Plain Talk

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIV No.III Pg.3
May 1977
Don't Be Like The Mule
Dan S. Shipley

"I will instruct you and teach you in the way which you should go; I will counsel you with My eye upon you. Do not be as the horse or as the mule which have no understanding; whose trappings include bit and bridle to hold them in check, otherwise they will not come near to you." (Ps. 32: 8, 9 NASV).

The difference between a mule and a man without understanding is that the mule has an excuse. Mules have no capacity for understanding. Things such as the instruction, teaching, and counseling mentioned in these verses would be wasted on the mule. They can be wasted on men. God teaches men the way in which they should go (v. 8). However, some men do not understand His teachings because they do not choose to do so. Hence, the admonition, "do not be as the horse or as the mule..." Men can be different from the mule; they can have an understanding in the will and way of God. In fact, God appeals to man's understanding in these very verses in telling him not to be without it.

Important principles are involved here. Calvinism says that unregenerate man is like the mule; that he cannot understand. However, they forfeit their case by pointing unregenerate man to Bible passages that supposedly prove his inability to understand and expect him to understand the passages that say he can't. In addition, appeals and arguments based on Scripture are made to the unregenerate who allegedly have no capacity for under standing them. Calvinists have even been known to debate their positions with the "unregenerates". To them, that should be something like arguing with a mule. In the face of such glaring inconsistencies, it appears that the mule is not alone in his lack of understanding.

Why would God say, "don't be like the mule" if man could not do otherwise? If it be objected that God is speaking to the regenerate here, then that would make them susceptible to NOT understanding, which is the very thing being regenerated supposedly makes possible. But the truth is, God addresses Himself to the UNREGENERATE; to the sinner. He instructs and teaches them in WORDS whereby they might be saved (Acts 11:14). Unregenerate men come to the Savior and salvation as the result of hearing and learning what God teaches (Jn. 6:45), NOT by the Holy Spirit's "bit and bridle" being placed upon his heart in some unsought and irresistible way. As indicated in our text, the mule comes near his master in response to the bit and bridle. Those made in the image of God come to their Master in response to His invitation; they come in a spirit of willing submission motivated by genuine love. You might say that the mule HAS to submit to his master's REIN; but that understanding man WANTS to submit to his Master's REIGN.

The tragedy is not that sinful man cannot understand, but that many will not (Matt. 13:14,15). It comes to all who sincerely want it and diligently seek it (Jn. 7:17; Matt. 5:6). It comes to those who are willing to put aside pride, prejudice and indifference. God shows the way which we should go. Don't be like the mule.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIV No.III Pg.4
May 1977
Paul, To The Romans (1-5)
Robert F. Turner

I am Paul, a called one, as respects God's good news. This gospel was promised when Christ was promised: a descendent of Abraham through David yet the very Son of God, as proven by his resurrection. He called, and sent me to all nations, that the blessings of the gospel might be had by all who are obedient to the faith.

']'his good news concerning Christ, when incorporated in a faithful life, is God's way of saving man from sin.

-------------------
Men universally could know of God as the Eternal Power and Deity, by looking at His product, the created world. This should cause all to praise Him, and recognize dependence upon Him. Instead, men have allowed pride and fleshly lust to rule. Such men God justly "gave up" to the consequences of their own sin.

All mankind shows a sense of moral "ought." We claim to see wrong in others, and know the wrongdoer is worthy of death. So, when we do wrongly, God is just in condemning us. Thus, Gentiles, having no access to codified law, stand justly condemned. A Just God renders judgment according to the deeds of each individual, without respect of person.

The Jews, with all their advantages, have failed to live according to the law of which they boast. 'they have erroneously thought that outward marks, as circumcision or lineage, will save. But God sees the inward man, the heart, the spirit of man. Yes, God is Just in condemning both Jew and Gentile, for all have sinned. ---------------------

Law is not the remedy. Law (rightful authority of God and just administration of the same) has but emphasized man's failure. All have alike missed the mark. Seeking justification (freedom from guilt) on the basis of law alone is futile: for no amount of right-doing can remove the guilt of wrong-doing. Even the Law and Prophets of old testify to this, saying the righteous man will live in his faithfulness (rather than by the perfectness of his doing.)

God's plan for man's righteousness is one of grace, expressed in the sacrifice of His Son. Christ paid the penalty for sin on our behalf, so that God is both Just and the justifier of all who put their trust in Christ rather than in themselves. Redemption (buying back), Justification (making free of guilt), and Propitiation (appeasement of the one offended, viz., God), are all made possible through the death of the Son of God, and the operation of forgiveness.

Nothing has been done to void law, (for submission to divine authority is essential in all dispensations). But efforts to attain justification via perfect obedience are vain. Both Jews and Gentiles must trust in Jesus Christ for justification via forgiveness.

As an example and test case, Abraham had rightstanding with God, not because of perfect doing so as to merit this standing, but by the operation of forgiveness on the basis of trust. As David said, God's grace is extended in the operation of forgiveness. And Abraham was justified, not (continued next page)

Vol.XIV No.III Pg.5
May 1977
- -In Direct, Bite-Size Statements
Robert F. Turner

(continued from previous page)

as a circumcised Jew (outwardly), but as an uncircumcised believer (one circumcised inwardly), who acted upon his faith.

The significance of Abraham's case to us is two-Fold (1) he was an example for all who so trust in God, being the father of many nations; and, (2) The blessings of the promise, being by promise, were his on the basis of a life-time of faithfulness rather than by perfect (meritorious) lawkeeping or outward fleshly marks.

Jesus Christ died (as the offering for our sins) and was resurrected (to he our intercessor) so that all who trust in Him might have forgiveness of sins. True believers are no longer enemies of God, but are freed from guilt, and arc at peace with God. We rejoice in hope, even in times of tribulation, for we trust in God's grace. God is reconciled to imperfect man through the death and the resurrected life of Christ.

-------------------------
Adam and Christ provide a contrasting study, for these two represent contrasting character groups. Adam first sinned, becoming the primordial "father" of sin; and because of his sin he was separated from God. All men have been separated from God, because all have partaken of the spirit of rebellion which he introduced into the world, each becoming a sinner. Whether men sinned by violating their conscience, as did the Gentiles between Adam and Moses; or by violating positive precepts, given through Moses, as did the Jews; the end is the same. Adam's sin is representative of all that followed, and his death (separation from God) becomes The Death, considered abstractly, which envelops mankind. On the other hand one man, Jesus Christ, by the gift of himself upon the cross, became the "elder brother" of those who trust in Him and thereby stand rightwise with God.

Adam and Christ offer contrast in the character of their effect upon mankind: the first bringing separation from God, the second abounding in grace. They offer contrast in results: the first introducing condemnation, the second producing the means of justification. The Death was initiated by one, and The Righteousness (also considered abstractly) was initiated by the other one. Death which became universal, having been introduced by Adam; was countered by the universal remedy, offered through Jesus Christ to Gentiles as well as to Jews. One brought sin into the world, and all who were influenced thereby became sinners; but the other was obedient (unto the death of the cross), and as many as are influenced thereby may be righteous, through the forgiveness of sins.

Law, in and of itself, only makes sin (and the need for forgiveness) more apparent. But our need is more than met by grace, which reigns unto eternal life through the self-sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

--------------------------
This takes us through chapter 5, (if you are a charitable reader). See editorial (p.2, this issue) for introduction. We plan to complete this effort in following issues. Criticisms and assistance will be appreciated.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIV No.III Pg.6
May 1977
Free Will" Quotes
Robert F. Turner

"God's Strategy in Human History," by R.T. Forster and V.P. Marston, is a book of word studies, arguments, and quotations from "church Fathers" on free will. The writers present solution's to what most of our readers would not know as problems — for we have long accepted the "free will" of man. However, in recent digressions toward semi-Calvinistic principles, some brethren are nibbling at the idea of "no human implementation" and "imputed righteousness" — apparently unaware of the relation of these concepts to a denial of man's free will. We quote from pp. 244-f.

-------------------------
The doctrine of "free will" seems to have been universally accepted in the early church. Not a single church figure in the first 300 years rejected it and most of them stated it clearly in works still extant.... The only ones to reject it were heretics like the Gnostics, Marcion, Valentinus, Manes (and the Manichees), etc. In fact, the early Fathers often state their beliefs on "free will" in works attacking heretics. Three recurrent ideas seem to be in their teaching: 1. The rejection of free will is the view of heretics; 2. Free will is a gift given to man by God- — for nothing can ultimately be independent of God; 3. Man possesses free will because he is made in God's image, and God has free will.

JUSTIN MARTYR (c. 100-165 A.D.) Dialogue CXLi: God, wishing men and angels to follow His will, resolved to create them free to do righteousness. But if the word of God foretells that some angels and men shall certainly be punished, it did so because it foreknew that they would be unchangeably (wicked), but not because God created them so. So if they repent all who wish for it can obtain mercy from God.

IRENAEUS (c. 130-200 A.D.)

Against Heresies XXXVII: This expression, "Now often would I have gathered thy children together, and thou wouldst not," set forth the ancient law of human liberty, because God made man a free (agent) from the beginning, possessing his own soul to obey the behests of God voluntarily, and not by compulsion of God. For there is no coercion with God, but a good will (toward us) is present with Him continually. And therefore does He give good counsel to all. And in man as well as in angels, He has placed the power of choice (for angels are rational beings), so that those who had yielded obedience might justly possess what is good, given indeed by God, but preserved by themselves

4) If then it were not in our power to do or not to do these things, what reason had the apostle, and much more the Lord Himself, to give us counsel to do some things and to abstain from others? But because man is possessed of free will from the beginning, and God is possessed of free will in whose likeness man was created, advice is always given to him to keep fast the good, which thing is done by means of obedience to God."

---------------------
The book quotes 17 "Fathers" up to Augustine, and his "new theology" of depravity and no free will.

[RETIREDFAN1]

:Vol.XIV No.III Pg.7
May 1977
?You Know What?
Robert F. Turner

Bro. Turner:

What of death bed conversion where baptism isn't possible? Is such valid? Does 1 Cor. 15:29 apply? A.T.

Reply

So-called "death bed" conversions, even assuming they are truly changes, are simply changes of heart late in life. The "death bed" part terms to add an emotional factor that may confuse the whole issue. Some seem to think the "dying breath" will make the change more genuine; but it seems one could argue with equal or greater strength that the opposite is true. If "it is hardly the time to lie" it is also "hardly the time to pass up a straw" that may affect our destiny.

And regardless of the genuineness of the change of mind or desire, one must ask if the scriptures teach that a change of mind alone is the point at which God promises forgiveness of past sins and a change of state. We are not contending that baptism is the means of forgiveness — any more than faith is the means of forgiveness. Neither earns the desired results. But if we are to trust God's word in the matter — and what else is there to trust for such information — we must conclude that remission of sins is at the point of baptism, and not before. Read carefully Acts 2:38; Mk. 16:16, Acts 22:16, Rom. 6:3-4, etc.

Jesus said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." "AND" is a coordinating conjunction — there are TWO things named here, and other elements in complete "conversion" are named elsewhere. There are no scriptures that name "faith only" as the single requirement of conversion. We are "justified by faith" (Rom. 5:1), but in such passages "faith" (trust) is used in an inclusive sense — the attitude or frame of mind toward Jesus Christ by which all of His commands must be obeyed. We do His bidding, trusting not in ourselves, but in His sacrifice on our behalf. James says "faith without works is dead" (Jas. 2:20-26).

Can we not "throw God's mantle of grace" over such cases? What God does with such cases is His business. It is certainly not my prerogative to cast His "mantle" — whatever that is. According to His word, He exercised His grace in giving us His Son. He teaches us by His grace (Titus 2:11-) and His teaching says that remission of sins and the new state are at the point of baptism rather than before. That is all I have the right to tell any man, healthy — sick — or dying.

ALL MEN ARE DYING, and our concern should be expressed in keeping with the word of God while they are yet able to accept and obey Him. There is no valid reason to believe that a "death bed" wish that one had gotten married, gone to Cincinnati or had obeyed the gospel, can make a husband, Buckeye visitor, or Christian.

1 Cor. 15:30 is a continuing part of v. 29; i.e., those "baptized for the dead" stand in jeopardy because of their deed. They have been baptized (on behalf of their own coming death, in preparation for judgment), and their acceptance of Christ, brings persecution upon them. This teaches us to be baptized before death.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIV No.III Pg.8

May 1977

Stuff About Things

Robert F. Turner

When I first began to "make talks" I ran across some scripture I did not understand. My father, an elder in our home church, helped me on those passages, but with the help he issued a warning and ever-needed wisdom.

He said the Bible was made up of individual bits of truth, many of which seemed complete and self-sustaining, but were actually only a part of the total picture. The part should always he understood in light of the whole (keep things in context) and if that isn't wisdom enough — the better one understands the whole, the richer the part becomes.

He went on to say that I would find many passages that were unclear. I should not become discouraged. If careful study, with attention to such context as I knew, did not explain them, just put them in a pigeon hole. We were sitting beside his roller-top desk, and the illustration was plain. "Some day," He said, "you will find other truths not now known to you; and this wider knowledge will answer some earlier questions. You can then remove that problem from its pigeon hole." It made good sense to me. Then, maybe because he knew human nature in general; or my nature in particular; he added a final warning. "Robert, I hope you live to be one hundred, and learn much Bible, and answer many problems for yourself and for others. But know this: when you die, you are going to leave things in the pigeon holes" (or words to that effect). I'm just beginning to learn how smart the old man was. What I need is a bigger desk.

'This is no indictment of the Bible nor of man's capacity to understand it. The same principle is true of all great quests — we are seekers throughout life's journey. The remarkable thing about God's word is the amount of information ascertainable to those who seek in faith — the opening of heavenly vistas to unworthy mortals. "When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, ... what is man that thou art mindful of him?" Psm. 8: Then let us develop a more humble attitude in our studies. Let as deal reverently with God's message to man, confident that we can, if we will, find there a light for our path. We will never know it all, but we can know enough to serve Him faithfully and, by His grace, be saved.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIV No.IV Pg.1

June 1977

Learning To Worship

Robert F. Turner

"The preacher's eyes I've never seen Though light in them may shine;

For when he prays he closes his, And when he preaches, mine."

------------------------

If I knew who wrote it I wouldn't embarrass him by telling. Besides, if the writer had been worshiping as he should, he wouldn't know that other's eyes are closed during prayer.

That preacher had probably made a studied effort to learn how to get and keep attention; how many of us make a studied effort to give attention? Both sides may he failing.

Granting (please do, or I'll feel terrible) that absolute and unstraying attention is impossible; surely there is some way to improve single mindedness in the public worship. Perhaps the most important prerequisite is an honest appraisal of our desire. If we do not care — are so little acquainted with true worship as to think "attending," "visiting," and gazing about the auditorium is all God expects of us — there is little use in going further with this.

But people who really want to worship God can improve their efforts. No. 1— "make not provision for the flesh" (Rom. 13:14) i.e., do not sit where there are distractions — move toward the front of the building. Unless you are forced (small children, physical disability, etc.) you cannot afford to overlook this means of improving your attention span and enriching your worshiping experience.

Practice charity —- hear the monotone singer as one who sings to God; and the trite expressions in prayer as the efforts of an embarrassed man, saying what he thinks is expected. (You can pray your own prayer you know; and if you lead publicly, you can set better examples for others. )

Listen with a view to learning! Take notes, reason through the process, being critical in a positive fashion. Better to forsake the preacher while making a note of your own, than to drift sleepily in "limbo." And when you drift, apologize to God, right then. Ask His help, and worship will become meaningful.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIV No.IV Pg.2

June 1977

Free To Serve Christ

Robert F. Turner

I sometimes wonder if we are really ready for the organizational concept of independent, churches which we preach. Would we be satisfied with churches that acted independent of our pet projects, Papers, schools, or offering of personal service? How do you feel about a church that has a preacher you do not know? Whose members do not read your favorite paper, or attend your favorite lecture? Are they suspect before you know what they believe or practice? If you travel enough you may find many such churches — calmly going about the Lord's business: doing their own work, under their own oversight, in keeping with their own ability.

Ignorance is not bliss. Good papers serve a useful purpose, as do good schools. In this day of movement and communication an awareness of the world about as forewarns (and forearms) so that we plan and act intelligently, and keep the church moving on a safe course. But it should be that church's own course — in so far as we have a legitimate say in planning the work of the Lord. There is more than one way to lose that independence.

We abdicate responsibility when we become a contributing church to some "churchhood" project. Collective activities necessitate surrender of independence in the project's realm, as all but the blind and prejudiced see. But we also sacrifice independence when our course is nothing more than reaction to what others say or do. We let them tell us what to preach, establish our priorities, etc. We must learn to fight error without being unbalanced by the battle.

The natural and inevitable "influential" preacher, paper, or even some congregation, can exercise weight in directing the course of others — and be innocent of malicious intent. Influence, of itself, is not wrong. We are expected to affect others by our teaching and example (1 Tim. 4:12). But be wary of attempts to do more than point to Christ, where individual conscience and responsibility take over. "Centers of influence" or "brotherhood voices" may impose their own brand of restrictions or reins on congregational independence.

Will each local church accept the responsibility of planning an aggressive, positive program of study, worship, and concern for the spread of the gospel of Christ? Of supporting that program with time, effort and money? If independence means only that we want to be "left alone" to wallow in errors or indolence we have missed the point. A true church of Christ is never independent of obligations to serve the Lord.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIV No.IV Pg.3
June 1977
Staybility
Dan S. Shipley

The man in Christ is exactly where he needs 
 to be. That is where he needs to stay. Remaining in that relationship takes what I have chosen to call STAYBILITY--staying with what is right at all times and at all costs. For a lack of staying-ability many Christians have turned back to a wrong life, liberalism or false-religion.

Staybility is needed in the time of temptation. None are exempt from the allurements and enticements that would pull us away from the Lord. Joseph wasn't. Yet he exemplifies the kind of staybility we all need in asking, "how then can I do this great wickedness and sin against God?" (Gen. 39:9). For him, and often for us, staybility may mean fleeing. If so, we'd best quickly take the "exit" pro-vided by the Lord (1Cor.10: 13). Many temptations come as the result of keeping the wrong kind of company (1 Cor. 15:33). Staying with the Lord may require leaving evil companions. As Paul warns, "be not deceived". Many Christians are. They think their indiscriminate mixing with the world won't hurt, but it always does. Liver so gradually, resistance to temptation is weakened; spiritual values become diluted; what seems like staying is drifting--and often so deceptively as to be denied. Accordingly, staybility is complimented by honest self-examination (2 Cor. 13:5).

Staybility is needed when things go wrong between brethren. Here, it may mean staying instead of leaving, as brethren often do. Those who jump up and leave at the slightest rumble prove themselves undependable and are likely to become church "floaters" or spiritual dropouts. Staybility means longsuffering, kindness, forbearance, love and forgiveness--none of which can be expressed by the impulsive quitter. Personal differences need not mean division; should not; and will not where there' is staybility in humility! Those with super-sensitive feelings will seldom be without something to take offense at in the midst of fault-laden brethren. But leaving changes little more than the scenery. Staying (staybility) can help them and their weak brethren to be stronger if they so will it and work at it.

Staybility is needed in times of discouragement. Most will admit to being vulnerable here. Much of it comes from dwelling on past failures, sins and weaknesses; in remembering what is best repented of and forgotten. Bad yesterdays cannot be relived so, with Paul, we need to be "forgetting the things which are behind, and (be) stretching forward to the things which are before..." (Phi1.3: 13). The staybility is strengthened by forget-ability. But even then, discouragement can come from elsewhere. It may come from brethren who know better but won't do better; it may come from the criticizers and complainers; or it may even come as the result of feeling unwanted or unneeded. Like Elijah, we may feel like throwing in the towel. But God says, "STAY! "be not weary in well-doing"; "be stedfast, unmovable". He wants for us a staybility that is above the influence of men and circumstance. And He deserves it!

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIV No.IV Pg.4
June 1977
Paul, To The Romans (6-10)
Robert F. Turner

WHAT PAUL SAID TO THE ROMANS is my bite-size, direct statement digest of that important letter. Introduction and Ch. 1-5
 were published in Plain Talk, Vol. 14, No. 3. We continue from chapter 6 in this issue. RFT

-------------------------
Should this make us less concerned about sin in our daily lives? No indeed'. True Christians are dead to sin in intent and purpose. Christ gave His life, was buried, and was resurrected to live unto God. When we were baptized into Christ we declared our old manner of life to be dead and buried. Shall a "dead" man continue to be active? Having rejected our old manner of life, we must carry out our intent to live unto God.

We are no longer under the curse of a system of law, so that a single sin condemns us. That bondage has been removed through Christ's death and the forgiveness it made possible. But we can still bind ourselves in a life of sin. You once yielded your members unto sin, and grew worse and worse. Now exert that same free agency to serve righteousness, and grow more holy, living unto God. By sinning you earn eternal death; but serve righteousness, and God sill give you eternal life through Christ.

You see, it was not the law that was to blame for our former condition; it was our sinful conduct. Our former manner of living was to give in to appetites of the flesh. We were bound, as if by marriage, to this "old man." But we (i.e., our "old man" of the flesh) died (when we died figuratively in baptism); so that now we (our "new man" of the spirit) are free to be married to a new and better life. Being joined to Christ we can, like Him, bring forth fruit to God.

However, it would be a mistake to think that the flesh no longer has sinful appetites, or that man's spirit (apart from forgiveness in Christ) could prevail. (I, myself, must struggle to keep my body in subjection to my will; nor do I consider myself to have attained unto the perfection in Christ toward which strive.) I sometimes do what I know (deep inside) I should not do. I do net always live up to the high standards I know to be right, and wish to follow. My spirit strives for a better life, but my flesh is weak. I am torn by this inner struggle. If I had only law and my own conduct for my hope, I would be most miserable. But I do not trust in my own strength. My spirit is so given to Christ that I can trust slim.

Remember what I said about serving God from the heart or spirit of man? Law alone brings only deep despair; not because the law is weak, but because man is weak. But when Christ died as an offering for sin, so that God can justly forgive, He made it possible for those who sincerely trust and strive to serve Him, to attain unto rightwiseness before God. Yes, God sees the heart. To be carnally minded is death, now as ever. But through Christ the spiritually minded have life and peace.

To be truly spiritually minded one must enthrone the Spirit of God in one's heart. Such enthronement will be evidenced in the intent and manner (continued next page)

Vol.XIV No.IV Pg.5
June 1977
-Continuation Of A Digest Of "Romans"
Robert F. Turner

(Continued from previous page)

of our life (for Deity dwells only in those who love Him and keep His commandments with perfect intent). Our true and sincere desires will be compatible with the leading of His Spirit (expressed in His word), and we will fight against sinful inclinations of the flesh. Our spirits will cry, "Father! Father!" and God will recognize us as His children. Eventually God will change our mortal bodies, so that, that which now wars against our spirit will be resurrected in glory to the praise of God.

Because God sees deep into our spirit, He understands our innermost groanings. He reads our hearts, and hears prayers we do not even know how to utter. In fact, the knowledge, and planning, and calling, and justifying and glorifying, in God's eternal purposes, are all mustered on behalf of those who love and trust him. We are brethren of God's Son, who died for us, and who intercedes for us. We are beloved of Go-! in Christ Jesus, and !note than conquerors in Him.

-----------------------------
I am concerned for my Jewish brethren. They have been highly favored in the past, and I want then to be saved. But God's people are not chosen by accident of birth. In building the nation through which Christ would come, not all of the descendents of Abraham were selected. Isaac was chosen; Ishmael was not. Jacob was sleeted to be in that lineage: Esau was not. Then, as now, God's blessings were by promise. We must not think that an accident of birth gives us the right to argue with God. God sometimes uses even the rebellion of people and nations to accomplish His purposes. Respecting salvation from sin, there are two classes of people: "vessels of wrath" and "vessels of mercy." The "vessel, of mercy" includes Gentiles as well as Jews, as Indicated by prophets of long ago. Jesus Christ is the testing stone. Gentiles who seek rightstanding with God on the basis of trust in Christ, are accepted. But Jews, who refuse Christ and seek rightstanding on the basis of perfect works or physical lineage, are rejected.

Both the Old and New Covenants have this in common: they must be understood through an objective approach to, and faith in, testimony clearly given. Just as God made His commands clear to the Jews, so that they could do them; so also has He made the word which produces faith in Christ. God sent His proclaimers to Gentiles as well as Jews (as predicted by Moses and Isaiah) so that whosoever will may hear, believe, and call upon the Lord, and be saved. But much of Israel, as prophesied, has rejected God's word.

—————————

This takes us through Romans 10. To conserve space we have not identified chapters as we go along, but we hope you well be interested enough to use your text side by side with this digest. Following the last section, next issue, we will give some word studies that help to show why we have adopted certain conclusions. This is an abbreviated commentary, not a translation or "version" in any sense. We hope it will be helpful, but it is no substitute for detailed, painstaking study of the complete word of God.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIV No.IV Pg.6
June 1977
Early Greek Boasters"
Robert F. Turner

From William Barclay's "new Testament Words." (p.47-f.) we quote:

------------------------
"The word alazon occurs twice in the N.T., in Rom. 1:30 and in 2 Tim. 3: In both places the Av translates it boasters and Moffatt, boastful.... The alazon was the braggart and the boaster out to impress men; the man with all his goods in the shop window; the man given to making extravagant claims which he can never fulfill. But we have still to see the alazon in his most damaging and dangerous form....

The Sophists were Greek wandering teachers who claimed to sell knowledge... of how to be a success in life ..... The Sophists claimed to give men subtle skill in words, so that, in the famous phrase 'they could make the worse appear the better reason'.

.Aristophanes pillories them in THE CLOUDS. He says the whole object of their teaching was to teach men to fascinate the jury, to win impunity to cheat, and to find an argument to justify anything....

Plato savagely attacks them in his book called THE SOPGIST: "Hunters after young men of wealth and position, with sham education as their bait, and a fee for their object, making money by a scientific use of quibbles in private conversation, while quite aware that what they are teaching is wrong.'

It is these men. and the like of them, of whom the N.T. is thinking, and against whom it warns the Christian. The warning is against a false teacher who claims to teach men the truth, and who does not know it himself. The world is still full of people who offer men a so-called wisdom, who shout their wares wherever men meet, who claim to have the cure and the solution to everything. [low can we distinguish these men?

(1) Their characteristic is pride. In the Testament of Joseph, Joseph tells how he treated his brethren: 'My land was their land, and their counsel my counsel. And I exalted myself not among them in arrogance (alazonoia) because of my worldly glory, but I was among them as one of the least' (T of J 17:8). The alazon is the teacher who struts as e teaches, and who is fascinated by his own cleverness.

(2) Their stock in trade is words. The Sophist defended himself to Epictetus that the young men come to him looking for someone to teach them. 'To teach them to live?' demands Epictetus. And then he answers his own question: 'No, fool; not how to live, but how to talk; which is also the reason why he admires you' (Discourses 3:23). The alazon seeks to substitute clever words for fine deeds.

(3) Their motive is profit. The alazon is out for what he can get. Prestige for his reputation and money for his pocket is his aim. The program he preaches is designed to return his party to power and himself to office.

The alazon (boaster) is not dead.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIV No.IV Pg.7
June 1977
?You Know What?
Robert F. Turner

Bro. Turner:

Would you mind commenting on the "doing" of Jesus, as it pertains to our salvation. Tract enclosed. R.H.

Reply:

The tract, by one of our brethren, reasons that since justification by law necessitates perfect obedience (a scriptural concept, cf. Gal. 3:10-12); that Christ must perfectly obey on our behalf. The later is not proven, nor does it follow. The writer only hints at "imputation" of Christ's perfect life to us, but his theological dream came from there, and leads others there, whether he espouses it or not. (See P.T., Vol. 12, No.

Paul's argument that "freedom from guilt" via law would necessitate perfect obedience to law, does not necessitate the conclusion that God's "perfect law must be vindicated by being kept perfectly in a human life." God wants all men to come to repentance. Must Christ "repent" for all men; and from what would He repent?

Christ's perfect life was necessary — on His own behalf. When He became man He accepted the obligations of man; and living under law, He did indeed keep law perfectly. He thus was qualified as the perfect offering for sin (2 Cor. 5: 21); but our rightstanding with God is on the basis of forgiveness (v.19, Rom. 4: 6-8).

The tract writer thinks the "body" in the Lord's Supper signifies His perfect obedience prior to the cross. 1 Cor. 11: 24 K.J. reads, "This is my body which is broken for you..." 'The A.S. moves "broken" to footnotes, saying, "Many ancient authorities read: is broken for you"; but complete removal of "broken" doesn't change context. And Peter said Christ "bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes so were healed" (1 Pet. 2: 24). It is the body offered on the cross, not in the perfect life, that is given significance in the scriptures "through the obedience of the One" (Rom. 5: 15-19) refers to the "one act of righteousness" (v.18, A.S.), viz., His death on the cross. (Matt. 26: 42) He cites Matt. 5: 17-18, that Christ came to fulfill the law — but fails to show how he got "on our behalf in this or any other passage.

He made the "body prepared of Heb. 10:5-7, refer to the perfect life before His death, when the context says it is a body "offered ... for sins." He seems to ignore the need for Jesus to live a perfect life on His own behalf, as a man; and thereby to qualify as the perfect sacrifice for us.

He uses "saved by His life" (Rom. 5:10) as referring to His life before death, when context (4:25) makes it the resurrected life. The DEATH-LIFE of Christ — in this order — is frequently referred to in Hebrews (7:23, 25; 9:12, 23-24, 28; 10:12) where the redemptive process is discussed. In His resurrected life He is our Advocate when we sin. (1 Jn. 2: 1-2)

The Calvinistic paper, Present Truth, contributed more than drawings to the tract, "A Certain Salvation."

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIV No.IV Pg.8

June 1977

Stuff About Things

Robert F. Turner

Robert Burns wrote (but in his own style), "Oh would the God's the gift give us, to see ourselves as others see us. It would from many a blunder free us, and foolish notion." That might work for some; but it would make others so self-conscious they might never speak another word, and that would be a sad day indeed.

Have you ever listened — really listened, to the conversation in a hospital room when "polite" visitors drop in to cheer up a patient? What if scattered "quotes" from different visits, were rolled into one?

"We figured you must be sick when we seen your fence was down and your cows was scattered down the highway."

"If you hadn'ta come, I sure woulda wished you woulda come."

"Where do you hurt the worst?" "Well, I reckon mostly all over." "I always say the worst thing about being sick is usually you feel so bad."

"If I was you I sure would be sick of all of whatever you've got."

"It wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't that I just don't like this kind of feeling."

"One thing for sure; if you ever got well you sure will feel better." "Lord, bless all of them that are sick of this man's family." And, " if he's got to go, give him a peaceful passing.'

"We just want you to know that if you don't get well, don't worry about nothing. Me and Jake's going to buy your place and farm it."

"Whenever I get lonesome in this here bed, I want you to know you have give me a lot to think on."

Now it is possible that some of my readers will not understand this; and some may feel sorry for the patient. Don't. After one such (or kinds such) conversation, a grizzly old patient warmly shook my hand, told me of his recent visitors, and concluded, "Made me feel so good to know they thank of me." Little attention had been given to the inept, inane words of embarrassed men, unaccustomed to social niceties. Much attention is given to thoughtful friends, who mean well.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIV No.V Pg.1

July 1977

Double Standards

Robert F. Turner

People used to ask why preacher's children were so ornery, until I began to reply, "Because they are forced by circumstances to associate with the children of brethren." I said it as a joke, but maybe it wasn't.

The "double standard" is no joke. It often plays a major role in moving preachers, ousting elders, and breaking up homes. Utopianism (expecting perfection or nothing) usually gets nothing. (I borrowed that line from Schaeffer.) How does one cope with those who expect of him moral, social and financial standards they make no pretense of applying to themselves?

We can chop down the standards, altering them to fit those of our peers, so that they no longer expect great things of us. Some solution!!

Or, we can become adept at hiding our sins... er, little weaknesses; and spend our life in hypocrisy. Better take out insurance for ulcers and psychotic depression, and, oh yes, some eternal fire insurance, if you can find it. You will not fool God, nor will you fool many people. Or, we might realize that our real problem is too much concern with what people think, and not enough for what God thinks. If we really believe His word is our standard for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness" would He not expect us to preach it like it is, and live up to that standard to the best of our ability? And if God expects this, why should not our hearers expect it?

Sometimes I fear the so-called "double standard" pricks us because, deep inside, we would like to be living like those hypocrites who claim to be children of God, but act more like their father, the Devil (Jn. 5:39 47). We squirm under God's standards, envious of those in less public positions who seem to "get by" with sin.

If we better understood God's word we would know our High Priest understands our weakness, and is ready to forgive those who sincerely strive to serve Him (Heb. 4:15-16, 1 Jn. 2:1-2). This world and her people offer no true serenity. It is found only in a conscientious service and trust in Him who shall judge us eternally.

[RETIREDFAN1]

July 1977

Perfect" Obedience

Robert F. Turner

"In Rom. 1:9 Paul said, in essence, "I serve God — with my spirit — in the gospel of Christ." Compare this with Rom. 7:25 where he says, "I serve the law of God — with my mind." In context "Mind" becomes "will," "inward man, " "law of my mind," and "spirit" — his spirit. When he says (Rom. 8:16), "The Spirit himself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are children of God;" he is saying essentially the same thing said in 1:9, viz., God knows that I am sincerely striving to serve Him. Paul was a true Jew, one "inwardly" with a "circumcised heart" (Rom. 2:28-29).

Much has been written, and needs to be written, about man's imperfectness and his inability to be justified on the basis of law. In the absence of perfect obedience we all stand condemned before God, and must trust in Christ as Savior, throwing ourselves upon the mercy of God. But we may be overlooking one thing that we can do, perfectly, and that we must do, if we are to expect God's mercies. We must give ourselves, with out reservation, wholeheartedly, to the Lord. We must TRY perfectly.

Paul did not consider himself to have attained or to have laid hold on the perfect life in Christ — the new life, lived unto God, which his death and burial with Christ had portended (Rom. 6:5-11, Phil. 3:10-15). (Serious students, give thoughtful consideration here.) But this one thing he did. He tried: He forgets the past, confident that God had forgiven; and he PRESSED toward the mark. And he wrote, "Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded."

If we do not perfectly know and do all the things Christ wants us to know and do — and we do not — there is a frame of mind, an attitude we must have, and without which we have no hope. It is not amiss to say this is something we must do perfectly.

It is sometimes called giving ones heart to God (Matt. 22:37), loving Gad more than all else (10:37-39), denying self (16:24), or seeking first His kingdom (6:33); but in every case its requirement is absolute. There is no "relatively speaking" to this requirement. I think one could even call it "faith" and do the term no injustice. In fact, this might teach some what is really involved in being "justified by faith."

Can we say, "if the heart is right, external details do not matter"? We must say, if the heart is right we would not ask such foolish questions. The right heart strives to do all, even while recognizing unworthiness and praying forgiveness (Lu. 17:3-10).

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIV No.V Pg.3
July 1977
The Permissive Trend
Dan S. Shipley

Trends can be troublesome things. They are real enough, to be sure, but often hard to grasp and identify. How do you corral and brand a tendency? By their very nature, trends are not ends, but are as intermediaries that lead to ends. They are something like what whiskers are to beards. As some sage has noted, a whisker is not a beard. Even several whiskers are not a beard. Now anyone can tell the difference between a whisker and a beard, but who can say just how many whiskers make a beard? Though not so tangible or predictable, little trends, like whiskers, slowly grow into something. Just what they will grow into is not always obvious — and not always good — and most certainly, not always easy to deal with.

A big reason why trends are so troublesome is that most who go along with them cannot view them objectively. Nothing blinds like involvement. None of us like to think that what we have sanctioned may be wrong or may even lead to wrong. The trouble is, many unthinkingly jump on the trend-wagon without really considering where it may take them. And, once aboard, few are likely to admit they made a mistake by getting on and going along.

Take the trend toward permissiveness in our own generation for example. Almost everyone will acknowledge it, yet who will claim to have been under its influence? From the family unit all the way to the highest echelons of government, we have seen the effects of such a trend. Public conduct and conversation that would have been considered shameful in another generation can scarcely find a blush in ours. WHAT IS HAPPENING TO US? Even if we acknowledge the "beard" of permissiveness, who cares? Who wants to shave it off? Seemingly, not many.

But the worst tragedy would be if God's people didn't care. Trends that affect the nation will be felt in the church. We cannot deny the permissiveness among us. It can be seen in the willingness of many churches to go along with most everything and seldom if ever, take a stand against anything. Only smooth and inoffensive preaching will be tolerated (Isa. 30: 10: 2 Tim. 4:3,4). The separate and distinctive nature of God's people is being diluted (polluted maybe better) with worldliness. Many among the set apart people are not — not when they revert to living like the world; not when the church is allowed to become a refuge for the ungodly. Discipline is practically unheard of. WHAT IS HAPPENING TO US? Where are those who once stood uncompromisingly for God's truth? Is it really better for us to go along in order to get along? Just how bad would things have to get before it would be proper to speak out? For those who will listen, God is saying, "already it is time for you to awake out of sleep..." (Rom. 13:11).

Trends involve much time and many people. It is not likely that the nonconforming few will have the time or the influence to reverse the permissive trend that has crept in among God's people. But we cannot remain in passive silence. We cannot fellowship the works of darkness. Wake up! Look into the mirror. See whiskers? Beard? 'Time to shave'.

[regaleagle]

Standing in righteous indignation cannot be done in a passive way.  

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIV No.V Pg.4
July 1977
Paul, To The Romans (Ch. 11-16)
Robert F. Turner

With this center-cut we conclude our digest of the Roman Letter. The introduction and chapters 1-5, are in Vol. 14, No. 3; chapters 6-10, are in Vol. 14, No. 4. If you did not receive these issues they are available upon request. The lengthy parenthetic explanation, this column, was deemed necessary to make Rom. 11: clear to readers who do not know Old Testament history. We urge you to use complete text side by side with this digest.

-----------------------
Has God utterly rejected physical Israel? No indeed! Do not be pessimistic as was Elijah. The preserved remnant, promised by Isaiah and others, will be saved through God's grace. But it must be by grace, and not by meriting works. God's grace is expressed in Christ, the Deliverer; and those who trust in Him are the "elect" according to (by) grace.

(God 's promises to Abraham were both physical and spiritual. "I will make of thee a great nation"-- and, "in thy seed shall all nations be blessed." Physical descendents of Abraham became a great nation, a chosen" people through whom Christ would come. But when lie came (the "seed" by whom all nations were to be blessed), then the physical phase of the promise had served its purpose. Now the "cultivated olive tree" takes on a spiritual significance. Jews and Gentiles who are faithful to Christ are spiritual Israel, "chosen" ones, according to the election of grace. Gen. 11: 1-3, Isa. 1:9, 10:20-23, 11:1011, 42:1, 49:5-6, Joel 2:32, Matt. 12: 17-21, Acts 13:23, 32-39, Gal .3:16-29 6:16, 1 Pet. 2:5, 9-10). God has used the rebellion of Israel, and their crucifixion of His Son, to offer redemption to all nations. Perhaps the Jews may be provoked to jealousy (in a good sense), and some of them saved; for if God can use their rejection of Christ to a good end, how much more their acceptance of Him.

Branches of the cultivated (Jewish) olive tree were cut off, because of their unbelief. Branches of the wild (Gentile) olive tree were grafted into the tree of promise, partaking of the spiritual phase of the Abrahamic "root," because they trusted in Jesus Christ. But Gentiles should not be high-minded. If they do not continue faithful to Christ they too will be cut out. And if those cutout Jews will accept Christ, they will be grafted into t h e tree of promise again. This tree is not nationalistic It consists of all who will accept, and continue faithfully to follow Jesus Christ. "Fullness" is realized in Christ on the basis of faith.

Israel's salvation is no longer a physical or nationalistic matter. In the manner described (individuals trusting in Christ) the salvation offered to Jews is the same as that offered to Gentiles, viz., salvation from sin. Jews and Gentiles should not look upon one another as enemies, but as lost souls, equally in need of the mercies of God. Oh, how wonderful are the ways of the Lord!

-----------------------
Brethren, we should present ourselves as living sacrifices to God. We should not be puffed up, but we should use whatever talent or gift (continued, next page)

Vol.XIV No.V Pg.5
July 1977
With Special Attention To Key Words
Robert F. Turner

God has given us to serve Him faithfully. We should render quiet obedience unto civil government, knowing there is no power
 but of God. We should receive our weaker brother whose understanding in matters of indifference is incomplete, but who sincerely strives to serve God. We must always act with conviction and good conscience toward God, helping one another to serve Him.

Jews and Gentiles should receive one another, as Christ has received us, to the glory of God. For He became a servant to both, in order that God's promises might be confirmed and His mercies glorified. This is the good news which I have been called to preach, and which I felt compelled to preach, regardless of the cost.

Before I can come to you I must go to Jerusalem to deliver a gift from Gentile saints to their needy Jewish brethren. Such gifts are proper, and may help to heal Jew-Gentile relations. Pray that this gift may be accepted.

Convey our personal greetings, and those of the saints here.

Dedicated to the glory of God, through our Lord Jesus Christ.

----------------------------
Terms Warranting Special Attention:
RIGHTEOUSNESS: once spelled "rightwiseness," refers to the "character or quality of being right or just." As respects man, it means to have right-standing before God. It does not imply absolute perfection, being frequently applied to imperfect men (Heb. 11:4, 1 Pet. 3:12), sometimes on the basis of their doing (Psm. 106:31, 1 Jn. 3:7). In such cases the term has a certain relativity, for man stands right only through the mercies of God and forgiveness in Christ. We should be content to use the term as God has used it in His holy word.

JUSTIFIED: "Just by acquittal from guilt," or simply, "free from guilt." Since "all have sinned" none are free from guilt except as God's plan for making man righteous is applied, i.e. forgiveness, in the blood of Christ: Rom. 3:24-25, 4:6-8, 5:8-9).

PROPITIATION: appeasement of the one wronged (God). In the O. T. type, the place of appeasement was the "mercy seat" (Heb. 9:5, cf. Rom. 3:25). Christ died for us, and lives (the resurrected life, pleading for us at the mercy seat) as our propitiation.

RECONCILIATION: complete change o f relationship, change thoroughly; cf. 1 Cor. 7:11. We must be reconciled to God (2 Cor. 5:20) and to this end the "word of reconciliation" is preached. Christ is our means of reconciliation in that He alone propitiates (Rom. 5: 8-11). "Atonement" (K.J.) should be translated "reconciliation" in v. 11.

GLORIFIED: the ultimate condition, made possible through Christ; contem- plating even the redemption of our body (Rom. 8:11, 13, 17, 18, 21, 23 , 30). First, a body made servant to our spirit, and God's Spirit; and perhaps a reference even to our ultimate state. There is marvelous progression in these terms. Study them!

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIV No.V Pg.6
July 1977
Saved By Forgiveness
Robert F. Turner

In Rom. 2:13 (A.S.) the words just and justified nave footnotes. We are reminded that these could be translated, righteous and accounted righteous. In Rom. 3:20, and again in 3:2, the same rotation is found. God's plan for man's justification, and for man's righteousness, are the same. Whatever it takes to bring about his justification, it takes to make him righteous.

Some tell us that the Son of God was given a "body" so that lie could live a perfect life in our stead; and that lire, "imputed" to us, becomes our righteousness. Heb. 10: 5-7 is cited, but the context there clearly refers to body offered on the cross so that sins maybe offered (vs. 10,12f) But does not Rom. 3:26 say that it is by "his righteousness" that God can be both just and the justifier of the believer? Yes, and "his righteousness is "for the remission of sins". Reference is to the obedience of Christ upon the cross — to the shedding of His blood. Compare 3:24 with 5:9.

Rom. 4: is the "imputation" chapter and here Paul clearly identifies the operation as one of forgiveness. Instead of imputing the perfect life of Christ to us, God does NOT impute sin Compare Rom. 4:6-8, with 2 Cor. 5:18-21 and see that God "reconciled us to Himself by Jesus Christ," the process being, "not imputing their trespasses unto them." And how could he, in justice, not impute our trespasses." His Son, who knew no sin, became our sin (offering), "that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." In previous articles (v.14, no. 4) we have shown that Christ lived a perfect life as His own obligation, qualifying Himself as an offering for the sins of others.

Now look at Romans 5, A.S.: "the free gift came of many trespasses unto justification." The footnote reminds us that the Greek here is "an act of righteousness," which would make it refer to Christ's death. Such is strengthened by v.18, where the text reads, through one act of righteousness." In such a setting we can confidently affirm that "through the obedience of the one shall the many be made righteous" (v.19), refers to the obedience of Christ unto death — giving Himself upon the cross for our sins. Jesus faced the cross with the dread of death common to man, but determined to do the Father's will. He made the Father's will His own will (Matt. 26:39-f; Heb. 5:8-9), and "bare our sins in His body upon the tree, that we, having died unto sins, might live unto righteousness" (1 Pet. 2:24).

The teaching that the perfect pre-crucifixion life of Christ is somehow credited to us for our righteousness, has its root in Calvinism. Denying any "human implementation," and seek to explain t h e "preservation of the elect, this fanciful dream developed. It is tragic to see gospel preachers, caught in the web of such error.

The MEANS of our redemption is Jesus Christ, "delivered up for our trespasses, and raised for our justification" (Rom, 4:25). (We are saved by HIS life — after death.) THE OPERATION is forgiveness (via the offering and intercession, Heb. 7:22-f) and the CONDITION is an obedient faith.

[RETIREDFAN1]

July 1977

?You Know What?

Robert F. Turner

Bro. Turner:

What constitutes scriptural worship? Can one "worship at home? M.M.

Reply:

"Worship" denotes an attitude of the heart, whereby one looks up to God praising and recognizing one's dependence upon Him. Yes, I believe one can "worship" at home, alone in the woods, or flying a jet plane. But this cannot be done with a heart that ignores God's instructions concerning our collective responsibilities. Reread that last sentence! Our public worship would be greatly improved if we better recognized the individual nature and requirements of worshiping "in spirit and in truth."

Precepts, examples, and inferences teach us that the early Christians sang praises, prayed, edified one-another, gave of their means, and partook of the Lord's Supper when they were gathered together publicly. This does not, however, warrant a "five item" definition of "worship" (are we worshiping on Wednesday night, in the absence of the Lord's Supper?); nor does it mean that merely "doing" five items constitutes acceptable worship.

In 1 Sam. 15: we read that Saul ignored God's instruction concerning slaying all the Amalekites and their flocks — saving some of the animals "to sacrifice unto Jehovah." Samuel said, "to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams." Now sacrifice had been commanded — but the mere "doing" was not what God wanted. In Isa. 1:11-15 the prophet calls Israel's elaborate and extensive formal worship "vain oblations."' David said, "The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit, a broken and a contrite heart. 0 God, thou wilt not despise" (Ps. 51:17).

Jesus taught the same thing. One may not acceptably worship, anywhere, in the absence of a sincere effort to serve God acceptably in all matters (Matt. 5:23-24). The most meticulous attention to details in worship "service" are useless unless we attend to weightier matters, as judgment, mercy, and faith (Matt.23: 23). Note that Jesus does not say, "If your heart is right the small things do not matter." Such is a complete perversion of the passage. He says, "these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone."

Worship begins with an attitude of heart, without which no conduct is acceptable. But this attitude includes respect for God's instructions. While God abhorred the offering of a fatted lamb, when the heart was not right; the offering of a pig (an unclean and forbidden animal) could not be accepted, no matter how "spiritual" one thought himself to be. In the New Testament saints are taught to "sing" praises to God (1 Cor. 14:15; Heb. 2:12) and no amount of self-assumed piety or imagined "right attitude" can make playing a mechanical instrument acceptable. One who ignores God's instructions does not have the right attitude — period.

Formalism cannot be overcome with new forms, mood music, dim lights, or other mechanical devices. Formalism will disappear only when we learn to sincerely worship our God.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIV No.V Pg.8

July 1977

Stuff About Things

Robert F. Turner

Figurative language "hangs loose" and useless in the mouth of fools. A parable, or proverb, is "as a thorn that goeth up into the hand of a drunkard" (Prov. 26:7,9). He doesn't feel a thing. Its beauty is unappreciated, its lesson is missed. But if you will read carefully, and use your head, Proverbs are profitable (1:1-f).

There are plays on words, and many Hebrew colloquial expressions; but human nature has not changed beyond recognition. Example: "A continual dropping in a very rainy day and a contentious woman are alike" (27:15). Drip, drip, drip, nag, nag — yes dear, that is enough explanation. "He that would restrain her restraineth the wind; and his right hand encountereth oil" (v.16). Not all "olden time" women were downtrodden and subdued.

"It is bad, it is bad, saith the buyer; but when he is gone his way, then he boasteth" (20:14). "That swaybacked, hamstrung, sore mouthed mule (when you're buying) becomes a noble hard-laboring animal (when you are selling him to someone else).

The lazy dead-beat, called a "sluggard," says, "there is a lion in the way." He can't go to work because of great obstacles — which he imagines, or other men go around. He "turneth upon his bed" as a door upon hinges — never leaving the pivot spot. He is too lazy to lift his hand from the common dish of food which Hebrews placed upon the table; but when you try to reason with him, he is "wiser in his own conceit than seven men who can render a reason" (26:13-16).

"A tranquil heart is the life of the flesh; but envy is the rottenness of the bones" (14:30). We sometimes stew in our own juice, and punish our selves by our attitude toward others.

Did you ever see a beautiful person, with many wonderful attributes, act so ugly that the beauty seemed out of place? "As a ring of gold in a swine's snout, so is a fair woman that is without discretion" (11:22).

"Can a man take fire in his bosom, and his clothes not be burned? Or can one walk upon hot coals, and his feet not be scorched? So he that goeth in to his neighbor's wife..." (6:27-29).

"Even a fool, when he holdeth his peace, is counted wise..." (17:28). Good reason to limit our comments and let you study Proverbs for yourself.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIV No.VI Pg.1

August 1977

The Jew In The Pew

Robert F. Turner

Paul wrote, "He is not a Jew which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God." (Rom. 2:28-29)

We have so long opposed so-called "spirit" which slights or ignores the actual obedience of God's commands, that we may have forgotten that true obedience must be "from the heart." Paul is not saying there is no such thing as an "outward" Jew, but that such is of no consequence as respects divine approval. God looks not on the outward man, but upon the heart.

Do we think "he is a Christian" who wears the name; or "this is the church of Christ" because it is socially or historically related to brethren once regarded as His church? Isn't it time we realized that it is not enough to rally beneath the flag,

"Church of Christ." One does not belong to Christ because he sits in a certain pew. He may sit in a certain pew because he belongs to Christ. Hmm! "Christian" tells what one IS, or it is worn hypocritically. I fear we sometimes are satisfied for it to say what one DID, some years back. When a baptismal certificate is accepted as proof one is "Christian" we are making the same error as the Jew who thought outward marks were enough.

Nor is it enough to balance, mathematically, our sermons and articles on letter and spirit. God did not reject the literal Jew, nor did He denounce the need for obedience (Rom. 11:l; 2:6-13). Neither letter nor so-called "spirit" can stand-alone. "Attitude" that will not obey is not the right attitude; and outward conformity to commands is not the "obedience of faith" (Rom. 1:5; 16:26). A "mechanical blending" is impossible.

Somehow we must stress more fully the character of Christians and the church. It is very possible that character can not be fully taught by sermon or article — it must be demonstrated. "Not meat and drink; but righteousness ...He that in these things serveth Christ is accepted.... follow after ... to edify" (Rom. 11: 17-f)

[RETIREDFAN1]

August 1977

No One Is Perfect

Robert F. Turner

"No one is perfect!" It is an old refrain, offered as sop for everything from a typographical error to a counterfeit currency operation. And somewhere in between, writers are careless thinkers, or show a Freudian slip in their theology. I know full well that man has separated himself from God, and must be reconciled to God (2 Cor. 5:19). Then why would I write (V.14, N.3, p.5) "God is reconciled to imperfect man...? I caught it two months after publication.

And I have before me another's paper with an exegesis of Rom. 9: which says, "God alone is sovereign in the universe, (9:10-21). His is the right to choose from among fleshly Israel, those who would be saved. This is demonstrated by His choice between Jacob and Esau (9:9-13)." The same issue has an article, "No, I Haven't 'Gone Calvinist"' and I don't think he has. But that concept of Rom. 9: is rich grist for Calvin. The choice of Jacob over Esau was with reference to physical Israel and lineage — not with reference to being saved or lost. Surely this was another know-better "slip."

Then there are statements made that show failure or an unwillingness to recognize an issue. A different writer, in a different paper, says, "Since each congregation is autonomous, we can choose to cooperate or not, and be just as Biblical either way." ("Cooperate" is here used in a context that defines it as pooling funds with other churches in a sponsoring church project.) We are free agents, and can choose to serve God or reject Him, for a time. But autonomy as a principle of church polity is limited to matters undetermined by divine rule. One church may choose to "break bread" on the Lord's Day morning, and another in the afternoon of that day; but neither can evoke their "autonomy" to change the day established by divine precedent. This statement assumes the thing to be proven, i.e., that churches may pool funds and function as a team under the oversight of one group of elders (in the project matter) without giving up "autonomy" in that matter. But then, "No one is perfect!" It's "our song."

It is being sung as though we were not responsible for our conduct and teaching. As though we need not recognize our errors, seek to correct them and pray God for forgiveness. As if "no one is perfect" is license to go our own error-filled way and expect God to accept whatever we choose to give Him. Some offer man's imperfections as a substitute for "prove all things, hold fast that which is good" (1 Thes. 5:21). Instead, it is reason to study harder and pray fervently.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIV No.VI Pg.3
August 1977
Saying, But Not Doing
Dan S. Shipley

The following statement appears in the creed book of a popular denomination. Read it carefully. "'The Holy Scriptures contain all things necessary to salvation; so that whatsoever is not read therein nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an article of faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation." Similar statements can be found in nearly all denominational creed books, one would be hard put to better express the all-sufficiency of the Scriptures, except it be in quoting such passages as 2 Pet. 1:3 or 2 Tim. 3: 16, 17. Even the men who write the creed books say that the Bible is all we need. They acknowledge it to be the only standard of faith and practice in religion. They say that no man should be required to believe or practice anything other than what can be read in the Scriptures. Not only do the creed books say it, practically every member of every leading denomination professes to believe it! And, what may sound even more surprising to some is that most denominationalists believe themselves to be following the Scriptures. Those who may doubt such a statement need only to ask them.

Why then, one may well wonder, the great difference between denominational profession and practice? What they profess certainly cannot be faulted. In fact, it is my judgment that the above-quoted statement of confidence in Scripture, if truly believed and applied, would go a long way toward promoting unity and eliminating the divisions of denominationalism. Why then the disparity between what is said and what is actually done? For one thing, many simply do not know what the Bible teaches. It is much easier to assume practices to be right than to prove them so, as per 1 Thss. 5:21. Ignorance of right begets ignorance of wrong. The man who does not know what "the Holy Scriptures contain" on the subject of baptism is not likely to know that infant baptism is wrong. It cannot be "read therein or proved thereby", but what is that to one who makes no effort to either read or prove? We mean no disrespect to its members when we say that DENOMINATIONALISM HAS NO GREATER ENEMY THAN THE SCRIPTURES. It is good to affirm our confidence in the Bible but it is better to know, believe and abide in its precepts.

No man ever became a member of any religious denomination by following New Testament teaching. When men will reject all that cannot be "read therein and proved thereby", they will reject denominationalism itself. If not, then they will reject the teaching of the Bible, even if unwittingly. What many have not realized is that denominationalism does not offer optional ways of being right, but of being wrong! It is not a question of whether men are pleased with such religion. Many are. BUT IS GOD PLEASED? Again, assumption is easy. But there is only one way that any man can KNOW what pleases God and that is in following to the best of one's ability His will, the Bible. Abiding in THAT doctrine produces fellowship with Heaven as nothing else can. Failure to abide therein forfeits all (2 Jn. 9). We SAY it is sufficient — but merely saying so is not.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIV No.VI Pg.4
August 1977
Bible Interpretation
Robert F. Turner

The obeginner at Bible reading expects to find doctrines and commands neatly indexed and detailed; and he is joined by others, who should know better, expecting concise Bible rules for distinguishing "approved examples" ETC. Both groups are disappointed for they fail to grasp the nature of Bible literature. It must be interpreted exactly as any other period Literature — except that its statements are inspired, hence both accurate and complete to accomplish their intended end. Many points of this article may be read in greater detail by referring to previous Plain Talk articles; indicated as Volume 9, Number 12, page 7; abbreviated "9-12-7."

Confused by the absence of what they expect, some think "human interpretation" is the culprit-- as though command or direct statement could be understood without interpretation. To say we should not accept anything that comes by human reason is to ignore God's process for revealing His will-- via the Holy Spirit, to chosen witnesses, who wrote, so that we may read and understand (Eph. 3:l-5; see V.13, N.10, p.7). The alternative is to accept the concept that only those receiving some direct Spirit operation can understand the Scriptures.

Of course some brethren decry "human interpretation" as they do "inference" — without giving much attention to the dictionary. We "interpret" if we understand the meaning of a command or a declarative statement. And inference is the process by which one reasons to a conclusion. It is not the same as "implied," "hinted at," or derived by specious logic.

Is a "necessary inference" binding upon the conscience? Yes! When careful study of God's word impresses you with an inescapable conclusion, you must receive it or be untrue to yourself and to God. (See 12-6-2.)

It is ridiculous to argue that examples teach nothing (Phil. 4: 9; 1 Cor. 11:l); and whatever they teach, God binds upon those who would follow NT teaching. Divisions occur because incidentals are sometimes regarded as examples of necessary conduct; but we are persuaded that more often than not, the real problem is a sectarian spirit that builds about camps of various views. We make it appear that the Bible is almost impossible to understand; leading some to reject approved examples and necessary inferences; when the real problem is our attitude toward one another. We must not lose faith in the word of God to produce unity among saints who will be exercised thereby (Jn. 17:17-21).

The customs and surroundings of the day in which the N.T. was written are present in the text, as in any communication. How else could thought be conveyed? (11-5-7) Knowing such matters is part of the job of translation and interpretation. Believing the Bible record sets a pattern for today, we are indeed faced with the task of separating 1st. century idioms from the basic truth intended, and incidental circumstances from the examples to be universally followed. But it is not an impossible task. It will be made easier by recognizing the nature of Bible literature (12-12-2), and having a willingness to study the word of God together.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIV No.VI Pg.5
August 1977
Examples, Inference, And Patterns
Robert F. Turner

(continued from previous page)

Our first observation about an approved example is that it does show the thing done is acceptable. We can do it this way without fear of violating God's will. This is no small matter, and for those who sincerely try to serve God, it is most satisfying. We may ride a mule to town, and meet in an upper room. But must we? In order to exclude anything else, even a command must have "only" or some other indication of completeness in its wording or context. When some say an example "excludes" all else, they use accommodative language on the basis that there is no other information on this matter. Even then, significance must be considered — as we do later. We may do better to say, "This is acceptable, and if you would do otherwise you must produce divine sanction or authority for it." The lack of uniformity in modes of travel (Acts 20: 13), and Jesus' teaching about the "place" of worship (Jn. 4:21-f), forbids our thinking the mule or the upper room are bound upon us.

In our commendable zeal to "DO Bible Things in Bible Ways" we may attach _significance where God placed none. What is the contextual point of a statement or example? Was Jesus teaching the act, per se, of washing feet; or humble service, exemplified by that act? (Note Jn. 13:7, 11-f.) If someone should prove that Jesus used only one container in instituting the Lord's Supper — so what? The container is given no religious significance; hence we are not at liberty to so regard it. On the other hand, significance is given the action of baptism (Rom. 6:3-5, 17), hence immersion can not be ignored with impunity. Sometimes the difference in divine principle and its application under 1st. century circumstances is indicated by the type of argument made. A universal truth re. the relation of man over woman is stated in 1 Cor. 11: 3; but the manifestation of this subjection in Paul's time (the covered head) was argued on the basis of their sense of shame, v.6; their judgment as to what was fitting or comely, v.13; what nature (the course or common practice of their world — Eph. 2: 3) taught them, v. 14; and uniformity of practice among the churches, v.16. We might use the same criteria today to establish "modesty" or "propriety," but neither we, nor Paul, would use such to prove divine injunction.

We could list various "ales" for Bible interpretation: as Rule of Harmony — rejecting an interpretation that violates other plain teaching; Uniformity-- in differing situations, seeking those elements common to all; Limited Extension — that done under special circumstances, would not apply where these circumstances did not prevail. These and other like rules have their place in Bible study. But we must not expect precision instruments for dissecting scriptures, and cataloging "bound" and "not bound." A far better definition for Pattern is: the whole of God's teaching upon any given subject.

All of the Bible is important to those who recognize its divine source and purpose. Rejection of its patterns and approved examples is an initial step in the rejection of any specific will of God, and of inspiration in the Bible sense.