Truth Magazine

By Mike Willis

A second prescription for good spiritual health in the face of bleak circumstances is given in Philippians 4:5 – “Let your moderation be known unto all men.”

The word “moderation” is a translation of the Greek adjective epieikes. To understand what character trait Paul is commanding demands that we do a word study. The word is used in a legal sense in secular Greek. It refers to the ability to set aside the letter of the law in order to give special consideration to mitigating circumstances in settling affairs (see Theological Dictionary of the New Testament 11:589). The word points to a man who has the letter of the law on his side but who does not insist that the demands of the letter of the law be met because of his moderate disposition and considerate leniency.

R.C. Trench emphasized that the word “expresses exactly that moderation which recognizes the impossibility of cleaving to all formal law, of anticipating and providing for all cases that will emerge, and present themselves to it for decision; which, with this, recognizes the danger that ever waits upon the assertion of legal rights, lest they should be pushed into moral wrongs … which, therefore, urges not its own rights to the uttermost, but, going back in part or in the whole from these, rectifies and redresses the injustices of justice” (Synonyms of the New Testament 154).

William Barclay commented along the same line:

The basic and the fundamental thing about epieikeia is that it goes back to God. If God stood on His rights, if God applied to us nothing but the rigid standards of law, where would we be? God is the supreme example of one who is epieikes and who deals with others with epieikeia.

It may be hard to translate this word, but it is not hard to see the clamant need of the quality which it describes. We live in a society where men insist on standing on their legal rights, where they will do only what they are compelled to do, and where they desire to make others do all that they can compel them to do. Again and again we have seen congregations torn by strife and reduced to tragic unhappiness because men and women, committees and courts stood on the letter of the law (A New Testament Wordbook 39).

As I read these definitions, I remember the parable of the two debtors in Matthew 18:23-35. The parable relates that a lord had a debtor who owed him 10,000 talents. He commanded that the debtor and his family be sold as slaves. When the debtor asked for compassion, the lord forgave him his debt. Later this debtor met a fellow slave who owed him 100 pence. He demanded that his fellow servant pay his debt. He fellow servant asked for mercy and time to repay, using the same words as the man who had owed 10,000 talents had used in asking mercy from his lord. The man refused to show mercy; he had his fellow servant cast into prison until the debt was paid. Of course, this man was exacting the letter of the law. Nevertheless, the Lord condemned him, using this as an example to teach us to forgive others even as God has forgiven us.

The shorter definitions of the word include such descriptions of the character trait commanded by moderation as follows: “mildness, gentleness, fairness, equitable, fair mild” (Thayer 238), “clemency, gentleness, graciousness . . . yielding, gentle, kind, your forbearing spirit” (Arndt and Gingrich 292). Some commentaries add such comments as the following:

Macknight: Moderation means that meekness under provocation, readiness to forgive injuries, equity in the management of business, candor in judging of the characters and actions of others, sweetness of disposition, and entire government of the passions (Philippians 465).

A.T. Robertson: “your gentleness,” “your sweet reasonableness” (IV:459).

Kenneth Wuest: not being unduly rigorous, being satisfied with less than one’s due, sweet reasonableness, forbearance (11:109).

Fritz Rienecker: reasonableness in judging. The word signifies a humble, patient steadfastness, which is able to submit to injustice, disgrace, and maltreatment without hatred and malice, trusting in God in spite of it all (A Linguistic Key to the Greek New Testament 11:214).

Having these definitions and comments before us, now let us make the application.

In order to have good spiritual health, especially in the midst of adversities, there are several principles by which we must live.

1. We must recognize that life is not always fair. Our sense of justice might lead us to think that we always will get what we deserve in life. That is not true. Christians are sometimes persecuted as a consequence of their doing righteousness (1 Pet. 4:16).

2. We must not allow life’s injustices to embitter us. One temptation the Devil uses to destroy men’s souls is to fill them with bitterness because of wrong suffered. The Christian must be careful not to allow his heart to fester over injustices as a result of which he becomes embittered.

Some men destroy themselves by brooding over past inequities. A church occasionally may mistreat a member (cf. 3 Jn. 9-10). Having imperfect people composing its membership, a church sometimes errs. On some occasions, the victim will quit serving the Lord altogether rather than manifesting that “patient steadfastness, which is able to submit to injustice, disgrace, and maltreatment without hatred and malice, trusting in God in spite of it all.” Without defending the sin committed against the victim, we nevertheless emphasize the weakness of character which quits serving God as a result of injustice.

3. We must manifest a yielding spirit in getting along with our fellow man. Lest someone misunderstand this point, let me state that we cannot compromise the truths of the gospel for the sake of unity. However, our attitude in getting along with others with whom we differ must be bending and yielding. We must not insist on our personal rights at the expense of brotherly love.

The Scripture says, “Let your moderation be known unto all men.” It can only be known as men see this disposition manifested by repeated acts of gentleness and self-restraint. A Christian must manifest a yielding disposition, in contrast to self-assertion of personal rights.

Self-assertion and assertion of rights may yield a temporary and personal victory. However, it ultimately leads to greater problems. A second pill in the prescription of good spiritual health is developing the character trait represented by the word “moderation.”

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 14, 418, 438
July 18, 1991

By John A. Smith

Joseph Resists Temptation

No temptation has overtaken you except such as is common to man; but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will also make the way of escape, that you may be able to bear it (1 Cor. 10:13).

Satan cannot defeat us unless we surrender. This can be easily seen in the life of Joseph. “No temptation could overcome his high-toned morality, no calamity could shake his implicit faith in God. Adversity in its bitterest form did not unduly depress him, and neither did the giddiest height of prosperity generate unseemly pride. In his father’s house he was pampered and fondled; in slavery wantonly and falsely accused; in the palace wielding unlimited power, he was always the same truthful, pure, just, noble-minded, Godfearing man” (W.E. Powers as quoted by C.C. Crawford in Genesis: The Book of Beginnings [Vol. 4], Joplin, MO:College Press, 1971 p. 533).

Joseph Seduced But He Resists

Joseph, sold by his brothers to a group of Midianite traders for 20 pieces of silver, was in turn sold to Potiphar. As captain of the guard, Potiphar was an important officer in Pharaoh’s army. From secular history we learn that Potiphar was also the chief of the executioners. (File that away for now!) As a foreign slave in Potiphar’s house, he no doubt would have been given menial tasks and been kept under close supervision when he first began his service. Whatever he did, regardless of how insignificant it may have been, he did it well. He was cooperative, not rebellious or bitter.

As a slave, Joseph prospered by his God (Gen. 39:1-6). In keeping with the “faithful in a few things; put in charge of many things” principle, Joseph was put in charge of all of Potiphar’s affairs. Joseph would have supervised other servants and employees as well as overseeing finances, business affairs and farms. The only thing withheld was the responsibility for his food. In Egyptian society eating with a foreigner would make one unclean.

Potiphar, although a pagan, saw that Joseph’s God was with him and prospering him. It was clear that Potiphar understood that there was a direct cause/effect relationship between Joseph’s devotion to his God and his success.

Potiphar then began to have some interest in Joseph’s God – perhaps not for the best of reasons, but interest none-the-less.

Propositioned by the Boss’ Wife (Gen. 39:7-10)

Mrs. Potiphar took notice of this well-built, handsome, young hunk (v. 6). He was appealing and offered quite a challenge. Her intentions were clearly sexual. She was bold and forward in asking him to go to bed with her. There was no effort to mask her intentions and desires. If she were so forward in her words, I can only imagine how forward she must have been in her dress and actions. Joseph faced a serious situation. Now, remember that Joseph was a young man with all the passions and desires of youth. Imagine being seduced by an older and prominent woman. I think we can understand how easily Joseph could have been swayed. Yes, Joseph faced a serious situation.

Joseph’s resistance was indeed remarkable. Consider Joseph’s environment: Mrs. Potiphar was his superior. Try to imagine for a moment all the favors Joseph could obtain if he satisfied her fleshly desires. Also, he was surrounded by sexual immorality. Egyptian society was corrupt. Their fascination with sexual immorality makes the immorality of today look like a Sunday afternoon church picnic. Joseph did not have friends who would support him in his noble decision of purity and morality. He was surrounded by filth!

Consider her persistence: day after day she tried to seduce him. This was not a one time seduction. Joseph’s resistance could not be worn down. It seemed that the more persistent she became, the more resistant he became!

Consider also his limited spiritual background: Joseph’s knowledge of God’s law was limited (the Law was some 400 years yet future). If you and I were to find ourselves in Joseph’s sandals, we could call upon a number of wellknown Scriptures which demand sexual purity. We could call to memory the “Ten Commandment Prohibition””Do not commit adultery.” Strength could come from Paul’s admonition to “flee fornication” (1 Cor. 6:18). But, Joseph did not take advantage of these Scriptures. In fact, he did not have a Bible at all.

What were Joseph’s reasons for resisting Mrs. Potiphar’s advances? First, he would not violate Popiphar’s trust (vv. 8-9). Potiphar had been showing interest in Jehovah and had great respect for Joseph. How would this be affected if Joseph gave in to Mrs. Potiphar’s advances? Potiphar trusted Joseph. In fact Potiphar took no thought for what he had because he knew that it was in good hands. If Joseph decided to give into Mrs. Potiphar’s advances, what would become of this trust? Today someone trusts you. Whether it is your parents, spouse, date, or God, someone trusts you. When trust is broken how is it repaired?

Second, Joseph would not disobey God (v. 9). He valued the approval of God and would not act so as to offend Jehovah. Though he was limited in his knowledge of Jehovah, he had strong moral convictions which he would not violate.

Third, his hormones did not over rule his head and heart. Joseph kept his fleshly desires under control. He had the ability to make choices and exercise self-control. And finally he had a desire for and took advantage of the way of escape provided by the Lord.

Joseph’s resistance brought imprisonment rather than reward (vv. 11-20). To resist and be rewarded is one thing, but to resist and get in trouble is quite another! Had Joseph been thrown into prison for some violation of moral or civil law, this would have been understandable. But, imagine what agony Joseph must have suffered when he knew that he was innocent!

Observations

The temptation was sexual, but as is often the case, Satan used other pressures as well. There would have been the fear of rejection and loss of position. Unlike Joseph, many people today yield to temptation, not because they are overwhelmed, but because of the fear of rejection.

Satan cunningly used legitimate desires to entrap Joseph. As we have observed earlier, sexual activity has its proper place. There is nothing wrong with sexual desires. There is nothing wrong with wanting people to like us or desiring to please others. However, Satan tried to get Joseph to satisfy these legitimate desires in some illegitimate ways.

It is when we are most successful, that we are often the most vulnerable. We may be tempted to let down our guard and thus face a devastating blow. Paul warns, “Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall” (1 Cor. 10:12). When successful we are often tempted to become self-reliant, thinking that we are stronger than we are.

We won’t resist unless we have a firm conviction. Verse 8 states that Joseph refused. He said no. He was determined, before he met with the temptation, that he would resist in such situations. He knew the value of a good run. 2 Timothy 2:22 and 1 Corinthians 6:18 admonish us to flee fornication. Sexual temptation grows in intensity the longer that we expose ourselves to it. Therefore, wisdom and prudence would have us run from it.

Resistance becomes much more difficult if we constantly subject ourselves to verbal and visual stimuli. Joseph made every effort to avoid contact with Mrs. Potiphar (v. 10). It’s true that we can’t avoid all tempting situations (to do so we would have to leave the world), but we can control our environment. Consider the wise man’s advice to the young man concerning sexual sin: “Remove your way far from her, and do not go near the door of her house” (Prov. 5:8). I have had the opportunity to talk with a number of young people whose lives have been affected by sexual sin. I have asked each of them how he/she could have avoided the sin of fornication. Several answers have been common to, almost all of them. They mentioned such things as: keep all of your clothes on all of the time, avoid dark places, and avoid being alone for long periods of time. (Think about it for a moment: Where are you most likely to be tempted – in the back seat of a car late at night parked at the end of a lonely country road or on the floor of the family room while Mom and Dad sit on the couch watching TV with you? I don’t think that the point is hard to understand!)

Resistance may cost a price with men, but not with God. Joseph paid a painful price for his purity and morality (2 years in prison). But, when we leave Joseph at the end of Genesis he had risen to the pinnacle of political power in Egypt (see Mk. 10:29-30). People may reject us, scoff at us and tell lies about us, trying to make us look bad. But God will never forget our faithfulness.

Young people remember that all is not lost, even if you do stumble and fall. There is forgiveness in Jesus Christ.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 14, pp. 424-425
July 18, 1991

By Lindsay A. Allen

The January 5th Times Daily of Florence, Alabama featured an extended article under the caption, “Churches of Christ Tackling National Campaign. ” The campaign entitled “One Nation Under God” is a $17 million evangelistic campaign under the oversight of the elders of the Sycamore Church of Christ, Cookeville, TN, with David Burke, a deacon, as national chairman. The purpose of this national campaign is to evangelize the U.S. through massive mailing, TV, radio, and simultaneous area gospel meetings throughout the nation. This massive mailing will be the largest in U.S. history except the U.S. Government, even surpassing that of the 1990 census. “Churches of Christ in the Shoals are playing a significant role with at least fifty churches in Lauderdale and Colbert counties involved who have pledged $1 million. One church has pledged $12,000 a year for ten years. Methodist and Baptist churches over the nation have given financial support.”

This plan begs for divine authority. After more than sixty years of Bible study, this writer has never read in the Scriptures anything that remotely resembles this project. If there is such Scripture, it is welcome and will be printed in this paper. Those who have conjured this monstrosity are among those who, years ago, pleaded for institutions to care for orphans. Those who opposed such efforts sounded a warning that once the door was opened there would be no end to the additions and innovations. They were warned that the spirit of apostasy is subtle and stubborn and does not relent until it has completely corrupted God’s plan. The above scheme is but one example of the evil fruit of departure from the word of God. It is a national evangelistic campaign of churches of Christ with national headquarters and over seen by the elders of one congregation! Can you believe it? Honestly, brethren, where was the Bible when you envisioned this “campaign”? If this plan is scriptural for one time for one nation, why would it not be scriptural for all nations for all time? Why not make it a permanent arrangement whereby all churches would turn their evangelistic responsibilities over to one congregation with each church supplying the funds?

Strange, indeed, that little is learned from history either divine or secular. There is need, not only to read the Scriptures, but also the history of the churches of Christ in the 19th century. “One Nation Under God,” aside from being unscriptural, is impractical and extravagant both in time and money. $17 million would support eighty preachers for five years at a salary of $40,000 a year. Think what eighty could accomplish in that length of time.

Another very distressing feature of this arrangement is fellowship with denominations. This strongly suggests that someone has not been preaching a full gospel with the proper “reproving and rebuking.” One could not imagine the enemies of Jesus and Paul offering financial support. Still another disturbing factor about this whole affair is that fifty churches of Christ in the Shoals, with the elders and preachers, are deeply involved in this national project. Brethren, all of us should take a good look at the landscape. We have drifted. Rome is not far away. This article is brought to a close with a brief look at the New Testament church as it is revealed in the Scriptures.

Each local church was completely autonomous and independent of every other church. Each church, under its elders, planned and executed its own work. Elders had no authority beyond the local church. No church planned a work beyond its ability and solicited funds from other churches. No church acted as an agent for another church. There were no “sponsoring” or “receiving” churches. Each church sustained the same responsibility for preaching the gospel according to its ability. Did the churches cooperate? Yes. When each congregation preached the same gospel for the same purpose, the saving of souls and glorifying God, there was complete cooperation. There was cooperation without centralization. The results were amazing. The gospel was preached to the whole world in one generation (Col. 1:23). The same things can be done today when the New Testament plan is faithfully followed.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 13, p. 403
July 4, 1991

By Lewis Willis

The question of fellowship seems to be a preoccupation with some brethren. Usually this signifies something rather ominous. Those who make this their chief thought are usually the ones who are trying to figure some way that fellowship can be extended to people who are teaching or practicing things that violate the Scriptures. They come up with all kinds of ideas about how you can have things like “limited fellowship” with these apostates. I suppose it is probably a good mental exercise, but it surely has caused a lot of trouble in the Church, especially over the last few years.

I have to confess to you that it interests me when I find a simplistic answer to problems that arise. Such an answer usually gets right to the heart of the matter and solves the problem quickly. Where the subject of fellowship is concerned I have always regarded Paul’s statement in Ephesians 5 as one of those simplistic answers to what would otherwise be a complex problem. In verse 11 he said, “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.” I just believe that you have to want to believe something else very badly if you misunderstand what Paul says. There is a lot of difference between having “no fellowship” and in having “some, a little or limited” fellowship. It actually appears to me that one’s intelligence is insulted to imply that this passage cannot be understood. All of the rationalizing in the world cannot change what Paul said. If we follow human, uninspired analysis and conclude that we can have some fellowship with darkness, all we have done is become “partaker of . . . evil deeds” (2 Jn. 11).

Even so, Paul’s statement gives us a sure-fire method for settling the question of who will be fellowshipped. When the “light” of the Lord – the Word of God – is applied to a practice, you determine immediately if the practice is darkness or light. If it is “darkness,” not only can we have no fellowship with it, we are told to “reprove” it. When you reprove darkness or evil works, you rebuke and expose them. Now, admittedly, my experience has been limited, but my experience has shown me that when you reprove, rebuke and expose error, those who want to practice it soon form their own fellowship. In other words, do what this passage says to do and you solve the problem of who is to be fellowshipped. It is impossible to have fellowship with someone who refuses that fellowship. And, if one finds his practice being rebuked, as the Scripture says, that will become so disconcerting that the person will separate himself from God’s people. So, if we will just do what Paul says, we solve this problem.

The process works like this: if you point out the sin of using instrumental music in the worship of the Church, the instrumentalist picks up his gear and forms a new fellowship. We call it “The Christian Church.” When you expose the sin of institutionalism, fellowship halls, ctc., those who want these works of darkness go out and form another new fellowship – we know them as “Liberal Churches of Christ.” When you expose the unscriptural organizational setup of the Boston/Crossroads Discipling Ministry, those who want this sinfulness form their new fellowship and they are known as “Crossroads Churches.” Simply by preaching truth and exposing error, the apostates depart to form their new church fellowship. It’s as simple as that! We have no choice but to preach the truth and expose error. So, when we do this, the problems about who will be fellowshipped take care of themselves. It is only a problem if we decide not to preach truth and expose error.

David seemed to have this same simple concept about this subject. He wrote, “I am companion of all them that fear thee, and of them that keep thy precepts” (Psa. 119:63). Those who do not fear God and keep his precepts “do not fit” in the House of the Lord. They are out of place and ultimately they will leave and form their own fellowship. However, this is usually done after having caused all the trouble they can cause, and, after they have deceived and duped as many brethren as possible into believing their error. Hear David again: “Mine eyes shall be upon the faithful of the land, that they may dwell with me: he that walketh in a perfect way, he shall serve me. He that worketh deceit shall not dwell within my house: he that telleth lies (lying is standard procedure for false teachers and those that follow them, LW) shall not tarry in my sight” (Psa. 101:6-7).

Truth and error do not mix. Those who urge the restraint imposed by God’s Word will not be tolerated by those who refuse those restraints. Therefore, they have historically gone forth to form new, false religions or fellowships. If that is their intention, let them depart and the sooner the better! God’s Word will solve the problem of fellowship if we will but respect and apply it!

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 14, p. 421
July 18, 1991