THE DIGNITY OF TOIL

The noblest man on earth is he who puts his hands cheerfully and proudly to honest labor and goes forth to conquer honor and worth. There is a dignity and glory to toil. The greatest names in history are of those who worked hard; no one who posterity delights to honor ever dreamed or idled his time away to gain game.

Labor is beautiful and the world has long since learned that men cannot be truly man without employment. We do not consider man noble because of his dress but because of his honor acquired through labor. It is the spirit back of the performance of the task that gives dignity and honor to the accomplishment. Through labor the very elements are brought under subjection and made to contribute to the good of other men.

The victories of labor are seen everywhere about us in the city or in the field. Labor makes the poor man’s heart rich with content and crown the weary head with honor, dignity and peace. Labor evokes and disciplines obedience, self-control, attention, application, and, perseverance gives a man a deftness and skill in his physical calling.

As in the material, so with things of the soul. Labor and toil are essential. Holy scripture bids us to “work out” our salvation and the master of toil bade His followers to strive not for the things that perish but for those that endure until life everlasting. In the realms of the spiritual the dignity of labor reaches its highest valuation. Through man’s toiling in obedience to the word of God, he can live such life as to receive the highest reward in heaven after this life is over.

SOMETIMES LOVE HURTS

One of the greatest things that God gave to man is love. It can take man to the highest of joy. The number of songs and poems written on the subject demonstrates how important love is in our lives. Someone has gone so far as to say that “Love is what makes the world go around”.

As great as love is, there is a down side. Some times love hurts. If you don’t believe me, just ask someone who has been dumped by their first love or a parent who has lost a child to an accident or illness. Those who go through such grief often find it hard to continue living. The reason for such emotional grief is love. Think of the grief of our Heavenly Father, when he “gave his only begotten son” (John.3:16). After all, “But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:8). The fact that love can be the source of the greatest joy and the greatest grief is one of the greatest conundrums of all time.

Another reason that love sometimes hurts is corrective discipline. Most if not all have heard of a father who said, “This is going to hurt me more than it’s going to hurt you.” Furthermore, most if not all have heard a child argue this point. The fact is, the father is talking about emotional pain and the child is talking about physical pain. In this regard, the writer of Hebrews stated, “And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him: For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth,and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?” (Hebrews 12:5-7).

Unfortunately, society (and even some in the Lord’s church) believe that physical punishment of a child is abusive and motivated by hate. The folly of this perversion of love is easily seen in the effect it has had on society (especially in our schools). Those who withhold corrective discipline really don’t love their child. In fact, all who are without corrective discipline are considered fatherless and not sons at all. Remember, “He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes” (Proverbs 13:24).

Yes, sometimes love hurts. Often that pain is unfortunate, but, at other times it is necessary. Don’t avoid corrective discipline because of the pain that it brings. Whether you are on the giving or receiving end, be sure that it is always understood that it is done in love for the greatest good of all.

Bruce Stulting

JERUSALEM HYPOCRITES: THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATIONS

Ananias and Sapphira were active members of the early Jerusalem church (Acts 5). Please notice that I did not say that they were faithful, but that they were active (5:1-2). They were active hypocrites, and God killed them for their hypocrisy (5:5, 10). Yes, “God is love,” but He is also a just God (I John 4:16; Revelation 15:3). I trust that some have not reached such a sinful frame of mind that they would accuse God of not having enough love in His dealing with this sinful pair. All would do well to remember Paul’s comment, “yea, let God be true, but every man a liar” (Romans 3:4). To be a hypocrite is to live a lie. The original word means an actor, i.e., one who acted out a part or pretended to be that which he was not. As hypocrisy relates to religion, Webster defines it as, “a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not” (Webster’s Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary, 1963).Remember how that Ananias and Sapphira sold their land and gave some of what they received to the church for a worthy cause (Acts 4:32-37; 5:2). J. W. McGarvey, in his sermon on “The Jerusalem Church,” had these comments about Ananias and Sapphira’s contribution.

If the disciples at that age had been as demonstrative and irreverent in the Lord’s house as are some of our modern assemblies, I think there would have been general and very hearty clapping of hands at this deed (253).

McGarvey said this in the summer of 1893! It is, however, as fresh and applicable for today as if it had been uttered this morning! Both husband and wife wanted to be seen of men to be praised for their false generosity. This character flaw is typical of all hypocrites (Matthew 23:28).

So it is that our Lord warned: “Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy” (Luke 12:1). Their lie to the God of glory brought about His swift and sure retribution (Acts 5:5, 10). McGarvey again comments:

What awful work this was; and how quickly done! No tears, no prayers, no delay. Nothing but solemnity and awe like that of the judgment day, and whose work was it? Not that of Peter; for he seems not to have known that Ananias was to fall dead;  and although he knew that Sapphira would, he expressed no will of his own in the matter. It was the work of the great Head of the church, who thus exercised discipline in His church, so as to show those to whom it would afterward be entrusted, the promptness with which crying sins must be rebuked if the church would please Him. This is divine intimation on the subject of discipline. Shall we learn the lesson, or shall we continue, as so many churches have long been doing, to keep the ungodly in the church, under the vain delusion that we are exercising forbearance and mercy which heaven will approve, or under the idle impression that we have a better hope of saving a wicked man in the church, than if we cast him out? (254).

I am constantly made to marvel at how some things never change. You may be sure that if Ananias and Sapphira “agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord” before an inspired apostle (Acts 5:9), that in our age of worldly pride and “supposing that gain is godliness” (I Timothy 6:5), the same sinfulness will run rampant in the church. How many churches really want sermons preached that deal with the sins of the brethren? The present “positive preaching” concept would have us angry at God and Peter and cooing like doves over the poor unloved and mistreated Ananias and Sapphira. Beloved brethren, we must open our eyes to the sad state of affairs so many in the church have come to and realize the importance in godly discipline and its place in the saving of souls (I Corinthians 5:4, 5, 10-13; II Thessalonians. 3:6).

David P. Brown

Withdrawing from the Withdrawn

Strange as it may seem, some actually deny the right of the church to withdraw their fellowship from those who refuse to walk in the light. Others agree that such must be done, but that it cannot be done if some have already “withdrawn from the church.” This is strange language indeed, or we read nothing in the Scriptures about the right of people to withdraw from the church.” However, we do read about the responsibility of the church to withdraw from certain ones who become wayward. The Scripture says, “mark them which cause divisions…and avoid them” (Romans 16:17); “when ye are gathered together…To deliver such an one unto Satan….Purge out…the old leaven…not to keep company…not to eat…. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person” (I Corinthians 5:4-13); “from such withdraw thyself” (I Timothy 6:5); “Now we command you… withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly…note that man, and have no company with him” (II Thessalonians 3:6-14).

These passages show that the church has an active responsibility in the matter of discipline, and must take a stand for truth and fellowship. Our responsibility is not merely passive. Apostates from the faith seldom become such for no reason at all, but are actively engaged in the ways of the world. “Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world” (II Timothy 4:10). Those who forsake the Lord in worship have usually already forsaken Him in living. Does this mean the church can do nothing to discipline wayward members if they have already ceased to worship with the saints? Just where do people get the idea that fellowship is limited to the worship “service”? They must think so, if they think they are to withdraw only from those who attend worship. Actually, we do not forbid anyone to attend worship when they are disciplined, but we encourage them to attend so as to be exhorted to Christian living. A withdrawal of fellowship simply means that Christians are to do nothing with those withdrawn from that would indicate any approval of their wayward conduct, and this would primarily be outside of the worship service. Any effort to reject God’s Will in discipline is an effort to follow the way of least resistance. We need to forget our fears and human reasoning and start obeying God.

Don W. Tarbet

Think about it . . .

Many parents are finding out that a pat on the back helps develop character — if given often enough, early enough, and low enough.

You cannot keep trouble from coming, but you need not give it a chair to sit in.

Plenty in the purse cannot prevent starvation in the soul.

Withdrawing from the Withdrawn

Strange as it may seem, some actually deny the right of the church to withdraw their fellowship from those who refuse to walk in the light. Others agree that such must be done, but that it cannot be done if some have already “withdrawn from the church.” This is strange language indeed, or we read nothing in the Scriptures about the right of people to “withdraw from the church.” However, we do read about the responsibility of the church to withdraw from certain ones who become wayward. The Scripture says, “mark them which cause divisions…and avoid them” (Romans 16:17); “when ye are gathered together…To deliver such an one unto Satan…Purge out…the old leaven…not to keep company…not to eat…. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person” (I Corinthians 5:4-13); “from such withdraw thyself” (I Timothy 6:5); “Now we command you…withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly…note that man, and have no company with him” (II Thessalonians 3:6-14). 

These passages show that the church has an active responsibility in the matter of discipline, and must take a stand for truth and fellowship. Our responsibility is not merely passive. Apostates from the faith seldom become such for no reason at all, but are actively engaged in the ways of the world. “Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world” (II Timothy 4:10). Those who forsake the Lord in worship have usually already forsaken Him in living. Does this mean the church can do nothing to discipline wayward members if they have already ceased to worship with the saints? Just where do people get the idea that fellowship is limited to the worship “service”? They must think so, if they think they are to withdraw only from those who attend worship. Actually, we do not forbid anyone to attend worship when they are disciplined, but we encourage them to attend so as to be exhorted to Christian living. A withdrawal of fellowship simply means that Christians are to do nothing with those withdrawn from that would indicate any approval of their wayward conduct, and this would primarily be outside of the worship service. Any effort to reject God’s Will in discipline is an effort to follow the way of least resistance. We need to forget our fears and human reasoning and start obeying God.  

Don Tarbet