Truth Magazine

By Larry Ray Hafley

Our Lord was an exceptionally practical man. He encountered diverse and complex situations. He faced complicated questions. He met both with practical actions and answers.

When the disciples quarreled over who should be the greatest in the kingdom, Jesus “took a child, and set him in the midst of them” (Mk. 9:36). There was no confusing philosophy, no theoretical discourse. He did not demean the disciples and describe his greatness and power, which he surely could have done. He did not say, “I will be King of kings, and you will be lowly servants, if you are lucky.” No, he rather taught them the true character of citizenship in the heavenly kingdom (Lk. 22:27; Matt. 18:1-5; 20:20-28). Plain, practical and to the point; that was the method of the Master.

When the scribes and Pharisees questioned his association “with publicans and sinners” (Lk. 5:30), Jesus compared his work to that of a physician. A doctor goes among the sick, not because he is sick, but in order to heal. Likewise, he went among sinners, not because he was a sinner, as they implied, but in order to save them. “I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.” Clear, concise, practical-, that was Jesus the Christ.

When the disciples of Jesus were challenged about their failure to fast, the silent charge was that they were not as devout as the disciples of John and of the Pharisees who did fast. This neglect of human tradition made Jesus’ disciples appear apathetic toward Divine truth and piety. Jesus did not cite another attribute of his disciples to make them seem more spiritual. Rather, he made a specific comparison. Bridal parties do not fast while the groom is present; no, they rejoice! However, when the groom leaves, then they fast (Mk. 2:18-20). Fasting as a formality has no inherent value. It may even diminish one’s ability to appreciate the fellowship of Deity. Precise and practical judgment; that was our Lord’s manner.

The gospel accounts of the Savior’s life are filled with evidence and examples of the most practical man who ever lived. Can you think of a few cases? The study will enrich and reward you.

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 7, p. 199
April 6, 1989

By Rodney Pitts

There was a time when all churches of Christ seemed to be standing for the truth of the Scriptures. People had basically accepted the idea that one did not have to wonder what would be taught or practiced in churches of Christ in different areas, but could simply walk into any building bearing the name and never worry. There were no liberal and conservative congregations, for all churches were thought to be basically conservative in their approach to Bible authority and its application in matters of the work of the church, etc.

In the 1950s, however, the church faced tome serious problems that had actually been boiling for some time. As a result of differing views concerning Bible authority and institutionalism that were just beginning to show up in full force, various churches began to split and the brotherhood was divided. The terms “liberal” and “conservative” took on special meanings in relation to this split. Congregations that favored the use of institutions to do their collective work were labeled “liberal” for their lax or loose stance on Bible authority. Those who disapproved of these innovation were labeled “conservatives” or “antis.” People had to begin asking questions concerning doctrine and practices of churches that they had at one time visited and worked with in harmony. Families and friends were divided, and in most cases, remain divided today.

Yet in the face of all this division, people began to make the same type of mistake as was made before the division in believing that for the most part, one could determine a congregation’s stand for truth by simply asking a few questions concerning the work or-organization of that church. It was thought that if you could determine that a church took a “conservative” stance on these matters of institutionalism, you could then rest assured that everything that was practiced or taught at that particular congregation would likely be in harmony with God’s will. And, it seems that this standard for judging a congregation’s soundness still lingers on today. This is done despite the fact that many of these congregations or their leadership may have already accepted certain beliefs that are foreign to the Scriptures and that deny their very basis for a stance against institutionalism.

I have not been preaching full-time for very many years, but I have been on both sides of the institutional question. I grew up in institutionalism, but took a stand against this error several years ago. I have now been associated with “conservative” churches long enough to realize that the term “conservative” connected to the word church means no more than the words “Church of Christ” being placed over the door. Brethren, it has been a long time since the division took place, and the Devil has been working overtime!

I am finding more and more that some congregations that may not send money to an “orphanage” or involve themselves in arrangements like that of the Herald of Truth, etc., are no more conservative than those we might term as rank “liberals.” Modernism and. humanism have “crept in unawares” and we are now facing issues and stances that are just as serious as those that divided the church in the 50s. Elders and other brethren who would never stand for $1 out of the church’s treasury to be sent to some institution are now taking strange positions on marriage and divorce, social drinking, abortion, etc. I know of brethren who have faced public opposition from elders and other members because they taught the truth concerning the alien sinner’s need to repent of his or her apparent adultery, immodest apparel, dancing, and even such subjects as situation ethics and abortion. Can we still continue to call these congregations “conservative” where the truth is opposed and false doctrine is taught and even practiced?

Brethren, let’s wake up and realize that God did not place a congregation’s stance on institutionalism as the “ultimate standard” of all judgments concerning its soundness. No one sin is any more acceptable to God than any other. James states that “for whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all” (Jas. 2:10). Please understand that I am not advocating congregational fellowship or disfellowship as our institutional brethren see it, nor am I stating that I believe that because some members of a congregation are in error that the whole congregation is in error. Neither am I saying that mercy and patience should not be practiced in relation to these people and congregations. But, when truth is censored and false doctrine is taught and even practiced with no repentance forthcoming, we as Christians must take appropriate action concerning those brethren despite their stand against institutionalism.

This article has not been easy for me to write. My thoughts that have been penned here are the result of much sorrow and heartache concerning men and brethren I know and love. Yet, I believe it is the truth and that it needs to be preached without fear or hesitation. For, if we are not careful, we will “strain out the gnat and swallow the camel” (Matt. 23:24).

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 7, p. 197
April 6, 1989

By Harry R. Osborne

While on vacation in San Antonio, my wife and I saw something that caught our attention. We were driving down a street and came upon a rather modem looking building. A large sign identified the structure as the “Holy Spirit Catholic Church.” Wanting to be fairminded about this piece of information, we discussed possible alternatives to our initial reaction that the sign was false advertising. We finally settled on an interpretation which released the maker of the sign from any charge of prevarication.

The connection between the Holy Spirit and the Catholic Church is that much of the practice of the latter is spoken of by the former. The Holy Spirit through the apostle Paul speaks of practices which have characterized the Catholic Church, namely fasting and celibacy for spiritual purification. However, the way in which the Holy Spirit spoke of these things is not going to be perceived as complimentary by the Catholics. For instance, in Colossians 2:20-23, he reproves the same idea about fasting which the Catholics promote by calling it “will-worship” (that which originates in man’s will as opposed to God’s will) and declaring it is “not of any value against the indulgence of the flesh.” In 1 Timothy 4:1-5, the Holy Spirit says those “forbidding to marry and commanding to abstain from meats” were “giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons,” thus, speaking “lies.” We thought of stopping to suggest that such passages be put under the sign to show what connection the Holy Spirit had with the Catholic Church, but doubted that the “priest” or others in charge would take our suggestion with much thanksgiving.

Having noticed a sandwich shop by this Catholic Church building, we came back down the street from the opposite direction that we might partake rather than abstain from meats. As we passed the building a second time we noticed another structure adjoining the church building which had gone unnoticed in our first passing. It too was a modern looking building, even larger than the church building. The sign on the structure proclaimed it the “Holy Spirit Family Life Center.” I am still in the process of seeking to be edified by that sign.

Leslie and I have wondered what connection the Holy Spirit has with a “family life center,” the name most denominations give to a structure designed to house various entertainment and social facilities (i.e., gyms, racquetball courts, volleyball courts, ping pong tables, aerobics classes, weight training rooms, kitchens, hot tubs or even swimming pools). We recalled that the Spirit of God was said to have “moved upon the face of the waters” in creation (Gen. 1:2), but could not think of a reference to such happening in a swimming pool or hot tub. We remembered that the Spirit of Jehovah was said to come “mightily” upon Samson in slaying the lion and wondered if these people thought that may have required weight training. We thought about a number of passages which prophesied or related the Spirit “falling” upon one, but thought that these folks must know that such did not happen as a result of tripping on a basketball or racquetball court. Since the fruit of the Spirit is named in Galatians 5 as love, joy, peace, etc.; we believed these people could not think that fruit, was apples, oranges, and peaches necessitating a kitchen to facilitate the consumption of such. We are still pondering the relation these people saw between the Holy Spirit and their recreational facility.

It made us remember that many of our liberal brethren are evidently of one mind with these Catholics in this matter. They, too, are building their family fife centers to rival the very latest among the denominations. Surely they would not be doing so without believing such was approved by God. However, since the Holy Spirit revealed the mind of God through the apostles (1 Cor. 2:10-13), the record of that complete revelation which we possess in the New Testament must declare that approval. Would it be out of line for us to ask them where they find that approval? They must believe the Holy Spirit is connected with their family life centers, even if they will not state it as boldly as their Catholic allies in this matter. Well, where is the connection? We read about the church being “the pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Tim. 3:15). Where do they read about the church providing the pillar and ground for the basketball court? We read about providing for the spiritual maturity of saints in the truth (Eph. 4:11-16). Where do they read about it providing a hot tub in which to soak sore muscles after a racquetball or aerobics workout?

Normally, our liberal brethren when pressed for the authority to justify their social gospel efforts reply that they are “expedients.” Maybe this is the connection between the Holy Spirit and their family life centers. The Holy Spirit does speak of expedients through the apostle Paul to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 6:12; 10:23). The bad news for our liberal brethren is that both places speak of an expedient as being something which is first lawful. That makes sense. By the very term, we would expect an “expedient” to “expedite” or help something to be done. The question is, “What is being expedited by means of this expedient?” With that question in mind, these brethren still have a problem. What is the work of the church which these family life centers expedite? Evangelism of the world? Education of the brethren? Benevolence towards the saints? I fail to see how a hot tub or volleyball court could teach a sinner about the need for or identification of the Savior. Furthermore, I have the same problem in seeking edification or benevolence furthered or expedited by an aerobics class or swimming pool. No, the appeal for “expediency” to be the connection between the Holy Spirit and their family life centers won’t work!

Those present at the Nashville meeting heard numerous justifications for these recreational facilities built and maintained by churches. One brother said they were a form of advertising much more effective than our newspaper ads. Others said they were not authorized, but were too small a thing to divide over. Another segment of the speakers justified them through their “New Hermeneutic” of a “Christiological approach” to interpreting the Bible. For us simpletons, that means these new thinkers figure Christ would like to have played in and invited others to play in these “family life centers,” therefore the church can pay for them. None of these explanations will work either. They are not advertising an authorized work, but creating a new work for the church in the realm of recreation which is wholly unauthorized. Since Christ revealed his desires for the work of local churches through his apostles without mentioning recreation one time, who are these new thinkers to suppose he must have wanted such? It may be a small thing to our liberal brethren, but it is important to God whether we act in obedience to his will or disobey due to presumptuousness.

No, the connection between the Holy Spirit and these “family life centers” is not found in these feeble justifications. Instead, the connection is found in the same place we found the connection between the Holy,- Spirit and the Catholic Church. The Holy Spirit condemns the Catholic Church because it is not in harmony with his teaching regarding the true church. The Catholics go beyond that pattern laid down in the Spirit’s teaching and stand condemned (2 Jn. 9). Likewise, the Holy Spirit condemns our liberal brethren’s digression into the social gospel efforts because they are not in harmony with Ins teaching regarding the work of the true church. The liberals have gone beyond the pattern laid down in the Spirit’s teaching and stand condemned (2 Jn. 9).

Many institutional brethren understand the problem, but are not sure what to do about it. In recent years, several young preachers have left institutionalism because they see the digression brought on by going beyond God’s pattern. The family fife centers are merely one ample of this digression which also has brought the “sponsoring church arrangement,” institutions doing the work of the church, and a variety of innovations totally void of scriptural authority. Given the statements by several at Nashville, that digression is not complete., The denial of the inerrancy of Scripture, verbal inspiration, and the call for a “New Hermeneutic” in an effort to “re-interpret the Bible” suggest the digression is picking up pace. Many of them are not only “liberal” with regard to their views on the authority for their practices, but are “liberal” in the classical sense of the word! May our prayer be that some of our institutional brethren will see the danger and leave this error before it blends imperceptibly into mainstream denominationalism. Let us work to bring the truth on these issues to our erring brethren before it is too late!

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 7, pp. 195-196
April 6, 1989

By Andy Alexander

The warnings of Paul concerning false teachers have largely fallen on deaf cars. Most people for one reason or another tend, to think every religious group of people is going to be saved. Though this is contrary to the teaching of Christ and the Apostles, they still aimlessly wander along life’s pathway believing a lie (Matt. 7:21-23; Gal. 1:6-10; 2 Thess. 2:11-12). No better illustration could be given than the group who call themselves the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Their whole organization is based upon failed prophecies.

The prophecy that has caused the largest problem over their entire existence is that concerning the events they predicted would take place beginning in the year 1914. There is a way that we as humans can easily ascertain whether a man who calls himself a prophet is speaking from God or merely speaking as a man. In Deuteronomy 18:22 God instructs us,

When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him.

With this in mind, consider what the Witnesses predicted would begin happening in the yea 1914:

1. Rule of imperfect men would cease.

2. Christ would then reign as earth’s new ruler.

3. Jerusalem not longer be trodden down by the Gentiles.

4. “New heaven and new earth” with peaceful blessings recognized by all humanity.

5. God’s kingdom, organized in power, would be in the earth.

Other things were prophesied for this date, but these are enough to prove to any honest inquiring soul that C.T. Russell was a false prophet and not to be feared by any who believe God’s word in Deuteronomy. These prophecies come from their own publication, The Time Is At Hand, published twenty-rive years prior to the year 1914.

Obviously, after making such grand errors they had to come up with an alternate plan. They did this by claiming that Christ did come and begin an invisible reign upon the earth. The magnificent events that were to take place before 1914 are now shifted to begin during the generation of people who were alive during 1914. This comes from their own publication, The Truth That Leads To Eternal Life, 1968. They are now in the process of working out new dates since that generation is just about all dead and their predictions have been proven utterly false. Why cannot men just believe the simple teaching of God in his word when he tells us concerning the second coming of Christ, “For you yourselves know full well that the day of the Lord will come just like a thief in the night” (1 Thess. 5:2)?

Pointing out these facts should help those in this religion to see the error of their own teaching. Many in the Witness Organization are blind to the facts surrounding the year 1914 and all the prophecies that have failed concerning that date.

Christ’s kingdom is in existence at this very time, but it did not begin in 1914. The New Testament plainly teaches that the kingdom is the church (Matt. 16:18-19). Those who are obedient to Christ are added to his church or kingdom (Acts 2:47). The Colossians were in the kingdom when Paul penned his letter to them (Col. 1:13). In Revelation 1:9, John informs us that he was in the kingdom at the time he was writing the last book of the Bible. Christ’s kingdom will last forever as he prophesied and those who believe in Christ, repent of their sins, confess Christ before men, and are baptized for the forgiveness of their past sins receive a kingdom that cannot be shaken (Mk. 16:16; Lk. 13:3; Matt. 10:32; Heb. 12:28). The reason this kingdom cannot be shaken is because it is a spiritual kingdom, not an earthly kingdom (Jn. 18:36; Rom. 14:17). Christ is at the right hand of God on his throne at this very moment and when he returns this earth will be completely destroyed and the Judgment will occur (Acts 2:32-36; 2 Pet. 3:10-12; Heb. 9:27). We need to follow the inspired instructions that Peter gave those early Christians, “Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by him in peace, spotless and blameless” (2 Pet. 3:14). This can only be done by obedience to the gospel of Christ (Heb. 5:9).

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 7, p. 198
April 6, 1989