent contact with brother Phil Morgan of Paris, Kentucky, and brother Greg Gwin of Knoxville, Tennessee. They spent three weeks in Russia this past summer studying Russian. They were amazed at how open Russia is to gospel opportunities and the way the Russian people received them. In the three weeks they were there they baptized a lady, Lena Zakheim. The week-end of February 16, I was able to meet and visit with her and Greg Gwin in Knoxville.

As you read this letter, The New Testament Church is being translated into Russian by two individuals, one an American and one a Russian. Also, I have already had requests for copies of The New Testament Church in Russian from preachers planning on going to Russia this year.

The cost of translating and printing 5,000 copies of The New Testament Church is going to run about $1.60 per copy. These books will be given to the Russian people just like we would a tract in this country.

No greater investment could be made at this time in Russia except to distribute Bibles. Would you or the congregation where you worship make a one time investment in the cause of Christ in Russia by paying for some of these books? Ten would be $16; one hundred would be $160 and one thousand would be $1,600, While the door of opportunity is open we need to move quickly. May I hear from you with your commitment within the next few days? The translation work is being done, money is needed to pay for this as it is done. To each contributor a full accounting will be made. Any money received over the initial amount needed will be used to print additional books. May I hear from you at once? Everyone who reads this letter can do something. Several have already sent a check to pay for 10 copies. If you knew Roy Cogdill, you can honor his memory by helping circulate his book in Russia.

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 8, p. 230
April 16, 1992

By Robert H. Farish

The attempts to escape an “institutional sense” or denominational concept, which some people hold with reference to the church, have resulted in some fleeing to a “simple individual to Christ relationship” concept which rejects the teaching of the Scriptures on “Christ and the church” relationship. The doctrine of “setting in order” and “appoint(ing) elders in every city” and “in every church” is explained away – the Holy Spirit’s words are made meaningless. The divine organization, the local congregation, is scornfully referred to as “the club.” A local church of Christ, composed of “all the saints in Christ Jesus that are in Philippi, with the bishops and deacons” (Phil. 1:1), must be rejected in order that the “individual to Christ relationship” may be “found.” Fleeing from Rome and 666 A.D. they run past Jerusalem and 33 A. D.

Much ado has been made over the Greek word ekklesia which has been translated “church.” It is asserted that “the word ‘church’ is a mistranslation.” Fortunately, for the average person, we do not have to know Greek in order to “understand what the will of the Lord is.” We can simply examine, in their context, the passages in the New Testament in which the word “church” appears and learn of the existence, characteristics and functions of the ekklesia of Christ.

A Local Church of Christ

The reality of the “Christ and the church” relationship is set forth in a number of passages. From the English translations we can learn of “the existence of an institution in the time of the apostles such as we have today, and which we call a ‘local’ church of Christ.”

“The existence of an institution in the time of the apostles such as we have today, and which we call a ‘local church of Christ,”‘ is established by those passages where a church is designated by its geographical location. A number of letters are addressed to churches in different cities. For example, letters were addressed to the seven churches in Asia according to their geographical location. Error that existed in the church at Ephesus was charged to that local congregation and commendations were expressed of that church. The same is true of the other churches. Two letters were addressed to the “church of God which is at Corinth.” This was a local church of God – it was located in Corinth. In Romans 16:5, Paul wrote that, “all the churches of the Gentiles” gave thanks for Priscilla and Aquila and he also included a greeting for the “church that is in their house.” Was not the church in the house Priscilla and Aquila “a church of Christ”? In the 16th verse of the same chapter, he wrote, “All the churches of Christ salute you.” If there were “churches of Christ” plural, was there not in existence “a church of Christ” singular? This is not “church of Christ tradition”; it is tradition “which ye were taught . . . by epistle of” Paul and other inspired writers. The apostle said for brethren to “stand fast and hold the traditions which ye were taught . . . by epistle of ours.” (2 Thess. 2:15). Let’s stand fast and hold the traditions.

A local church of Christ that existed in the time of the apostles was made up of “all the saints in Christ Jesus that are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons” (Phil. 1:1). This is not the “simple individual to Christ relationship” but is an organization composed of “all the saints etc.” at Philippi. This was “a local church” at Philippi for the apostle wrote, “when I departed from Madedonia, no church had fellowship with me in the matter of giving and receiving but ye only” (Phil. 4:16). While there are cases of individual Christians having fellowship in the furtherance of the gospel, yet this is not such a case. This is a case of a church, “as such,” having fellowship in the furtherance of the gospel.

We can learn, if we study the passages in their context, that while the church was in its introductory stages it “cometh not with observation,” that is, it was not recognized by the Pharisees. Yet when it came, in fact, it could be observed because it had organic existence. Certainly those within the church as well as those without the church could see (observe) the church in its activities as a church as “they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of bread and the prayers” (Acts 2:42). The language, “the kingdom cometh not with observation … for lo, the kingdom is within you” was addressed to the Pharisees in answer to their question as to “when the kingdom of God cometh.” The kingdom of God was not “within” the Pharisees at that time! The kingdom of God was “in the midst” of the Pharisees and they knew it not. It was “in the midst” of them in that its king was there and his authority was accepted by some, although his reign, in fact, did not begin until late, when he was raised from the dead to sit on David’s throne. The kingdom came on the day of Pentecost. The church from that time had organic existence (reprinted from The Gospel Guardian, XVII:10 [15 July 1965], 145-146).

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 8, p. 235
April 16, 1992