Plain Talk

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.IX Pg.1

November 1973

Let God Be God!

Robert F. Turner

Recognizing the existence of God involves the recognition of His eternal power and deity —- which means we creatures are subject to the authority of our Creator. (Rom. 1:18-f) Thus, submission to an Ultimate external authority goes hand in hand with any genuine belief in God.

The person who will only accept as true and authoritative those things which conform to his internal sense of truth and right, has denied an essential aspect of God. Such reasoning makes the revealed will of God something different to different people, which means it becomes no authority at all in its own right. I am not writing of some theological theory— I am writing about a type of infidelity that is manifested all about us, day after day.

I am told, If you believe a certain thing is true, then it is truth to you — but it is not necessarily truth to me. This subjectivity elevates the student above the source of information. If Gods word is the final word— truth on the subject— (and I write to people who accept this premise; Jn. 17:17) then Gods word is truth to you and me alike. It says the same thing to you that it says to me. We must be doers, not judges of the law. (Jas. 4:11-12)

Interpretation means getting the thought out of the words; the thought which the author placed there. We grossly abuse the idea of interpretation when we take the liberty of putting our own thoughts into the matter. I may err in my efforts to understand Gods word — just as you may err in like efforts — but neither of us has found the truth on the subject until we know what God said about it.

I will respect your right to study Gods word and teach what you believe you find there. But that doesnt mean I must accept your conclusions as the truth for you. I may have good reason to believe you are in error, and want to point this out, for your own good. It would please me to know that you had the same concern for my eternal welfare, and would want to help me know Gods way more perfectly. Why cant we be men in this matter — AND LET GOD BE GOD!! (Acts 18:26; Rom. 3:4)

(Reprint, Vol. 4, No. 2)

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.IX Pg.2

November 1973

Commit--Nt Requires Me

Dan S. Shipley

There is an old story with a good moral about Henrietta the hen and. Pattie the pig, who, while walking in the countryside one day, happened upon a weary and. half—starved traveler. After pondering the situation for a moment, Henrietta (being a benevolent sort of a hen) suggested to Pattie how nice it would be for them to provide this hungry stranger with a meal of bacon and eggs. To which the astonished Pattie squealingly replied: Henrietta, that may involve a small sacrifice for YOU, but for ME thats TOTAL COMMITMENT!

In Henrietta and Pattie are pictured. popular attitudes that hinder many would-be followers of Christ. Whether in ministering to the needs of others or otherwise serving the Lord, many are inclined to give that which costs the least. There are the Henriettas who crow of their willingness to give the very clothes off their backs. And. they will —after they have become worn out of out of style. And sometimes then only after removing the buttons and zippers (I have heard of some poor Mexican brethren who were recipients of such benevolence )

Then, as Pattie, too many of us are reluctant to give of self. True, some will, provide the eggs of a limited involvement, but like Henrietta, most are selfishly willing (if not expecting) that others furnish the bacon of total commitment. The difference between this total commitment and something less is the difference between living for self and giving of self. As a holy priesthood., Gods people first present their own bodies as living sacrifices, holy, acceptable to God (Rom. 12:1). Self, then, becomes the altar upon which every acceptable sacrifice is offered unto the Lord. Apart from this altar what sacrifice could please Him? To put it another way, self must be the firstfruits sacrifice from every child of God.! Think about it. When the greater is freely given the lesser will not be withheld. This is nowhere better exemplified than in those poor and. afflicted Christians of Macedonia who willingly and even beyond their ability gave to help the poor saints of Jerusalem —but first they gave their own selves to the Lord... (2 Cor. 8:5).

However, the supreme example in such giving is to be seen in Christ Himself. With Paul, we must see what He has done as having a personal significance; that He loved me, and. gave himself up for me (Gal. 2:20). Truly appreciating that helps us to see that no commit__nt to the Lord is total without me!

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.IX Pg.3

November 1973

Haman's Hang-Up

Dan S. Shipley

In the book of Esther we read of a successful man by the name of Haman who allowed his pride to become his downfall--or hang-up. After Esther became queen, King Ahasuerus promoted Haman to a position above all the other princes in his court. Haman delighted in recounting how he had been advanced above the others and how that only he was invited to a special banquet with the king and queen. He even thought, To whom would the king delight to do honor more than to myself? Haman had a bad case of the big-head!

The proud seem to have the least patience with those who fail to recognize their greatness, so Haman was filled with wrath when Mordecai the Jew (Esthers foster father) bowed not down nor did him reverence. At the suggestion of his wife and friends, Haman had a gallows prepared for hanging Mordecai while at the same time, unknown to him, the king was preparing to honor the same lowly Mordecai. Mordecai was honored. Haman mourned. His intent to destroy the Jews in the kingdom was revealed to the king and proud Haman never had held his head higher than when hung from the gallows he had made for Mordecai. As God says, pride goeth before destruction.

Big heads and proud hearts will always be a hang-up for Gods people. To every Haman God warns, be not proud (Jer. 13:15). Number one on a list of things hated by God is the proud look (Prov. 6:17) and every one that is proud in heart is an abomination to the Lord (Prov. 16:5). It is obvious, then, that pride is sin as plainly stated in Prov. 21:4, and often a deceptively subtle sin at that. So much so, that some have been known to pride themselves in their humility! It is as obvious as it is detestable in others, yet seldom detected within self. Therefore, every Christian would do well to search his life often and carefully for such sin.

Too, pride has a lot of promoters that need identifying. One of the more prominent ones is achievement. As with Haman, promotion may promote pride. Almost anything that advances one above others is apt to advance self—esteem as well. Success usually comes hard; success with humility comes even harder. Especially is this true with financial success. Nothing promotes pride quicker than a little money and: material possessions. God warns the wealthy not to be high-minded (1 Tim. 6:17) nor to glory in their riches (Jer. 9:23). Other pride promoters to be wary of are education, nationality, association with the somewhat of society —or almost anything else that would gain the praise and plaudits of the world.

Finally, pride must be viewed as an especially dangerous sin in regard to its effects. Not only does it make men forget God (Deut. 8:14-18), it hinders repentance because the proud are reluctant to admit wrong-doing. It makes saving face more important than saving the soul. Pride not only makes one think too highly of himself, it makes him think too little of the Mordecais about him. It resents reproof and correction (Prov. 15). No wonder God resisteth the proud. . . (Jas. 4:6)

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.IX Pg.4

November 1973

Winked At Ignorance

Robert F. Turner

In the midst of the areopagus, Paul said to the Athenians: And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent... (Acts 17:30). Whose ignorance? What kind of ignorance? When did God overlook it?

The study of words like times, ignorance, winked at, etc., will not, within itself, ten one what the text means. The orthodox position is that God did not immediately punish their idolatrous practices but that men are now accountable to know of the true God. Let me suggest an alternative to which you may give thought: the ignorance God overlooked was the IGNORANT WORSHIP of Himself.

Note Gods instruction to Israel: And these words which I command thee this day, shall be upon thy heart; and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children ... And thou shalt write them upon the door-posts of thy house, and upon thy gates, (Deut. 6:6-9). Such commandments are expressive of an undeviating observance of Divine will. They do not mean simply to write or to parrot. God did not overlook the Jews sins of ignorance while knowing that they would commit such. He commanded certain sacrifices to be offered for erring done in ignorance (cf. Lev. 4:1-35; & Num. 15:24-29). Since the Jews were not excused for ignorance, this leaves the nations as the answer to whose ignorance? And it was to Gentiles that Paul spoke of winked at ignorance.

The what ignorance resolves itself in the answer of this question: Did God overlook ignorance of the Gentiles IDOLATRY? My conclusion is that he did not and I suggest the following two reasons to prove my point.

(1) The context. Paul begins his sermon by singling out an altar amongst the many which lined the streets of Athens. Its inscription was To the unknown God. Paul said, Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you, (Acts 17:22). I believe that it is of this ignorant worship in vs. 22, that Paul speaks in vs. 30.

(2) God tolerated ignorant worship of himself while saying Gentiles were without excuse who worshipped the creature more than the creator. Gentiles frequently worshipped God in ignorance because of the lack of a perfect or completed revelation of God to them; therefore, their under standing of God and how to worship Him may have been imperfect. However through the created things they co perceive Gods everlasting power divinity —there was a true God. did not overlook their IDOLATRY showed the natural end of such.

Paul realized his fleshly brethren the Israelites, were lost because of their Ignorance (Rom. 10:1-3). Today, the indifferent but sometimes religious person attempts to shelter himself in a dark cave of ignorance thinking himself secure because he refuses to come out. All must agree that the WHEN of God s overlooking ignorance has passed. To know is not necessarily to act, but one MUST KNOW to worship God pleasingly. — Jim B. Everett

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.IX Pg.5

November 1973

We Must Take The Remedy

Robert F. Turner

This fellow was on the way to be baptized, see! And this limb fell on him, and killed him. Now, what about that fellow?

Repeatedly, this ancient question is asked — often by people who seem to think they have originated the Gordian knot — as if every commandment of the Lord relative to baptism must now be cast aside.

Suppose we have that same man on his way to hear about Christ, for the very first time? A crocodile jumps up out of the bar-ditch and gobbles him down. Now, what about that fellow?? In both cases the untimeliness of his death, or what he may have done had he lived, have nothing to do with his spiritual fate. This is determined by what he did do— the things done in his body while he lived. (2 Cor. 5:10; Rom. 2:6)

Was he a sinner? If so, the wages of sin are death. Rom. 6:23) But we are reminded that the gift of God is eternal life. To which we reply that this is through Jesus Christ our Lord. Christs death on the cross is the REMEDY—-it made possible the salvation of sinners; but the remedy must be taken, or appropriated, before its benefits are realized.

Citizens of the proverbial far-away island who have never heard of Christ are just as lost as those in Suburbia, U.S.A., who know of Christ, but ignore him. Those islanders die of physical disease, in the absence of modern medicine, just as we do who have the medicine but refuse to take it. The same principle is true with reference to spiritual sickness. Spiritual death is due to sin — here, or there, or anywhere.

One of the plainest of Bible doctrines is the Remedial aspect of the gospel of Christ. The laws of Gods revelation do not impose a burden upon mankind; but are a part of Gods gracious remedy, to correct and deliver us from the consequences of a spiritual condition we brought upon ourselves.

Man was already a sinner when our Lord died for us. (Rom. 5:8) In Matt. 26:28 Jesus said, For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. FOR REMISSION OF SINS means, in order that sins may be removed. He did not die because sins were removed, but so that may be removed. That is clear to all Bible readers.

Then Peter uses the same expression in his instructions to the believing portion of the Pentecostial multitude. Repent, and be baptized every one of you— for the remission of sins. (Acts 2:38) The obvious facts are: these people were sinners, they believed Peters statements re. Jesus Christ, and they must now repent, and be baptized, (by Christs authority) SO THAT THEIR SINS WOULD BE REMOVED. Gods instructions were a part of the remedy for sins— the means by which God saw fit to test their faith, and the conditions upon which he saw fit to offer salvation through Christ.

Recognizing your sinful condition, have you faith enough to obey God??

(Reprint, Vol. 1, No. 11)

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.IX Pg.6

November 1973

Whiteside, On The Church

Robert F. Turner

R. L. Whiteside was an honest, Capable Bible scholar. The following is from a compilation of his works, Reflections. (p.259-f) Omissions, necessary for brevity, are indicated.

The word church is a translation of the Greek word that means the called out. All who have been called out of sin into the service of God, by that very process become a part of the called-out people, members of the church.

### To say that the local churches of Christ constitute the church of Christ is a great mistake, for there are children of God who are not members of any congregation. When Philip baptized the Ethiopian eunuch, there was no local church in that community for the eunuch to become a member of; yet he became a child of God, a member of Gods family, which is the church of God. ###

The church is not so much an organization as it is an organism. This is true whether the whole body of believers is considered or simply a congregation. In either case, Christ is the head, from whom all the body fitly framed and knit together through that which every joint supplieth, according to the working in due measure of each several part, maketh the increase of the body unto the building up of itself in love. (Eph. 4:16)

course where a group of people are banded together for a definite purpose, there must be some sort of arrangement, or organization to meet the needs of the body. In the very nature of the case, somebody must by appointment or by common consent take the lead — must direct affairs. Every body must have a head. Also somebody must look after various details connected with the operation of the body. The local church is no exception. Somebody must direct its affairs, and somebody must attend to the detail a of service. Hence, in the early churches there were elders and deacons. It seems very plain that elders were appointed in every church.

The early churches were bound together by strong spiritual ties. Jesus was the head, and the gospel was the bond of union; but each church was a whole unit; as much so as if there had not been another local church in the world. It was complete in itself, independent of any outside control. There were no ecclesiasticisms, such as the denominations have today. There was no grouping of churches under one man or set of men. Each church owed allegiance to the, Lord, and worshipped and served His according to His will. That is the Lord s way today — walk in it.

Divisions developed in the church of God at Corinth, and Paul told them that they were carnal. So long as a church moves along smoothly, no one can tell with certainty who are really true to the Lord. For there must be also factions among you, that they that are approved may be made manifest among you. (l Cor. 11:19) When divisions come, those who are true to the Lord stay with the right. ### Of course the group that stays with the Bible is the one to cast your lot with.

(Reprint, Vol. 4, No. 3)

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.IX Pg.7

November 1973

Who Owns Church Money?

Robert F. Turner

Dear bro. Turner:

Please comment on the question

Dear bro. Turner:

Please comment on the question, Who owns the church treasury?

Reply:

This is a hot potato, and all hot heads are asked to skip this section. Thinkers, read on!!

The church treasury belongs to the church —— and of course we are speaking of the local church, for this is the only kind of pooled fund authorized in the New Testament.

The church is a company of saints formed by mutual agreement— (either expressed or understood) in order to work and worship together as one. In order to function collectively these saints must accept some common leadership, and pool their means and/or abilities. These pooled resources no longer belong to the individuals making up the company, but belong to the collective unit, the church.

The fund is at the feet (i.e., at the disposal) of whomever these members (in forming or joining themselves into a church) agree shall act in this capacity. The Apostles once held this position in the Jerusalem church (Acts 14:35, 37,; 5:1-4) and later, the elders. (Acts 11:30)

The elders do not own the fund, but act as trustees— to use legal terminology.

Does The Money Belong to God?

Everything belongs to God, including this money — even before it was contributed to the treasury. (Isa. 66) How desperately, in these days of materialism, we need to understand this. We are but stewards. (Note Acts 17:21-f. God doesnt need anything!)

The church treasury is our means of operating collectively. It becomes Gods fund to the extent that we collect and administer it according to His divine will, and for His purpose.

Legally, and I think logically— the fund belongs to the purpose for which it was given. (See cy pres in unabridged dictionary or law book) If a church is truly scriptural the church treasury will be used only for the God-assigned work of the church. It can not be used for any good work the elders may see fit to approve.

When Brethren Disagree

Brethren may disagree as to the God—assigned work of the church, and hence have no common purpose with respect to their common fund. A prayerful objective search of Gods word should and. will settle such problems for all who are willing to do only that for which there is divine authority. But if agreement can not be had, the basis for collective action in the disputed work is destroyed.

When brethren part company under such circumstances, an equitable dissolving of company (church) resources is in order— although I blush to admit it seldom takes place. Usually, a sectarian spirit prevails, and the majority, or strongest party takes all. (We fight for Gods (?) money.) Someday we may learn to give ourselves unto God—(2 Cor. 8:5).

(Reprint, Vol. 1, No. 14)

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.IX Pg.8

November 1973

Stuff About Things

Robert F. Turner

A fellow rarely ever thinks that those who adversely criticize him are real bright. They probably mean well, but just dont know as much about it as he does— or something like that.

Knowing this bit of human nature, I even take my own reactions to criticism with a bit of salt. If I feel wronged I give myself time to cool; if hurt, time to heal; if puzzled, time to think it over. But one little gem keeps popping up that just leaves me with a cold blank feeling. Im willing to study, cry, or blow my top—if someone will clue me in.

The trouble with you is that you keep trying to teach others what YOU BELIEVE the Bible teaches.

Yeahhhh!! Thats right, but what can I do about it? Doesnt everybody do the same?? Actually, what else can anyone do??

But my critic tells me that others just teach the Bible and say it doesnt make any difference how we believe it. Now does this mean it doesnt make any difference whether we believe the Bible or not? If we teach the Bible doesnt this mean we teach what the Bible says? And if we teach what it says—- and this will be WHAT WE BELIEVE IT SAYS— should we not insist that people believe and act accordingly?

So my critic makes one more effort to get through my thick skull. (He tries hard to teach me what HE believes...) There are many different, ways to heaven, he says; and one is as good as the others. (He proves it by drawing a buggy wheel and showing me that all spokes lead to the hub.)

Well, I must ask my friend another question. (We agree that Im, stubborn) Do you believe the Bible teaches that the way to heaven is like spokes in a buggy wheel?

If he says No then hes trying to get to heaven on a buggy wheel instead of divine truth. If he says Yes then we have established this issue: He believes the Bible teaches a buggy-wheel way of salvation; and I believe the Bible teaches ONE way, truth, and life. (Jn. 14:6; Eph. 4:4-f)

And he is trying to teach me what HE believes the Bible teaches, and I am trying to teach him what I believe the Bible teaches.... and we are back where we started. What about that????

(Reprint, Vol. 3, No. 4)

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.X Pg.1

December 1973

The Price Of Fear

Robert F. Turner

The fearful will go to Hell. In Rev. 21:8 they are classed with the unbelieving, the abominable, murderers, whoremongers, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars; an unsavory company. Have you stopped to think why this is so? Your soul may be at stake!

There are fears which are necessary in the Christian life— such as: deep, abiding respect for God; (Heb. 12:28) be not high-minded, but fear; (Rom. 11:20) and fear lest Christians will stray from Christ. (2 Cor. 11:3) Such fears are in keeping with a strong faith In God.

But there are fears that spring from doubt; (Matt. 14:25-32) which manifest themselves in many ways. When God sent Israel forth to war He rejected the fearful lest his brethrens heart melt as his heart. (Deut. 20:8) God wants people who put trust in Him; not in physical strength or numbers. (Jdg. 7:3)

Those who fear the people and love the praise of men more than the praise of God (Jn. 12:42-43) are of little value to the Lord. Anxieties cripple our usefulness, and prevent our putting His kingdom FIRST in our lives. (Lu. l2:22- 34) If we fear to ask, we will not learn; (Lu. 9:45) and If we fear to act, we become unprofitable. (Matt .25:25-f)

Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. (Matt. 10:28) This is part of Christs instructions to the twelve, sent to proclaim truth in a hostile world. In later years Jesus spoke to Paul in a vision, Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy peace For I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to hurt thee: for I have much people in this city. (Acts 18: 9-10)

Today the Lords cause needs men of courage — men unafraid to SPEAK —men more concerned for their soul and the lost souls about them, than for self. Soft preachers are not money-hungry. In these days an educated man can make a good living at something else. But they are cowards !! and this lack of faith in God will send them to hell with the rest of the fearful.

(Reprint, Vol. 9, No. 7)

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.X Pg.2

December 1973

Won, One By One

Robert F. Turner

If too few have been won to Christ through our efforts, it may be partly because we have not been aiming in the right direction; viz., at the individual. In this age of mass evangelistic efforts aimed at effecting mass conversions, some may have lost sight of their obligation to the unit of lost humanity. We could be getting a little like the salesman whose boss asked why he failed to make his full quota of calls on a certain day. "I would’ve made it boss," he replied, "but one of them stopped me to find out what I was selling!" When rushing to expose the whole world to a little of the gospel means neglecting the adequate teaching of "every creature"; when they are not sure of just what it is we’re "selling", then a reorder of priorities is needful. While it is true that the Bible likens the word of God unto seed, it does not follow that scattering, is the best means of planting the gospel into the hearts of men. It is one thing to make the gospel available; it is yet another to get out and teach it. Consequently, there is more to evangelizing the world (or even a small community) than just having classes and preaching that are "open to the public". The public, even the "lost and dying world" as we express it, is not lost generally; but only as this man or that man, the individual is lost.

None realized this better than He who commissioned the preaching of the gospel to "every creature" in "all the world" (MAR.16:15). True, He spoke to the multitudes, but not to the exclusion of the individual. His meeting with Nicodemus (JOH.3) and the Samaritan woman (JOH.4) serve to illustrate the worth of such teaching. He was constantly aware of what we may tend to forget: that one soul is of more value than the whole world (MAT.16:26). Philip preached Jesus to one traveler. Paul and Silas spake the word of the Lord to one jailer. Thus, these and other souls were won for the Lord, one by one.

Accordingly, our effectiveness in reaching others with the gospel can be increased by emphasizing the "ONE" concept. Remembering that within every man is that part made in the image of God; that part whose value is not determined by the comeliness of its fleshly tabernacle nor by external circumstances. That part of any man makes him worthy of my attention, my respect, and my best efforts. Knowing that he personally is accountable to God; that he must answer "according to what he hath done" because the Judge will render to "every man according to his deeds" and knowing that he will be judged by the gospel (ROM.2:16; JOH.12:48), it behooves us to make that gospel known unto him. At best, he could learn it, believe it and obey it unto salvation. At worst, he could make an informed decision even in rejecting it and we would have still done the Lord’s will.

When thinking of winning men for Christ then, let’s think in ones, not in groups. Lecturing groups is easy, converting the group is hard. Groups don’t have consciences, problems or questions. Individuals like Nicademus and the Samaritan woman do. Each must relate self to gospel truth. Each must appropriate that truth to self one by one.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.X Pg.3

December 1973

Consiberalism

Dan S. Shipley

When asked whether he preferred to be identified as a conservative or a liberal, a certain Texas politician replied: Neither, Im a consiberal! The consiberal viewpoint, though seldom identified so appropriately, is old enough to have whiskers, aliases not withstanding. In both politics and religion it has been best known as the middle-of-the-road position. Its adherents like to think of themselves as being a part of the popular mainstream; somewhere in between those whom they consider to be freewheeling unrestrained liberals and the narrow-minded non-progressives. There may be a place for the consiberal in politics, but not in religion, certainly not in the Lords church.

First, the consiberal concept is tied to the false, if pleasant, premise which says that truth is usually found somewhere between two extremes. Some brethren seem to regard this hallowed assumption as having a divine source— even to the point of allowing it to determine their position on vital, church dividing issues. The problem with this concept is that truth is never relative, either to men or to the positions they may occupy. Seeking out the middle-ground and calling it truth is a far cry from proving all things (1 Thess. 5:21). My middle-ground could be as far removed from truth as I consider the extremes to be. Soul-saving truth is only found with God (Jn. 17:17); to walk in truth (2 Jn. 14) is to walk in the light with Him (1 Jn. l:5-7). This idea of truth between extremes is just another version of the way that seemeth right (Prov. 114:12); the way in which the presumptuous walk.

Furthermore, truth is extreme by its very unique nature. It is exclusive and intolerant; it is not subject to arbitration nor to the subjective appraisals of men. Now wouldnt it be unusual if the unique qualities of Bible truth were not reflected in the lives of those who love it? Would they be considered extremists by the consiberal? Since NT truth is Gods pattern for shaping us into the kind of people He wants, how much leeway could the consiberal concept allow in obeying His will? Where, for instance, is the middle-ground on the issue of baptism? Where is the truth between extremes concerning the instrumental music issue? And what makes these issues any different from others that have more recently caused division among us? Truth is involved! For too many, consiberalism is an out; an out for those unwilling to study; an out for those to fear being identified as liberal or anti; an out for those seeking to avoid conflict, making changes or facing issues. Has it been your out?

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.X Pg.4

December 1973

The Spiders Bug

Robert F. Turner

As I sat studying in my office, I noticed a bug ambling across the tile floor and I thought: I need to get up and kill that bug. But then, I became absorbed in my thoughts again and forgot the bug, until I heard a scratching beneath the baseboard. I turned and saw a struggle for life that became a struggle to death. I was fascinated by the battle.

Unseen by me, a spider had observed the bugs movements much closer than I and when the bug had gotten in range, he had pounced on him. The bug struggled well at first —he lay on his back and fought the spiders efforts by kicking vigorously and biting the spiders legs. His defense seemed impenetrable, but gradually a pattern of silky threads began to form. I can see that, though the bug struggles harder, his movements are being restricted. His struggles become spasmodic and feeble, and now he lies quietly in his new webbed straitjacket with but an ounce of life left in him. And soon there will be only a hollow shell. I feel pity for him.

Mr. Bug, With but a little foresight, you could have avoided all the terror and struggle. You could yet be alive, if you had walked circumspectly and thus avoided the spiders plot. It is too late now.

The old Devil is like that spider. And the fact that God uses the figure of a roaring lion (1 Pet. 5:8) does not mean that this is the way we are able to see him. But God tells us that the devils activity and intent is to devour us —we should be warned. However, because we are unable to see him, we forget that he lays his cunning plots, bides his time and judges his range. See that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise, redeeming the time, because the days are evil (Eph. 5:15-16).

It grieves me to think of all the men who have ignorantly strayed into the Devils corner. They fought well against his extreme evils while being hobbled by those which appeared innocent. They neglected their strength and protector and served the fleshly appetites. They drank the sweet wine of success and ate the bread of false teaching, while assuring their brethren and friends that they were not entangled therein. Until, finally they must awaken to the fact that they have become slaves to that which once served their appetites. The old spider has got em and wont let them go. I pity them.

And, like Mr. Bug, they become a hollow shell —the Devils booty, (cf. Col. 2:8). The needless struggle and lost life could have been avoided if they had stayed out of range of the Devils web of deceit (cf. II Cor. 11:13). God, who has of old thwarted the Devils efforts through faithful men, says, Be watchful. Let us not be so foolish as to toy with the Devils vain philosophy and to taste of deceitful lusts. Our lives are too great a price to pay. And the best way to stay alive is to stay away.

Thank you, Mr. Spider. Perchance what I have observed will help me —and I didnt have to get up and kill the bug. Jim B. Everett

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.X Pg.5

December 1973

Did You Repent In The Aisle

Robert F. Turner

Many years ago while teaching a Bible class I asked a young lady the meaning of repent". Her immediate answer was, Oh, thats what people do in the aisle. Then, seeing my puzzled expression, she continued: You believe in the seat, repent in the aisle, confess at the front, and are baptized in the baptistery.

Very neat, very neat indeed! And I suspect that there are a surprising number of adults who get little beyond this childish conception of the plan of salvation. We repent in the aisle! Abject sorrow for sin, that humbles—brings us trembling before our God— shakes our complacency and puts steel in our determination to sin no more, is virtually unknown.

If tears are shed this is a rarity sad may often be traced to nervous embarrassment or a prolonged emotional appeal on the part of the preacher. Some speakers seem to fear any emotional appeal, while others seek to stimulate a synthetic down-pour by tactics of mass psychology. What has become of genuine, soul-searching conviction that changes a whole life? Well, the necessary ingredients are still with us, and but await recognition and proper use.

Sin is rampant, and if repentance is rare it is not for lack of reason. But sin must be made apparent to the sinner. Platitudes and generalities soothe the flesh— they do not strike the heart. When men come to themselves, are pricked in their heart, then they may repent. (Lu. 15:l7 Acts 2:37-38) Paul feared lest a penitent man be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. (2 Cor. 2:7) Does this fit our man in the aisle? Ye sorrowed to repentance: for ye were made sorry after a godly manner a portion of 2 Cor. 7:8-11. Read these verses carefully, for they distinguish between sorry I got caught and the humbling, self-abasing experience of one who realizes his unworthiness in the presence of God. Such a feeling fills with care, and our very being revolts against our former manner of life — the sin, of which we are now so ashamed.

Unclean! Unclean! we cry; and turn with joyous gratefulness to the Saviours offer of forgiveness.

Paul taught repentance toward God as well as faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ. (Acts 20:21) All sin is against God (Lu. 15:18) i.e., the creature wrongs the Creator when sin is committed; and since God alone can forgive, it is fitting that the creature present a contrite spirit to the Throne. The old-time mourners bench was based on Calvinistic errors too space-consuming to be discussed here; but I sometimes wonder if we may not have run past Jerusalem in our casual attitude toward repentance.

Jesus said, Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. (Lu. 13:3) Repent or perish— it is an ultimatum of Almighty God, an awesome thing. But the sin-burdened soul who truly repents sees more: Repent, and be baptized— for the remission of sins. (Acts 2:38) Christ lifts the burden of those who obey Him, and mourning turns to thanksgiving.

(Reprint, Vol. 1, No. 12)

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.X Pg.6

December 1973

Nothing New Under The Sun

Robert F. Turner

We have repeatedly stated that the current church problems are but digressive issues of the past in modern dress. Brethren who refuse to consider the scriptural principles involved, and swallow the anti—anti propaganda of the sponsoring churches, are following the same line taken ~ the digressives of years past.

Consider the following article. Does it have a Familiar ring?

——————

For twenty years or more I have labored under the delusion that the anti, as they were derisively dubbed, were a split off the church of Christ; that they were anti-Sunday school (therefore did not believe in teaching or the study of the Bible), anti-society, anti-missionary, anti- everything except ante-up -- they just wouldnt give.

... I have learned that the so- called anti wing is not a split off the church of Christ, but that a number digressed from the church— leaving the loyal brethren. I know too, that the digressives, in their eagerness to make good, have not only padded reports— of money raised, of converts made and work done— but have misrepresented the loyal brethren and minimized their work.

I was made to believe that the loyal brethren were opposed to preaching the gospel to the heathen, opposed to all missionary work; that all the missionary work was done by the societies, that the loyal preachers were ignorant, behind the times, and opposed to progress and advancement. Taken from the GOSPEL ADVOCATE of August 26, 1915; written by Otto Delton Maple, a former Christian Church man who had been blinded to the plea of loyal brethren by prejudicial and false charges, and name calling.

From The Unchangeable

The ship of Zion has floundered more than once on the sandbar of institutionalism. The tendency to organize is a characteristic of the age. On the theory that the end justifies the means, brethren have not scrupled to form organizations in the church to do the work the church itself was designed to do. All such organization usurp the work of the church, and are unnecessary and sinful. (ACC Lectures, 1939)

When brethren form organizations independently of the church to do the work of the church, however worthy their aim and right their designs, they are engaged in that which is sinful. (P. 338, see citation below.)

There is no place for charitable organizations in the work of the New Testament church. It is the only charitable organization that the Lord. authorizes or that is needed to do the work the Lord expects his people today to do. (P. 340, see below.)

When men become dissatisfied with Gods arrangement and set up one of their own, they have already crossed the threshold to apostasy. (P. 341.) (By Guy N. Woods, ACC Lectures, and GA Annual Lesson Commentary, 1946)

(Reprint, Vol. 2, No. 11)

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.X Pg.7

December 1973

You Know What?

Robert F. Turner

Bro. Turner:

Our church does things I know are wrong, but most of the members accept them. I have tried to believe everything is all right, but I know it is not. How long may I continue to take part in and support these errors? LW.

Reply:

I will be frank— and space forces me to be abrupt— please understand. You do not need answers as much as you need STRENGTH. The basic problem here concerns your attitude toward God, and response to your conscience.

Today thousands are captives —-prisoners of their own spiritual wellness — lacking the courage and the strength to act upon convictions. And such weakness is more than a handicap: it is sinful. Fear, that prevents our doing what we know we should do, can condemn our souls. (Rev. 21:8 Jas. 4:17)

Paul wrote, Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth. And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin. (Rom. 14:22-f) In this passage faith is subjective and refers to the individuals conscience. How can one be true to God, who has not the strength to be true to himself?

It is understandable, and commendable, that one should exercise patience toward those in error — while in an effort to correct the error. But even this does not excuse our own participation in error. Deliberate sin is presumptuous (See Num. 15:27-f) and God has never, in this or any other age, tolerated such high-handed. disrespect for divine authority.

Ill say it plainly, but— believe me— with all the love of my heart; you will go to hell if you continue to support and encourage something you know to be wrong.

Bro. Turner:

Since God authorizes a church to have elders, if members disobey the elders (who are scripturally qualified have they not disobeyed God? PM

Reply:

The voice of the elders is NOT the voice of God—under any circumstance. The voice of the Apostles was the voice of God ONLY as God spoke thru them by inspiration. (Matt. 16:19; Jn. 15:26-f; 1 Cor. 2:13)

The question assumes that God has authorized elders to speak for Him. This is not the case. Some common direction and. guidance is necessary for collective action, and it is Gods plan that men with certain qualifications (1 Tim. 3:) serve in this capacity (1 Pet. 5:2) but their judgement could be wrong — even unscriptural. (See Acts 20:29-f).

In matters of judgement, obedience to elders assures uniformity of action— a thing to be desired. But the question of RIGHT and TRUTH must be settled by a higher court — that of Almighty God. Our allegiance is first and always to God; and His will is revealed in the Bible, not in elders, however noble their intentions.

(Reprint, Vol. 1, No. 10)

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.X Pg.8

December 1973

Stuff About Things

Robert F. Turner

One man, intent upon becoming wealthy, determined to invest only in ventures which gave him advantage of others. A second, equally ambitious but wiser, determined to build a business which offered the greatest advantage to others.

Guess what? The first man became filthy rich, with four wives and three Cadillacs. (His third wife got the fourth Cadillac in her settlement, but had to sell it for taxes.) He never knew a quiet, satisfied moment in his life.

The second man worked like a dog, and nearly everyone took advantage of him — which worried him little. He made a modest living, earned respect for what he was, and bored folk to tears with pictures of his grandchildren. (oh yes, he bought the used Cadillac at a court auction.)

Moral of the story is: What Most People Want, Costs Too Much!

Moses chose rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season: Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt: for he had respect unto the recompense of the reward. (Heb. 11:25-26) (That last part means, in every —day English, he could see beyond the end of his nose.)

Short-sighted people quit school early,— to work on the road, escape class-room discipline, or otherwise prove their immaturity. Others overgraze their land, misuse their credit, or mistake a bragging drunk for a man.

But the shortest short-sightedness of all is that which ignores the brevity of life, the certainty of judgement, and the awfulness of Hell.

Riches for riches sake (built on selfish desires) cost too much. They seem pleasant enough, viewed from afar; but they exact their toll both in this life, and in that to come. We can build only one true security, and that consists of the treasures we lay up in heaven. A lifetime of service to the Lord is not too great a cost for this end.

If you think you do not need this particular lesson, try depriving yourself to give to some worthy cause. Give something you think you cant do without. I have tried it a few times, and — Man, does it hurt!

(Reprint, Vol. 1, No. 6)

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.XI Pg.1

January 1974

Prejudice

Robert F. Turner

I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels— WHAT a tremendous array of witnesses!! And for what?? That thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality. (1 Tim. 5:21) Here a Greek word, prokrima, makes its single appearance in the New Testament. It means judging before-time, or prejudice. (See ASV)

Timothy would receive accusation concerning elders— but he must protect the elders by demanding adequate witnesses. He must not be hasty— to lay hands on any man. In brief, judgements had to be made then, as now; and Timothy is reminded that all who judge are themselves standing before God (no respecter of persons), and Christ (with what judgement ye judge, ye shall be judged), and the elect host of heavenly beings.

Pre-judging means drawing conclusions without sufficient evidence. It means disregard for the charged ones rights or claims; an unreasoned bent, without due examination or knowledge; bias. premature judgement. it is an ugly ungodly unrighteous attitude that causes us to ignore the Creator and mistreat His creatures— and that sin is compounded when the creatures are our brethren in the Lord.

It closes eyes to beauty, stops ears to truth, and steals from us the rationality that is our God-given heritage. It has burned as witches those whose only fault was being different, or misunderstood. It has deprived man of noble ideas, because they were new; of marvelous developments, because they called for change. Prejudice has built spite fences, and prevented a flow of love that could enrich our lives beyond fondest imagination. It negates the very brotherhood of man.

But more, prejudice— self-serving badge of littleness— creates in him who harbors it a distorted sense of greatness. He defies justice and justifies foolishness. With the wisdom of a fool he enthrones himself, and shuts out God; for we must be taught of God, and a prejudiced man will not be taught anything greater than his prejudices. Only the honest and good heart will inherit heaven.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.XI Pg.2

January 1974

Journey Mercies

Jim R. Everett

During the past three months in Australia the above phrase was often heard. It was usually in a prayer for bro. Harry Pickup, Jr. and myself— that God would grant us journey mercies; and I am so thankful that God did just that. We are safely home after ten missions each. In addition, bro. Pickup had a two-night debate with a Holiness preacher (at Wagga Wagga, N.S.W.) and I had a one-night debate with bro. Jim Waldron (U.S.) on sponsoring church arrangements. I didnt hear the Holy Spirit discussion but it is reported that Harry did well. I hope the Holiness man understood the issue better than bro. Waldron understood our objection to the sponsoring church arrangements.

And journey mercies are again needed, as we contemplate our program for this new year. Before this is in your hands I will have been to Birmingham, Ala. (77th St.) to discuss the Australian work. Then, Jan. 13-20, I am to be in San Antonio, TX., for a meeting with Highland Blvd. church. Next stop is W. Columbia, TX., Feb. 11-17; then a long (for me) stay in my study, to do some writing.

The next meetings are in Arkansas: Magnolia, Apr. l5-22; and Hope, Apr. 22-28. From there to Texas: Greggton, Apr. 29-May 5; and Rockdale, May 12-17. Then Russellville, Ala., June 2-7, and Pasadena, TX., (Red Bluff) June 16-23. Next, Vivian and I will take a long swing east— Decatur, Ga., July 14-19; Kingston Springs, Tenn., July 21-26; Newport, Ohio, July 28-Aug. 2; Hidalgo, Ill., Aug. 5-11; and back to Houston, TX., (Spring Branch) Aug. 18-23. This is home base of a sort, as the Spring Branch church assists in my regular support. It will be a pleasure to again see those folk.

In September we take another turn at the study and typewriter; but hit the road in October for meetings in Wichita, Kas., (Southwest) 6-11; and St. Louis, Mo., (former Spring and Blaine) Oct. 13-18. From there we go to Canada for four weeks; Jordan and Bancroft, Ont., are confirmed, with assurance that there will be plenty to do the rest of the time.

From Canada, we go to Marion, Ind. Nov. 18-24; and Athens, Ala., (Eastside) Dec. 1-6. If this doesnt fill the year, well think of something. Our meeting program is filled through 1975, with six or seven meetings in 76. We do indeed pray for journey mercies and we do hope Hes willing.

______________________________

Our sincere thanks to bros.andverett for recent articles. Dan was editor for 3 months.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.XI Pg.3

January 1974

Throwing Away The Key

Dan S. Shipley

Sin is bad but covering sin is even worse. If deliberate sin is like putting oneself in jail then covering such sin is like throwing away the key. The covered sin, the one a man attempts to hide and refuses to confess, shuts one off from spiritual prosperity and divine mercy. He that covereth his sin shall not prosper, but whoso confesseth and forsaketh sin shall have mercy (Prov. 28:13). There can be no trading on Gods mercy because it does not ignore sin. It is not a question of whether His mercy saves the sinner; but whether the sinner will allow it by confessing and forsaking his sins. In covering sins the sinner spurns the mercy through which forgiveness and salvation are possible. If a merciful God provides the feast, sets the table, and invites all to partake, then how can He be faulted by those who choose to starve themselves? No, the Lords hand is not shortened, that it cannot save, neither can limitations be placed on his mercy —except by the rebellious sinner w h o refuses it. What sin could be more pernicious than the one a man will not acknowledge nor repent of? Little wonder God says such an one shall not prosper.

But not only does the covering of sin preclude forgiveness, it easily becomes the launching-pad for yet other sins. Nothing encourages sin like sin. Lies and deceitfulness are popular camouflage for hiding evil. This in turn leads to the development of a compromising attitude toward all sin, both in self and others. The unwholesome attitude that permits one sin will soon permit another. Why? Because it involves more than ones disposition toward a certain unlawful act; it involves his attitude toward God Himself —the One whose law is violated! When tempted by Potiphars wife Joseph reminds her of his obligations to his master then asks, how then can I do this great wickedness, and sin against God? (Gen. 39:9) To wrong his master was bad; to wrong God was worse. How men need Josephs perspective of sin —and regard for God. Ungodliness (Gr.asebeia) is essentially a wrong attitude toward God, the expression of which is lawlessness (Gr. anomia) which is sin, 2 Jn. 3:4. (See Vines on ungodliness) In view of this, no sin can be considered as isolated or insignificant. (Notice carefully Jas. 2:10-11 in this connection, especially For He that said..., v.11) One just as well talk about the size of God as to make distinctions in sizes of sins for the deliberate practice of sin constitutes a rejection of Him and His law (1 Jn. 3:4; 1 Thess. 4:8). It is not difficult to understand why no man can prosper while perpetuating disrespect for God in the covering of sins.

Finally, and logically, the practice of covering sins has the effect of hardening the heart (Heb. 3:13). How could it be otherwise when one persists in violating a truth-trained conscience? Who could court such ungodliness without a corresponding adverse effect on the inner man? Can a man take fire in his bosom, and his clothes not be burned? (Prov. 6:27) Surely anything that can so harden a mans heart while causing him to dishonor God and shun His mercy is a dangerous sin. It may be that the worst sin is to hide sin.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.XI Pg.4

January 1974

You Are Lost!

Jim R. Everett

Some preachers are so diplomatic and tactful that they never make a lost person realize that he is lost. Their ability to preach around Gods pronouncement of mans condition is an oratorical marvel matched only by a con artist. However, before a man can be saved, he must come to the shocking realization that he is lost I And the person who does not preach Gods word plainly enough that a lost person may see that he is lost may well be the Devils messenger.

Cutting a man to the heart is not a task to be relished, and no teacher of Gods word delights in hurting people. It is the end result of freedom, salvation and joy for which we labor. But between sin and salvation is the painful experience of self-examination. Indeed, Gods truth can prick the heart.

A message of offered salvation will not move one who does not believe he is lost. Jesus said, I come to seek and save that which is lost, (Luke 19:10) He offered the lost sheep of the House of Israel freedom from sin— Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free, (John 8:32). But the Jews responded, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free? Whether they intentionally or ignorantly missed his point, they did not believe they needed what Jesus offered.

When Jesus offered them salvation, they became defensive and tried to kill him, Christ plainly pointed out that they were children of the Devil, (YOU ARE LOST !). That smarted. Stephen spoke to Jews about their ancestors actions and said, Ye stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye, (Acts 7:51). Their fathers had slain the prophets who spoke of the coming of the Just One and they had killed Him when he came. Such true words cut them to the heart and they took their anger out on Stephen with teeth and stones.

Ahab called Elijah the troubler of Israel and Jezebel vowed that Elijah would die as he had killed the prophets of Baal. Elijahs words had laid bare their festered souls. What else need I say? Many people cannot tolerate self-examination and are never able to admit that they are lost.

If you have never obeyed the Gospel, you are not in fellowship with God— regardless of how you may judge that God answers your prayers. If you have never believed in Jesus Christ and repented of your sins, you are yet in your sins— regardless of how good you may be. If you have never been baptized for the remission of sins, you are lost— regardless of the good feelings in your heart.

Now, if God says you are a sinner, dont get mad at me; and if God says you are lost, YOU ARE LOST! But sometimes people see that you love their souls and are trying to help in saying them. As a result, they see themselves as God sees them. The danger of your enmity is worth it, if you will submit to Christ and be saved. I hope your reaction will be, Thanks, I needed that!

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.XI Pg.5

January 1974

Differences

Robert F. Turner

Have you the nerve to try and imagine how you would plan and conduct a worship service if you had only the New Testament as your guide, and had never known any form of so-called Christian worship? I dare you to consider it, seriously. We are so accustomed to certain ways of doing things that our ways are practically considered as Bible, and we shock easily when we see differences.

Consider these differences noted in Australia. (Taken from many places with no universal consistency apparent nor particular issue made.

men meet to themselves just before services to pray, and decide who shall do what. Someone presides at a small table at the front, and directs the service. (Asked Why? they said, How else can we have order?) No obvious song leader; he is seated and simply starts the song which the one presiding has announced. Frequently the song leader will read the first verse of song before singing. A long velvet bag is placed on table, and saints may place contribution in the bag before or after service. (No passing of bag during service.) Old and New Testament passages are posted, so all may follow as these are read— by two different men.

Much time and effort given to the Lords Supper. Sometimes six to eight minutes given to scripture reading and explanation re. the bread; then a like time given to fruit of the vine. In one place all saints are asked to come to stand about the table for the comments, prayer, and communion. The bread is passed, and each breaks a piece, but holds it, and only partakes when the one presiding does so. Thus, all take at once. So also with the fruit of the vine. In one place a large container (with tiny lip) was placed among the individual cups. The thanks were offered, then the one who was to pass the element turned his back to people, poured contents into the individual containers, and then passed them to worshipers. (I noted a few used the large container, so concluded this was a compromise on the one cup idea.) The Lords Day morning service is regarded as worship while evening service is gospel service. (I was told that there had been times when some would use the piano at gospel service, but not at worship service.)

The song leader, NOT the preacher, must tell people to sing. (I closed a gospel sermon by asking all to sing the invitation song — and not a soul stood or it was a simple misunderstanding, but embarrassing to me and to them.) Following sermon any one may question the preacher — and some of these sessions last nearly an hour. And there must be no TV football or roasts to burn. Following morning service members often are reseated and sit quietly visiting and discussing the sermon, etc.

Now, are these differences? From the way we do it — yes; but there is little problem for those who have no desire to bind customs as law. I have no desire for difference just to be different, and realize that many of these things come from British background and customs but say, ARE OUR CUSTOMS MORE BIBLE THAN THESE?

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.XI Pg.6

January 1974

Dear Lord Of Harvest

Robert F. Turner

I have a letter on my desk, begging for a dedicated MAN who will go and preach the gospel, Recently the elders of a large church told me they were seeking desperately for a real MAN, whom they could support and send forth into the world with the truth. And there are churches with large unallocated funds, set aside for support of gospel preachers, but waiting for the MAN who will qualify, and go.

These are not places for someone to settle, play golf (or go hunting), and establish community ties as he implements a local teaching program —although I understand it is becoming increasingly difficult to find well qualified men for this too. But there is a desperate need for men who will break ties with our affluent and comfortable way of life, for the cause of Jesus Christ.

The MAN must be one who has given his heart to the Lord, who truly has a hunger for souls. He must be realistic enough to see that zeal can not take the place of knowledge, and he must be willing to study hard and get as much experience as possible in his own part of the world, before launching out into the deep. He should know that being in a mission field does not make a man brilliant. Instead, it often shows how little he knows, and makes his conceit and arrogance the more obnoxious to those who hear him.

He should understand that people are very much the same in all parts of the world. The ignorant in Africa act about like the ignorant do here; and the clear-minded valid prospect in India is no more likely to act impulsively than his counterpart here. Genuine converts to the Lord come one at the time, being taught, hearing, learning, coming. The true MAN of God is not number or publicity hungry. He is soul-hungry, and works accordingly. I have been impressed with the fact that churches looking for real MEN of the gospel seem to understand this, and are content to find MEN who will do their work well, and leave the increase to God.

One group of elders told me recently, We want a MAN who can take being shot at (i.e., with Satans barbs) and know when and how to shoot back. It is not an easy assignment. They are asking for experience, and wisdom in the use of the sword of the Spirit. I hope they realize that the best will sometimes err and fail. But is this asking too much?? I think it is not. Surely the evangelist should understand that his role in the army of the Lord will place him in the front line of battle, and he should prepare himself to fight the fight.

There was a time when we thought we had plenty of MEN, but no means of supporting or sending them. I suspect we were wrong on both scores. There have never been enough MEN, and there has always been a way for real MEN to go. Our present affluency only makes the want of MEN more apparent.

And the basic message of this article becomes a cry for laborers in the vineyard. The harvest truly is plenteous, but the laborers are few; Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he will send forth laborers into His harvest. (Matt. 9:37-f)

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.XI Pg.7

January 1974

You Know What?

Robert F. Turner

Dear bro. Turner:

What are the scriptural boundaries of a local church? How may one distinguish between the work of church A and that of near-by church B?

Reply:

Local churches are not geographic divisions. They come into existence as a plurality of saints agree to function as a team— to work and worship together, (Cf. Acts 11:20-26 and Phil. 1:1; 4:15). Phoebe was a servant of the Cenchrean church — in Rome, (Rom. 16:l-2; Cf. Phil. 2:25-30; Col. 1:7). One may live next door to a certain church building, and be a member of a church which meets on the other side of town— with valid reason.

The God-assigned work of a church (as indicated by precept, example and inference) naturally divides itself into that which has to do with self-maintenance of the unit (if you dislike my terminology select your own): such as worship, self-edification and discipline, and care of needy members of that congregation; and their obligations abroad: such as preaching and supporting the gospel to the world, and care of needy saints other than their own members. Our query is obviously concerned with this last category. What part of the world-need belongs to church A and what part to church B? Which sinners are the obligations of church A and which must be taught by church B? Sounds rather silly, doesnt it?

If assuming a territory puts one church in charge of that section, it is not surprising that long ago a self-acclaimed mother church called "dubs on the world, and has been trying ever since to get all churches to work through her. There is, however, no scriptural basis for such a concept, either on a world-wide or even a state-wide basis.

Church A and church B each have a world obligation— with a most obviously scriptural limitation. Each is to perform out of that which ye have, (2 Cor. 8:11), or out of your ability. (A.S.V.) There was a level of production which Paul hoped for, (Arndt-Gingrich, also expect) and beyond which he did not expect them to go. (Not as we hoped, but first gave their own selves to the Lord. For I mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened. 2 Cor. 8:5-f) This does not mean that brethren and churches could not scripturally go beyond Pauls expectations (the churches of Macedonia went beyond; as did the poor widow, Mk. 12:44), and were commended for their self-less liberality. But they went beyond by digging into their own living. It was of themselves that they gave —not funds they had solicited from some others.

And here is the boundary of God-assigned church work: all that you will do, all that the church will do, using her own resources. This is just another way of saying that independent congregations have an obligation to meet God-assigned world needs as they have opportunity and ability. Courtesy and a desire to avoid duplication of efforts may dictate consultation when many churches meet in the same general area, but neither dubs nor geography make church boundaries.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.X No.XI Pg.8

January 1974

Stuff About Things

Robert F. Turner

Man seeks in vain to master an adequate concept of God. Contemplation of a single aspect— like timelessness — can leave one reeling; and we become aware of mans minuteness in eternity. But Gods timeless nature is repeatedly demonstrated in His revelation of principles that fit today as though they were made today. (Since God knows no yesterday, we can say they are made today— by I AM.)

Now man does some wonderful things too— in his own time. There was this Og, an enterprising wight. He wanted to use his talents to improve the lot of his fellow-citizens in the kingdom of Gfx, but his altruistic endeavors were constantly interrupted by wars with neighboring savage States. It was necessary, time and again, to put aside his studies in herbal remedies to grapple with those who would overrun his beloved land. If only he could devise something to keep these enemies at bay— maybe even convince them that war does not pay.

He carefully studied the natural resources of Gfx, and made a marvelous discovery. Here at his feet, were the means of delivery. He called a meeting of the Gfx fathers, and revealed his plan. They were shocked— aghast at the horror, the inhumanity of the idea. DO that— even to our enemies?? We must reason with them; persuade them that they can not win against our new secret weapon.

But there was no reason in savage brute force, so the men of Gfx were carefully schooled in the use of the modern device, and went forth to battle. We have no stomach to write of the carnage. Ye lust— ye kill—!!

When Gods rain had washed blood from the land, and the Gfx fathers considered, in the calm of peace, the awfulness of their decision; they determined to erase this invention from the mind of man. The enemies were no more, and the home folk were carefully brain-washed of the whole affair. A sample of the dread weapon was buried in a time vault, to be opened only in the event of drastic national emergency. People spoke in whispers of the terrible something that lay sleeping— deterrent to future wars.

And deep in the vault was a creek boulder, a round rock, with instructions: Throw at enemys head!!

Gods truth doesnt wear thin with age nor are His solutions out-dated.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XI No.I Pg.1

March 1974

How Long Is Hell?

Robert F. Turner

Of what duration is that state to which the Scriptures assign the Devil, his angels, and those who are his earthling subjects?

Well, how long is God? In Rom. 1:20 His power and deity are said to be aidios —eternal, or everlasting. The word is used only twice in the N.T. —the second time in Jude 6 where it describes the nature of the chains by which Satans angels are bound.

In 1 Tim. 1:17 God is called King eternal (ton aionon, of the ages) and His honor and glory is for ever and ever (aionas ton aionon, ages of the ages). Then in Rev. 20:10 the Devil is cast into the lake of fire and tormented forever (alonas ton aionon, ages of the ages). The 14th. and 15th. verses say (the powers of) death and hell and whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

How long is eternal life? I am aware that the term can refer to the quality of life in Christ, but the etymology of the word is that of duration. Moulton and Milligan say, it never loses the sense of perpetuus. In Jn. 10:28 Christ relates eternal (aionion) life with time, saying and they shall never perish neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. It is this same word (aionion) that is used to describe the fire and destruction of Matt. 18:8,. Jude 7, and 2 Thes. 1:9.

Matt. 25:46 assigns certain ones to punishment eternal (aionion) and others to life eternal (aionion). How long is hell (gehenna, punishment)? Exactly as long as heaven.

Man, being time bound, has time-bound concepts — and terminology. He has had to adapt his words, by special usage (as ages of the ages) to express perpetuity. When God wished to describe to man His eternal nature, He used the terms man would so understand. But the Bible terms that describe the unbounded limits of the punishment that awaits those who rebel against their Maker, are exactly the same terms used there to define the limitlessness of God, of Christ, and of the heavenly home of saints.

Are You Ready For An Eternal Destiny?