Truth Magazine

By Mike Willis

In recent issues, I have been studying Philippians 4 to learn principles of spiritual health which enable us to enjoy life’s best moments and to endure its adversities. We have previously emphasized that good spiritual health requires the following: (a) Rejoicing in the Lord; (b) Letting your moderation be known to all men; (c) Living with the awareness that the Lord is at hand; (d) Being anxious for nothing; (e) Thinking on things which are pure. Good spiritual health also requires that we learn to be content in whatever condition we find ourselves. Paul wrote:

Not that I speak in respect of want: for I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content. I know both how to be abased, and I know how to abound: every where and in all things I am instructed both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need (Phil. 4:11-12).

There is happiness to be found in contentment. Elsewhere Paul wrote, “Godliness with contentment is great gain” (1 Tim. 6:6).

Paul’s Circumstances

When Paul penned this epistle his circumstances were such that few of us would have been content with them. He was in a Roman prison for preaching the gospel – suffering evil for having done good. Not only was that so, some of his own brethren were preaching from impure motives with the express purpose of doing him harm (Phil. 1:16). Nevertheless, Paul had learned to be content.

“I Know How to Be Abased”

Paul recognized that there were lessons which a person learns from his infirmities and afflictions. He had personally experienced such afflictions. He had been “in stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults, in labors, in watchings, in fastings” (2 Cor. 6:5). He had been “in labors more abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequent, in deaths oft. Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save one. Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night and a day I have been in the deep; in journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils by mine own countrymen, in perils by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; in weariness and painfulness, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness. Beside those things that are without, that which cometh upon me daily, the care of all the churches” (2 Cor. 11:23-28).

On top of this he was given a “messenger of Satan,” a “thorn in the flesh” (2 Cor. 12:7). Three times he asked the Lord to remove it. Finally, the Lord replied, “My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness” (2 Cor. 12:9).

Paul accepted the Lord’s “no.” He learned how, not only to be content, but to benefit from the Lord’s decision. Therefore, he said, “Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ’s sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong” (2 Cor. 12:9-10).

The wise man taught us to give thought to afflictions. “In the day of prosperity be joyful, but in the day of adversity consider: God also hath set the one over against the other, to the end that man should find nothing after him” (Eccl. 7:14). The same God who allows good times also allows evil times to come. Like Paul, we need to learn how to be contented in evil days.

The psalmist saw that God’s afflictions drove him back to God. Consequently, he wrote,

Before I was afflicted I went astray: but now have I kept thy word (Psa. 119:67).

It is good for me that I have been afflicted; that I might learn thy statutes (Psa. 119:71).

I know, O Lord, that thy judgments are right, and that thou in faithfulness hast afflicted me (Psa. 119:75).

Have we learned to be content in these kinds of circumtances? One of the lessons which we must learn in order o have good spiritual health is to be content in the midst f adverse circumstances. Where this does not happen, men lecome bitter, sour, and resentful in their dispositions oward God. Paul could say, “I have learned how to be tbased.” Most of us who have been raised during the pros)erity which has been in America during my lifetime have aperienced very little abasement to learn the spiritual lessons vhich accompany it.

“I Know How to Abound”

Paul also stated that men had to learn how to abound. He was not teaching “seven laws of prosperity” or “how o become rich” when he emphasized man’s need to learn “how to abound.” There are certain temptations which come with wealth which must be overcome. A Christian must learn the stewardship of his prosperity and overcome the temptations associated with wealth. Unfortunately, these lessons have not been learned by most Americans who have abounded.

Here are some sins which accompany wealth: (a) Atributing one’s prosperity to his own abilities (cf. Lk. 2:15-21); (b) Laying up treasure on earth (Matt. 6:19-21); (c) Using one’s wealth to satisfy his own lusts without regard to the claims which the poor and needy have on him (Lk. 6:1-31); (d) Becoming arrogant (1 Tim. 6:17); (e) Trusting in riches (1 Tim. 6:17); (f) Thinking oneself to be self-sufficient (Rev. 3:17); (g) Allowing the cares of this world to choke out the gospel (Lk. 8:14). The list could be extended.

I have witnessed prosperity destroy the souls of men. The love of money has caused some Christians to take jobs which revent their worshiping with the saints. Abundance has enabled other Christians to become so involved in recreational activities (bowling leagues, softball leagues, etc.) and with entertainment facilities (a boat on the lake) that God is virtually eliminated from their lives. Such people may be abounding, but they have not learned to abound in the sense that Paul did.

Paul learned that one’s prosperity should be used to the glory and service of God. He had seen the good which men like Barnabas were able to do with their wealth (Acts 4:36,37) and, therefore, he willingly used his wealth to further the Lord’s kingdom. He labored to provide not only for his own needs, but also for the needs of others (Acts 20:34). He did not allow his prosperity to distract him from is service to God, as Demas did (2 Tim. 4:10).

Contentment

Paul wrote, “I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content” (4:11). The word “contentment” (from autarkeia) means “a mind contented with its lot.” Contentment is learned behavior. Writing in the Pulpit Commentary, R.M. Edgar said, “We cannot acquire it at a bound. We must serve our apprenticeship to it as to any other art. It is not a science to be theoretically mastered, but an art to be practically obtained. We must go to the ‘school of art,’ we must set ourselves earnestly as scholars to learn the lesson, and we must ‘keep our hands in’ by constant practice” (173).

Contentment accepts one’s state in life as the allotment of the providence of God. To learn to accept the allotments of the providence of God is a lesson which we slowly learn. Some pass through life never content with their circumstances in life; their discontentment leads them into sin.

There are sins associated with discontentment, such as murmuring, complaining, bitterness, envy, jealousy, etc. (see concordance for illustrations). He who has not learned to be content with his circumstances in life has not reached spiritual maturity. (This should not be understood to mean that one should cease trying to improve himself or cease trying to do more in the Lord’s work.)

Conclusion

Good spiritual health requires that one learn to accept those things which he cannot change with contentment. This contentment is not related to outward circumstance (whether one is abased or abounds). This contentment is grounded in God.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 18, pp. 546, 566-567
September 19, 1991

By Clinton D. Hamilton

A question concerning the mediating work of Jesus (1 Tim. 2:5) in relation to interceding of the Holy Spirit (Rom. 8:26) has been raised by a reader. In elucidating on the question, the querist comments as follows: “It is my understanding mediator and intercessor are interchangeable (the same word), hence my problem to reconcile these two teaching.” The querist goes on to state that “if the Spirit of Romans 8:26 is the spirit within us (Eccl. 12:7) that helps us to pray and as such is an intercessor between the one praying and Jesus the Christ (who puts the prayer before his heavenly Father) as our only mediator before God, that I can understand.”

However, the querist further observes: “But there are those who say the Spirit in Rom. 8:26 is the Holy Spirit, part of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. If so, wouldn’t this fragment the Holy Spirit?” In further amplification, the querist comments: “And if, as some . . . contend, the Holy Spirit only helps us pray when we are confused in what to ask for, and the Bible says we do ask amiss (Jas. 4:3) and we can ask in doubt (1 Tim. 2:8), so if it is the Holy Spirit who comes into us when we pray why do we ask ‘amiss,’ ‘doubting’?”

Finally, the querist states: “To my understanding (until corrected scripturally) the Holy Spirit bears witness with our spirit (Rom. 8:16) through the word. His help (if Rom. 8:26 does mean the Holy Spirit) in our praying is to help us to bring into remembrance what the Bible teaches on how to pray.”

Response: There is but one mediator between God and men, Jesus Christ (1 Tim. 2:5). The Holy Spirit is not, therefore, a mediator. This is a threshold issue and having settled this issue (who the mediator between God and men is), then it follows clearly that whatever Romans 8:26 means it cannot mean that the Holy Spirit is the mediator between God and men.

Mediator is from mesites, which means a go-between. This word is a compound of mesos, middle, and eimi, to go. Jesus is the perfect mediator because he is both God and man. He possesses the same nature, characteristics, and qualities of God toward whom he acts, as well as he does of those on whose behalf he acts. In this position of a go-between, no other being is so qualified as he is and no other is so approved by God. Consequently the Holy Spirit is not in this role.

On the other hand, it is also true that Jesus makes intercession for Christian (Heb. 7:25). Intercede is from entugchano which means to make petition, plead, or supplicate. In Romans 8:34, it is stated that Christ died for us, has risen again and is at the right hand of God, and makes intercession for us. True, Jesus Christ is our mediator but he also makes intercession for us to God.

Crucial to dealing with the issue posed by the querist is the meaning of the Greek term pneuma translated spirit in Romans 8:26. Does the term refer to the human spirit or to the Holy Spirit? This is a threshold question. It would appear from the fact that this same pneuma referred to in verse 26 is the one who in verse 27 makes intercession or supplication according to God on behalf of the saints. It is therefore evident that the reference is to the Holy Spirit and not to one’s own spirit.

In verse 26, the word translated “make intercession for us” is huperentugchanei which is a compound of huper, on behalf of, an entugchano which means to make petition, plead, or supplicate. In verse 27, entugchanei is followed by huper rather than being compounded with it. Having answered the threshold question I posed with the conclusion that the pneuma of these verses is the Holy Spirit, the issue addressed in the querist’s question about a possible contradiction in Scripture can now be considered.

There is only one go-between, or mediator between, God and men. However, the fact that this go-between supplicates or intercedes for men before God does not mean that any one interceding becomes the mediator between God and men. Intercessions (same word as defined above) are to be made for all men, according to the instruction of Paul (1 Tim. 2:1). The fact that men intercede for others does not put them in the place of Jesus Christ as the mediator. Although the mediator between God and men does intercede for them, this fact does not make one who intercedes for another also the mediator between that person and God. Making intercession on behalf of another does not impinge on the work of Jesus Christ as mediator between God and men to the point of usurping, or playing, the same role as Jesus Christ does as the mediator between God and men.

What does Romans 8:26 mean when the statement is made that the pneuma makes “intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered”? Alfred Marshall’s translation renders this verse basically as follows: And similarly also the Spirit takes share in our weakness; for what we may pray as it behooves we know not, but the Spirit it (him) self supplicates on (our) behalf with groanings unutterable. According to the instruction of God in Scripture, prayer is to be uttered consistent with the will of God (cf. 1 Jn. 5:14). Man being imperfect may have difficulty in expressing himself because of his weakness. The American Standard Version renders Romans 8:26: “And in like manner the Spirit also helpeth our infirmity: for we know not how to pray as we ought; but the Spirit himself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.”

“Helpeth” is translated from the root verb sunantilambanomai, which means according to Thayer “to lay hold along with, to strive to obtain with others, help in obtaining . . . to take hold with another (who is laboring), hence univ. to help: Lk. 10:40; Rom. 8:26.” Martha was concerned that Mary did not help her in serving and asked Jesus that he bid her to do so (Lk. 10:40). The sense is very clear: Martha wanted Mary to take hold in serving with her. The idea in the word is to assist, to help.

The same verb, sunantilambanomai, used in Luke 10:40, is used in Romans 8:26. The Holy Spirit is said to help in our weakness, that is as the text says, he helps our infirmity or weakness. Gar translated for means because and what follows it is the way he helps by making intercession for us with groanings that cannot be uttered. His intercession does not inferfere with or conflict with or supplant the mediator role of Jesus Christ. That he intercedes for us is unquestioned (Rom. 8:26-27). That this intercession does not relieve man of his responsibility and accountability in praying to God is fundamental to all the Bible teaches on man’s giving account to God (Jn. 5:28-29; 2 Cor. 5:10; Rom. 14:10-12).

It is evident from the teaching of the preceding passages that the Holy Spirit does not direct a correction of any words in our thoughts that would indicate we are not praying as we ought for then would men not be responsible for what is said. The Holy Spirit does not do something to the person praying but rather does something for the person. On the other hand, that person who seeks to serve God acceptably but who has some weakness, the Holy Spirit assists or helps in the Holy Spirit’s making intercession to God. This, of course, would be through Jesus Christ because he is the only mediator between God and men (1 Tim. 2:5).

The Holy Spirit intercedes with groanings or sighs, stenagmois, but these are not spoken words, alaletois, which means not spoken or expressed (Rom. 8:26). However, although they are not uttered, God who searches the heart knows what is the mind of the Spirit (Rom. 8:27). Therefore, he knows what his intercession is. But in his groanings the Holy Spirit intercedes for or on behalf of the saints according or relation to God. It should be clearly evident from these verses that the Holy Spirit does nothing to the Christians or saints but does help them in their weakness because he makes intercession for them. This help is consistent with the mediatorship of Jesus Christ and the will of God just as are intercessions made for some saints by other saints (1 Tim. 2:1).

It is through the Holy Spirit’s revelation that men are directed as how to pray or for what to pray. God who is the one searching the hearts knows the mind of the Holy Spirit, therefore he knows what the Holy Spirit’s supplication is on behalf of the saints (Rom. 8:27).

We certainly do not know everything in connection with this work of the Holy Spirit in relation to Christ and God. But God has revealed that the work is done and he has also revealed the responsibility and accountability of men to God. Both the praying of the individual with his weakness and the interceding of the Holy Spirit on his behalf are true. There is no fragmentation. Each being involved in the actions taken is independent. The actions which the passages under review teach are consistent with, and not contradictory to, each other.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 18, pp. 549-550
September 19, 1991

By Wallace H. Little

The newspaper headlines said: … One nation under God’ makes its debut this week. ” In the body of the article, I found, “. . . The national ‘One Nation Under God’ campaign was conceived by the Sycamore Church of Christ in Cookeville, Tenn. . . . The local four-day effort began on Saturday evening, in a nearby town. According to the article, “. . . During the first week in July, 102 million brochures are being delivered throughout the country.” They claim the idea is to put the gospel message into every household in the U.S.

The idea will fail miserably, as it should.

I received some material direct from “headquarters,” with instructions to “do my part.” Let me quote from the letter. “. . We chose a ‘rally’ format because we thought that it might attract people who would not attend a traditional Gospel meeting. We went to public facilities to attract people who would not go to a church building. We’ve installed patriotic speakers to attract people who would not go to hear a Gospel speaker. This represents their approach.

Now just how much gospel can we expect to hear from “patriotic” speakers, including two local politicians, and a man who was imprisoned by the North Vietnamese? These men may well be believers in God, but hardly after the New Testament order. Will they preach baptism for remission of sins and the church? If the purpose in Christ’s coming was to seek and save that which is lost – and it is (Lk. 19:10), I wonder how our brethren expect this to be done without preaching the plan of salvation.

The Sycamore church has gathered or been pledged several millions of dollars. Take the Philippines, for example. It would probably cost about $150.00 per month, or $1800.00 per year to support the average preacher there. So, if the Cookeville brethren have $3.5M, that would support more than 1900 preachers in that nation. Or take the U.S. Assuming the average preacher here needs $30,000.00 per year, we could have 116 more supported preachers for a year in the U. S.

Anyone want to bet Sycamore gets $3.5M worth of soul saving preaching from this nonsense?

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 17, p. 532
September 5, 1991

By Dan King

The current climate in our nation regarding divorce and the breakup of the traditional home is not only appalling to good men and women everywhere, but is abhorrent to the God of heaven. The same general circumstance which led the Lord to say, “I hate divorce” (Mal. 2:16), surely makes him view this spiritual mess with disgust! The old prophet spoke of the altar of the Lord being covered with tears (v. 13), undoubtedly the tears of women left in the lurch, having been forsaken by their husbands once their youthfulness and beauty had dimmed. “I gave that man the best years of my life, and this is what I have to show for it,” says a woman with a divorce decree in her hand. Her story is repeated thousands of times over in this nation every year. God said of Israel’s sorry state: “The Lord hath been witness between thee and the wife of thy youth, against whom thou hast dealt treacherously: yet is she thy companion, and the wife of thy covenant” (v. 14).

Admittedly, these days it can happen the other way around. Women also leave their husbands for a variety of reasons. But one will be aware, from simple observation, that most of the time it is the women who get the “short end of the stick” in these situations. They are left with children to feed and to raise, on a limited income, and are forced to live in relative poverty. Statistics show that a large segment of our population living below the “poverty line” are single mothers, many of whom are divorced and raising children alone. The children are left without fathers, or have them only on weekends, and the result here is also catastrophic. Malachi explained God’s ultimate end in the preservation of the family: “That he might seek a godly seed” (v. 15). Again, statistics prove (not surprisingly), that a majority of youthful lawbreakers come from broken homes. Our nation is on a downward slide in terms of the number of criminals and the violence of the crimes they commit, because a majority of these people have grown up in frustration and privation – the results of divorce and the hostilities that led to it.

For those of us who still care, the words of Christ in the New Testament give little consolation to the person contemplating taking this road out of marriage. In Mark 10 and Luke 16, there are parallels to those teachings about which we so often quarrel when we talk about divorce (namely Matt. 5:32; and 19:9). Here, however, there is no talk of “exceptions”; rather, the rule is stated: “Everyone that putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and he that marrieth one that is put away from a husband committeth adultery” (Lk. 16:18; cf. Mk. 10:11-12). Those people who first read these gospel accounts were not aware that there were any exceptions. They were only made aware of the rule: one man and one woman for life! I am not here denying the validity of the “exception” for adultery, as stated in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9; but I am denying that the exception is the rule! The decree of Jesus is that there is to be no divorce. We would be much better off were we to get that into our heads and our hearts. Homes would be much more stable, problems would get worked out, and children would grow up in a more nurturing environment. The result would be an improvement for the entire nation.

The Jewish scholar C.G. Montefiore commented on Matthew 5:32: “In these verses the originality of Jesus is made manifest. So far, in the Sermon on the Mount, we have found nothing which goes beyond Rabbinic religion and Rabbinic morality, or which greatly differs from them. Here we do. The attitude of Jesus towards women is very striking. He breaks through oriental limitations in more directions than one. For (1) he associates with, and is much looked after by, women in a manner which was unusual; (2) he is more strict about divorce; (3) he is also more merciful and compassionate. He is great champion of womanhood. And in this combination of freedom and pity, as well as in his strict attitude toward divorce, he makes a new departure of enormous significance and importance. If he had done no more than this, he might justly be regarded as one of the great teachers of the world” (Rabbinic Literature and Gospel Teaching, 46-47).

Montiefiore recognized from his study of Matthew 5:32 and its parallels what many people do not. Most of modern society and much of sectarian “Christianity” has forgotten just how “strict” Jesus really was on divorce. Let us not number among them. Let us marry and live with his rule in view: One man and one woman till death parts!

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 18, p. 551
September 19, 1991