RETIREDFAN1 Posted April 21 Author Share Posted April 21 Vol.XX No.XII Pg.4 February 1984 Yesterday Robert F. Turner Yesterday...it exists only in fading memory, worn out photographs, and history books. And yet, it is one of the finest learning centers available to us if we will only allow ourselves to be taught. However, there is no living space in yesterday, so don't plan to reside there. As pleasant as it was, we cannot recall it, and Solomon warned against trying to live in it (Eccl. 7:10). Although reflections upon its achievements can be encouraging, be careful: yesterday is often larger than life. How we remember things being and how they really were are often two different things. Many, though, would not want to live in yesterday. For them it is a haunted house that is filled with regret, and memories of mistakes and failures they would like to forget (Gal. 1:13). But as wonderful or as humiliating as it may be, yesterday is not our savior, nor will it necessarily condemn us. It makes little difference how faithful we were (1 Tim. 1.19), what we meant to do (Acts 24:25), or thought we would have done (Matt. 23: 29-36). God's standard for judging is not yesterday, and one's acceptance before God is not described in the past tense. And, regardless of past mistakes, God's grace and mercy are sufficient to forgive and to forget even if we are unable to do so (Ps. 103:12). And even if the achievements of yesterday were great, remember that the memories of men are short: we, along with our accomplishments, will not likely be immortal. Yesterday will soon be forgotten by tomorrow's generation (Ecc. 2:16; 9:13-18). "The world will little note nor long remember what we say here..." was not true of Lincoln's words but will be of ours. What yesterday was is but a reflection of what tomorrow will be. Others have said it better: "Straight ahead lies yesterday," and "Those who are ignorant of history are doomed to repeat it." Solomon's conclusion was, "There is nothing new under the sun," (Eccl. 1:9-11). Such statements remind us that looking back can help us to see ahead. Moses encouraged the Jews to, "remember the days of old...ask your father...your elders, and they will tell you," (Deut. 32:7). And because Rehoboam refused this counsel, he led a nation to divide (1 Kings 12:8). Yesterday brethren fought and churches divided, and the next generation does the same. A careful look at yesterday might have prevented it. Yesterday reminds us of how short life is (Job 14:1-2). Our rapidly growing collection of yesterdays make us humble. "True, today we are here, but tomorrow may see just a grave in the vale and a mem'ry of me." How easy it is to count our yesterdays. How impossible it is to know of our tomorrows. Yesterday...our knowledge and memories of it can challenge and give courage, or depress and weaken resolve. What power there is in yesterday! Allow its power to aid in living happier today and in anticipating a better tomorrow. David Smitherman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RETIREDFAN1 Posted April 22 Author Share Posted April 22 Vol.XX No.XII Pg.5 February 1984 Who Has The Question? Dan S. Shipley Bumper sticker religion has little appeal to me, but its message is hard to ignore, especially if you happen to be driving or parked behind a bumper where it is displayed. That's just where I found myself recently, and here's what I read: "THE BIBLE HAS THE ANSWER." There was a bumper sticker I had to agree with. That's what I believe; that's what I preach. And that, apparently, was what the driver in front of me believed — probably the one behind me too. In fact, most of Texas and part of California would agree that the Bible does have the answer! Why is it, then, that so many people who have Bibles don't have the answers? And that can best be answered with another query or two. WHO HAS THE QUESTION? And, more importantly, WHO HAS THE QUESTION THAT WILL BE SATISFIED WITH NOTHING LESS THAN A BIBLE ANSWER? Now that query may not fit on a bumper sticker, but it certainly deserves an important place in the thinking of those who would please God and seek salvation. Unfortunately, too few are asking the kind of questions whose answers are found in the Bible. Certainly, the irreligious and immoral are not. For the most part, they, as the Gentiles of old, refuse to have God in their knowledge (Rom. 1:28). They live for the here and now, serving the lust of the flesh and generally have no more regard for gospel truth than would a hog for a string of pearls. Yes, the Bible has the answer, but like the rich and foolish farmer of Lk. 12, they have no time for God and, therefore, no questions. But, there are others who do not have the questions and among them, amazingly enough, are those who claim to fear God and follow the Bible. Now these are mostly people with good intentions, but they make the tragic and popular mistake of assuming to have the answers. Instead of proving all things (1 Thss. 5:21), they accept a "hand- me-down" religion without question and without conviction. Even if unwittingly, they commit their souls to a course in religion based more on social and family ties than a "thus saith the Lord," they wrongly equate their religion with righteousness and, therefore, do not subject themselves to the righteousness of God (Rom. 10:3). Worse, their comfortable assumptions find reinforcement through their feelings, experiences, and prejudices. After all, they have religion; they have a "church"; they have their Bibles — and maybe even one of those bumper stickers. BUT WHAT THEY DON'T HAVE IS BIBLE AUTHORITY FOR WHAT THEY BELIEVE AND PRACTICE! They do not have a truth-determined relationship with the Lord. And worse, most are satisfied beyond question in their way that "seemeth right" and happily assume that God is too. What they, and all of us, must do is come back to where we say the answers are. One of the first lessons we learn there is that man must be willing to do God's will (Jn. 7:17). This is the heart of acceptable religion. Then, in all that he does, man must give diligence to present himself approved unto God (2 Tim. 2:15) by abiding in the doctrine of Christ (2 Jn 9). It does have the answers — but only for those who will hear and learn (Jn. 6:45). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RETIREDFAN1 Posted April 23 Author Share Posted April 23 Vol.XX No.XII Pg.6 February 1984 Received From Men Robert F. Turner Timothy's faith was from mother and grandmother (2 Tim. 1:5). But faith is supposed to come from "hearing the word of God" and not from men — right? It does — as an absolute source. Rarely someone studies the Bible and gets their faith entirely independent of all men, but that is the exception. Normally, people acquire faith from people. It ought to be compared to scripture and proved by truth, but faith is usually what our teachers believe. It adds seriousness for the teacher and demands caution of all listeners. "Of whom you learned" the things you believe is part of Paul's argument. What if the faith of the teacher is corrupt? The "Calvinist faith" that now dwells in many brethren dwelt first in their preacher and before that in the writers from whom he read. Our faith also generally has the intensity of our teachers. Weak faith churches often remain that way conveying their weak faith to their converts. They are converted to weak faith and seek no other. And other churches radiate strong faith from generation to generation by conveying their faith to their children and converts. Children of some brethren are observed to be ignorant and carnal-minded. Why? One reason is that parents have conveyed what dwelt in them. How could they train children "in the nurture and admonition of the Lord" (Eph. 6:4) when they do not possess it themselves? How can they teach their children what they do not know? A few children bypass their parents and learn directly, others are trained up in the Lord by godly brethren who give of their own faith, but most of these children have in them only the poverty that was in their parents. Why do some churches continue to produce preachers, teachers, and elders while other churches have never produced a single one? Are the people of different quality? I doubt it. Some churches encourage spiritual development and can provide for it. Men learn to teach — how and what — from teachers (2 Tim. 2:2). Godly elders convey their skill, devotion, and spirituality thus generating elders. Few want to be an elder having never seen one, nor have they a good idea how to do the job without seeing elders at work. Are values learned by discussing them? To some degree, I guess, but mostly they are acquired from men we associate with. Small wonder that materialism is invading the church. We have learned from our worldly companions, and "evil companions corrupt" (1 Cor. 15:33). We need a Moses (Heb. 11:24-) or an Abraham (11:8-10) to demonstrate right values. We need one who is a success without being rich. Lectures are not enough! We draw courage from the brave. Patience is learned living next door to Job. Zeal is not generated by command but is an infection caught through the fever of the fervent. Conclusions? 1) Treasure those who have in them such precious gifts. 2) Where such do not exist, someone must bravely break ground and do the hard work so he will have treasures for those who seek them. Joe Fitch, San Antonio, TX. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RETIREDFAN1 Posted April 24 Author Share Posted April 24 Vol.XX No.XII Pg.7 February 1984 ?You Know What? Robert F. Turner Bro. Turner: We regret the closing of P.T. and would like to request one more article on the church. J. B. (And this was the only space I had for it. rt) What "went forth" from Jerusalem? Well, Isaiah prophesied the "ways — paths — law — and word" of the Lord would "go forth" (2:3). Fulfillment, as recorded in Acts 2: vindicates the prediction. One searches in vain for Peter's emphasis upon some institution that would save, or stand between God and man. Oh yes, the Lord's "church" was established — for when people "gladly received" the word (that had "gone forth") they became a part of that called-out body that belonged to Christ. But it is CHRIST who saves, via His ways, paths, etc. Now, how does Christ's church grow? An excellent example is found in Acts 11. Gospel teachers came to Antioch and preached "the Lord Jesus" (v.20). Preached the "church"? No, preached that which had gone forth from Jerusalem — the "ways, paths, law, and word" of the Lord. Verse 21 says, "a great number believed, and turned unto..." the "church"? No; "to the Lord." Oh yes, in coming to the Lord they became a part of the Lord's people, His "church;" but the record says, they "turned unto the Lord." Barnabas exhorted them to "cleave" (be faithful) "unto the Lord" (v.23). Why didn't he tell them to be faithful to the church? I don't know — it doesn't say. But I do know what it says. And in the growth and development of this effort we are told, "much people were added unto the LORD." (rt) We have discussed, to this point, the prophecy, coming into existence, and propagation of — what? Salvation in Christ! The product of this manifestation of grace — the called out people of God (1 Pet. 2:9) — are God's FLOCK, or BODY, FAMILY, KINGDOM, etc. These are figurative designations, each emphasizing some special characteristic of these people. "CHURCH" is a collective noun (like "flock") that is applied to these people — as a whole (Matt. 16:18), with geographic restrictions (Acts 9:31, AS), and as local organized groups (Phil. 1:1; 4:15). But individuals may be cut off from the body of Christ (Rom. 11:20-22; 2 Pet. 2:2), and local churches may be no longer recognized — their "candlestick" removed (Rev. 2:1-5). This too, is determined on the basis of that which "went forth from Jerusalem." Diotrephes could change the roster of men, but God's roll counts for eternity (3 Jn .9-10; 2 Tim. 2:16-19). Heeding "perverse things" (Acts 20:29-f), and "leaving thy first love" (Christ) is what removes individuals and local groups from God's favor. Emphasis upon the institutional aspect of "the church" was one of the earliest steps to apostasy. The whole or universal body of people was seen as a corporate "society" which took precedence over the word of God. The "church" was soon regarded as authority for the word — "mother" of that which brought it into existence. The "infallible" church is an outgrowth of this earlier error. We quickly repudiate that fruit, but may plant its seed, if we forget that the WORD, not the "church," will judge us eternally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RETIREDFAN1 Posted April 25 Author Share Posted April 25 Vol.XX No.XII Pg.8 February 1984 Stuff About Things Robert F. Turner When I was very young, back in the dark ages, today's "four letter words" were strictly forbidden. Oh, they were around all right, but we were taught that nice people did not soil their lips, or offend the ears of others with them. (We learned that soap will wash out the mouth, if not the mind; and may even jog the memory for a time.) We knew what the law said. But boys work hard at getting around parental law. Our "gang" sometimes gathered in a far corner of the woodshed to play this little game. One boy would declare, "It's not nice to say '—' " Another would immediately respond, "YOU said it!" At this the first boy would ask, "Said what?" And his critic would say, "—." Now this gave a third boy the opportunity to charge, "YOU said it." "Said what?" "—"' And soon we all had tasted the forbidden fruit. With luck (not getting caught at it) we could practice our complete secret vocabulary without losing our "little angels" status. (My mother would whip me yet if she knew this — and I would thank her for it. Don't show this to my grandchildren.) It may have been curiosity, the spirit of adventure, or a streak of rebellion that authored that game. We knew better, although I can't believe we were aware of its seriousness, or possible long-range effects. Now when adult brethren excuse ungodly conduct with child-like excuses they are playing a dangerous "game" with God — and He sees and hears all in the woodshed. Rumors are spread to ruin a brother's reputation — as we "protect the brother- hood." Speculative teachers feed pride, trample the weak, in the game called "free search for truth." Editors hungrily seek some new "issue" to sell papers; and throw ethics to the wind as they "stamp out error." Paul was slanderously reported to have said, "Let us do evil that good may come." He wrote, their damnation was just (Rom. 3:8), and he was right. When we abandon the principles of Christianity in our claim to "fight the good fight," we are playing games with God. Our weapons are not carnal (2 Cor. 10:3-5), and the use of carnal means is an abandonment of the gospel armor. We must plant truth in hearts, knowing "God is not mocked" by games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now