Truth Magazine

By Rick Duggin

In recent years there has been some controversy over the use of applause in connection with religious speeches. Some see no harm in clapping their hands to show approval of a powerful point. A few thoughts on this subject may prove helpful in other areas as well.

Perhaps it would be interesting to note that this is not a new problem. Consider the following quotations.

The emperor (Constantine, rd) diligently attended divine worship, and is portrayed upon medals in the posture of prayer . . . And lie even himself composed and delivered discourses to his court, in the Latin language, from which they were translated into Greek by interpreters appointed for the purpose. General invitations were issued, and the citizens flocked in great crowds to the palace to hear the imperial preacher, who would in vain try to prevent their loud applause by pointing to heaven as the source of his wisdom . . . At times lie would severely rebuke the avarice and rapacity of his courtiers, who would loudly applaude him with their mouths, and belie his exhortation by their works (Schaff, History of the Christian Church, 111, p. 34).

Julian the apostate complained of the indifference of his heathen followers. “The spectators at his sacrifices came not from devotion, but from curiosity, and grieved the devout emperor by their rounds of applause, as if he were simply a theatrical actor of religion” (Ibid., p. 48).

Chrysostorri mourns over the theatrical customs, such as loud clapping, which the Christians at Antioch and Constantinople brought with them into the church (Ibid., p. 377).

Pulpit eloquence in the fourth and fifth centuries reached a high point in the Greek church, and is most worthily represented by Gregory Nazianzen and Chrysostom. But it also often degenerated there into artificial rhetoric, declamatory bombast, and theatrical acting. Hence the abuse of frequent clapping and acclamations of applause among the people. As at this day, so in that, many went to church not to worship God, but to hear a celebrated speaker, and left as soon as the sermon was done, The sermon, they said, we can hear only in the church, but we can pray as well at home. Chrysostom often raised his voice against this in Antioch and in Constantinople (Ibid, p. 473).

At this point you may wonder why I have quoted the writings of early preachers rather than the New Testament itself, There is a good reason for this course. As far as I can tell, the New Testament is completely silent on the subject of hand-clapping and applause, either in a religious setting or out. I do not know of a single passage that even leans in that direction. Therefore, one who wishes to read of applause in churches must turn to uninspired history rather than to the biblical record.

We do know, that the most enlightened and spiritually-minded men of the third through the sixth centuries were unanimous in their opposition to applause following religious discourses. In view of their laxity in other areas, this is quite interesting.

We do know that the apostate Julian opposed applause in connection with his heathen sacrifices because it lowered his efforts to the level of theatrics.

We do know that those who favored applause were the ignorant masses who considered sermons more as performances than as exhortations to godly living. The more worldly the assembly, the greater the need for frivolous practices.

We do know that denominational writers such as Philip Schaff rejected applause as unseemly in religious settings. When Christians begin to practice activities that denominational leaders consider offensive, it is later than we think. Of course, other denominational leaders covet applause. Anyone who has ever watched Jimmy Swaggart knows that his worldly antics invite such responses. Do we really want to imitate such irreverent foolishness?

The burden of proof is clearly on the one who advocates applause in worship. The silence of the New Testament does not give consent (cf. Heb. 7:14). Which passage could be used to authorize clapping during or after a sermon? If the practice was not learned in the New Testament, where was it learned?

Let us reverently heed the preaching of God’s word and accept its challenge to mold our lives into the image of our Lord.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 5, p. 137
March 7, 1991

By Lester A. Doyle, Jr.

As we gather around our Lord’s table this morning, we do so as a memorial to him. Memorials are places of memory; memory of those we love and those who loved us. Our Lord has given us such a memorial – the Lord’s supper.

We read in John 6:48 the words of Jesus: “I am the bread of life.” In verses 56 through 58 he said: “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in Him. As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who feeds on Me will live because of Me. This is the bread which came down from heaven, not as your fathers ate the manna and are dead. He who eats this bread will live forever.”

He was offering something that had come straight from heaven, something new. When he led his disciples into the upper room, He said, “This do in remembrance of Me.” We have no memorial gardens where he lays to visit and remember. He arose from that grave. The only physical link we have with our resurrected Savior is the supper he left for us. When we share his supper, we remember the life he lived, the death he died, the resurrection he achieved.

This is how we remember the one that loved us the most, our Savior Jesus Christ.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 5, p. 136
March 7, 1991

By John A. Smith

The Human Distinction (1)

Modern science tells man that he is nothing more than the product of a cosmic accident. We are simply a more highly developed animal whose most ancient ancestors were swamp slugs that somehow ended up swinging from tree branches.

The Bible presents a much more respectful and honorable picture of man. It is one which demands that our behavior be much better than that of animals. The Bible presents a picture of man that displays a clear distinction between animal life and human life.

The “Human Distinction” is based upon our being made in the image of God. When God created man He said, “Let us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness. . . So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them” (Gen. 1:26-27). As David pondered man’s creation and existence he asked: “What is man that You are mindful of him, and the son of man that You visit him? For You have made him a little lower than the angels, and You have crowned him with glory and honor” (Psa. 8:4-5). That is quite an honor! Image someone telling you that your basketball skills are just a little below that of Michael Jordan (or Larry Bird if you really appreciate talent). Would you feel honored? Of course you would. Well, how about being made just a little lower than the angels? Man was created by God with a special, honorable nature.

When Noah departed from the ark, God gave him and his family a few simple instructions. In Genesis 9:3-6 they were told that they could eat any animal, but they could not eat the meat with the blood still in it. They were strictly forbidden from eating humans. Why? It is because of the sanctity of human life that is not shared by the rest of creation.

As humans we are special, distinct from the animal kingdom, higher than the animals, and the objects of more love, grace and mercy.

Young people need to be impressed with the reality that they are higher than animals. They are encouraged in Ecclesiastes 12:1 to “Remember now your Creator in the days of your youth, before the difficult days come, and the years draw near when you say, I have no pleasure in them.” Remember that you were created in the image of God and are not simply the result of an ancient accident in some primeval swamp. You are distinct and superior to the rest of creation. This distinction should have a profound effect upon your behavior.

What The Human Distinction Provides Us

The human distinction grants us the ability to reason. As humans we have the ability to think logically and process information. We are not driven by brute instinct. The Lord recognized this ability when he called upon Israel to “Come now, let us reason together” (Isa. 1: 18). We can think before we act. Sadly, not all young people (or older folks for that matter) use this important God-given ability.

We are not driven by brute instinct to mate. We insult ourselves and degrade ourselves when we act like a beast in the field that mates at certain times of the year without giving any thought to what he is doing.

Young people, don’t let sex cause your brains to turn to mush or cease to function. This reminds me of a “Woody Woodpecker” cartoon that I saw several years ago. Woody was sitting on a tree limb happily drilling a hole in the side of a tree when a girl woodpecker landed on the tree next to him (you can tell she’s a girl by the long eyelashes and pink bow in her feathers!) Immediately Woody’s eyes pop out of his head and turn to hearts while his brain falls out! Have you ever known someone like this? You know – the person who seems to lose all reason when it comes to the opposite sex?

We are not brute beasts or mush-brained woodpeckers! We have been created in the image of God with the ability to reason. Let’s make sure that we use it.

As a result of being rational creatures, we have the ability to make choices. Joshua understood this when he told Israel to “choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve” (Josh. 24:15). He recognized that individually the people of Israel had a free will. To serve Jehovah or the false gods of the land was their choice. They would not be forced against their will or driven by brute instinct to worship and serve Jehovah.

In regard to sexual activity, we likewise have the ability to make choices. Young people are not driven by some internal primitive instinct to mate. If sexually active, it is because they choose to do so. T~ey have the ability to resist the lusts of the flesh and make choices that are spiritually and physically wise and healthy. In addition young people have the comfort of knowing that they will not be tempted beyond what they have the ability to resist (1 Cor. 10: 13 read it, mediate upon it and take hope!).

. Parents, we need to recognize that our young people will be making their own sexual choices. We cannot be with them every minute of every day. Before we turn our children loose behind the wheel of an automobile, we make sure that they know the rules of the road. They must demonstrate some proficiency in the operation of an automobile. Before we turn our young people loose on the world, let’s make sure that they understand the problems that can arise from sexual activity and are prepared to make the good, healthy and wise choice of pre-marital sexual abstinence. While we cannot be with them every minute of every day and make every decision for them, we can instill the values and morals upon which these choices will be made.

Having the ability to reason and make choices results in our having the ability to practice self-control. Animals don’t have that ability. Among God’s creation, it resides solely with mankind. When Marvin, the bull, catches the scent of a cow in heat, he instinctively pursues the cow and mates. Driven by instinct, he can’t help himself.

Although many young people act like Marvin, they do have the ability to regulate their own sexual behavior. In fact, God expects that young and old alike control their behavior. Among those described and condemned in 1 Timothy 3:15 are those who are “without self-control.” Every call in the New Testament for sobriety is a call for self-control (see Tit. 2:12). As parents we need to see that there is more talk of self-control than birth-control. Our young people need to recognize their ability to control their own sexual thoughts and actions being trained and encouraged to do so.

Self-control doesn’t demand that we turn away from everything that has to do with our sexuality. It simply means that we operate according to the “rules of the road.” We leave sexual gratification where God placed it – in marriage (Heb. 13:4).

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 5, pp. 134, 150
March 7, 1991

In the spring of 1990, brother John Welch preached a sermon at one of the congregations in Louisville, Kentucky in which he made the statement that while Jesus was on earth “he was a man; just an ordinary guy, ordinary man like you and me.”

Several challenged the statement in print and brother Welch responded by stating, “I state unequivocally, here and now, that I do believe in the deity of Jesus before, during, and after his period of time on earth” (Gospel Anchor [September 1990], p. 3). Discussion has continued between brother Welch and several others regarding whether the retraction was a retraction of the doctrine taught or the wording used to express it (see Gospel Anchor [November 1990-February 1991]). 1 am willing to give brother Welch the benefit of the doubt. I do not believe that he is a modernist or trying to establish a sect or cult, as some have said.

In brother Weldon Warnock’s article “Revival of An Ancient Heresy,” published in Guardian of Truth [21 February 1991 ], the controversy over brother Welch’s statement from his sermon and the teachings of some others was alluded to without specifying the occasion or one who stated it. I was aware of brother Welch’s correction and the subsequent discussion surrounding it at the time. Inasmuch as brother Warnock and I were interested in discussing the issue, not the person, brother Welch was not named and no mention was made of his correction. Upon receiving his copy of Guardian of Truth, brother Welch contacted me complaining that it was unfair to publish the allusion to the quotation from the sermon without also noting the retraction. We are willing to print this notice of his retraction in fairness to brother Welch so that none will believe that he defends his wrong statements about Jesus. Brother Welch made no objections to the doctrinal content of brother Warnock’s article.

As brother Warnock wrote at the conclusion of his article, we appeal for brethren to confine themselves to the language of Scripture in expressing the Bible doctrines of the deity and humanity of Jesus. In this all can be united. – Editor

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 5, p. 140
March 7, 1991