Watchman Magazine

In Luke 17, the Bible tells us of a time when Jesus came to a village near the border of Galilee and Samaria while on His way to Jerusalem. As he came into the village, ten lepers were shouting to Him in the distance. They pleaded with Jesus to heal them saying, "Jesus, Master, have mercy on us!"

Jesus responded by commanding them, "Go, show yourselves to the priests." No doubt this gave the lepers great cause for hope. Under the Old Testament regulations regarding lepers, there was no reason for a leper to go to the priest unless some change had occurred in his status. Leviticus 13 and 14 detail the tests for leprosy, the quarantine associated with it and the sacrifices to be given in the case of cleansing. The same trust that led them to seek healing from Jesus led them to do as He said and go to the priests. The text shows how their hope became a reality in the following words:

• Continue reading

Under the headline, "Pro-homosexual Church Withdraws from CBF," the following article appeared www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=11536, August 17, 2001.

"University Baptist Church in Austin, Texas, has notified the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship (CBF) that they are pulling out of the national group because of its policy against homosexuals, according to a report in The American-Statesman.

"The CBF’s policy prohibits the hiring of non-celibate gays and lesbians, bars them from missionary work and does not allow the organization to give money to homosexual groups or causes.

"’We most deeply regret the condemning message you have sent in the name of Christ to all gay and lesbian persons by your action,’ wrote the Rev. Larry Bethune in a letter from the church Aug. 16. ‘Because it is God’s call for our congregation to minister with gay and lesbian Baptist Christians and their families, we cannot in good conscience support an organization which discriminates against our brothers and sisters in Christ … any more than we could do so if the CBF discriminated on the basis of race or gender,’ Bethune wrote.

"This isn’t the first scrape University Baptist has had over its policy of welcoming homosexuals. The Austin Baptist Association voted to oust the church in 1995 after University Baptist ordained a gay deacon. The Baptist General Convention of Texas’ executive committee voted to end its affiliation with University Baptist in 1998. University Baptist is a member of the American Baptist Churches, U.S.A., a Baptist denomination that continues to debate whether to take a stand on churches that allow non-celibate homosexual members."

Candid Comments

First, how does the average Baptist regard the spiritual status of "the Rev. Larry Bethune" and the "University Baptist Church in Austin"? Are those who endorse and sanction homosexual behavior, such as they do, still in a saved state before God (1 Corinthians 6:9-11)?

• Continue reading

The following requests and questions (in italics below) were submitted to me for comment. We trust the responses will be helpful and will gender study and reflection, not strife and recrimination.

"For those of you who believe in a "patterned" and prescriptive "worship", would you please supply the following for me?

(a couple of stipulations….Do it FROM the New Testament ALONE. Do it by PROVABLE Authorial intent)

Reply: Why should we be forced to follow a pattern in reply? Since it is obvious the querist does not believe in a pattern, how can he demand that we follow one?

• Continue reading

In a recent exchange between a Christian evangelist and a Baptist "pastor," the latter stated that anything one needs to do in order to be saved is a work, and thus nullifies grace.

His Calvinistic "faith only" doctrine is coming back to bite him. Surely, he will admit that one needs to believe in order to be saved. Is belief a work that nullifies grace? Some of Christ’s followers asked him, "What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?". Jesus answered and said to them, ‘This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent’" (John 6:28-29).

But the Calvinist will also agree that a little confession is good for the soul. He submits to Paul’s teaching in Romans 10:9 which demands that oral confession precede salvation: "[I]f you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus … you will be saved." The minimal effort required to articulate such a confession as the Ethiopian eunuch made in Acts 8:37 is a facet of faith, the Calvinist argues and thus is not really a work. Oh?

• Continue reading

“They sow the wind, And reap the whirlwind. The stalk has no bud; It shall never produce meal. If it should produce, Aliens would swallow it up” (Hosea 8:7).

The minor prophet was excoriating the false religions which Israel dallied with in their temptation of God so many centuries ago now. Such false religions plant something without substance and produce something destructive. Their adherents are without moral compass, for false religion offers either none or one inferior to God’s and thus the challenges of the world and the worldly overcome them in time.

The prophecy bears some resemblance to Christ’s parable of the sower in Matthew 13. There also, three of four souls touched by the gospel did not endure in the faith because of persecution, trial or apathy. Today, so many churches of Christ are sowing the wind in their instruction of the young that we are nearly reduced to standing back and waiting for the whirlwind when the next, untaught generation assumes pulpits, pens and presbyteries.

• Continue reading

A Brief Tribute to Glenn Rogers

The Rio Grande Valley of Texas is that area along the US-Mexico border, from Rio Grande City at the upper end to Brownsville on the coast. The "Valley" includes Mission, McAllen, Edinburg and Harlingen, Texas (and several other small communities). In this region there are two English speaking churches not involved in institutional cooperatives arrangements and associated innovations (Laurel Heights in McAllen & Pendleton Park in Harlingen).

But in this same region there are dozens of Spanish speaking churches and local preachers. I know of at least six congregations on this side of the border. Moving to the other side of the border, there are that many congregations just in Reynosa, Mexico – just south of McAllen. There are many second and third generation Christians here, making it obvious that a great deal of work was done here in the 50′s and 60′s. Much of this work was done by Glenn Rogers, accompanied by his wife & faithful helper, Loyce.

• Continue reading

Christ’s giving the Great Commission is a natural consequence of his mission while on earth. He gave it after he had conquered man’s two greatest enemies, sin and death (John 1:29; 1 Corinthians 15:20). The commission aims at the spreading of this wonderful news to the lost of this world. (Matthew 28:18-20; Mark 16:15-16; Luke 24:46-47). What is involved in carrying out the Great Commission?

Overcoming Contrary Emotions

In reading the accounts of the giving of the commission, the transformation that took place in Jesus’ disciples is sometimes overlooked (Cp. Mark 16:14; John 20:19). They went from being full of doubt, unbelief and fear to bold proclaimers of Jesus’ words (Mark 16:14; Luke 24:10-12; Acts 2-3). Everyone who endeavors to teach others will undergo a similar change. This is so in a special sense for those who would preach in another country. At least, I found it so.

• Continue reading

The Church Of Christ

The Church And Salvation
What The Church Is Not
What The Church Is
The Work Of The Church
The Lord’s One Church

The Church Of Christ

One Cannot Be Saved
Outside The Church

Ephesians 5:23
Acts 2:47
Ephesians 1:22-23
2 Timothy 2:10

• Continue reading

It is not unusual these days to see a bumper sticker with some message indicating that the owner is an alumnus of some college, or member of a fraternal order or church group. Recently I saw one indicating that the driver of the car was an "ex-Ranger," probably a past member of the Rangers baseball club. This triggered a thought about the possibility of forming an association, complete with bumper sticker, of those people who used to be members of the Lord’s church and calling it the "Ex-Christian Association." Surely there are enough people around who qualify.

• Continue reading

The Bible records for us an amazing feat, performed by a young man of faith. I refer to the slaying of Goliath by young David. The great victory of David over Goliath was a victory which made all of Israel grateful. This included Saul, who took David into his house where he was befriended by Saul’s son Jonathan (cf. 1 Sam. 18:1-5).

However, the friendship of Saul and David was not destined to last. It was destroyed by one of the most insidious weapons Satan has in his arsenal, the sin of envy. David performed in battle so well that the people began to talk of his prowess. The women of Israel sang, "Saul has slain his thousands, and David his ten thousands" (1 Samuel 18:7).

• Continue reading

There is a current trend among some brethren to "broaden fellowship" who must accept a tolerance toward error before such broadening can be accomplished. We are told that since "everybody is wrong about something" (and we are!), we can be sure of nothing (which does not follow!).

In the past 2 John 9-11 has been used by brethren to show that there are limits to fellowship. I find nothing wrong with this and believe it to be a proper use of this passage. The "doctrine of Christ" makes proper allowance for one "growing in the grace and knowledge of Christ" as well as making provision for one’s mistakes. This matter of "growing in the grace and knowledge" (2 Peter 3:18) includes the fact that we do not know everything. Forgiveness includes the premise that we sometimes know and do not … thereby sinning. Both of these factors are built-in features of New Testament Christianity. God planned this when He set up the scheme of Redemption. However, while taking this into consideration, God still teaches that while we may not know everything, there are things we must know and things we are accountable for knowing. Simply because we do not know everything does not permit the theory that we cannot know anything! Such nonsense puts a premium on ignorance.

• Continue reading

As a gospel preacher I have an obligation to those who listen to my preaching. I am not a free agent in the absolute sense of the word: responsibilities limit me to some degree. While each preacher of the gospel will remain free and unfettered so that he may preach all of the gospel, this does not permit license to ignore the necessities that are thrust upon him. I am jealous of what freedom I do have. None shall restrict me from preaching "in season and out of season" (when it meets with approval and when it does not) or from preaching "the whole counsel of God."

Each preacher has a commitment to God to preach so as to please God whether it pleases the brethren or not (cf: the life of the prophets) and this is not negotiable. However, it is possible to abuse this prerogative and take advantage of brethren who agree in principle with this commitment but disagree with the application of it by an unwise preacher. The life of many a faithful preacher has been made hard by foolish ones who abuse the patience of good brethren by not using discretion toward responsibilities. Preachers should show good judgment in their work.

• Continue reading

Modesty, Dancing & Behavior

Years ago I read The Legend of Sleepy Hollow, by Washington Irving, as a high school assignment. At the time I was struck by a short passage which I have remembered since as the "ankle passage." I was amazed at how times had changed, regarding the morals of the day. Recently, I read the short story again, and came across the passage. It is a description of a young woman, (a bit of a flirt), who was the object of Ichabod Crane’s attention. Here is an excerpt:

"She was withal a little of a coquette, as might be perceived even in her dress, which was a mixture of ancient and modern fashions, as most suited to set off her charms. She wore the ornaments of pure yellow gold, which her great-great-grandmother had brought over from Saardam; the tempting stomacher of the olden time; and withal a provokingly short petticoat, to display the prettiest foot and ankle in the country around."

Truly, if a "provokingly short petticoat" is defined as one that displayed the "foot and ankle", times have changed. I ask that you consider two things in regard to this quote.

• Continue reading

I live in River Oaks, a small community just outside of the Fort Worth city limits. This community has a small weekly newspaper called the River Oaks News. A recent edition of the News revealed that a Christian living in the River Oaks area had received an award for his work in the Masonic Lodge. It used to be rather common to hear of Christian men who held membership in the Masonic Lodge, and who would, when confronted with the sinfulness of such membership, choose the Lodge over the Lord’s church. Others would have a tender heart toward truth and, when they became aware of the sin in their life, would repent and repudiate their membership in Masonry. Lately, though, less is heard of Masonic membership, and less preaching is being done on the subject of Masonry. Perhaps this is the reason this man is so proud of his association with a religion and a religious institution other than the Lord’s church. We do not know if he is ignorant of the truth, or not. We only know that he holds membership in two religious institutions, and is accepted in both. This, despite the fact that the New Testament reveals that membership is allowed for God’s people in only one religious institution, the church: "But if I am delayed, I write so that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15). Regardless of that particular circumstance, it makes clear our need to teach on this matter, that none be caught up in this error.

• Continue reading

In a final handout to the preachers and other invited guests assembled at Florida College this summer, brother Phil Roberts, under the heading Do You Accept the Literal Sense?, persisted in his argument against believing the Genesis account of creation is to be taken literally. Regarding Genesis 1:7 and Joshua 10:12-13, he wrote, "What would a person who knew nothing about modern astronomy assume that the passages were saying? What is the "plain sense" of the passages? Would somebody who rejected the "plain sense" in favor of an interpretation adjusted to fit modern knowledge of astronomy be a false teacher?"

• Continue reading

In the next section of brother Robert’s response to my own article and the writings of brethren who maintain a literal approach to the creation week (six consecutive 24 hour days), he derides simple and straightforward principles of biblical hermeneutics. To begin with, he questions our usage of terminology such as "the normal sense of the word ‘day’." Surely he does not imply by this that words do not have what we might describe as a "normal sense"? Such talk as this reminds us of the double-talk which we so commonly hear from the modernist and liberal who does every sort of dance around the ordinary and accepted meaning of words in order to avoid what common sense would suggest is the "normal sense" of the words employed by the inspired writers of Scripture. We have become accustomed to these word-games from them, but it will take us a while to acclimate ourselves to this new hermeneutic which is presently making itself felt among our brethren. Most pronouncements which we make in our language are not subject to interpretation. They simply say what they say. It is only the occasional remark which is subject to interpretive methods, because of certain contextual features which require a second look.

• Continue reading

How Many Extra Generations Needed?

The second presentation handout about which I would like to comment is a page entitled How Many Extra Generations Needed/Allowed by King’s Methodology? It begins with a relative date of 1700 BC which he claims is the "approximate date of Abraham give(n) (sic) by King." More than once in his material Phil misrepresents me on this point. He takes off from the relative date which was cited in my article: "The approximate dates for the life of Abraham obtained from the biblical data and archaeology are 2000 to 1700 BC" (p. 1). He knows that liberal critics date the life of Abraham at 1700 or thereafter, since they offer the Nuzi and Mari material cultures and their documentary evidence as establishing a late date for the patriarchal age. Phil is well enough in tune with that argument to know that I do not accept the late date for the age of the patriarchal period. Many archaeologists do, however, opt for this later time slot. That is why I mentioned it in the article — not because I accept it. Note that in our earlier quotation from Hill’s handout, Hill himself mentions a date as late as 1800 BC!

• Continue reading

We shall begin our treatment of these matters with a word about our earlier article: Let it be understood that we stand by what we wrote, and are happy to offer comment upon the criticisms of others as to the soundness of our essay. Our detractors make it sound as if they wish to maintain the sacred text against the speculations of one who compromises it with observations from history and archaeology. Nothing could be further from the truth. And it assuredly sounds as if the “pot is calling the kettle black” when we read such allegations flowing from the pen of someone who is defending Hill Roberts’ views as more inherently biblical than our own! Believe it who may! No one among conservative brethren in the past half century, in my experience at least, has represented an agent of change on such matters related to science and the Bible any more than brother Hill Roberts. And his brother Phil is now publicly casting his lot with him.

• Continue reading

In the April, 1999 issue of Watchman Magazine, this writer penned an article on The Primeval Chronology wherein we reviewed an essay under the same title by Dr. William Henry Green of Princeton University, which appeared originally in the journal Bibliotheca Sacra in April of 1890 (more recently reprinted in Classical Evangelical Essays in OT Interpretation, edited by Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., Baker: 1980). The general topic of discussion was the question of what the age of the earth actually might be, especially in relation to Archbishop Ussher’s date of 4004 BC (or his alternative date of 4138 BC). We asked, “What is the foundation of a chronology of this sort? It is the assertion that the chronologies of Genesis 5 and 11 do not allow more than a few thousand years from Adam to Abraham” (p. 1).

This being the assumption which underlies Ussher’s date, in that brief article we set out to discuss the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11 under the guidance of Green’s helpful dissertation. At the time the material was not viewed as particularly controversial or even important, because most everyone assumed that the points made in it were fairly simple and non-threatening, and especially so since everyone seemed to agree on that which was the basic thrust of the material. Certainly, no one raised public objection to that article at the time. And I received no correspondence taking issue with that study. This is so, I believe, because in my experience as a preacher and teacher of the Word, I have yet to encounter anyone who seriously entertains the propriety of Archbishop Ussher‘s chronology. This does not mean that they do not exist, it just means I have not run into them yet. I am sure they are out there! But they are rare, of that I am certain from my own experience.

• Continue reading