Truth Magazine

So wrote the apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 13:8. I thought of this Scripture when sister Polly Phillips sent me the following letter she received from her husband, brother H.E. Phillips, on her birthday on October 26, 1982. Its words remind us of the strength of human love. Solomon wrote, “Set me as a seal upon thine heart, as a seal upon thine arm: for love is strong as death; jealousy is cruel as the grave: the coals thereof are coals of fire, which hath a most vehement flame. Many waters cannot quench love, neither can the floods drown it: if a man would give all the substance of his house for love, it would utterly be condemned” (Song of Solomon 8:6-7). You will witness that love in this letter.

To My Wonderful Wife:

In the early springtime of life our eyes met and started the fires of love which within a year brought us to join hands and hearts in marriage vows, and God joined us together for the rest of our lives.

In the springtime of our lives all the joy, thrills, dreams, ambitions, and love were ours! What more could we ask for?

As the summer came on we were filled with the happiness of young parents, but we faced the hardships, plans, disappointments, anxieties and pain of young parents! We had the complete joy and happiness of sharing ownership of the greatest blessings on earth — our children. They brought us real fulfillment in our lives.

But in the autumn of life we shared an ever greater responsibility: the caring for, training, and loving unpredictable teenagers with their schools, dating, finances, and finally marriages. There were many solemn hours which only we and God shared. The hot sunshine, the blistering winds, and the stormy seas, separated by the periods of refreshing calm, brought us through the adolescent and young adulthood of our beautiful, loving children. They were worth it and a thousand times that much. It was not really bad — it was only the inexperience of two young, concerned, loving parents, who wanted the very best for their children. Because of you they got our best.

Now we walk hand in hand in the beginning of winter. Our steps are slower, the sound of the birds is softer, and the beauty of the sunset is not so brilliant. But we thank God for all the happy memories, and for the many wonderful things we now have.

As the shadows lengthen and we realize that our “three score and ten years” is not far ahead, our hands hold tighter, our love grows stronger, our faith in God is greater, and we rejoice that we have been so blessed with so much so long!

Happy Birthday, 

By Larry Ray Hafley

From Good News (July 9, 2000), the bulletin of the Timberland Drive church in Lufkin, Texas, we extract the following comment on 1 Timothy 4:2: “Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.” 

Convince, rebuke, exhort. I have heard some preachers say this means a man’s preaching should be two-thirds negative and one-third positive. This charge is not a mathematical equation. The context shows the preacher is to address the people’s needs, regardless of how his message is received. Convince them when they need it; rebuke them when they need it; exhort them when they need it. You can’t measure preaching in terms of mathematics, but you can certainly measure it in terms of need (Taken from Common Sense Preaching, Dee Bowman). 

Brother Bowman is correct! Preaching is indeed about the specific need of one’s audience. That is why Peter did not denounce idolatry in Acts 2; it is why Paul did not speak against binding circumcision in his Athenian address in Acts 17. Preaching to an audience’s need explains the tone and tenor of Stephen in Acts 7 and the thread and theme of Paul in Acts 13.

Like brother Bowman, I, too, have “heard some preachers” speak of the “two-thirds, one third” equation. However, when that mathematical measure has been cited, it has not been used to say that an audience’s needs should be ignored. Those who speak of preaching that is “two-thirds negative” generally are refuting the idea that we need to “accentuate the positive and eliminate the negative.” 

It is in that context, using 2 Timothy 4:2, that we often speak of preaching that is “two-thirds negative and one-third positive.” “I have heard some preachers say” it is too much like the rustic, ruffian spirit of pioneer preachers when we name names (Baptist, Methodist, etc.) and identify denominational doctrines. We have been encouraged to take a less “polemic” approach and not to be “adversarial” and “controversial” in our appeal to truth. I have heard “some preachers say” these things as they (quite negatively, I might add) decry and deride “negative preaching” as that which causes people to “tune out” and “turn us off.” 

When such advice has been given, I, like brother Bowman, “have heard some preachers” show that “two-thirds” of 2 Timothy 4:2 is, “negative,” while only “one third” of it is positive. They form this mathematical equation, not to downplay meeting an audience’s need, but to show that they do greatly err who say that our speech and our preaching must be “positive” and “not negative.” 

The same is true of Jeremiah 1:10. “See I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down, to build and to plant.”

When need requires we must “root out . . . pull down       . . . destroy, and . . . throw down.” There is a time “to build, and to plant,” “a time to break down, and a time to build up” (Eccl. 3:3). 

It is only when we hear “some preachers say” that “speaking the truth in love” means that we must avoid “negative preaching,” that we hear preachers rightly observe that “two-thirds” of Jeremiah 1:10 is “negative,” while “one-third” is “positive.” It is only when preaching that roots out, pulls down, destroys, and throws down is castigated as being harmful and contrary to the spirit of godly gospel preaching that we hear “some preachers” speak of the “two-thirds, one-third” equation. 

Preaching that reproves, rebukes, roots out, pulls down, destroys, and throws down is as much needed as is that which builds, plants, and exhorts. If not, God would not have so instructed his holy apostles and prophets. 

(Surely, no one will make comments on this article that are two-thirds negative. If they disagree with it, perhaps they can address my need in a positive fashion.)

4626 Osage, Baytown, Texas 77521

By Rufus R. Clifford III

The Apostle Paul in Romans 8:6 says, “For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.” A Christian is to be spiritually minded which means their mindset is what it ought to be! Paul again states this concerning our mindset, “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus” (Phil. 2:5). Christ had the proper mindset! Over in Colossians 3:2 we are told: “Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth.” In order to set my affection, I must have the proper mindset and this simply means that I’m keeping God, people, and things of this world in their proper place in my mind! 

Why Is This So Important?

In the Bible the words “heart” and “mind” are often used interchangeably and involve a person’s intellect, volition, and emotions —  it’s much more than just our physical muscle known as the heart. Jesus stressed the importance of having our hearts (minds, intellects, emotions) in the proper place when he said, “For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also” (Matt. 6:21). So according to Jesus, where my mindset is will determine where my treasure is which will in turn affect the way I live in this world. Paul stated the same thing when he told us to set our affections on things above! Paul was in essence reminding the Colossians and all who read his letter today that one’s mindset must be in the right place.

This Answers Many Questions

1. Why is it folks will dress up when going to parties, or funerals, or weddings and yet give little regard to their appearance when coming to church? THEIR MINDSET! They have unknowingly placed parties, funerals, and weddings on a higher level in their minds than they have given to almighty God!
2. Why is that children today are taught to say, “Yes sir” and “No sir” and “Yes ma’am” and “No ma’am” to their elders and yet speak of God in terms of “you,” “the man upstairs,” or “him”? THEIR MINDSET! They have placed giving respect and honor to men of this world on a higher level in their minds than they have given to almighty God!
3. Why is it folks can’t make it to service but one  time a week and yet they can attend a ball game and sit and watch a double header, or not miss one single meeting at school or work or even in some cases attend these functions sick? THEIR MINDSET! They have given things of this world a higher position of importance than they have given to almighty God! 
4. Why is it that folks respect the laws of this land and readily accept their responsibility to obey them and yet try to disprove the law of God and show little regard for God’s authority today? THEIR MINDSET! They have brought God down to man’s level and in their minds they no longer respect and honor and give God the important position that he deserves!

One’s mindset will determine how he dresses, how he speaks, how he lives day to day, and, more importantly, where God stands in relationship to himself. For you see until I have placed God first and foremost in my mind as being the awesome supreme being that he truly is my respect and regard for what his will is will not be what it ought to be! In other words it could be said that my mindset is not right.

Where Is Your Mindset?

Can it be said that you are spiritually minded? Has your thinking become like your Savior’s? If the answer is yes then that means your affections are on things above and others will notice this because your dress, your speech, your very attitude towards God’s holy word will reflect these very things.

Where Is Your Mindset Today? 

Get it right, 
Put it right, 
And keep it right!
                      
Your mindset determines everything!
                         
107 CR 458, Killen Alabama 35645, Carey4102@aol.com

By Mike Willis

In an effort to defend an on-going fellowship with those who are teaching admittedly false doctrines, some brethren have re-defined “false teacher” as a bad apple, one who is intentionally dishonest and manifests all of the character traits listed in 2 Peter 2. The argument that is made is that the word “false” (pseudos) always refers to one who is dishonest.

In previous articles, I have cited New Testament evidence that demonstrates that is not so (“If He’s Not A False Teacher,” Truth Magazine [July 20, 2000]). In this article, I want to demonstrate that the pseudos word group is not exclusively used with reference to intentional dishonesty. My evidence is drawn from a contemporary writer, Philo of Alexandria. Philo the Jew or Philo of Alexandria (a city in Egypt with a large Jewish population) lived from about 20 B.C. to A.D. 50, making him contemporary with Christ and the biblical authors. The language of the New Testament is not a divinely created language with special definitions; rather, the language of the New Testament reflects contemporary usage of the words. Philo’s use of the language is instructive in showing us how the pseudos word group was used in the period contemporary with the New Testament writers.

The quotations that are given are taken from The Works of Philo translated by C.D. Yonge (Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1993). 

Intentional Deceit
The pseudos word group can be used of intentional deceit, as it frequently is so used (for an example, see Special Laws I:235). No one is denying that the pseudos word group can describe intentional deceit. However, one should not presume that intentional deceit is the primary meaning of the word, assuming without contextual reasons for doing so that the pseudos refers to being intentionally dishonest.

An Antonym To True/Truth

In going through the uses of the pseudo word group in Philo, one is immediately impressed with the number of places in which the word is used as an antonym for “true” or “truth.” Here are a few citations:

For of what advantage would it be to make our assertions clear and distinct, but nevertheless false?” (Allegorical Interpretations III:121).]

“. . .some are true, some are false” (On Husbandry 141).

“. . . separating true from false arguments” (The Preliminary Studies, 18).

“. . . a foe to truth, a champion of falsehood” (On the Confusion of Tongues, 48).

“. . . speech into truth and falsehood . . . truth to falsehood” (Who Is Heir of Divine Things? 132).

“. . . and what is false and what is true” (On Dreams — Book 2, 47).

“. . . but seeking the plain truth, since his mind was unable to admit any falsehood” (On the Life of Moses, I:24).

“. . . for it is suitable to the mind that it should admit of no error or falsehood” (On the Life of Moses, II:129).

“. . . and at the vast amount of falsehood which they had embraced instead of truth” (On the Life of Moses, II:167).

“. . . their having from their infancy learnt to look upon what was false as if it had been true” (The Special Laws I:53).

Additional examples can be cited, for this is a very common use of the word pseudos.

Can A False Teacher Be Sincere?

Particularly interesting for the present discussion is whether or not one who is designated as being pseudos can also be honest and sincere? 

Philo speaks of one’s “outward senses” bearing “false witness” (pseudomarturia), obviously not intending thereby to say that they intentionally deceive (On the Confusion of Tongues, 126).
A proof that one can be well-intentioned but a false teacher is seen from this quotation:

And if, indeed, any one assuming the name and appearance of a prophet, appearing to be inspired and possessed by the Holy Spirit, were to seek to lead the people to the worship of those who are accounted gods in the different cities, it would be fitting for the people to attend to him being deceived by the name of a prophet. For such an one is an impostor and not a prophet, since he has been inventing speeches and oracles full of falsehood, even though a brother, or a son, or a daughter, or a wife, or a steward, or a firm friend, or any one who else seems to be well-intentioned towards one should seek to lead one in a similar course (The Special Laws, I:315-316).

Note that Philo describes this false prophet as one who is “well-intentioned,” nevertheless his speeches and oracles are “full of falsehood.” Obviously, Philo thought this relative or associate was good, honest, and sincere, although deceived and a false prophet.

Conclusion

This evidence is what motivates lexicographers to state in their definitions that the pseudos word group is not exclusively used of intentional deceit and deception (see “What Does ‘False Teacher’ Mean?”, Truth Magazine [September 5, 1996], 534, 554-556). In our study of “false teachers,” we assert that what makes one a “false teacher” is his teaching false doctrines, without regard to his intentions, whether well-intentioned or an intentional deceiver. One cannot always know another’s heart, but he can always examine his message to see if it corresponds with the truth of Scripture. When what one teaches on a subject is false 
6567 Kings Ct., Avon, Indiana 46123 mwillis1@compuserve.com