Truth Magazine

By John A. Smith

Preface

Young people today face an increasingly hostile and confusing world. Temptations which were once subtle and cunningly disguised are being paraded with society’s approval. Young people are being bombarded by a mixture of messages that encourage them to act on their natural sexual impulses without regard for morals. T.V. (soaps in particular), movies and much of our popular music promote a life-style of instant gratification free from moral restraints. Left to themselves young people face a herculean task in overcoming this pressure.

For the young Christian these pressures take on new and more significant meaning when viewed in the light of one’s eternal soul. It’s not just a matter of pregnancy or disease. It is a matter of sin. The young Christian can overcome these pressures with faith in a loving and merciful God. Strength and purity can be derived from a knowledge of God’s Word. With a mind set on things above and patient parents who remember the days of their youth, the young person can be spiritually victorious.

Consider a few sobering facts that illustrate the depth of the problem of teenage sexual promiscuity:

• There has been a 200% increase in number of teen pregnancies since 1960.
• If the current rate continues 40% of today’s 14-year olds will become pregnant at least once before they turn 19.
• By the time you finish reading this article at least 2 unwed teenage girls in the state of Kentucky will have given birth.
• Teenage girls account for 30% of all reported abortions and the number seeking abortions has more than doubled since 1960.

It is rare these days to find a congregation that has not had to deal with the problems caused by out-of-wedlock teenage pregnancies. This problem is not confined to the world, “Good girls,” some of whom are already Christians, get pregnant by “good boys” who likewise are members of the Lord’s body. It is time that we wake up and take our heads out of the sand. Our young people need to hear strong uncompromising sermons on sexual sin. But beyond that they need to be taught why to say “no,” how to say “no” and be made to feel good about remaining sexually pure.

I fail to understand the mentality of most Christians in past generations regarding sexuality. It was the only area of life in which it was thought that we could change behavior or shape values by silence. Silence has not worked. Silence will not educate, perfect, mold or restrain. We need to openly, honestly and frankly discuss the problem of young people and sexual pressure.

It shall be the purpose of this series of articles to discuss in honest and frank terms the problem of teenage sexual pressure. I do not want to offend anyone, but want to use terms that can be easily understood. This material is the result of 21/2 years of careful research, interviews with many teenagers facing the various consequences of teenage sexual activity, and one year’s experience teaching sex education in the local schools.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 4, pp. 97, 109
February 21, 1991

By Weldon E. Warnock

Old heretical issues of the past have a way of being resuscitated and given new life among the people of God. Such is the case wherein some are indicating that Jesus was just a man, nothing but a man, while he was here on earth. This is not a new doctrine, but an old one, conceived and incubated in the hearts of fallible men.

The apostle John wrote of those who denied that the Son of God had come in the flesh. Listen to him: “Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is the spirit of antichrist” (1 Jn. 4:2-3). This Jesus, John states, is “the true God, and eternal life” (1 Jn. 5:20; cf. 1:1-2). To deny that Jesus was God in the flesh is “not of God” and manifests “the spirit of anit-christ.”

Several different groups in times past have put out disclaimers on the divinity of Jesus. One of them was the Ebionites, essentially a Jewish sect of the first century. They held that Jesus was the supreme lawgiver of the church, the promised Messiah, the Son of David, but yet a mere man. Some of the Gnostics taught that Jesus was at best ranked only with the highest of the prophets. He was simply one of many and not unique – divine.

The Arians (4th century) advocated that Christ is a middle between God and man, a sort of demi-god. In the 17th century, the Socinians maintained that Jesus of Nazareth, though supernaturally conceived, was a mere man with extraordinary revelations, but elevated to heaven and deified in reward of his holy life.

Once again the Godhood of Jesus is being called into question. Uncertain sounds are being heard that undermine the divine nature of our Lord Jesus Christ. These cannot be permitted to go unchallenged! The following will conclusively show that Jesus was truly Emmanuel – God with us (Matt. 1:23) while here on earth, yea, forevermore (Heb. 13:8).

1. Jesus was God. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . . And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us” (Jn. 1: 1, 14). When Jesus became flesh, he did not become a new being, but entered into a new mode of being.

Thomas confessed that Jesus was his Lord and God (Jn. 20;28). Jesus commended Thomas’ adoration and held it up for the imitation of the coming ages. Jesus said in v. 29, “Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou has believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.”

Paul wrote, “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh” (1 Tim. 3:16). “. . . and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever, Amen” (Rom. 9:5).

2. Jesus was the Son of God. He made this claim for himself. “The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live” (Jn. 5:25; cf. 9:35; 11:4). In his interview with Nicodemus, Jesus designated himself as “the only begotten of God” (Jn. 3:18).

The Jews understood Jesus to claim equality with God. “Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God” (Jn. 5:18). On another occasion, they charged Jesus with blasphemy for making himself God. “The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God” (Jn. 10:33).

Were they mistaken in their perception of Jesus’ claims and teachings? If so, why did he allow it to stand? Why did Jesus not undeceive them? Obviously, he was God!

3. Jesus was Jehovah. John the Baptist was to “go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways” (Lk. 1:76). This is taken from Isaiah 40:3 where Isaiah prophesied, “The voice of one that crieth, Prepare ye in the wilderness the way of Jehovah” (ASV). Isaiah clearly calls Jesus Jehovah, John being the forerunner.

Paul speaks of Jesus as “the Lord of glory” (1 Cor. 2:8). This expression, in first century Jewish thought, meant Jehovah. Hence, the princes of this world crucified Jehovah. Lenski said, “The person is here designated according to his divine nature (Lord of glory) while the thing predicated of him belongs to his human nature (crucified).”

4. Jesus was the “I AM.” He said, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am” (Jn. 8:58). “And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world . . . . for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins” (Jn. 8:23-24). The pronoun “he” is italicized in v. 24. Hence, they were to be believe that Jesus was “I AM.”

William Hendriksen stated that the same thought is expressed in both John 8:24 and John 8:58; namely, that Jesus is God (Commentary on John). Compare Exodus 3:13-14 where God tells Moses that his name is “I AM THAT I AM.” When Jesus said, “I am,” he identified himself as the eternal God.

5. Jesus was always the same person. Emphasizing certain words in Colossians 1:15-20, let us observe that Paul speaks of the one person who is the image of God (v. 15), by whom were all things created (v. 16), who is before all things (v. 17), in whom was the Father’s good pleasure for all fulness to dwell (v. 19, NASB), and having made peace through the blood of his cross (v. 20), God reconciled all things to himself. Hence, the Son of God did not cease to exist when he was incarnated.

Another passage which shows no discontinuity of the person of Christ is Philippians 2:5-8. Jesus, being in the form (essence of a person or thing) of God, took upon himself the form (essence) of a servant, and being found in fashion (likeness) as a man, he (same person as in v. 6) humbled himself, and became obedient unto death. Here is explicitly set forth the fact that Jesus was both God and man.

6. Jesus asserted full power to forgive sins. When the palsied man was brought to Jesus, the Lord said, “Son, thy sins be forgiven thee” (Mk. 2:5). When the scribes heard this they reasoned in their hearts, “Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? Who can forgive sins but God only?”

If Jesus was merely a man, the scribes reasoned correctly, and, therefore, Jesus was guilty of blasphemy. But Jesus responded, “But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins . . . . I say unto thee (palsied man), Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house” (vv. 10-11).

7. Jesus indirectly compared himself with God. Jesus proclaimed, “All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him” (Matt. 11:27; cf. Lk. 10:22).

“Knoweth” (epiginoskei) in the text is full knowledge. Man knoweth only in part, what is revealed, but Jesus had total, complete and full knowledge of the Father. His knowledge was as thorough of the Father as the Father’s knowledge was of the Son. Nothing less than deity can accurately be ascribed to Jesus by the words he spoke in this verse quoted above.

John wrote, “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he that declared him” (Jn. 1:18). The phrase, “in the bosom of the Father,” shows the eternal relation of the Son and “declared” (exegesato) means to “exegete, lead out, interpret. ” What mortal man could give an exegesis of God? Jesus said, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father” (Jn. 14:9).

8. Jesus demanded devotion and honor which can only be properly yielded to God. The Bible teaches that we are to love God with all our heart, soul and mind (Matt. 22:37). Yet, Jesus said, “He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me” (Matt. 10:37, NASB). How could Jesus demand love above family if he were not God?

On occasions Jesus was worshipped, which worship he accepted. “Then they that were in the ship came and worshipped him, saying, Of a truth thou art the Son of God” (Matt. 14:33; cf. 20:20; 28:9,17). Jesus taught that only God is to be worshipped (Matt. 4:10). But Jesus accepted worship, therefore, he was God.

9. Jesus claimed inherent power to raise his own body, quicken souls and to raise all the dead at the last great day. Concerning his body Jesus said, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (Jn. 2:19). Verse 21 states that “he spake of the temple of his body.” He also said, “I lay down my life, that I might take it again . . . . I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again” (Jn. 10:17-18). Strange words for a mere man!

Furthermore, Jesus declared he would raise tne spiritually dead (Jn. 5:25), which he did through the gospel (Eph. 2:5; Col. 2:12-13; Rom. 6:311). At the last great day those in the graves shall hear his voice and come forth (Jn. 5:28-29).

10. Jesus announced himself as the center of rest for the human soul. He stated, “Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest” (Matt. 11:28-30). Jesus also said, “Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you” (Jn. 14:27; cf. 16:33). Only God is the resting-place of the soul. Jehovah will bless his people with peace (Psa. 29:11).

11. Jesus promised his continued presence with his disciples after his ascension. “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them” (Matt. 18:20). One of the last promises Jesus made was, “Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world” (Matt. 28:20).

These assurances of Jesus are inexplicable if he were possessed of one nature – the human, which must of necessity be local and limited as to its presence. But Stephen saw him in heaven (Acts 7:56), Paul saw him on the Damascus road (Acts 26:13-118; 1 Cor. 9:1), later receiving encouragement from him at Corinth (Acts 18:9-10) and at Jerusalem (Acts 23: 10), and John was the recipient of his comfort on the isle of Patmos (Rev. 1:17-18).

Though these appearances of Jesus in the preceding paragraph were miraculous in nature, he still knows, cares and abides with us.

12. Jesus came from heaven. He was not a separate entity while he tabernacled in the flesh. His divine and human natures were inseparable, indivisible, concurring in one Person, not parted and divided into two persons. Such is the pure teaching of the Scriptures. We read, “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven” (Jn. 3:13). The Son of man came from heaven, lived 33 years among mortal men, and returned to heaven. John 6:62 states, “What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before” (Jn. 6:62).

Jesus told the Jews, “for I proceeded forth and come from God” (Jn. 8:42). To his disciples he uttered, “I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world, and go to the Father” (Jn. 16:28). In his prayer to the Father, Jesus prayed, “And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was” (Jn. 17:5).

To deny the deity of Jesus destroys our trust in him as our Savior, prohibits our loving him with all our hearts, and precludes our admirations of him with our whole being, for to do so would be idolatry!

Conclusion

Brethren, the times demand of us a re-assertion of the foundational truths, the foundation of the gospel, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God (Matt. 16:16; Jn. 20:30-31).

The effort to portray Jesus as a mere man in order to hold man responsible and inexcusable (Rom. 1:20; 2:1) for every act of disobedience, to show that man is able to live sinlessly perfect, is a fallacious argument from beginning to end. Jesus was a divine being (God-man) and we are human, totally and completely. He resisted sin (Heb. 4:15; 1 Pet. 2:22) and we don’t under all circumstances, for “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23).

We all agree that no person on this earth has lived above sin, except Jesus, and none ever will (Rom. 3:23; 1 Jn. 1:8, 10). Why engage in controversial rhetoric over “is man able to live a perfect life?” when all of us agree that no one does? Any doctrine which strips Jesus of his divinity, God os his grace, and man of his need for a Savior in order to hold man responsible for his sin is not the Bible doctrine. Indeed, man is a sinner, not by an inherent evil nature, but through succumbing to the temptations of sin (Jas. 1:14-15). Any doctrine which releases man from responsibility for his sin by attributing it to an inherent evil nature is not a Bible doctrine.

Let us be content to employ the language of Scripture to describe Jesus as both the Son of God and Son of man. Let us be content with the language of Scripture in saying, “All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.” Let us hold our theories about whether or not man has the ability to live sinlessly perfect as our own private opinions (Rom. 14:22), the preaching of which genders strife and questions (1 Tim. 1:4; 6:4), and get on with the preaching of the gospel!

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 4, pp. 102-104
February 21, 1991

By Jeffrey L. Smith

Perhaps you’ve heard of or experienced some one “witnessing for Jesus” or giving his “personal testimony” for Jesus. Both practices involve presenting evidence for Jesus’ existence and power based on personal experience. The practices are popular with many denominations and several television evangelists. However, when the practice is examined through the magnifying glass of the Scriptures, it can be described as showing admirable zeal for God, but not according to knowledge (Rom. 10:2).

Old Testament Witnesses

During Old Testament times, different types of witnesses were allowed in different circumstances. In both civil and criminal affairs, Deity, men, animals, and inanimate objects could all be witnesses.

1. Civil Matters. In civil matters, Deity is called on as a witness several times. God was called three times to witness between parties in civil affairs (Gen. 31:50; Judg. 11:10; Jer. 42:5). Jesus was prophesied as a witness to the people (Isa. 5:4). In the sale of property, people could be brought to watch the transaction with the understanding that they would be willing, at a later date, to bear witness to the transaction (Jer. 32:6-25,44). All sorts of animals and things were allowable as witnesses. A heap of stones bore witness between Jacob and Laban at their parting (Gen. 31:48). A song bore witness to God for the children of Israel (Deut. 31:19). An altar bore witness to all that God had done for the children of Reuben, Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh (Josh. 22:27). Ewe lambs (Gen. 21:30), the Tabernacle of Witness (Num. 17:7,8), and even the law itself (Deut. 31:26) bore witness in civil matters during old Testament times.

2. Criminal Matters. Criminal matters in the Old Testament had different rules and requirements for witnesses. The law for people bearing witness in criminal matters is set forth in Deuteronomy 19:15-21. One witness was not enough to convict a man concerning any iniquity or sin (v. 15). Two or three witnesses were required to convict a man. The qualification for bearing witness against another man was to have personally seen or heard the event or action in question (Lev. 5:1). Bearing false witness was a crime punishable by the same punishment which the falsely accused would have received if he indeed was guilty. True and false witnesses are contrasted in Proverbs 14:5. God bore witness in criminal matters (1 Sam. 12:5; Jer. 29:23; Mic. 1:2; 2:4; Mal. 3:5). Wicked men bore false witness against Naboth (1 Kgs. 21:13). The carcass of a torn beast born witness to its death (Exod. 22:13).

New Testament Witnesses

In the New Testament, as in the Old, different types of witnesses were used, and had to satisfy similar qualifications.

1. Civil Matters. In New Testament civil matters, God the Father, Jesus the Christ, and the Holy Spirit all bear witness (1 Jn. 5:9; Jn. 8:18; 1 Jn. 5:6). The apostle Paul called God as witness to the frequency and content of his prayers (Rom. 1:9). Jesus bore witness to the truth (Jn. 18:37). The Holy Spirit bore witness of salvation’s extension to the Gentiles (Acts 15:8). Many men witnessed Timothy’s confession of faith (1 Tim. 6:12), others witnessed the good deeds of Gaius (3 Jn. 6), while still others witnessed Paul’s teachings (2 Tim. 2:2). Things, as well, bore witness in New Testament civil matters. Rain and fruitful seasons bore witness to God’s existence (Acts 14:17). The consciences and thoughts of the Gentiles bore witness that they were under law (Rom. 2:15). Gold and silver were prophesied to be witnesses against those who esteem them higher than they esteem God (Jas. 5:3).

2. Civil Matters. In New Testament criminal matters, Jesus gave witness to himself (1 Tim. 6:13). Men were set up as false witnesses against Christ (Matt. 26:62), against Stephen (Acts 6:13), and against Paul on a number of occasions (Acts 21:28; 24:6).

Qualifications for Witnesses

Although different witnesses were permitted in different circumstances, one characteristic that all Old and New Testament witnesses have in common is presence at the event in question. Whether the witness was Deity, a person, an animal, or a thing, whether in civil or criminal matters, the witness had what we would call “first hand” knowledge. False witnesses, in the New Testament as in the Old, were those who gave testimony which was not based in fact, or testimony that they were not qualified to give. Giving false or unqualified testimony is condemned in both testaments (Rom. 13:9).

Witnesses for Jesus

With that brief overview of witnesses in the Scriptures accomplished, let’s consider what the Scriptures say about witnesses for Jesus. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit all bore witness for Jesus. God the Father bore witness to Jesus at his baptism (Matt. 3:17) and transfiguration (Matt. 17:5). Jesus bore witness to himself before Pilate (Jn. 18:37; 1 Tim. 6:13). The Holy Spirit also bears witness to Jesus (1 Jn. 5:6-9). Qualifications of human witnesses are clearly set forth in the Scriptures. Witnesses for Jesus must have seen him from the baptism of John through the resurrection (Acts 1:22; 13:31). John the Baptist proclaimed Jesus as Christ (Jn. 1:7-8). The original apostles stated their qualifications on numerous occasions (Acts 2:32; 3:15; 4:33; 5:32). Justus and Matthias were able to be considered to replace Judas because they fulfilled the requirements of an apostle (Acts 1:23). Paul the Apostle was pronounced a witness by Jesus himself (Acts 26:16), out of due season.

Witnesses for Jesus Today?

Given the requirements set forth in the Scriptures, we see that no one alive today could possibly qualify as a witness for Jesus. The testimony of qualified witnesses for Jesus is preserved for us in the New Testament, which is the only valid witness today. Belief in Jesus as Christ is not to be based on the testimony of any human now walking upon the face of the earth. Belief comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God (Rom. 10:17).

As we attempt to convert others to Christianity, our method should be similar to that of the Samaritan woman at the well in John 4. After her conversation with Jesus, she believed him to be the Messiah. She immediately went back to her village and shared her experience. Although she had seen Jesus first-hand, and was a qualified witness, she didn’t try to prove anything based on her personal experience. She, instead, encouraged her townspeople to see Jesus for themselves (Jn. 4:29). This they did. And after they had seen Jesus for themselves, they also believed. Their belief was not based totally on the woman’s testimony, but upon her testimony and the evidence they had seen for themselves (Jn. 4:42).

Conclusion

Our practice today should not be to ask others to believe Jesus is the Christ based only on our experience. None of us qualifies as witnesses for Jesus. Instead, when our belief in Jesus produces the zeal it should, and we desire to share the good news, let us have the zeal that is according to knowledge. Our practice should be to ask others to examine the evidence afforded us through the New Testament, the inspired record of qualified witnesses for Jesus.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 4, pp. 108-109
February 21, 1991

By Luther W. Martin

Paul the Apostle continued: “So likewise you, unless you utter by the tongue words easy to understand, how will it be known what is spoken?” (1 Cor. 14:9).

Many years ago, the late Foy E. Wallace, Jr., from time to time criticized the writings of Jimmie Lovell in the publication Action. As a young preacher, I noted the criticisms, and out of curiosity, I read both Lovell and Wallace’s writings. I soon concluded that Foy had a legitimate point, and that Lovell’s words had “an uncertain sound.”

Much more recently, Reuel Lemmons, as Editor of Action, in the April, 1988, issue, wrote concerning brother Darrell Folz, “a 64-year old house painter, WBS (World Bible School, LWM) teacher and lay preacher.” Lemmons, in terming brother Foltz “a lay preacher,” was certainly giving an “uncertain sound”! He was writing like a rank sectarian.

On April 26, 1988, 1 wrote to brother Lemmons, as follows: “Brother Lemmons, I am saddened by your choice of words, wherein you designate brother Darrell Foltz, ‘a 64-year-old housepainter, WBS teacher and lay preacher.’

“The expression ‘lay preacher’ is un-biblical, and straight out of the mouths of sectarians.

“Won’t you please correct your careless word-choise, in a subsequent issue of Action? Thank you.”

I received no response to my letter. Brother Lemmons departed this life a relatively short time afterwards.

Now, in the September, 1990, issue of Action, edited by brother Tex Williams, there is a bold headline -97 saved, church is dedicated in Guyana.” The expression “97 saved” sounds typically like the report of a “Baptist revival.” But equally “an uncertain sound” is expressed, when “a church is dedicated”!

The body of the article contains such expressions as:

(a) “. . . following an 11-day campaign by 36 Church of Christ workers.” The expression “Church of Christ workers” by Action, obviously carries a most sectarian connotation and endorses such a concept.

(b) “A highlight of the campaign was the dedication of the new Church of Christ building in Georgetown.” The “dedication of buildings” is simply another appropriation of a sectarian practice. It is “an uncertain sound.” When did a “building” become “the new Church of Christ”? Yet, Action, by using such terminology, appears to support sectarian thinking.

(c) 1,200 persons crowded into the new building to take part in the dedication and to hear a speech by Desmond Hoyte, president of Guyana.” Is the president a brother in Christ? Or are the brethren in Guyana failing to observe Romans 16:17-18? And, is Action fostering this sectarian influence by commonly reporting such activities and using such expressions?

(d) Guyana’s president commended the church for having donated “a blood analysis machine to the Georgetown medical faculty.” The Guyana brethren should be concerned with teaching about the blood of Christ; not using funds supposedly given for the Lord’s work, and instead, using those funds for analyzing the blood of men!

(c) “The Harding University chamber choir also took part in the dedication ceremonies June 15 and the evening services though June 19.” With the “Harding University chamber choir” participating in the “dedication” and in the “evening services” the Harding and Action brethren, can scarcely oppose the use of “choirs” in the worship of the church!

In conclusion, the brethren who are supporting and bidding God speed to such sectarian concepts and activities, have departed from the New Testament pattern.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 4, pp. 99-100
February 21, 1991