Plain Talk

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.VIII Pg.7

October 1982

?You Know What?

Robert F. Turner

Bro. Turner:

Did Paul know Jesus while the Son of God was in the flesh (2 Cor. 5:16)?

Reply:

Maybe, but that passage may not say what some think I am saying. Paul says, "Wherefore we henceforth know no man after the flesh: even though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now we know him so no more" (A.S.). Very obviously this is not referring to "knowing" a man when we meet him on the street, i.e., recognizing and identifying him by name. Paul says he now knows no man (not even Timothy or Barnabas) in whatever way "after the flesh" indicates.

Studies in Chronology will show Paul was converted about six years after the resurrection, which means he could have seen Jesus walk the streets of Jerusalem. "Last of all... he appeared to me also" (1 Cor. 15:8), refers to the resurrected Lord, and does not negate seeing Him earlier. But the point of 2 Cor. 5:16 is very different from this kind of seeing and knowing. Study context with me.

Verses 14-15 say the love Christ has for us is a constraining influence, moving us to look at things differently that before. We judge if One died for all, then were all dead, including Paul. The fleshly lusts and way of life which condemned us, and cost the life of God's Son, must no longer rule the new man (v.17).

Some were judging Paul by fleshly standards. "His bodily presence is weak, and his speech of no account," they said (10:10). Paul detailed his accomplishments under protest, feeling foolish (2 Cor. 11:), or, as he says in our text, "that ye may have wherewith to answer them that glory in appearance, and not in heart" (v. 12). But he did not approve of judging by outward show, or "after the flesh." Now — look at verse 16.

"Henceforth" — I once measured men by fleshly standards, but no more. We "know no man after the flesh" — we do not so judge men. I once judged Jesus Christ by worldly standards — outward appearance — a lowly man from Nazareth. "Even though we have known" (or have judged) "Christ after the flesh" (or, by fleshly standards) in times past, "yet now" (and from now on) "we know Him so no more" (we will no more so judge Christ — or any other).

KNOWING NO MAN AFTER THE FLESH means I must not judge by social rank, riches, clothes, etc.; must not reject because of poverty, color, nationality, and the like. Realizing I was lost, without hope in the world; and though so unworthy, Christ loved me and died for me; now I see only those who are following Christ, and those who are not. The first I love, and treat as brethren — rejoicing in our mutual hope. The last I love, and reach out for them with the good news of salvation in Christ.

"He who knows no man after flesh has, e.g., in the case of the Jew, entirely lost sight of his Jewish origin, — in that of the rich man, of his riches, — in that of the learned, of his learning, — in that of the slave, of his servitude, etc.; Cf. Gal. 3:28." (A comment by Alford.)

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.VIII Pg.8

October 1982

Stuff About Things

Robert F. Turner

This story has been around for some time but was told to me as being factual, and I'm inclined to believe it. Saturday afternoon the church phone rang, and strangers in town asked the preacher, "Does that church have Bible Classes on Sunday morning?" The preacher explained they did, for all ages; "and we meet at 9:45 a.m."

Next morning he looked in vain for stranger — hoping to get better acquainted with them, and assist them in finding suitable classes for all the family. Finally, they arrived, barely in time for morning worship. The preacher asked why they were not there earlier, and one said, "Oh, we rarely ever go to the Bible classes."

"But you asked about them specifically," he protested.

"Oh yes," he was told, "we always check on that. You see, we would not want to get mixed up with some 'no-class' group!"

By all means, avoid those terrible "no-class" people; though you seldom attend classes, or coming, do not study or take part in the lesson. Be certain you do not get in with those awful "anti-orphan home" people, even though you are satisfied if "your" church spends thousands on "Joy Buses" and recreation centers, giving a mere pittance to institutional care. Avoid like a plague those "liberals" who dim the lights and sing "mood" songs. You can surely find a place where country-western beat has invaded the "psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs," and you can shake the house with good old foot-patting and afterbeat.

Are we carrying things too far? We know some have deep feelings, or convictions on these matters, so have no intentions of making blanket charges against any group. We simply want to remind you that these and many other differences can become "flags" which some may wave and defend, without ever thinking them through, or being consistent in their convictions and actions. This becomes sectarianism — fruit of a spirit that can exist even when the "doctrine" is pure.

Are we second cousins to such a spirit? Like one fellow said, "Kin? No, not exactly. Well, kinda exactly! You see, he married my second wife."

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.IX Pg.1

November 1982

Inherited Faith

Robert F. Turner

Brethren tell me they are not baptizing their young people — or not as many of them as in the past. "Their" young people?? Of course they mean children of church members, who were "in Bible class" since infancy. This may be a good reason to examine teaching programs; or ponder the effect of working mothers and the break-up of home life. But first, consider what may be a fatal attitude. Have we relied on a sort of automatic baptizing of "our" youth (like father, like son) without having to convert each one? Do we treat them as individuals, each lost in sin, needing to make a decision independently, that will affect the remainder of life?? Do we count them as "ours" when in reality, as respects the gospel, each belongs to him or her self, until commitment is made to Christ?

Many young people are "on their own" for the first time when they go away to college. Here they begin true self-evaluation, and a "rap" session with them reveals what they find. We respect the confidential nature of such conversations, but I can tell back-home elders and preachers that "their" young people, though home-loving and "loyal to the church," are often unsure of what the latter means. Many have an inherited faith, not their own. So, they experiment with strange doctrines or new life styles.

Prejudicial studies of denominational error do little to prepare our youth to meet the real thing. Pushing baptism on youngsters before they are truly aware of sin and its consequences, sends upper teenagers into the world with little reliance on or appreciation for a merciful God. Failure to explain "issues" scripturally and free of bias, convinces reflective young people that there were probably only personal differences.

We have some fine young Christians but we also have third-generation "Church-of- Christers!' While the latter hungers for freedom from home restraints; a fellow-student, same age, who has but recently obeyed the gospel, is hungry for more truth and humbly thankful for salvation. It would shake you up to hear these two in a heart-to-heart talk. Maybe we need a shaking — to try and save our youth.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.IX Pg.2

November 1982

Realistic Teaching

Robert F. Turner

The front page article is a serious indictment of church teaching programs; and since I have spent most of my life in local work, often responsible for such programs, this has a very personal sting. But what are we to do about the situation?

We can blame parents — who do not encourage and assist children in home work (??) or follow-up the teacher's efforts — who did not and do not promote their own home teaching program. We can blame the students — "They are not interested in Bible study — They couldn't care less about David..." But none of this buck passing relieves us of our obligations. This may come as a terrible shock to some, but it is the teacher's business to create an interest in the subject — and that goes for the preacher in the pulpit as well as for classroom teachers.

The class-room setting (is it conducive to order, good lighting, pleasant but business- like?), the grading of students (so common interests prevail, — the selection of material to be presented suited to interests we have a right to expect of those students?), and has the teacher well prepared: NOT just something to say, but a method of stirring attention to this subject, and making it an answer to the needs of these students???

Entertainment, games, tricky methods, are often cheap shots — substitutes for genuine teaching. The test is, are the students Bible taught and motivated to use the information, or simply pleased by a social ploy. Is our goal "fun kicks," or taught, believing, behaving children?

I do not have all the answers (surprised?) but want to suggest one factor often missing, which may make a whopping big difference. We must be more realistic in our appraisal of Bible school pupils: their capacity, what we can expect to accomplish, how to go about it. I do not suggest lowering our goals — just adjust the way to reach them. What advantage in concentrating on what one must do, when we have not shown the need for change nor cultivated the desire for it?

For example: have we seriously considered the problems of Junior boys, tried to list them, built a confidence with the boys, led them to see Bible answers to those problems in a realistic way??? (Saying, "All children should obey their parents!" is not the same as leading them to that conclusion, while stirring a desire on their part to be good boys.) It is not realistic to see those boys as tiny birds, beaks open, ready to be fed. We must challenge their minds, and send them looking for their meal.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.IX Pg.3

November 1982

Still Smoking?

Dan S. Shipley

As a former smoker, I know how easy it is to ignore messages from the news media and the pulpit that discourage smoking. It is difficult for most of us to be objective in considering that which condemns what we want to practice. As someone as well noted, Affection is a briber of the judgment; and it is hard for a man to admit a reason against the thing he loves, or to confess the force of an argument against an interest." Convincing Christians to give up tobacco wouldn't be nearly so hard if they could first be convinced to face the issue objectively and with an open mind. And yet, of all people, the Christian should recognize the difficulty of dealing with prejudiced and closed minds. As a follower of Christ, he knows that personal preferences must be subordinated in seeking to please the Lord. The smoking Christian owes it to himself and to the Lord to consider the evidence relative to smoking.

When he does, he will certainly consider such facts as those recently released by the Surgeon General's office in The Health Consequences Of Smoking. In The Forward section of that report, Dr. E. N. Brandt, Jr., Assistant Sec. for Health, writes: "Cigarette smoking is the major single cause of cancer mortality in the U.S. Tobacco's contribution to all cancer deaths is estimated to be 30 percent... Cigarette smokers have total cancer death rates two times greater than do nonsmokers. Heavy smokers have a three to four times greater excess risk of cancer mortality... There is no single action an individual can take to reduce action risk of cancer more effectively than quitting smoking..." According to statistics released from the Public Health Service research, lung cancer, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, and coronary heart disease are the principal causes of death attributable to cigarette smoking, but they are not the only ones. They have concluded that the rate of early death from all causes ranges from 40 to 120 percent higher for smokers than nonsmokers, depending upon the amount smoked daily. It is not without good reason that the word "Warning" appears on the cigarette package. Those who are told to glorify God in the body (1 Cor. 6:20) should seriously consider the health hazards of smoking.

Equally important for the smoking Christian to consider is the possibility of enslavement to tobacco. To be brought under the power of a habit is to violate the principle of 1 Cor. 6:12. For the smoker who wants to know, "What about the glutton, the coke-aholic, the coffee-holic?"— the same principle applies equally to them! With Paul, every Christian must resolve, "...I will not be brought under the power of any." Rather, "I buffet my body, and bring it into bondage..." (1 Cor. 9:27).

Finally, the Christian smoker must consider the possibility that smoking may hurt his influence. Shouldn't every Christian be "an ensample to them that believe, in word, in manner of life..."? (1 Tim. 4:12) Justified or not, many are offended by the smell, the pollution, and being forced to inhale second-hand smoke. Honestly now — everything considered, wouldn't it be better if Christians didn't smoke?

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.IX Pg.4

November 1982

Learning To Enjoy Life

Robert F. Turner

Eccl. 11:9-10 is often interpreted as if Solomon was being slightly sarcastic ("Just go ahead then and sow your wild oats if you want to, young man, but, remember...") and then quoted to young people as a warning. Certainly the danger of "sowing wild oats" needs to be impressed upon the hearts of young people and a warning is indeed in the text. But is there not also a positive lesson that needs to be learned and practiced by the older generation as well as the young folks? Look with us at the context.

"The light is pleasant ... good for the eyes to see the sun ... if a man should live many years let him rejoice in them all... Rejoice young man let your heart be pleasant... follow the impulses of your heart and the desires of your eyes.... Remove vexation ... put away pain...

Solomon is saying that life is to be enjoyed (vss. 7-8; see also 2:24-25; 3:12-13; 5:18-20). And it is when we are young that this lesson can and should be learned, while at the same time learning about the serious side of life: accountability before God, the certainty of old age, death and judgement (vss. 9-12:8).

But in this process of learning to enjoy life there are some phases that young people will pass through which will be as frustrating to us as they are familiar. For example... have you ever heard a group of 15 year old girls giggle and seen their eyes roll to the back of their heads when they talked about or saw some boy? And have you ever known teen-age boys to do just a little "showing off" in order to get the attention of and impress some special girl?

And what is the all-too-often reaction of parents and other adults to this? "Grow up!... Act your age!" Well what do we think they are doing? They are growing up. They are acting their age. They are learning to enjoy life.

Perhaps a better attitude toward our young people would be to realize that giggling girls and boastful boys are as normal as the "peach fuzz" on junior's face and that the giggles of today will give rise, tomorrow, to further, more mature, expressions of enjoying life.

Perhaps a better way of treating young people would be to help them learn to enjoy life. Take the time to encourage participation in wholesome activities, teaching them all the while to stand in awe of their Creator and His day of reckoning. Trying to stifle natural and harmless frivolities of youth and at the same time belittling them for it won't go well with our attempts to instill respect for ourselves and God.

While these years are difficult and seem like an eternity in their duration, Solomon says, "childhood and the prime of life are fleeting". It will soon pass and, hopefully, our patience will be rewarded in years to come with sons and daughters who enjoy life, reverence God, and respect their parents. Grin and bear it, roll with the punches and, as much as anything, remember how it was when you were young and learning to enjoy life. David Smitherman

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.IX Pg.5

November 1982

Use Your Bible

Dan S. Shipley

"HE THAT COMETH TO GOD..." (Heb. 11:6)

Intro.

1. Mortal man does nothing more important or needful than coming to God. 2. Though often lost sight of, this is the whole point and purpose in religion. a. NOT coming to religion, a church, etc. b. NOT a matter of letting God come to man (as Calvinists teach) 3. Man has volition; can come to God, but is a CONDITIONAL coming...

I. Must Come In Faith

A. Believing "He is" 1. He is AS He is & reveals Himself to be, not as men suppose Him to be 2. He is righteous, just, love, omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, etc.

B. Believing He wills

1. i.e., He has certain desires & wishes concerning man as set forth NT 2. Jesus prays, "thy will be done on earth..." 3. Salvation promised to those who do His will, Matt. 7:21; 1 Jn. 2:17 4. Man's faith relates to God's will as it does to His existence (Gal. 2:6)

C. Believing He rewards (Matt.5:12) 1. Who? Believers who seek Him according to His will. 2. "Those who seek Him first, Matt. 6.33 diligently"

II. MUST COME IN HUMILITY

A. Such humility involves awareness of three things 1. Greatness of God (as seen above) 2. Littleness of self (cannot direct own steps) 3. Sense of need (As David (Ps. 51:1-4); as prodigal, publican) 4. "lowliness is the beginning of holiness"

Iii. Must Come Willingly

A. Principle of willingness fundamental to all spiritual progress 1. Jn. 7:17 "If any man willeth to do His will..." 2. 2 Cor. 8:12 "For if there be FIRST a willing mind..." 3. Men cannot be driven to God:— but they can be driven FROM Him...

B. True faith is ever demonstrated in willing obedience

Iv. Must Come On God's Terms

A. Versus modern concepts to the contrary only hinder coming to God 1. Seeking to establish their own righteousness, Rom. 10:3

B. Word of reconciliation shows way of reconciliation, 2 Cor. 5:18-20

1. Coming to God IS reconciliation and is possible only in removing the enmity between man and God--SIN: (Isa. 59:1,2) 2. The gospel contains God's remedy, Rom. 1:16; Jn. 8:32; Jas.1:21 3. "There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy...", Jas. 1:12 (Note: He who gives the law, and He only, is able to save')

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.IX Pg.6

November 1982

Resist The Devil

Robert F. Turner

Resisting the devil is the demand of both James (4:7) and Peter (1 Pet. 5:8). But how do we do that?

We must have the will to resist. Some so love the world and pleasures of sin that they simply do not want to resist. "...and the lusts of your father (the devil) ye will do" — you wish to do (Jn. 8:44). Such people do not resist: they give up — quickly — easily — gladly. God works successfully in man by getting him to "will and do after His good pleasure" (Phil 2:13). Nothing replaces "want to".

We also need a confident spirit — a "can do" attitude. We seldom rise higher than our expectation. Remember Peter? He said, "Though all men shall be offended because of thee, yet will I never be offended... Though I should die with thee, yet will I not deny thee" (Mt. 26:33,35). He did deny and that before morning. Yet we should not expect him to renounce his claim. Later, Jesus called for him to reaffirm that bold commitment. He told Peter that in the final scene, he would measure up to it (Jn. 21:15-19). And remember Paul's "I can do... through Christ who strengthens me" (Phil. 4:13). And we "can do" too.

We also use scripture to resist. The Bible is not a charm that scares the devil away, but its truth in man enables man to intimidate him. Jesus met the devil with "It is written" and the devil left him (Mt. 4:1-f). It is our "sword" to fight the devil (Eph. 6:17). The devil's strong delusion overcomes only those who "love not" and "believe not" the truth (2 Thes. 2:10-12). Prayer helps us resist. The Lord prayed for Peter in his crisis (Lu. 22:32) and told him later to "watch and pray, lest ye enter into temptation (Mk. 14:38). The Lord spent the night before his arrest in prayer. Paul asked brethren to pray for him that he might boldly preach as he "ought" (Eph. 6:18-20). Ask God for help; he knows how to deliver (2 Pet. 2:9).

We need wisdom to help us resist. James recommended prayer for wisdom in time of trial (1:5). This is no fool's game! Good judgment is absolutely necessary if we are to defeat the cunning of the devil. Successful resistance demands that we be "not ignorant of his devices (2 Cor. 2:11).

It takes character to resist the devil. That means being "strong in the Lord" and "putting on the whole armor of God." The result? We will "stand against the wiles of the devil" and "withstand in the evil day" (Eph. 6:10-13). The weak are devoured by Satan. Good character rejects sin. Even in the stress of hot anger, good character will "sin not... neither give place to the devil" (Eph. 4:26, 27). Paul sent to "know your faith, lest by some means the tempter have tempted you" (1 Thes. 3:5). Therefore, we are urged to "resist steadfast in the faith (1 Pet. 5:9).

Good associations help our resistance to evil (Gal. 6:1) as surely as evil companions corrupt (1 Cor. 15:33). Good brethren "provoke unto love and good works" (Heb. 10:24).

Joe Fitch , San Antonio, TX.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.IX Pg.7

November 1982

?You Know What?

Robert F. Turner

Dear bro. Turner:

In 1 Cor. 7:6; 2 Cor. 8:8 are we to understand Paul is not speaking (writing) by inspiration of the H.S.? RM

Reply:

In 1 Cor. 7: Paul writes with some "present distress" (v.26) in mind. He advises against marriage, yet acknowledges marriage is lawful, and urges it if one cannot "contain" ('...better to marry than to burn" v.9). Saying "This I say by way of concession, not of commandment" (v.6) means the nature of the case: regard for the temperament of different people (some who can "contain" and some who can't) prevented his saying either one must marry, or must not, under prevailing circumstances. His personal bent was to remain unmarried, but he would not bind this on all people. Expositor's comments: "Better to marry than to burn; but if marriage is impossible, better infinitely to burn than sin."

In v.10 he cites the Lord's teaching (in personal ministry) re. the permanence of marriage (Matt. 5:32; 19:3-9); then (v.12) "say I, not the Lord" does not mean this is not valid inspired teaching — only that Jesus did not deal with this particular in His personal ministry (Jn. 16:12-f).

Again, in v.25, in view of certain circumstances, and the absence of a command from the Lord, Paul gives his "judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be trustworthy" (Cf. 1 Tim. 1:16). Expositor's comment: "His advice is therefore to be trusted. The distinction made is not between higher and lower grades of inspiration or authority but between peremptory rule, and conditional advice requiring the concurrence of those advised. Paul's opinion, qua opinion (meaning, limited by conditions — rt), as much as his injunction, is that of the Lord's steward and mouthpiece."

In 2 Cor. 8:8 "I speak not by way of commandment," and v.10, "I give my judgment for this is expedient," are statements recognizing that how much and when they produce their offering for the needy saints is their business, and should be done as a matter of love and a willing mind (v.12; 9: 5-7). Paul made clear the divine will re. concern and sacrifice of saints in abundance for those in need; but he wanted their compliance to be more than an ordered response — he sought to bring the human will into "synch" with the divine (Phil. 2:5 Rom. 12:2). It is a point we need to ponder.

Inspiration of the scriptures assures us that the message is accurate and says what the divine will wants said. Clearly the divine will wants us to know that sometimes Paul gave his advice or judgment for special circumstances — and aren't you thankful that when such is the case, we are told so. This casts no shadow upon those special cases, nor upon the remainder of the scriptures where no such qualifiers exist. It does teach us, however, that a careful student considers each statement in context. We are reading history, private letters, letters to churches with special problems, biographical type material, poetry, apocalyptic literature, etc., all inspired, but demanding mature, objective consideration.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.IX Pg.8

November 1982

Stuff About Things

Robert F. Turner

Ten students were asked to engage in a class-room experiment in Human Behavior. Different length lines were drawn on the chalk-board. Then the instructor pointed to a line second in length, and asked all who believed this to be the longest line to raise their hand. Unknown to one student, nine of the ten had been previously instructed to "vote" for this line, so nine hands were raised. The tenth student, knowing the line was not the longest, hesitated — then seeing the other hands, raised his hand also.

I am told that in repeated experiments the percentage of capitulation to the majority opinion was very high, especially when the odds were nine against one. When only eight voted in "error" the percentage of capitulation dropped, though still high. Not only did the two buck a smaller majority, but they encouraged one another to render an honest judgment.

Reminds me of the time I remained seated at the display of an American flag, and the playing of the U.S. national anthem. Everyone remained seated. But as I was leaving the building I overheard one man say to another, "You know, I felt a bit guilty about not rising when they played the Star Spangled Banner, but no one else did so." His companion nodded assent. And I have kicked myself ever since for not leading a patriotic movement. If one person had arisen in respect for our flag and country I am convinced all present would have done so.

In this day of conformity, all the more reason for daring to lead — to have convictions and therefore speak or act. We lament the dearth of leaders and heroes without realizing that these are often ordinary people who arose to the need of the moment. They did what was right, without waiting to see if others did the same thing.

Individuality is not kooky. That is often only the "show-off" traits of one who actually is extra hungry for recognition by the masses. But genuine individuality acts regardless of what others think. The Christian individual (and all Christians come to Christ, and serve Him, in a one-on-one basis) marches to a divine drumbeat. He seeks to learn the will of the Lord, and as he acts he checks to see only if the Lord is pleased.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.X Pg.1

December 1982

Traditional Teaching

Robert F. Turner

Longtime church members have been frequently warned of the dangers of tradition. "In vain do they worship me, teaching as their doctrines the precepts of men" (Matt. 15; Mk. 7). My impression has been that we must not allow customs of long standing to be regarded as of divine authority.

But Christ apparently quoted from Isaiah 29:13 (LXX), and in checking this out another aspect develops. In the RSV we read, "...but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear of me is a commandment of men which hath been taught them." This last phrase is given a footnote, "Or, learned by rote." Their fear of God is learned" in the sense of memorized doctrine — making an "A in catechism but knowing little of the genuine fear or respect that comes from a mature grasp of God's greatness.

In this sense "traditions of men" need not be limited to doctrines that originate with men; the teaching per se may be an accurate statement of divine truth. But it is taught and received as official Jewish doctrine — dare we say, "official Church of Christ doctrine"? It is learned "by rote" — by repetition of form or word but often without attention to meaning. The small children of church members may know "faith, repentance and baptism" well, and quote a few scriptures to go with it — as a result of catechism-type drilling on our part. This is "cute"; we may be proud of them; and yet none of this proves their hearts are given to God. When adult learning goes no deeper than "rote" it is a reflection upon all.

"Their fear of me is a commandment of men..." They fear because they are told to do so. Should we not teach men to "fear God?" Oh Yes! But teaching is incomplete that does not gender that fear by developing humility and dependence upon God. Teaching must go far deeper than the impartation of facts. In a companion passage to Isaiah, Ezekiel says, "thou art unto them as a very lovely voice, and can play well on an instrument; for they hear thy words, but they do them not" (33:31-32). Sing us to sleep preacher, and be sure to say right words — old familiar doctrines which we know well, but which move us not!!!

[RETIREDFAN1]

.XIX No.X Pg.2

December 1982

Cogdell -Turner Exchange

Robert F. Turner

Sometime late in 1980 the Lockland church in Cincinnati, asked me to consider having a written discussion on institutional issues with a Cincinnati preacher, Bro. Gaston Cogdell. A man near my age, bro. Cogdell advocates church support of what he calls "adjuncts and aids to the church "Publishing Houses, Orphans Homes, Hospitals, Homes for the Elderly, Singing Schools, Other schools, and so forth." After repeated efforts to arrange equitable and unambiguous propositions via letters had failed, we "met" via telephone conference and reached the following agreement. Four subjects: THE CHURCH, UNIVERSAL AND LOCAL; CONGREGATIONAL INDEPENDENCE; COOPERATION OF CHURCHES; and WORK OF THE CHURCH would be discussed.

Each of the writers (Cogdell and Turner) would write an affirmation of his choosing on the first subject and send it to a third party — bro. Mark Nitz, Cincinnati. When Nitz had both articles, he would make copies for the records, then send Turner's article to Cogdell — Cogdell's article to Turner. Each would then write a rebuttal, returning them to Nitz; to copy and switch. Then each writer, with his opponent's affirmation and first rebuttal before him, would write a second rebuttal, and that subject would be finished — except for possible reference made in articles on following subjects. No article was to exceed five pages, double-spaced; and deadlines were established. One month of "rest" was allowed between subjects — and believe me it was needed.

First articles were due July 1,'81 and the process has continued without a hitch, so that final articles were in by Sept. 1, '82. However, it was decided (enroute) for each man to review and write a SUMMARY, and those were completed by Nov. l,'82.

Now, GUARDIAN OF TRUTH FOUNDATION PUBLISHERS (Earl Robertson, Pres.) have agreed to publish the discussion in book form. They write, "We will get started with the typesetting just as soon as possible" — and will make appropriate announcements when the book becomes available, probably in the early part of 1983. PLAIN TALK is happy to announce this book, but all sales will be made by the Publishers. They may be addressed: Route 4, Box 358; Tompkinsville, Ky. 42167. We do NOT have commercial interest in this.

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

In this issue we welcome a guest writer, bro. James R. Cope. He wrote, WILL WE "FOLLOW JESUS"? And bro. David Smitherman (now a staff writer) does a fine job with RULE (OBEDIENCE) AND THE KINGDOM. Thanks to both men.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.X Pg.3

December 1982

Church - Building Religion

Dan S. Shipley

Whether through neglect or misunderstanding, it is obvious that too many Christians practice a localized kind of religion; one that is almost entirely limited to the confines of the church building.

Take, for instance, the matter of Bible study. All too often it is restricted to a church-building activity. That may have been excusable back when the scarcity of Bibles was such that copies were chained to lecterns in some church buildings, but hardly in our time. As Bible class teachers well know, too few parents and children use their Bibles at home — even in preparation for class studies. What ever happened to the practice of families gathering around the kitchen table for Bible reading? — or mothers reading Bible stories to their children at bedtime? In the long ago God said that He wanted His words in the hearts of His people and, further, "thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up." (Deut. 6:6,7) Getting the word of God into our hearts and into the hearts of our children will take more than an occasional Bible opening at the church building! Brethren, how can we hope to accomplish this great work when so many long-time Christians have never so much as taken the time to learn the books of the Bible, let alone make a personal study of them? It should not be difficult to understand why we are not growing in the faith if our appetite for spiritual food is satisfied at the church-building (1 Pet. 2:2). Equally important is the matter of limiting our praying to the assemblies of the church. Nothing should be more characteristic of the Christian than frequent and fervent prayer. As Paul puts it, "Pray without ceasing" (1 Thes. 5:17), and through James God tells us that "The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much" (5:16). Do we believe it? The Christian's prayer is an expression of his faith. He believes in the God to whom he prays, yet cannot see. He believes God hears and answers his prayers. His prayer is also an expression of humility. He sees God's greatness and his own littleness; his supplications acknowledge his need for help; his thanksgivings express his appreciation for blessings received. I, for one, believe we need more praying in our assemblies. But I believe we need more prayer outside of our assemblies too! Christian, take time out of your busy daily schedule for some quiet moments of prayer. Its one of our greatest blessings.

Yet another problem with church-building religion is the limited association it allows with brethren. Unfortunately, about the only time many Christians see one another is at the meeting house. There are times, of course, when circumstances permit little else. However, many can and need to do better than merely having a brief "foyer fellowship with brethren. Brethren need encouraging, consoling, exhorting, and admonishing. They have burdens we can help to bear, weakness we can help to overcome. But, we must be there — for their sake and ours. When we leave the pew, we still follow Christ.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.X Pg.4

December 1982

Rule And The Kingdom

Robert F. Turner

...and if Satan casteth out Satan he is divided against himself; how then shall his kingdom stand? And if I by Beelzebub cast out demons, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore shall they be your judges. But if I by the Spirit of God cast out demons, then is the kingdom of God come upon you" (Matt. 12:26-28).

Two "kingdoms" are in existence: God's and the Devil's. The nature of each and how I become a part of them is vital to our understanding.

A baby is born and in a safe relationship with God (Ezek. 18:20). Its death, while certainly sad, does not bring a sorrow that cannot be consoled (2 Sam. 12:23) for it is "safe in the arms of Jesus."

But as the child grows his relationship with God changes. While a "young man" (Ps. 119:9), at some "age of accountability" (Eccl. 11:9-10), he begins to allow the will of Satan to rule in his heart and life. He freely chooses the Devil over God, becoming obedient to his will, and thus a part of the kingdom: the rule of the Devil (Jn. 8:44)

As this man matures, however, he comes to appreciate that God doesn't want men to die in sin (2 Pet. 3:9). He further learns of the "good news" that God sent His Son to die for the sins of men (2 Cor. 5:14-15). Once again he exercises his free will in obedience — this time to the will of God. In so doing he becomes a part of the kingdom: the rule of God over hearts submissive to His will. This obedience involves, initially, a real change of heart toward all past sins (Acts 17:30) and immersion in water to wash them away (Acts 22:16). This same submissive attitude toward God will cause him to "walk in the light" (1 Jn. 1:7), dead to continuing in sin (Rom. 6:1-14); because he allows God's seed, His will, to abide in him (1 Jn. 3:9).

But after a period of faithful service, the world pulls, his faith weakens, and love grows cold. Once more the will of the Devil becomes his will. Once more he becomes obedient: Once again he is in the kingdom: now doing the will of the Devil (1 Cor. 5:1-5). In his apostasy he is once again what he was before: a son of the one obeyed (Rom. 6:16), no longer worthy to be or be called God's son (Rom. 8:14; Lk. 15:19,21).

However, this man is not beyond hope. Successful efforts are made to strengthen his faith and rekindle his love (2 Cor. 2:5-6). His allegiance changes. Once more he renounces the will of the Devil and obeys the will of God. Repentance and prayer reflect an obedient attitude once more. God again rules in his life. Once again he is part of the kingdom (2 Cor. 5: 7-8).

Two kingdoms: God's and Satan's. Not "institutions" but relationships entered into and sustained by the submission and continued obedience of our spirits to the will and rule of either our Father (Rpm. 1:9) or our adversary (Eph. 2:2); for we can have but one Master (Matt. 6:24). May His will be ours and His kingdom within us (Lk. 17:21). David Smitherman

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.X Pg.5

December 1982

Will We Follow Jesus ?

Robert F. Turner

Activities of modern saint or sinner are to be imitative of Christ in whatever areas the teaching of his apostles bound those activities upon those saints and sinners they addressed. The Apostle Paul wrote: "The things which ye both learned and received and heard and saw in me, these things do: and the God of peace shall be with you" (Phil. 4:9). He also said, "Be ye imitators of me, even as I also am of Christ" (1 Cor. 11:1). It is clear from these texts, plus his statement that "in us ye might learn not to go beyond the things which are written" (1 Cor. 4:6), that apostolic practice and teaching constituted the sole standard for the governance of all saint's words and deeds, whether expressed individually or jointly.

Limited only by Moses' law which He kept perfectly, or by a uniqueness of deity, every act of Jesus is the divine standard for human conduct. (His miracles showed divine power.) In His Great Commission Jesus told his apostles to teach the persons baptized to observe all things he had commanded them to teach). He did not tell them to observe all things he had observed or do all he had done, or teach others to do so. He did not tell his apostles to bind on those they taught everything he taught prior to his death, e.g., keeping the Law of Moses while it was yet God's will. The redemptive death of Jesus was peculiar to deity, "once for all" enacted "when he offered up himself" (Heb. 7:26-28). Let us notice some exemplary actions of Jesus our Lord.

1. Jesus suffered for us. Christ taught his disciples to expect persecutions and evil speaking, yet to rejoice in suffering for his sake. Much later Peter told believers that their "fiery trial" was "proving" them. He called them "partakers of Christ's sufferings" and told them to rejoice in them (Mt. 5:10-12; 1 Pet. 4:12-19). Saints are to "follow in His steps" of patience, being without guile, sin, retaliation or threatening and wholly committed to God's will (1 Pet. 2:19-).

2. Jesus repelled the tempter by using God's word and prayer. We must take "the sword of the Spirit which is the word of God" and "with all prayer and supplication" we shall be victorious (Mt. 4:1-11; Eph. 6:17,18).

3. Jesus forgave sinners seeking his mercy. Both his example and the saint's admonition are seen in Paul's words "forgiving each other, if any man have a complaint against any; even as the Lord forgave you, so also do ye" (Col. 3:13).

4. Jesus exemplified compassion. Eight times the same verb form occurs to express this emotion prior to his acts of mercy. Christian's hearts are to show tender mercies and compassions" toward persons needing them (Phil. 2:1; Col. 3:12).

5. Jesus exemplified humility. By washing his disciples' feet he showed his willingness to serve others (Jn. 13:3-15). He rebuked selfish ambition and pride (Mt. 20:20-28; 11:28-30). Paul pointed believers to Jesus' example of humility in "becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross" (Phil. 2:5-8). — James R. Cope

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.X Pg.6

December 1982

Quality Vs. Quantity

Robert F. Turner

A small frame building at the edge of a sleepy little town housed an old man's furniture shop. The sign was faded; the location was poor. Most of the equipment was old and hand operated. It was the finished furniture that was outstanding. The critical eye and deft hand of a master craftsman was the key. His furniture was not only strong and useful; it was a work of art.

People soon discovered him and his business began to grow. Mounds of backorders stacked up. Some help for the old furniture maker was a necessity. Furniture production went up, but the old man frowned at the finished product. There are flaws that he would never have allowed. His men do not demand perfection.

But business continues to expand. Finally automation is required. Large shining, and impressive machines do the work of a whole crew of men. But the machines have no eye for beauty. The old man struggles, but his famous quality is eroded by the demand for quantity.

The old man goes down the street to talk to his friend — a preacher in the church where they worship. The preacher nods his head and listens to the lament. He has the same problem, at least in principle.

The preacher studied hard, and his sermons were timely, needed themes. He explained scriptures so that all understood. His illustrations were graphic; his exhortations moved men. Soon the building was filled. He is happy — he is also perplexed. He struggles to suit lessons to people — as he did before. While he works with simple themes for babes, others are bored. When he preaches to challenge them, the babes are confused. He delivers a needed rebuke but sees it spill over on those who needed only encouragement. He cannot wish for a smaller audience, yet he must work even harder to prevent further loss in quality teaching.

The preacher calls on the elders and explains his dilemma to them. They nod understandingly. The problem is well known to them. When the flock consisted of but a few people, watching for souls was easier. People felt a personal sense of responsibility. All were acquainted with each other. When anyone had a problem, everyone knew about it — and helped to solve it. Everyone absent from the assembly was noticed. When the number multiplied, things changed. Brethren may need to be introduced to each other. A man becomes unfaithful, but no one is aware of it for months. Many become spectators — doing nothing and lost in the crowd. Attendance charts are kept. Work programs are begun. Brethren are constantly reminded and exhorted. They try, but keeping the quality of the church as it become large is unreal task.

And remember — small is not always good. The little church across town may be small because it has nothing worthwhile to offer. It may remain small for the same reason. There are many ignorant, indifferent, and completely carnal minded small churches. Joe Fitch San Antonio, TX.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.X Pg.7

December 1982

?You Know What?

Robert F. Turner

Bro. Turner:

We are confused about merit and obedience controversies. We know we must obey, and that promises are conditioned upon obedience. Doesnt that mean we merit the promised reward?

Reply:

Mercy may be extended upon conditions that in no wise earn the result. Merit, not obedience, cancels grace!! Merit" is not found in common versions of the Bible, but the dictionary tells us as a verb it means, "to earn by service or performance; to deserve." Thus, "meritorious" works are works that "earn" holiness, by which one could be declared "free of guilt" because he truly is, on his own merit, without sin. Such a one needs no mercy, needs no forgiveness. Never having sinned, he "deserves" praise. It is not a gift, not a reward; it is his by inherent "right" or "due". We must not confuse this with the hope and expectation of faithful saints, for their confidence is not self-generated. They recognize themselves as sinners (unworthy, failing to merit) and look to the mercies of God via the crucified Christ, for forgiveness (Heb. 6:19-20; 7:25; Gal. 2:20).

Many first century Jews sought to "establish their own righteousness" (Rom. 10:3), "having (their) own righteousness which is of the law" (Phil. 3:7-9); and the scriptures have much to say about the futility of such an effort. Because they were under the Old or First Covenant, and New Covenant writers are telling us to look to Christ (not to Moses) for salvation, many have equated "meritorious works" with O. T. command - ments — as if the Holy Spirit was saying, "You can not merit salvation by keeping the Old Covenant" (period). That is true! But was the Spirit saying, "You can merit salvation by keeping the New Covenant?" Think that one over!!

What makes the New Covenant superior to the Old?? Is it better because "be baptized" is a better command that "be circumcised"? The Hebrew writer hinges its superiority to its "better promises" — which depend upon Christ's sacrifice whereby mercy and forgiveness are extended (8:6-13). Paul called the law "holy, just, and good" (Rom. 7:12-14), and blamed himself, not the law, for his wretchedness. The solution was Christ as an offering for our sin (8:3), not some new "set of comet ands" whereby we may merit salvation. If the reader has given serious thought to the meaning of "merit" he will agree when we say one does not merit salvation by Old or New Covenant. Salvation is a gift of God: to Old Covenant Jews who were faithful (Heb. 3:16; 11:40) and to people of all ages who through faith are forgiven of their sins by virtue of Christ's sacrifice on man's behalf.

Paul wrote, "I buffet my body... lest I myself should be rejected" and "I press on toward the goal" (1 Cor. 9:27; Phil. 3:14). His confidence, assurance, hope, was not in himself nor in his "merit," but in the mercy of God through Christ. We must obey the Lord (Heb. 5:9; Gal. 5:6) but none of us obey so perfectly we merit heaven. We should be brought to our knees in the realization of our sinfulness and consequent grave need for God's grace and mercy — "and be ye thankful:"

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.X Pg.8

December 1982

Stuff About Things

Robert F. Turner

"The love of money is a root of all kinds of evil" (1 Tim. 6:10), and the maker of all kinds of strange happenings. For example, in my early preaching days a group of elders told me they could support me only so much per week; "But," they added, "we have agreed you need not make any contributions from that amount." I asked if they had cleared this with the Lord — and saw some shamefaced men.

At another place I learned a man with oil wells had agreed to sign over royalty rights of a certain well to the church, so they could make double payments on their new building. But the church soon let up on their own giving, and were making single payments with the oil royalty money. The oil man wanted his well returned, but the elders refused to sign necessary papers.

In a regular business meeting, when it was asked, "Is there anything else?" I casually mentioned that I understood bro. _____ wanted to regain control of his well, and "whoever has those papers will want to fix that right away — for I'm sure none of us would try to force a man to give." There was a long silence, then one man said weakly, "Without that oil money we may lose our building." With all the seriousness I could muster I suggested we appoint a committee to look into school buildings, halls, or other places where we could meet when we were put out of our present house. Another long silence — then one of the elders said he knew where the papers were, and would see that they were signed and returned to the oil man. More shamefaced men!! But this story has a sequel. When the oil man got his well back, he took one look at the papers, thanked the brother, and again gave the well's earnings to the church, on a long-term basis.

Some will cheat the Lord in their computations of "as prospered." There are multiple cases of men stealing church money in the process of counting collections. Maybe that is why I remember so well the nine or ten year old boy who, hearing us talk of need for more money, called me aside to say he had $50 in savings, from the sale of some Future Farmer lambs; and he would give that for the Lord's work if I would get his father to check it out of the bank for him.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.XI Pg.1

January 1983

Christ In Christianity

Robert F. Turner

When an alcoholic quits drinking and a fornicator quits his past type of life does this mean each has become a follower of Christ? We certainly welcome these changes for the better, and admire the strength of character they show; but turning from certain worldly traits does not mean one has turned to the true and living God. It is very possible to make drastic and needed changes to a better life, without taking up the life our Lord would have us live, or obtaining the blessings a Christian life offers. We may serve SELF with a religious zeal.

Sometimes it seems the reformed person is more concerned about living a clean moral life than is some professed follower of Christ; and that leads people to ridicule the church. Unless "the church" condones an impenitent life the ridicule should be reserved for those hypocrites who bring shame upon the name of God (Rom. 2:24). No church is any more than imperfect people who are trying to serve God, and hence must constantly seek forgiveness through Jesus Christ. Yes, trying has ceased, and criticism justified, when we condone ungodliness. But God's revelation of His will and the true meaning of Christianity is negated when we equate a clean moral life, by man's standards, with being a Christian. Jesus of Nazareth is more than an ancient philosopher; He is the manifestation of eternal being and power, the key to our eternal destiny. He is the Christ, the Son of the Living God. Through Him, Christianity becomes unique in its compelling proof of life beyond the grave. Through faith in Him, man is given purpose, and hope. Loving obedience takes on new meaning in Him.

The man is a fool who mires himself in a life of dissipation — so self-centered he robs himself of love for his surroundings; robs himself of the blessings of this life. He does not see that clean moral living is the "best policy" for earthly happiness. But seeing this does not make him a Christian. This wonderful privilege is reserved for those who lose self in service to Christ, who allow the Creator to direct the creature's journey homeward. Like Cornelius, we must heed God's word and live for Him. (Acts 11:14; Rom. 6:1-11; Phil. 3:7-16)

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.XI Pg.2

January 1983

Whirlwind Of Dust

Robert F. Turner

With a New Year before us it is easy to allow the changing calendar to affect our spirits — we are one year older — nearer to the end. It is well to be aware that "life is a vapor" (Jas. 4:14), but I refuse to wallow in coming death. Let us use and enjoy the life that remains. Fact is, I have not yet decided when I will mature. ?Quien Sabe? (Who knows?)

The Lord willing, Vivian and I may enjoy a few weeks at Rocky Roost, our Texas home, and then I go to Stephenville, TX. for a meeting-- probably Feb. 20-25. I'll preach at Cedar Park, near Austin, TX. Mar. 21-27; and soon afterwards leave for Cincinnati, Ohio (Lockland church), Apr. 3-8. The pace quickens. Richmond, Ky., Apr. 17-22; Clarksville, Ind., Apr. 24-29; Greenwood, Ind., May 1-6. We are due in Lawrenceburg, Ky., May 15-20; West Chester, Pa., May 29-June 3; Eastside of Indianapolis, Ind., June 12-17; and Bedford, Ind. (Pinhook) June 1924. In July Vivian and I plan a trip into Minnesota and the Dakotas with Jack and Helen Turner-- first vacation since 1977.

But it is back to meetings: July 31- Aug. 5, at O'Conner Rd., San Antonio, TX.; Aug. 14-19, Decatur, Ala. (at Old Moulton Rd.); and Aug. 21-26, with brethren in Marietta, Ga. May get to my 50th. High School Reunion in September; but the remainder of the year we plan to be in Burnet, with possible exception of a Sherman, TX. meeting in November.

DAN SHIPLEY reports a good work in Lindale, TX. and gives us the following tentative meeting schedule for this year. He is to be in Groves, TX. Mar. 27-Apr. 1; Tyler (Garden Valley Rd.) Apr. 17-22. Then he's off to Prescott, Ariz., May 8-13; and Glendale, Ariz., May 15-20.

July 10-15, he preaches in Shelbyville, Tenn.; Aug. 14-19, at Cy-Fair in Houston, TX. He goes to Rogers, Ark., Sept. 11-17; Ft. Smith, Ark. (at 46th. St.) Oct. 2-7; Westside, Golden, Colo., Oct. 17-21; and Kiestview in Dallas, Tx., Nov. 7-11. He emphasizes this is a tentative schedule, with some uncertainties.

This year will be an experiment for me — first "all-meeting" year since the ulcer break-down in '78. No intentions of resuming the heavy program of earlier years, however. I do not want to burn out — leaving ashes; but neither do I want to rust out. If God wills and wisdom directs we will match ability and jobs, determined to make life a joyous, God-serving journey — slow enough to smell the roses, but fast enough to leave a little whirlwind of dust when spirit is gone.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.XI Pg.3

January 1983

Behavior That Gains

Dan S. Shipley

What Peter says about wives gaining unbelieving husbands through exemplary behavior teaches a powerful lesson about influence that all need to learn (1 Pet. 3:1-4). Many Christians, wives and otherwise, are sharing homes, with those who "obey not the word." Their spiritual needs are no less than those of any other unsaved sinner in the world. Yet, amazingly enough, the home is often a neglected "missionary" field. Not, of course, that Christians living there are unconcerned — and, not that they haven't tried. But, after awhile, the arrangement is apt to be taken for granted. No matter how disappointing and frustrating earlier experiences may have been, we have a remarkable ability to adjust and "get used to" the worst of situations. And that is precisely why Peter's admonition needs remembering and applying first at home.

To be sure, we know about letting our lights shine before men and allowing them to see our good works (Matt. 5:16), but what men? Isn't it true that we usually think of those with whom we work and our neighbors? But nowhere is the light of faithful and godly living more needed than in the presence of our own loved ones. The influence of gospel-formed character is most needed where association is most frequent and relationships are closest — and, that's where we live. Of course, it is not the behavior and the good example that saves, but it is the strongest kind of recommendation for that which has produced it. Therefore, when Christ and His gospel are reproduced in the conduct and character of His people in their day to-day activities and associations, it will be the proclamation of a powerfully impressive sermon that will be hard to ignore.

For this reason, we must not allow our- selves to become complacent or indifferent regarding our behavior in the home — the very place where many tend to be careless about it. It is not enough that our faith has brought us to the baptistry, to Bible classes, and worship if it has not brought a decided change in our deportment. And, who will notice this more than our own family? Faith is not so much tested in "Sunday - go - to - meetin'" clothes as in house-shoes and curlers. The wife, for instance, who is careful about her conduct in public but is quarrel- some at home, demonstrates a kind of hypocrisy and disposition that hurts the cause of Christ — and the chances of converting her husband to it. It is bad enough that some unbeliever would be exposed to temper tantrums, angry retorts, and abusive language of any Christian, let alone have to live with such in his own home. The Christian whose demeanor demonstrates an unwillingness to live by gospel truth will be hard put to recommend it to others.

On the other hand, behavior that reflects the influence of the gospel and gains men for Christ begins from within, "in the hidden man of the heart" (v.4). When Christ rules the heart He rules the conduct. It's all a matter of faith. What Christ is to a man determines what that man will be for Christ — and what he will be to others, in the home and elsewhere.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.XI Pg.4

January 1983

Restoration Concepts

Robert F. Turner

The plea in religious circles to "restore" is an old one. The "restoration movement" of the Campbell and Stone era was not new. Others, correctly or otherwise, have felt a need to "restore," and concepts of restoration can be found in history as well as among us today.

Joseph Smith sought a "restoration of the gospel." Based upon the false premise that the original gospel had been corrupted, (1 Nephi 13:32), he thought it was restored when he gave the Book of Mormon to men.

Mormons also want to "restore the church" and thus they vainly seek to restore the priesthood, prophets, and apostolic office.

These concepts of restoration are obviously based upon erroneous ideas and lead away from, rather than to, the truth.

And there are also some among "us" today who would "restore." But when appeals are made to Campbell, Stone, the Declaration and Address, the "restoration brotherhood," and our "restoration heritage," one wonders if all some want to restore is the "Restoration Movement." Others talk in a careless way of "restoring the New Testament church" and "the proper name."

But these concepts of restoration, if not carefully clarified, are as dangerous as the others. A restoration movement with Alexander Campbell at the center of it is no better than one with Joseph Smith as the focal point: one makes Campbellites, the other Mormons, and neither produces Christians. Those that seek a restoration of "the church" without an accurate concept of "church" have done us no favor either. And, "restorations" that are merely outward are of no benefit: simply changing the name we wear or the sign on the building does nothing to change the heart.

And yet, true restoration is needed and can be had. It all depends. For one thing, the proper concept of restoration itself needs to be restored. We need to ask ourselves, " What needs to be restored and how do we go about it?" Ezra knew: "Ezra set his heart to seek the law of Jehovah, and to do it, and to teach in Israel statutes and ordinances," (7:10). Restoring a proper regard in the hearts of men for God's will is the "what" and teaching is the "how."

Then, restoration must begin with "us." Appeals to others to forsake traditions and creeds and to "do it the first century way" will fall on deaf ears if we are unwilling to do the same thing, (Rom. 2:1, 21).

"Restore New Testament Christianity" — what a noble sentiment! Yet... if we better appreciated what is involved in this, I wonder if it would really be so attractive.

Brethren, it just might mean that some drastic changes would have to take place in our thinking and practices if we did some true restoration. But, after all, isn't that what restoration is all about?

David Smitherman

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.XI Pg.5

January 1983

Use Your Bible

Dan S. Shipley

THE BEREANS "THEREFORE BELIEVED" (Acts 17:11,12)

I. Because They Kept Open Minds

A. "they received the word"

1. They listened, without prejudice and without gullibility 2. Without such hearing and learning, no coming to Christ, Jn. 6:45 3. Good listeners always complement the gospel, Matt. 13:14,15

B. They received the word "with all readiness of mind"

1. "readiness" (PROTHUMIA) indicates eagerness, willingness 2. Such a mind is absolutely vital to righteousness, 2 Cor. 8:12 3. Such is the honest and good heart of Lk. 8:15 4. Note: such a heart exists before knowing truth, Jn. 7:17

Ii. Because They Kept Open Bibles

A. "examining the scriptures" (i.e., Old Testament scriptures) 1. They recognized the scriptures as being authoritative 2. They recognized the need to "prove all things", 1 Thss. 5:21; to test the teaching by the Word. 3. They were not satisfied to take the word of the preacher

B. "whether these things were so" 1. They knew that any teaching that did not harmonize with scripture could not be so and, therefore, unworthy of acceptance 2. Their subsequent believing was based upon their accepting these things as being so (Rom. 10:17) 3. Such examining and testing still vital in our confused religious world of today ("Are these things so? Examine the scriptures!")

Iii. Because They Kept Open Schedules

A. They examined the scriptures "daily"

1. Open minds and open Bibles mean little where there is no time for their employment 2. In this way, men truly are "redeeming the time", Eph. 5:16 3. Similarly, the Pentecostians received and continued "steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine in a "day by day" involvement (Acts 2:41,46) 4. Daily involvement with the scriptures essential to growing in faith, knowledge, strength (1 Pet. 2:2)

B. The tragedy of schedules to busy for God and His Word! "No time for God? What fools we are, to clutter up Our lives with common things and leave without heart's gate The Lord of life and Life itself — our God.'" (Norman Trott)

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.XI Pg.6

January 1983

How Much To Give

Robert F. Turner

How much shall I give? It would be easier if God sent bills! Careful evaluation determines the amount---but amount is not even the first thought.

First, man must want to give. "... they were willing of themselves ... as there was a readiness to will ... if there be first a willing mind ... not grudgingly or of necessity' (2 Cor. 8:3, 11,12, 9:7). No gift without a willing heart is enough.

First, man must give himself to the Lord (2 Cor. 8:5). — God's interest is man — not money. The greater gift given, the lesser gift (money) is not hard. And a man who gives himself is not likely to be stingy with money.

First, man must love. The Corinthian's gift was proof of their love (2 Cor. 8:24). If people love souls, giving to preach is easy. If men love the brethren, giving to feed them is natural. We invariably put our money where our heart is.

First, man must recognize that he is a steward. God just entrusts man with these material goods. They still belong to him, and man must give an account for all he has. Jerusalem saints understood this--"neither said any of them that ought of the things that he possessed was his own" (Act. 4:32). That makes giving easy.

Now to the amount of giving — the amount depends on income. God puts us on our honor —give as we see God giving to us. "...let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him" (1 Cor. 16:2). The more our salary is, the more we give. The amount of giving depends upon what we have — "...it is accepted according to that a man hath..." (2 Cor. 8:12). We must not think we have paid "our weekly tax" on our income and no other claim can be made on us. Just as surely as we have resources, we have responsibilities.

The amount of giving depends upon the need. When crisis threatened the Jerusalem church, that special need compelled special giving. Brethren sold their houses and land to be able to give (Act. 4:32-35). They did not ordinarily give this way, but saints were hungry. Extraordinary need could compel us to give all we have.

The amount of giving is established by priority. How does my giving compare with my spending for other things? Do I spend more on movies or golf or fishing or hairdressers than God's work? If my spending for the Lord's kingdom is way down from the top of the list of my expenditures, something is seriously wrong. People who seek first the kingdom of God, use their money accordingly.

The amount of giving reflects my thankfulness. God ministers bread for food and multiplies our seed sown (2 Cor. 9:10). How much do I appreciate God's generosity? As Christians, we have all spiritual blessings (Eph. 1:3) — chosen by God, redeemed, forgiven, an inheritance. How much does all this mean to me? Paul's last argument to the Corinthians was brief but profound. "Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift" (2 Cor. 9:15).

Joe Fitch, San Antonio, TX.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Vol.XIX No.XI Pg.7

January 1983

?You Know What?

Robert F. Turner

From Oklahoma, an argument on Gal. 6:10 (author unrevealed); and I am asked to examine and reply in P. T.

Reply:

The author says "let us do good" is "hortatory subjunctive;" and "according to the laws of Greek grammar, a hortatory subjunctive is always in the first person plural, and is an exhortation or command which includes the speaker and the person or persons ...addressed. In this case the letter is addressed to 'the churches of Galatia' and therefore the command is given to the churches of Galatia." By that he means, a church is commanded to support general benevolence from its treasury — as a collective work.

The basic fallacy here is assumption that a letter addressed to a church cannot contain exhortations for individual members of that church. Context of the particular exhortation, NOT the address at beginning of letter, determines application of that particular admonition. The church consists of individual saints, who have both individual and collective obligations. A letter addressed to a local group could, and usually does include exhortations of both kinds.

The "hortatory subjunctive" part is just a snow job. "Hortatory" means giving or characterized by exhortation. This is not a grammatical form; nor does it make the address at the beginning of a letter apply with exclusiveness. "Subjunctive" is a Greek mood. "In the first person plural it has also the suggestive force which is usually classed as an imperative." So what's new? Nothing but the effort to give someone the impression that "the Greek" of Gal. 6:10 gives churches the authority to form and support church-hood institutions for the furtherance of the social gospel.

"Neither let us commit fornication" (1 Cor. 10:8) is first person, plural, present subjunctive. The letter is "addressed to the church" so, by the "laws of Greek grammar" (fallaciously offered) the church can act in such an immoral way, and had to have this "hortatory subjunctive" admonition. Another "hortatory subjunctive" is found in 1 Cor. 10:9 ("neither let us make trial of the Lord"). It is also first person, plural, present, subjunctive; but is an admonition to individual saints who form the church, even as it uses the example of individual sinners who were part of the "congregation" in the wilderness.

Paul addressed "all the saints that are in Christ Jesus that are at Philippi." But in 4:15 he called them a "church" and followed "church" with a singular verb. Somehow we must be made to realize that "church" collects people — saints — and it may be used collectively OR DISTRIBUTIVELY. The address at the beginning of the letter cannot be used to categorize the contents of the letter as having either collective or distributive application. The immediate context must determine that.

I'm surprised our "hortatory subjunctive" addict did not argue that a single church is not being considered for general benevolent work, since Galatians is addressed to "churches." Did Paul advocate diocesan work???