Truth Magazine

By Joe R. Price

Paul H. Dunn, former member of the “Presidency of the First Quorum of Seventy” in the LDS Church now holding emeritus status as a general authority, has been the focus of a controversy within the Mormon Church for the past couple of years. It seems that Dunn, one of the most popular LDS lecturers and writers, has been telling exaggerated (if not fabricated) personal stories about his heroism in the Korean War and his experiences as a professional baseball player. The verdict is still out on how much or for how long the LDS Church leaders knew about the deceptive stories of Dunn. Did they let him continue because he was “in demand”?

A headline about this matter in the Salt Lake Tribune caught my attention: “Speaker Says LDS Teachings Suffer From ‘Cute’ Syndrome” (Aug. 10, 1991). Attorney Eric C. Olson (himself a Mormon) presented a paper at the 13th annual Sunstone Symposium in which he suggested that Dunn’s stories are representative of a Church Education System that “may value entertainment and reassurance over honesty, insight and accuracy.” He went on to say, “From the CES (Church Education System, jrp) perspective, no matter how real or how true a principle or, circumstance may be, it is of negligible instructional value, if it does not excite the student or fit the correlated preconception.” The article further explained, “Such a posture, he warned, can lead to a ‘vacuum of relativity’ where a principle appears to be truth only if it bears the right stamp, is spoken by the right person or serves the right purpose. ‘We start wrapping the truth in little finer packages until it is no longer truth,’ Mr. Olson said.”

Mr. Olson’s observations are, quite astute, and are applicable for New Testament Christians. Have we become a people who are interested in truth only when it entertains I am reminded of Romans 3:9-19, where the apostle Paul proposed to lay “to the charge both of Jews and Greeks, that they are all under sin.” Being led by the Spirit of God (Jn. 16:13; 1 Cor. 2:10-13; 2 Tim. 3:16), he used no less than six Scriptures from the law to prove the accuracy of his teaching! I wonder if Paul could get published using that many Scriptures today, especially since he was writing to the “average Christian” (Rom. 1:7). Is truth only appeal or excites us because of the way it is presented (“packaged”) by the teacher, preacher, etc.? I am afraid this is too often the case.

For instance, upon what basis do we conclude that brother so and so preached “a great sermon”? His command of the English language? His use of metaphors, similes and anecdotes? His style and ability to enrapture an audience or “keep it in stitches”? Or, is it the clear, precise message of truth which he presents (2 Tim. 4:1-5)? Please do not misunderstand. A man who masters the ability to speak publicly is a wonderful asset to the kingdom, if he uses that ability to direct attention to the word of God and away from himself. Did you answer the question? Before you do, consider the apostle Paul, who of himself said, “But though I be rude in speech, yet am I not in knowledge” (2 Cor. 11: 6). He did not seek to please men with his preaching, but God (Gal. 1:10-12; 1 Thess. 2:3-6). He did not use flattery (1 Thess. 2:5), human wisdom (1 Cor. 2:14) or philosophy (Col. 2:8) to present truth, but a “thus saith the Lord” (Col. 3:17; 1 Thess. 2:13). Was Paul a great preacher, with great lessons? By most people’s standards, probably not. After all, he was threatened, stoned and imprisoned for his preaching (cf. Acts 9.22-24,29; 13:44-51; 14:19; 16:19-24). That is not how the world treats its “great” preachers! Maybe Paul should have wrapped his message in a “finer package!”

The Packaging or the Power of the Gospel?

Do we still trust the power of the gospel to save our souls (Rom. 1:16)? When we must have the truth of the gospel packaged in the skillfulness of men before we approve of it, we have lost our faith in the power of the gospel and built our faith upon the abilities of men. Consider a few of the ways our faith can be placed in the packaging of the truth rather than in the truth itself.

1. The appeal of intellectualism. We have nothing against obtaining a college education. To broaden one’s knowledge and appreciation of the various disciplines of learning can be of great benefit. Indeed, elders, preachers and teachers can benefit from whatever higher education they have been fortunate enough to obtain. Yet, when we are only interested in what a gospel preacher or teacher has to say if he holds a B.A., M.A. or Ph.D, we are on dangerous ground (1 Cor. 1:26-2:4).

We are stressing the wrong thing when we encourage people to hear brother so and so preach because of his intellectual attainments. When we are only interested in an “educated” man preaching for us (regardless of his knowledge of and love for the truth), is our prime objective gospel preaching? What of the man’s message? It seems as if the message of God’s word is sometimes taken for granted as we marvel over the educational achievements of the man teaching it. Have we forgotten that the power of the gospel is found in the message which is preached and not in its messenger (cf. 1 Cor. 1:17-25)? Are we interested in hearing a man preach and teach who, by the world’s standards, is unknowledgeable and unlearned? Or, do we “hold out” for the truly educated preacher? I fear we would not have desired the preaching of Peter and John, “unlearned and ignorant” as they were (Acts 4:13)! We must avoid “packaging” the word of God in the wrapping of man’s intellect before we are interested in opening it!

2. The pop psychology PMA approach to gospel preaching. It is a sign of the times. People want to feel good about themselves. They want reassurance that they are “o.k.” More and more brethren want the elders, preachers and teachers to help them define and emphasize this good feeling. Well, I like to feel good about myself, don’t you? And, the Bible teaches that the Christian ought to be the happiest person on this planet (Phil. 4:4-8,10-13; Eph. 1:3; Matt. 5:3-12). However, this is not what we are talking about.

There seems to be an affection on the part of some to practice “pop psychology” from the pulpit and with the pen. The positive mental attitude approach to living espoused by Norman Vincent Peale, Robert Schuller and others emphasizes man’s internal power to overcome depression, guilt and sin. Man fills his own needs, and becomes his own remedy for life’s problems. Such an approach to Christianity puts one’s faith in self rather than in Christ. It sees man as having the answers within himself to overcome the guilt of sin (cf. Jer. 10:23; Prov. 14:12). This is deceptive “packaging” which will leave a person’s soul lost in sin!

3. Emphasize the positive, eliminate the negative.” This approach teaching and teaching has influenced the religion of men for decades (if not centuries). Eventually, it becomes a call to move away from “book, chapter and verse” preaching to emphasize oratory and writing skills. Knowledge of the word of God suffers from such a concept, and so do God’s people (cf. Hos. 4:1-6). While this objective is denied (I certainly hope it is!), the effect remains, nonetheless.

The writing guidelines of one journal suggest that writers use a minimum of Scriptures. At the same time, teachers of the gospel should be at their “creative best,” embellishing their articles with various literary techniques:

Second, we hope you will write for the audience we are trying to reach. We hope to reach the “average Christian.” Each article is thus to be short and limited to one major point. Do not tell us all you know, but what you know most surely. Generally speaking, two or three passages should provide a sufficient base for such articles – perhaps even one. . .

Obviously, what we are after is a piece of journalistic writing. The thrust of the article should be practical, speaking to the real needs of people. The style of the writing should be popular. We urge you to be your creative best: think of interest-catching leads, sharp illustrations, and if appropriate, and if possible, sprinkle in a little wit (Assignment letter, Christianity Magazine, undated).

Such guidelines place more importance upon the “packaging” of the product than upon the truth being presented.

Avoiding The “Cute” Syndrome

Of course, we should do our best when preaching, teaching or writing the truth of God. We are thankful for talented writers, teachers and preachers who can effectively communicate God’s word. As God’s fellow-worker (1 Cor. 3:5-9), the preacher must do the best he can to present truth. As hearers of that word, we must demand that the truth be presented, and then fully obey it. The people of Ezekiel’s day expressed a desire to hear the word of the Lord. Some even viewed Ezekiel as a “great preacher.” But they refused to obey the word of God which he preached (Ezek. 33:30-32). However, because Ezekiel’s message would come to pass (and not because he thrilled his audience), there could be no denying that God’s prophet had proclaimed God’s word to them (v. 33). Ezekiel, Paul, or any other preacher of God’s word could only be regarded as “great” (effective) when their message was the truth of God. Effective preaching and teaching is not determined by the teacher’s flowery language, perfect prose or journalistic technique. It is defined by teaching everything which is profitable for the salvation of men, “the whole counsel of God” (Acts 20:20, 27; 1 Tim. 4:16; 2 Tim. 4:2).

The churches of men have long since given in to the temptation of making their message “cute.” Entertainment, excitement and reassurance is the order of the day. Mr. Olson’s assessment of the LDS Church’s educational program is an example of what can happen when one becomes more interested in impressing an audience than in accurately presenting the word of God. The truth suffers and souls are endangered as a result. We must not become victims of such devices.

Do not be deceived by the “packaging” which men often call the word of God. We must “preach the word!” The package may at times be crude, but the product must always be genuine (2 Tim. 3:16-4:5). Beware of the “cute syndrome!”

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 21, pp. 651-653
November 7, 1991

By Keith Greer

He who does not love does not know God, for God is love (1 Jn. 4:8).

On June 18, 1991, at 5:15 p.m., my grandfather, Dillie Perry Greer, finished his course on this earth. That following Saturday, with his wife of more than 61 years, five children, thirteen grandchildren, and thirteen great grandchildren, we laid Grandpa to his final rest. As they did that day, tears run down my cheeks as I remember.

My memories of Grandpa are many and varied. He gave me my first haircut, and since I was the first grandchild, I was blessed in my early years to be around him a lot. Even though he was very strict with me, he always did so with kindness that made me understand that he cared dearly. Not much escaped my Grandpa’s watchful eyes.

When I was about ten, Grandpa instructed me not to pick the strawberries until they were ripe. I love strawberries and decided I couldn’t wait. Well, he caught me and said, “Keith, I told you not to pick them. Go get me a switch.” Thinking that I could delay the punishment, I looked for hours, until dark. Then, I came in and told Grandpa that it was too dark to find a switch. To the best of my recollection, Grandpa had the eyes of a bat, and yes, I was punished. I brought the punishment on myself and, yet, never once did I doubt Grandpa’s love for me. That’s why he corrected me. “He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him disciplines him promptly” (Prov. 13:24). Grandpa always disciplined promptly!

There are many things that I admired about Grandpa. His oldest son, my Dad, did many things that hurt him, and I know he didn’t approve or understand. Yet, not once did I even hear him say a bad word against my Dad. Why? He loved him, of course!

Grandpa had another special quality that stood out. He was the most contented man I have ever known. By the world’s standards, he wasn’t a wealthy man, and, yet, if you were around him, you might think that he was the richest. Always thankful for what he had and understanding that it all came from God, he was a faithful steward (Jas. 1:17; Matt. 25:23). “But godliness with contentment is great gain (1 Tim. 6:16).

Going to my grandparents’ home, we were always made to feel welcome. The house would be filled with his kids and grandkids, and Grandpa would just beam with pride. I didn’t always do the right thing. Yet, Grandpa’s love for me never diminished. He had a strong hand and tough standards, God’s standards. Never compromising, but with compassion and love he led by example.

In April of this year, I went back to Lowell, Indiana for a gospel meeting. Grandpa came three nights to that meeting. (He would only be able to attend one more worship service afterwards.) On the last night of the meeting, I was standing by the stairs, and Grandpa came up to me with that big, wide grin on his face and said, “Keith, you’ve become a real fine gospel preacher. I’m very proud of you.” Today, that is very special to me, because Grandpa had much to do with why I am a preacher. As I was returning to Las Vegas, I went to say goodbye to Grandpa the next day. We hugged, and I kissed him and told him I loved him and would miss him. Grandpa was crying, and I was crying because both of us knew that this would be our final goodbye on earth!

Grandpa taught me many lessons during his life, and it was my privilege to speak at his funeral. Grandpa was very close to me, and he loved his family dearly, but he loved God first! The greatest comfort that he leaves me, and the greatest example of his life is that he left with eternal hope. For, you see, he died in Christ! “For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring those who sleep in Jesus” (1 Thess. 4:14). Thank you, Grandpa, for your time, patience, understanding but most of all for your gift of love!

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 21, p. 647
November 7, 1991

By James R. Cope

They all showed up the same day and all except one left about the same time two weeks later. They came from “all over” in response to a genuine need of Florida College. Some were experts in carpentry, some in painting, some in general maintenance. All of them are active and well-along-in-years citizens in heaven’s kingdom. They paid their own expenses to come from several states to be “Good Samaritans” in behalf of the young people who attend Florida College and to lend a helping hand to an already overworked year-round maintenance crew of Florida College. Some of them had sent their children here and grandchildren of some have been or are now enrolled.

The men who responded to our new President’s request are the following: Gene Compton, Baytown, Texas; Willard Derryberry, Spring Hill, Tennessee; Jack Dugger, Nashville, Tennessee; Jeff Haselden, Sr., Luqoff, South Carolina; and Don Roberts, Brentwood, Tennessee.

Any person who has spent even a short time on the campus of Florida College is aware of various on-the-spot needs of this school. Some of these needs are obvious at a casual glance but to the carpenter, painter, plumber or general maintenance worker, that which needs attention immediately becomes an “eyesore.” Fortunately Florida College is rich in such “friends to youth.”

Our new president, “Colly” Caldwell, is well acquainted with many men who qualify as “friends” to hundreds of young men and women who have come here as students and left as graduates. Some have sent their own children and others have sent their dollars or become “overnight” parents to students and teachers visiting their areas in recruiting students, traveling with the chorus, debate, or athletic teams. Many who have never been on campus are among the most loyal supporters the College has.

So what did Colly do in his first few days as President of Florida College? The answer: He called on men who could carpenter, plumb, paint and pray to come for a few days in August to work with their heads and hands because their hearts were known to be identified with what the College has done for their own children and seeks to do for their grandchildren! Most of these men I have known firsthand for some 30 years or longer and one was a classmate 57 years ago.

With their own heads and hands these men have attended to physical needs on the Florida College campus which have gone unattended for many years – not because none was aware of these needs but because there were already a dozen needs ahead and crying for attention. These men have given more than money. They have given themselves! Yes, their time, their expertise, their energies, but most and best of all – themselves! This is the spirit that has made Florida College possible and will keep it going as long as there is need for the type of education this school offers.

Only one other man has been officially connected with Florida College longer than I and none other knows better than I the thousand-and-one things needed to “make the old mare go! ” When I see men my age willing to give their time, money, energies, and expertise as these men who have been here for the past two weeks have given, I know that there must be hundreds of others alive who thank God that their own sons and daughters were able to drink from the same fount of which they drank decades ago.

With the resignation of brother Lloyd Copeland from the Board of Directors at its last annual meeting, not one of the original Board members remains. Yet all present Board members I have known many years. There is not one of their number I do not trust implicitly regarding both character and his soundness “in the faith once delivered to the saints.” Practically all of them are alumni or sent their children here. This Directorate made no mistake in its choice of Colly Caldwell to be the new President of the College, successor to Bob F. Owen, who served well for nine years.

The response of aging brethren of many talents to Colly’s invitation to come and assist mentally and physically is evidence that those who have known Florida College through the years believe it deserves their sweat as well as their dollars and tears. That God may bless you richly with students and finances essential to Florida College’s continuing progress is the prayer and hope of your friend and brother, James R. Cope.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 21, p. 646
November 7, 1991

By John Shadowens

Matthew 19:9 reads, “And I say unto you whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.”

There has been a great deal written in recent months about the subject of marriage and divorce, and rightly so, since this is a problem that plagues the church. There has not been very much written; however, about the individual that has been put away. Such a one finds himself in a real dilemma. I would like to suggest that those who have been put away, who are sincere, and wanting to do what God says, be given the support and encouragement to fight the good fight and not give up and quit (Gal. 6:1; 1 Tim. 6:12). One thing that a put away person wants to know is “What can I do?” This is a legitimate question. These people are being told so often what they cannot do, that I am afraid that they disparage and fall out of the race altogether. So what can they do?

That which is desired of course is to repent and turn their thoughts towards the Word of the living God. Many times brethren are not kind when something like this happens, saying, “we” forgive, but in essence, they do not, and then the individual becomes a sore spot in the congregation and it is cheered when he or she leaves. That one should repent is clear in the Scriptures (Acts 2:38; 17:30-31; 26:20; Mk. 2:17; Lk. 24:47; Rom. 2:4; 2 Cor. 7:10). After one does repent (2 Cor.2:4-10), like the one in the church at Corinth, he should be received back and encouraged.

The individual who has been overtaken in a fault should realize that he now has another chance. He has disappointed the Lord, and other brethren, as we all do. Now, he must start a long road back to gaining the confidence of brethren he once had (Rom. 14:7). That is a difficult task because of the consequences of sin. He must turn his thoughts to God, and work toward trying to save others. He has sinned, and knows a great deal about this area of temptation and can perhaps be of help to others.

He again, can realize that God still loves him and that if he truly repents and turns to God, God will forgive him (1 Jn. 1:7). Because he has been put away, he realizes that he can never remarry except if the situation in Romans 7:1-4 happens; therefore, it would be truly unwise for him to keep female company, such as going out on dates (1 Thess. 5:.2-2).

Society will accept his divorce, but God, in his word, has issued his decree. When one begins to date, the individual is placing himself in grave danger. The danger is that he will fall in love (which is not permitted) and submit himself to undue temptations, possibly marriage or just plain fornication. Another thought is the unfairness to the innocent person he will date. The relationship cannot go anywhere. Even if the individual is not looking for a relationship, it can still lead to sin. Proverbs 13:15 says, the way of trangressors is hard.”

Once again, the conclusion can only show just how serious the marriage relationship is, and what God’s attitude is toward it. Young people need to take more time to find a companion. There must be more strong teaching in the family about marriage and divorce. There must be more encouragement for all to marry Christians.

It would seem then, that what the put away person can do and what he can look forward to is to repent and turn his thoughts and affections to God and walk toward Heaven. He can use himself as an example to others in a positive way, and devote the rest of his days to the Lord and his cause, Brethren can help by giving comfort and support to the restored individual who finds himself in this situation. Christians are bound by God to help each other to heaven.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 21, p. 661
November 7, 1991