Truth Magazine

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

By Bobby R. Holmes and Ron Hallbrook

Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you (Matt. 5:10-12).

We can well understand it when people who do not profess to be believers persecute the people of God, but it is ironic and especially sad when those who claim to be servants of God abuse his people. “So persecuted they the prophets which were before you,” Moses was called the meekest man of his day because he endured repeated opposition and abuse at the hands of the very people who claimed to believe in God (Num. 12:3). Jesus Christ himself was delivered to be crucified by the religious leaders of the Jewish nation “He came unto his own, and his own received him not” (Jn. 1:11).

Apostate movements among God’s people breed disrespect for God’s Word and contempt for those who stand in the way of digression. Of all the things Paul suffered, none could have been more painful and frustrating than the blows of false brethren (2 Cor. 11:26). Paul warned, “Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers . . . . For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are enemies of the cross of Christ” (Phil. 3:2,18). This was not a warning about atheists but about digressive brethren who bite and tear, and do damage to the cause and the people for whom Christ died! John, the apostle of love, said that digressive brethren not only reject apostolic doctrine but also abuse brethren who insist on following the apostolic word (1 Jn. 2:9; 3:10-18; chapt. 4).

There is a dear band of saints at Sturgis, Mississippi, which is not ashamed to stand with Christ and with all who have suffered for truth and right throughout the centuries, They are not afraid or ashamed to suffer for Christ, though they are few in number and poor in this world’s goods. They are strong in faith and rich in love for the Lord and for the truth of the gospel. We can help them in the midst of their great trial of affliction.

The Sturgis church began in 1974 with the conversion of Lela McCarter. The meetinghouse is located in a rural area some three and one-half miles off State Highway 12 between Starkville and Sturgis, Mississippi. Recognizing the need to preach Christ to the black race, the Lee Boulevard church in Starkville helped to plant the Sturgis church. The history of the relationship between the Starkville and Sturgis churches is a classic example of the results of the liberal movement within the body of Christ in departing from the Bible pattern on church organization and other things.

When a very small church building was constructed at Sturgis about 1984, these brethren were put under the oversight of the Lee Boulevard church, located fifteen miles away in Starkville. Sturgis was even required to send their Lord’s Day contribution to the Lee Boulevard eldership, which in turn took care of paying the bills. The Sturgis meetinghouse was built by a combination of efforts and labors by members from Starkville and Sturgis, but the deed to the Sturgis property was put in the name of Lee Boulevard and was held by them, through the years. Later, a larger meetinghouse was built next to the small one (which was then used for classes and a kitchen for social meals) but, again, the whole thing was kept under the oversight of the Lee Boulevard eldership.

In late 1987, a young preacher named Mike Hurst was attending Mississippi State University in Starkville. He heard of the small church at Sturgis and inquired about preaching for them since they were without a preacher at the time. Mike began preaching on Bible authority, local church organization, and related subjects. The Sturgis brethren also began reading Truth, a bulletin published by the Dallas Avenue church in Lancaster, Texas (edited by Bobby Holmes). As a result of plain teaching from God’s Word, the Sturgis church realized it had no business allowing another church to “assume oversight” over them and immediately shook off the chains of liberalism.

Not only have the kitchen facilities been removed, but other important steps have been taken. A letter was sent to the elders at Starkville. It read in part,

The men of the Sturgis Church of Christ, in the business meeting of January 24, 1988, reached the conclusion that the church here must be totally independent of the Lee Blvd. church in handling its own matters, financial and otherwise. In a study of God’s Word, we find that each congregation is to be independent of all others. In 1 Peter 5:13, the elders are charged to “tend the flock of God which are among you, taking the oversight thereof. “We have both violated God’s Word. We in allowing you to take the oversight of this church and you in doing it. We cannot help the past but we can correct the present and protect the future. Please read Acts 20:17 and 20:28.

The letter respectfully requested “that the Lee Boulevard church turn over to the Sturgis church the deed to Sturgis church property and all monies accruing from the Lord’s day collections of the Sturgis church.” Though Lee Boulevard offered no records to verily their accounting of the Sturgis church’s money, they answered by letter that Sturgis was due less than $500.00 and transferred the money to the Sturgis church’s own bank account.

The Lee Blvd. elders refused to transfer the deed for the Sturgis church’s property to the Sturgis church. At first Sturgis was told they could continue to meet in their building rent free, but then later they were told they could purchase their property for $35,000! Lee Blvd. pretended that this was fair because they had paid off part of the loan from their own treasury. Sturgis offered to make arrangements to pay back that amount, to no avail.

On 26 November 1990, Lee Blvd. transferred the deed for the Sturgis meetinghouse to the name of a third church, the Highway 82 church in Starkville. This is another liberal church made up of black members, to which some of the Sturgis members had moved their membership several years ago. Next, the Hwy. 82 church wanted $200.00 rent per month from Sturgis. When the Sturgis church protested this move, Hwy. 82 said Sturgis could continue to assemble in their meetinghouse until the property is sold. At that point, Sturgis would be evicted.

Being poor, unknown, and isolated, the saints at Sturgis asked us to help them to find a solution to their problem. Both of us (Holmes and Halbrook) have preached there. We made a trip to Mississippi the week of 26 November 1 December 1990 to preach, to encourage the brethren, and to see what more could be done. We have consulted with gospel preachers in Mississippi, with lawyers in three states, and with other brethren. We are not alone in our interest in the Sturgis brethren. Clark Buzbee preaches for the sound church in Starkville and is well acquainted with the problems at Sturgis. He graciously helped to get someone to go out to Sturgis so they could have monthly preaching. J.F. Dancer at Grenada has driven one hundred miles to visit the church at Sturgis and to encourage them during gospel meetings. Wayne Fancher an elder from Grenada has accompanied brother Dancer. Frank Butter, now of Shelbyville, TN, and Roosevelt Johnson of Columbus, MS have also come to help. Other brethren who have preached or otherwise participated in the services at Sturgis include Kyle Smith (Grand Prairie, TX), George Slover (San Marcos, TX), and Gene Lyles (Brady, TX).

What about the church building? The Sturgis brethren have legitimate legal claims to their property after all these years, even though their deed has been held in trust for them by Lee Blvd. Sturgis could defend their property rights by appealing to a court of law, but who among God’s people wants to see that happen? To take that course would raise all sorts of doubtful questions, gender strife, consume thousands of dollars, drag out for years, and even then perhaps end in a miscarriage of justice. The simplest and safest course is to negotiate a more reasonable price on the property and seek to make a financial settlement.

Thomas D. Keenum, Sr. is an elder in a faithful church and an attorney in Booneville, MS. At his own expense, he has done research, offered advice, and served as a neutral and fair negotiator. Through his efforts, the Hwy. 82 church has agreed to sell the Sturgis brethren their property for $17,000.00. Hwy 82 first insisted on a 1 May 1991 deadline, but brother Keenum has gotten us more time.. The Sturgis brethren are in a strait without financial resources. Donations from church treasuries would not be appropriate, but we are asking – even pleading -for individuals to help our brethren at Sturgis who have suffered so much for the cause of Christ. We must not let them lose their meeting place by indifference to their plight. Raising funds is not easy. After all these brethren have-suffered and sacrificed, let us suffer and sacrifice with them by meeting their need.

Brethren Keenum and Buzbee have agreed to help Sturgis by providing a detailed and accurate accounting of every penny received. They are not asking Sturgis or anyone else to pay them for this service, nor will they organize any institution, corporation, or board. They are not taking it upon themselves to make decisions about how the money received will be spent. They are acting purely as individuals to aid Sturgis. Every penny received will be applied to this property settlement and not a penny will be requested beyond that amount. This need is most likely to be met by the average person who can give $5.00, $25.00, $50.00, or $100.00. Send whatever you can to Sturgis Church of Christ Building Fund, P.O. Box 418, Booneville, MS 38829. Your contribution is tax deductible. To “provide things honest in the sight of all men,” checks written from this account will be cosigned by Thomas Keenum and David McCarter of the Sturgis church (Rom. 12:17).

To appreciate the love of the Sturgis brethren for the truth, consider what they did when the butane gas used to heat their building ran out the night before a Saturday morning service during Bobby Holmes’ gospel meeting in February of 1988.

With the temperature at 16 the next morning, you can imagine how it was in the building. Most people would have simply called off the morning service, but not these people. They came to hear a lesson from God’s Word and they stayed. They had already been told the heat was off, but they came anyway. Now folks, that’s having a love for truth (Truth bulletin, 21 Feb. 1988).

This devoted band of 20-25 tries to spread the gospel to their friends and neighbors. Visitors at gospel meetings include denominational people. There is good potential for this church in the days and years ahead. Appeals to Scripture and the autonomy of each local church have been made to the churches at Lee Blvd. and Hwy 82, to no avail. Purchasing the property at a negotiated price is the only viable solution. Our liberal brethren will hear neither God’s Word nor the cries of his oppressed people who love the truth. Their cries are entered into the ears of the Lord of hosts (Jas.5:4). Let us hear them, too!

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 14, pp. 422-423
July 18, 1991