Truth Magazine

By George Harris

Three years ago when Conrad Steyn and I took a stand for the truth and repented of liberalism, there were some articles from us that appeared in the faithful journals. One such article by myself appeared in Searching the Scriptures. Ricarte S. Velonero of the Philippines wrote to me on the 23 November 1987, and informed me that he had read the article with interest. He had been preaching for the liberal church for four years.

Since that time we have been studying the Scriptures together by correspondence, and he has come to a knowledge of the truth in relationship to local church autonomy and institutionalism, and has made a public statement to that effect. In the process he has taught the congregation that he preaches for, the things that he has learned regarding the truth on institutionalism and the whole philosophy behind it, and they are all in one accord in denouncing liberalism and standing for the truth. The whole group comprises some 30 members.

On the 4 January 1988 he wrote to me and informed me that during a fire his house had burned down and he had lost all that he owned. All of us preachers would be horrified if that happened to us. If our studies were burned down there would be many years of hard labor and valuable material that would be lost and we would have to start from scratch.

On the 16 July this year Ricarte wrote to me of the devastation caused by the earthquake which they experienced; it resulted in the loss of the life of his brother who was his greatest helper in the work of the Lord in his area. The apostle Paul would probably have felt a similar loss if that had happened to one of his companions.

Ricarte needs your support, your prayers and your letters of encouragement, just as we needed them three years ago. I am pleading on behalf of this fine soldier of the cross, that you help financially in any way that you can, realizing the urgency of the need to preach the truth to the people of the Philippines. I am confident knowing your generosity that you will respond in a very beautiful way, and the Lord will bless you richly for your work of love. If you are unable to help financially, please drop him a line and encourage him for the stand that he has dared to take against the onslaught of liberalism.

You can contact him at the following address: Ricarte S. Velonero, Lampayan, Matalan, Cotabato Philippines 9322.

Statement from Ricarte S. Velonero of the Philippines

Ricarte S. Velonero

Lampayan Church of Christ

9406 Matalam, Cotabato

Republic of the Philippines

I would like to state that in the past I have been associated with the liberal churches, who practice much error in regard to the work and organization of the church. Much of my error has been in fellowship as the church here is autonomous and I have been self-supporting in the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ here in Lampayan, Philippines.

After much general soul searching, much fervent prayer, and extensive study with George Harris of Cape Town, South Africa, the error of the liberal church is apparent to me. The “sponsoring church” practice violates the pattern of sound words in regard to local church autonomy. “Institutionalism” is an affront to the sufficiency of God’s organization of the local church. True New Testament fellowship, is a relation enjoyed by faithful brethren in accompanying God’s eternal purpose in the church, and this fellowship excludes church sponsored recreation and using the church’s financial resources for those other than qualified needy saints.

Beloved brethren, I have repented of any and all contributions that I may have made to those errors and teachings that those whom I have been in fellowship with have perpetrated and have asked for God’s forgiveness. I have severed all ties with the liberal brethren and you are the only brethren that I can look to for fellowship in the gospel. I ask you as faithful brethren in Christ Jesus to forgive me and receive me into fellowship. I covet your prayers on my behalf that I might use the remainder of the years which Jehovah our God blesses me with to proclaim the simple gospel of Jesus Christ found only in the pattern of sound words, and that he will bless me with caring brethren to support me, that I might serve him full time in an effort to redeem the time for the days are evil. This is our Father’s world and he wants it evangelized. Please help me in my task as I labor in the Cause we all love so dearly.

The members of the church here have also taken a stand for the truth, and we are united in our plea for the simple gospel.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 3, p. 73
February 7, 1991

By Frank Jarnerson

Several years ago, a preacher in the Christian church made the argument to me that if we cannot play an instrument in worship, we cannot play one anywhere, because everything we do is worship. In the May, 1990 issue of The Examiner, one of the anonymous writers said: “Is it wrong to play a piano and sing to God? If it is, then it is equally wrong to use a piano for any reason. 1 Corinthians 10:31 says, ‘Whether then you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.’ If you can’t use mechanical instruments to praise God then how can you justify their use at all?” (p. 8)

It may be difficult to distinguish between “service” and “worship” in some passages, but the fact that not everything we do is “worship” should be obvious from the meaning of the words as well as the way they are used in Scripture.

Let us notice the context of the quote from 1 Corinthians 10:31. Beginning with verse 14, Paul warns against idolatry. He then said that when Israel ate the sacrifices they were “partakers of the altar,” even so if the Corinthians ate the sacrifices of the Gentiles, they were having “fellowship with demons” (v. 20). They were admonished not to have fellowship with idolatry, but they could “eat whatever is sold in the meat market” (v. 25), if they understood that such action was not worship to the idol. However, if a weak brother said, “This was offered to idols, do not eat it for the sake of” his conscience (v. 28). If the action of eating meat was intended as worship to an idol, it was wrong. If the same action was done for a different purpose, there was nothing inherently wrong with it. Likewise, they did not “commune with Christ” every time they drank grape juice. Eating meat, or drinking grape juice may be worship or not worship, depending on your purpose. Verse 31 does not say “whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, you are worshiping.” It says that in eating and drinking, we should consider the consciences of our brethren, and thereby “glorify God.”

Jesus cleansed the temple twice, because men had failed to distinguish between “service” and “worship” (Jn. 2:14-16; Matt. 21:12-13). The services of selling doves and making change were good works, but Jesus said that they were in the wrong place. The “house of prayer” had become a “den of thieves.” Maybe they thought that if they could not sell doves and make change in the temple, they could not do those things anywhere! Jesus did not buy their excuses, whatever they may have been!

W.E. Vine summarizes the definition of worship as: “Broadly it may be regarded as the direct acknowledgment to God, of His nature, attributes, ways and claims, whether by the outgoing of the heart in praise and thanksgiving or by deed done in such acknowledgment.” Thayer comments: “Among the Orientals, esp. the Persians, to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence . . . hence in the New Testament by kneeling or prostration, to do homage (to one) or make obeisance, whether in order to express respect or to make supplication.” Regardless of how obedient subjects may have been to the kings, they had not “worshiped” until they performed acts of reverence that were required by the kings. An example of that is found in Daniel 3. Though Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego were faithful servants of Nebuchadnezzar, when the order was given: “at the time you hear the sound of the horn, flute, harp, lyre, and psaltery, in symphony with all kinds of music, you shall fall down and worship the gold image that King Nebuchadnezzar has set up,” they refused to obey. In this we see a clear distinction between service and worship. If they mean the same, then the Hebrews had already “worshiped” Nebuchadnezzar, so why not bow to the image and avoid the fiery furnace?

In the first century those who refused to worship the Emperor were not permitted to “buy or sell” because they did not have the “mark of the beast” on their forehead or hand (Rev. 13:17; 14:9). Those Christians knew the difference between serving the Emperor and worshiping him, and it cost them dearly! There was, and is, nothing wrong with being obedient to the “decrees of Caesar,” but there is something wrong with worshiping him!

“Service” is a more general word and may be used to describe worship, but not all service is worship. Abraham told the young men with him that “the lad and I will go yonder and worship” (Gen. 22:5). After David’s son died, he “went into the house of the Lord and worshiped,” then he went to his own house and ate food (2 Sam. 12:20). The Ethiopian eunuch had gone to Jerusalem “to worship” (Acts 8:27). True worship has both an inward dimension and an outward dimension. It involves the attitude (“in spirit”) and the acts performed (“in truth”). If the worship was to the Emperor, it involved reverence expressed in whatever actions he required. If the worship is to God, it must be “in spirit and in truth” (Jn. 4:24).

It is not true that if you can serve the emperor, you can worship him. Neither is it true that if you can play an instrument anywhere you can play it in worship, nor if you can wash feet anywhere you can wash them in worship, nor if you can eat meat anywhere you can eat it in worship! Worship is special acts offered reverently to a special Being. Men who made “the washing of hands” a religious requirement, were “worshiping in vain” because such was not authorized of God (Matt. 15:9).

We need to be content in doing the things God authorized as “worship,” and “serve” him in all things. Those who make everything we do “worship,” are on dangerous ground.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 3, pp. 74-75
February 7, 1991

By Robert F. Turner

It seems my brethren need to reread Job 38, as Jehovah upbraids those who speak and write as though they could explain God. And while it is handy, read also Job’s penitent confession: “Therefore have I uttered that which I understand not, Things too wonderful for me, which I knew not . . . . Wherefore I abhor myself, And repent in dust and ashes” (42:1-6). The current controversy over the nature of Immanuel (God with us, Matt. 1:23), is becoming ridiculous.

This is not to say we should refrain from discussing what the Word of God says about the incarnate Son of God. But serious reflection should tell all of us that many revealed truths concerning God in the flesh must be received by faith, and are not subject to finite comprehension. It certainly is not my intention to add to the bold pronouncements that seem to accompany some articles on the subject; but rather, I want to remind history buffs of a unity meeting that took place in Lexington, Kentucky on January 1, 1832. “Raccoon” John Smith was the speaker, and a more complete account of matters may be read in Life of Elder John Smith, by John A. Williams (37 1); or The Church, Falling A way, and Restoration, by J.W. Shepherd (253).

Smith said, “God has but one people on the earth. He has given to them but one Book, and therein exhorts and commands them to be one family. A union such as we plead for – a union of God’s people on that one Book – must, then, be practicable . . . .

“But an amalgamation of sects is not such a union as Christ prayed for, and God enjoins. To agree to be one upon any system of human invention would be contrary to his will, and could never be a blessing to the Church or the world; therefore the only union practicable or desirable must be based on the Word of God, as the only rule of faith and practice.

“There are certain abstruse or speculative matters – such as the mode of the Divine Existence, and the Ground and Nature of the Atonement – that have, for centuries, been themes of discussion among Christians. These questions are as far from being settled now as they were in the beginning of the controversy. By a needless and intemperate discussion of them much feeling has been provoked, and divisions have been produced.

“For several years past I have tried to speak on such subjects only in the language of inspiration; for it can offend no one to say about those things just what the Lord himself has said. In this scriptural style of speech all Christians should be agreed. It can not be wrong – it can not do harm. If I come to the passage, ‘My Father is greater than I,’ I will quote it, but will not stop to speculate upon the inferiority of the Son. If I read, ‘Being in the form of God, he thought it not robbery to be equal with God,’ I will not stop to speculate upon the consubstantial nature of the Father and the Son. I will not linger to build a theory on such texts, and thus encourage a speculative and wrangling spirit among my brethren.

“I will present these subjects only in the words which the Lord has given to me. I know he will not be displeased if we say just what he has said. Whatever opinions about these and similar subjects I may have reached, in the course of my investigations, if I never distract the church of God with them, or seek to impose them on my brethren, they will never do the world any harm . . . . Let us then, my brethren, be no longer Campbellites or Stoneites, New Lights or Old Lights, or any other kind of lights, but let us all come to the Bible, and to the Bible alone, as the only book in the world that can give us all the Light we need.”

There are statements in Smith’s full speech that I would have to question. We must remember the circumstances of this early period in “restoration” efforts, and their but recent coming out of sectarianism. But his warning about speculative matters, and things of deity that are beyond man, are words that need repeating today. I have said before that I believe some were “whittling on God’s end of the stick,” and its seems this is again applicable.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 3, p. 69
February 7, 1991

By Weldon E. Warnock

The invasion of Kuwait by Iraq has set off a barrage of speculations and predictions by our purblind seers and self-inspired prophets.

Pat Robertson told the viewers of his “700 Club” television show that the confrontation with Iraq, coupled with recriminations against Israel over the shooting at the Temple Mount, point to fulfillment of Bible prophecies that the nations of the world are going to come against Israel.(1)

Jack Van Impe told his national TV audience that four major prophecies in the Bible pinpoint Iraq and the Persian Gulf as the prelude to the Battle of Armageddon, a conflict he says will begin at the Euphrates River in Iraq.(2) Van Impe believes that Iraq is modern Babylon.

Ken Fleming, a professor at Emmaus Bible College, Dubuque, Iowa, identifies Iraq as the prophetic Babylon of Scripture. He wrote, “Prophetically, in the future Babylon will once again be a great nation. The Bible foresees that it will prostitute its political and religious and commercial power in association with a world leader called The Beast (Rev. 14:8-9; 17:11-12) . . . Likewise we note things of interest in Iraq (Babylon) which may have a bearing on the approach of the events surrounding the Second Coming.”(3)

Dr. Spiros Zodhiates, Editor-in-Chief of Pulpit Helps, advertises a cassette of his entitled, “Iraq in Prophecy.” The ad states, “These lessons provide the biblical information to identify Iraq as the modern Babylon.”

Is Iraq modern Babylon? Is Iraq in Bible prophecy? It is true that iraq is located in the area that was once occupied by ancient Babylonia, but that proves nothing, unless the Bible teaches that Babylon would be revived once again into another nation, specifically in the nation of Iraq. This concept we will clearly show is without biblical support, being concocted in the wild imaginations of men.

Babylon’s Past Glory

Babylon was situated on the Euphrates River, about 50 miles south of modern Baghdad, the capital of Iraq. Baghdad is located on the Tigris River, approximately 40 miles east of the Euphrates. The Tower of Babel was built there and Hammurabi, the great lawgiver, reigned there in the nineteenth century before Christ. It was from Ur in Babylonia that God called Abraham to go into a land that he would show him.

In the Neo-Babylonia era, Nebuchadnezzar was the ruler (605-562 B.C.) in the height of its glory. It was during his time that Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed (586 B.C.) and the Jews were taken captive for 70 years. From there Daniel was prime minister and from there Cyrus the Persian issued an edict allowing Jews to return to their homeland. It was there that Alexander the Great died (323 B.C.), while planning a new capital. Babylon was overthrown in 539 B.C. by the Medo-Persians.

Babylon’s Rebirth

After hundreds of years of lying in oblivion, we are now told that ancient Babylon has been reincarnated in modern Iraq. They tell us that over the past ten years Saddam Hussein, Dictator of Iraq, has spent enormous sums of money in restoring many historical sites, such as the Southern Palace of Nebuchadnezzar, the Processional Way and the Ishtar Gate.

We are informed that Hussein wants to restore Babylon as a symbol of the greatness of the people of Mesopotamia, making it a prime attraction of the Middle East. Hussein would like to move his capital to Babylon, it is reported, in the future. He considers himself as a twentieth century Nebuchadnezzar, leader of a strong empire.

Millennialists reason that since prophecies about Babylon have not been fulfilled, namely, Isaiah 13, 14; Jeremiah 50,51 and Revelation 17,18, we are to look to Iraq for their completion. But let us focus our attention on the prophecies about Babylon and see whether or not they have been fulfilled.

Isaiah and Babylon

The prophet Isaiah, through inspiration, looked beyond 150 years into the future and saw the downfall of Babylon. Listen to him: “The burden of Babylon, which Isaiah the son of Amoz did see . . . . Howl ye; for the day of the Lord is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty” (13:1,6).

God’s judgment upon Babylon is depicted in vivid, figurative language as “the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine” (13: 10). Jesus employs identical language in foretelling the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 A.D. (Matt. 24:29). These symbolic expressions denote the fall of political rulers, the destruction of nations and the termination of their government (cf. Joel 2: 10; 3:1516).

Using the Medes as his instrument (13:17), God said Babylon would be as when he “overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah. It shall neither be inhabited, neither shall it be dwelt in from generation to generation: neither shall the Arabian pitch his tent there; neither shall the shepherds make their fold there” (13:19-20). This does not sound like there is going to be a revival of the Babylonian Empire. God said it was finished, forever!

In Isaiah 14:21-22 God says that Babylon will never rise again to possess the land, nor build cities. God will cut off from Babylon the name, remnant, and son, and nephew. In v. 23 it would be swept with the “besom of destruction.” A besom is a small broom to sweep out corners and clear out trash. In light of Isaiah’s declaration, Saddam Hussein is not the modern Nebuchadnezzar and the Iraqi people are not the Babylonian nation, millennialists to the contrary.

Jeremiah and Babylon

It is claimed that Jeremiah’s prophecy concerning Babylon in chapters 50, 51 has not been fulfilled because the city of Babylon was to be left without inhabitants as the result of being overwhelmed by a horde of great nations from the north (50:1-10). Babylon did not cease immediately to have inhabitants when Cyrus captured the city in 539 B.C., hence, it is concluded that the prophecy remains to be fulfilled. In fact, there was no fighting when Babylon fell.

Nobody is saying that Babylon was immediately ravaged after its capture by Cyrus. But both Isaiah and Jeremiah’s prophecies were totally fulfilled concerning the city shortly after Alexander the Great’s untimely death in Babylon in 323 B.C. The city, because of a series of events, was weakened and allowed to decay. McClintock and Strong state the following:

The great city of Seleucia, which soon after arose in its neighborhood, not only drew away its population, but was actually constructed of materials derived from its buildings . . . . Since then Babylon has been a quarry from which all the tribes in the vicinity have perpetually derived the bricks with which they have built their cities . . . . The “great city, ” “the beauty of the Chaldees’ excellency,” has thus emphatically “become heaps” (Jer. 51:37) – she is truly “an astonishment and a hissing, without an inhabitant” (1:606).

Jeremiah’s prophecy has Babylon invaded by great nations from the north (50:9). Those stationed in Saudi Arabia do not fit this description. Too, the northern armies would use the bow and arrow, lances and ride upon horses (50:9, 14,42). 1 don’t think the United States and its allies will resort to such antiquated weaponry to fight Saddam Hussein and his guns, missiles, tanks, poison gas and planes.

Millennialists also argue that the prophecy pertaining to Babylon in Jeremiah 50,51 has not come to pass because the children of Israel and the children of Judah are to be restored to their homeland (50:4-5), which, they tell us,. did not materialize when the remnant returned under Zerubbabel in 536 B.C. Israel is to be restored after the defeat of Babylon. Israel has not been fully restored, hence, Babylon must yet be defeated, they surmise.

But the Jews have been restored. Jeremiah stated, “For thus saith the Lord, That after seventy years be accomplished at Babylon I will visit you to return to this place” (Jer. 29:10). Notice that the Jews would return after 70 years to this place. Jeremiah did not say, “1948,” or “the 20th century,” but “after seventy years” they would return to this place. Ezra 1:1 and 2:1 show this was fulfilled. They came to Zion under Zerubbabel, and others later with Ezra, joining themselves together in a perpetual covenant (50:4-5).

If Babylon in Jeremiah 50,51 is Iraq, then why does Jeremiah tell Israel to “flee out of the midst of Babylon” (51:6) when there is probably not one Jew today within a hundred miles of Iraq? What will Jews be doing in Iraq?

Revelation and Babylon

Ken Flemming said, “Jeremiah’s prophetic vision of Babylon is clearly linked to John’s in Revelation 17 and 18 regarding events that take place during the great tribulation. Thus we look for a literal Babylon of world importance during the tribulation.”(4)

In Revelation 17:5 Babylon is designed as “Mystery Babylon.” A.T. Robertson says in regard to “mystery” (musterion), “Babylon is to be interpreted mystically or spiritually . . . for Rome” (Word Pictures, Vol. 6, p. 430). The wickedness of ancient Babylon is personified in Rome, the oppressor of the church when John wrote Revelation.

The characteristics ascribed to the Babylon of Revelation fit better the city of Rome than any other city. (1) Rules over the kings of the earth (17:18). (2) Corrupts the nations (17:2; 18:3; 19:2). (3) Sits upon seven mountains (17:9). Rome sits upon seven hills. (4) Center of the world’s merchandise (18:3,11-13). (5) Persecutes the saints (17:6). These traits do not fit Baghdad or Iraq. Only the convoluted logic of premillennial preachers could find Iraq in the book of Revelation, or any other book of the Bible.

Nevertheless, these soothsayers go on confounding and being confounded. They will never stop. Their total failures of the past have not deterred them. They just falsely reinterpret Scripture to fit current events, whether it be a Napoleon, Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, or now, Saddam Hussein.

According to U. S. News & World Reports the Middle East turmoil has sparked a run on end-time prophecies. Hal Lindsey’s book, The Late Great Planet EArth, has shot up in sales by 83 percent since August, and Zondervan Publishing House is updating the book, Armageddon, Oil, and the Middle East Crisis by John Walvoord. Other books on the Middle East are selling well. As Jeremiah said, “The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule by their means; and my people love to have it so; and what will ye do in the end thereof” (5:31).

Endnotes

1. U.S. News & World Report, Nov. 1990, p. 67.

2. Ibid.

3. Interest, Dec. 1990, p. 14.

4. Ibid., pp. 13-14.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 3, pp. 70-72
February 7, 1991