Roy C. Deaver

After a lengthy battle with dementia, Roy C. Deaver passed from this life on March 2, 2007. Roy was born in 1922 in Stephens County, Texas, in the suburbs of Caddo, to my grandparents, Harvey and Alta Deaver. My grandmother was 18 when Roy, her oldest child, was born. She had experienced difficulties with a couple of prior pregnancies, and according to family lore, she had prayed the prayer of Hannah, and asked God for a healthy son, whom she would encourage to become a preacher of the gospel. Roy preached the gospel for more than 60 years.

Dementia was not the only thing Roy battled during his life on earth. He defended and proclaimed the truth of God’s Word. He was well known among Christians as an educator, administrator, minister, elder, teacher, writer, and debater. The impact on those who heard him speak, and those who read his writings, may never be known this side of eternity. He was also a son, a brother, a husband, a father, grandfather and uncle.

He was tireless in his devotion to the church. At one time he served as the President of Ft. Worth Christian College, the director of Brown Trail School of Preaching, the pulpit minister at Brown Trail Church of Christ, and as an elder at Brown Trail. The operative phrase here is “at one time”. Roy Deaver served in these capacities at the same time.

I was teaching a class one Sunday, in Lewisville, on the book of Romans, and a visitor to the class raised his hand to make a comment. Because of the difference in our last names, he had no way of knowing that Roy Deaver was my uncle. As he spoke, he stated, “Roy Deaver is the smartest man in the brotherhood. He knows more Bible than anyone I know, and he has memorized the entire New Testament.” I wouldn’t doubt that Roy was an incredible Bible scholar and one of the best Greek scholars of his time. I never heard him claim to have memorized the entire New Testament, but obviously Roy had impressed many that were seated at his feet while he taught.

The relationship I had with Roy was less frequent, in occasion, as those who were in his immediate family, or those in the congregation or school where he was working. When we got together, there were lots of jokes, lots of laughs, and lots of fun. I watched him grieve, not as one without hope, the death of one of his sisters in 1965, the death of his dad in 1977, the death of his brother in 1999, and his mother in 2000. He helped us grieve the loss of other family members, including my dad in 2001. Thankfully, he was too sick and unable to come to the funeral of my mother, his youngest sister, in 2006. But, I have found numerous notes of encouragement and love from Roy to my mom, sent over the years. Roy was the last survivor of that Deaver family of six. My faith tells me that they are all together now, enjoying one another and perhaps a “mess of catfish” and some clear conversation. My grandfather, Roy’s dad, suffered from dementia, and so did my mother. It’s been a long time since that Deaver family had a clear and meaningful conversation together.

I was always able to call on Roy for advice, counsel, or insight into situations that I was facing. When the Lewisville church was first established, and continued to show amazing growth, he, tongue-in-cheek, asked me, “Didn’t you say that you had already appointed elders there?” Then, we laughed, knowing full well that he had the utmost respect for elders. When I was asked to serve as an elder in 2000, at a very young age, he gave me encouragement, and expressed his confidence in me to accomplish the task with God’s help.

In the later years of his life, it saddened me to see friends and colleagues turn on him, withdraw fellowship from him and members of his family, and dismiss and minimize his contributions completely, based on their disagreement with a few of his teachings. The Lord will settle those things in His time, but I can’t help but be saddened by the actions of these men. It also saddened me to see him struggle with his memory, one of his greatest God-given tools. His close friend, Tom Warren, experienced many of the same things during his bout with dementia. A family member told me, that in his last days, Roy would cry and say, “I need to be preaching the gospel”. It appears that, after the Lord, his mom’s prayer shaped him as much as the influence of Brother Pullias, Brother Hardeman, and Brother Warren.

As we have honored some, in this blogspace, who were giants among us, we honor Roy Deaver in that same regard. Even if it takes nine, or ninety, of us to fill his shoes, we are obligated to try and fill them.

Is there a future giant among us today?

PROPHECYING & SPEAKING IN TONGUES

My esteemed colleague and dearly beloved brother in the Lord has posted a most intriguing article entitled, “That You May Prophecy.” When we initiated this blog last year, we stated that our purpose was to encourage a deeper study of the Word of God. We also stated that the four contributors would not agree with each other on every article that would be posted. I am writing this article as another view of the contents of 1 Corinthians 14.

One of the first rules of Bible study is to study a passage in its immediate context. By that, we mean can one ascertain the meaning of a scripture by studying the scriptures that surround the given verse.

In the book of 1 Corinthians, the Apostle is dealing with problems that were being faced by the church in Corinth. This of course, does not mean that other congregations were dealing with the same problems, or that other congregations would ever deal with the same problems. Therefore, as we study the problems enumerated in the book of 1 Corinthians we must remember that Paul was writing to deal with specific issues relating to the Corinthian congregation. Scholars, also call this, the “Sitz em Laben,” or the life situation of those who were recipients of the letter.

It is not possible to fully understand statements such as, “but especially that you may prophecy” (1 Corinthians 14:1), and “Why do you forbid to speak in tongues” (1 Corinthians 14:39), without placing these statements in the context of the entire discussion of 1 Corinthians 12-14).

Paul’s lead statement, “Now concerning spiritual gifts…” (1 Corinthians 12:1) allows us to know something of the question he is about to answer. He then begins to discuss several aspects of the spiritual gifts problems relative to what was taking place in Corinth. Brother Wayne Jackson states about this section of scripture, “Paul’s need to address this controversy likely was generated by a report of divisiveness within that church (cf. 1:10ff), and as a result of correspondence with some of the saints there (7:1).

Paul mentions the spiritual gifts that were available to the Corinthian church. Among these are wisdom, knowledge, healings, prophecy, tongues, and interpretation of tongues. From reading chapter twelve, it becomes apparent that some at Corinth were boasting about their particular spiritual gift. Paul concludes this chapter and begins chapter thirteen by stating very clearly that these gifts are of little value if they are not exercised with love. After defining love, he places it in contrast to the spiritual gifts. The gifts were temporary phenomena, they would cease, but love would last forever.

In Chapter fourteen Paul selects three of these gifts; tongues, interpretation of tongues, and prophecy, to illustrate the division that was occurring in the church at Corinth. It appears that the Apostle is attempting to regulate the use of these gifts.

Some of these Christians appear to be abusing their ability to speak in tongues. Paul admonishes those who had the gift of speaking in tongues to remain silent, if there was no one present who had the gift of interpreting (1 Corinthians 14:2, 6). In addition, he admonishes those who had the gift of tongues to speak “in turn” (1 Corinthians 14:27). Finally, they were told to exercise self-control so that order might prevail when they came together (1Corinthians 14:33).

In regard to prophecy, Paul makes the assertion that it is greater than the gift of tongues, when the gift of tongues is used improperly. The gift of prophecy was a divine gift that allowed the possessor of the gift to teach in such a way so that the entire church might be edified (1 Corinthians 14:3). Because the gift of prophecy did not require an interpreter, so it was deemed the greater gift (1 Corinthians 14:1-5, 22-25).

Paul’s admonishment to desire the gift of prophecy (1 Corinthians 14:1) and to not forbid speaking in tongues (1 Corinthians 14:39) must be studied in the context of the entire discussion (1 Corinthians 12-14). Neither of these gifts would last. It is my conviction that both of these gifts were miraculous gifts and that they were temporary (1 Corinthians 13:8). One should no more affirm that we have the gift of prophecy today, than that we have the gift of tongues today. They both appear from the context, to stand or fall together. It is my conviction that neither is present in the church today.

That You May Prophesy?

In the context of 1 Corinthians 12 – 14, Paul speaks of numerous spiritual gifts present, at that time, in Corinth. At the beginning of Chapter 13, he contrasts the gifts of tongues, prophecy, knowledge, and faith with the gift of love. At the end of Chapter 13, he speaks of the superiority of love, as a gift of the Spirit, even over the great gifts of hope and faith. Of all the spiritual gifts, only love will endure throughout eternity.

At the beginning of Chapter 14, he writes, “Pursue love and desire spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy” (NKJV). Then, throughout Chapter 14, he extols the benefit of prophecy to those in the church and to unbelievers.

Does the context require us to view this gift for first century Corinth only? For first century Christians only? For us, as Christians, even today?

Should we pursue the gift of prophecy? If we seek the gift of prophecy today, can we find it? What is the Biblical meaning of prophecy, or the Biblical meaning of prophesy?

Vines states, concerning the words derived from “prophemi”, included in 1 Corinthians 14:1 above, the following:

“Though much of OT prophecy was purely predictive, prophecy is not necessarily, nor even primarily, foretelling. It is the declaration of that which cannot be known by natural means (Matthew 26:68), it is the forth-telling of the will of God, whether with reference to the past, the present, or the future”.

Ralph Earle states, concerning the word “prophemi”, that it “means to speak forth”. He further states, similar to Vines, the following:

“Contrary to popular usage today, the Biblical meaning of “prophecy” is not foretelling, but forth-telling. Put in simplest terms, the prophet is one who speaks for God”.

That would be consistent with Peter’s admonition in 1 Peter 4:10f. If we speak for God, we speak forth for God, and for His glory.

Scholars are divided on whether or not this gift, or in some cases any of the spiritual gifts remain with Christians today. The difference in their positions would appear to be based primarily on the definition distinction of foretelling and forth-telling, and also on the source of the information for the prophets (spokesmen for God).

Vines even states that teachers have replaced prophets in the church, primarily due to his interpretation of 1 Corinthians 13:8f and 2 Peter 2:1. His basis for this distinction is stated as follows:

“The difference is that, whereas the message of the prophet was a direct revelation of the mind of God for the occasion, the message of the teacher is gathered from the completed revelation contained in the Scriptures.”

My personal conviction is that spiritual gifts continue today, in whatever measure the Spirit chooses to distribute them (1 Corinthians 12:7ff; 1 Peter 4:10f; etc.). I cannot know, and neither can Vines or anyone, whether all the people referred to as prophets, or who prophesied in the first century and prior, received their revelation directly from God. They may have received a revelation from others that had received a direct revelation from God. Or, they may have received their revelation from those who had received a revelation from someone who had received a revelation from someone who received a direct revelation from God.

The point is that the gift of prophecy is a gift intended for the sharing and edification of others. And the gift of forth-telling is with us today, and is expected to be with us until the Lord returns. We must all ensure that our forth-telling is consistent with the Word of God revealed to us. But, whether we teach in homes, in a classroom, write books, or seldom read blog articles, we should be forth-telling the Word of God. We should seek to prophesy.

Finally, in 1 Corinthians 14:1, Paul writes:

“Pursue love and desire spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy.” (NKJV)

“Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.” (KJV)

“Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy.” (NIV)

“Pursue love, yet desire earnestly spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy.” (NASB)

“Pursue love, yet strive for spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy.” (McCord)

All of these are very similar in that they encourage us to pursue a course of love, and to desire spiritual gifts. These readings also seem to indicate that we should “especially” desire to be prophets or to prophesy.

Alfred Marshall’s Interlinear New Testament indicates a somewhat different reading, from the Greek text, which changes the focus of the passage.

“Pursue love, but desire eagerly the spiritual, in order that you may prophesy”. It appears to me that this reading is somewhat different in idea than the others listed above. Are we to be loving? Yes. Are we also to pursue the spiritual, or the spiritual gifts? Yes. Why? So we might prophesy. So we might be credible, and accurate, spokesmen, or forth-tellers, of God’s divine will. In OT times, the coming of the Messiah would have been a future event, but also something that had to have been told, because it could not have been known by natural means. Today, the proclamation of the return of the Lord, and judgement, is a telling of a future event. It too, is something that cannot be known by natural means. It requires, under God’s plan, spokesmen, forth-tellers, foretellers, or prophets.

Many of you, who read this, are preachers, teachers, writers, or you share the gospel with a friend, co-worker, neighbor or stranger. In a sense, you are prophets. You understand that you participate in an enormous activity. With that participation comes an even larger responsibility.

Promise Keeper

Has anyone ever failed to keep a promise to you, or let you down in some way? Have you ever been the one to let someone else down? It’s an empty and disheartening feeling, either way, isn’t it? In the graceless age we live in, with all of its formal agreements and contracts, we may have lost the inherent security of being people of our word. This is not an integrity issue of credibility only, but dependability.

In the week prior to the cross, and upon the brink of making the atoning sacrifice for all mankind, Jesus engaged his disciples in a series of discussions targeted at reassuring them that He could be depended upon to keep His word. They must have needed reassurance; they must have been struggling with the feeling of abandonment and disappointment.

One such discussion, recorded in Luke 22, is such a discussion, although not as apparent as many of the others. Jesus begins the dialogue, in verse 8, sending Peter and John to go and make preparations for a place to partake of the Passover feast.

Jesus said, “Go and prepare the Passover for us.”

“Where do you want us to prepare it?” they said to Him.

He said, “When you go into the city, a man carrying a pitcher of water will meet you; follow him into the house which he enters, and say to the householder, the Teacher asks, where is the guest room, where I can eat the Passover with my disciples. He will show you a large furnished room upstairs. Prepare the Passover there.”

Jesus, in a small way, is making a promise to Peter and John directly, but to all who are in earshot of his voice. He is telling them what will happen in the future, and He is telling them they can depend on Him. His words must have seen strange, even with all the other signs the disciples had witnessed over the last three years. If the promise did not materialize, Jesus’ credibility among His disciples would have been seriously damaged. If events did take place as Jesus told them it would, it would be a source of comfort, and security, to know that Jesus keeps His word.

For a moment, look at this story with different eyes. Not from the perspective of Jesus, Peter and John, or the other disciples. Look at it through the eyes of a man with a pitcher of water. It appears he doesn’t even know Jesus is working through him and around him. With all the activities of the day, the schedule he has to keep, the business he must conduct, and the people with whom he must engage, it’s a wonder he could get himself, and his family prepared for the Passover feast. All we know, is that with all this man, with a pitcher of water, had to do, he would end up in a certain spot, at a certain time, carrying a pitcher of water, and on the way to someone’s house. He may never have known that it was Peter and John who were following him, or who it was that might have sent them.

Verse 13 sums up the story, not written by an eyewitness, but told to Luke by an eyewitness (Luke 1:2). The verse says, “They (Peter and John) went and found everything as the Lord had told them, and prepared the Passover.”

The story must have been a source of encouragement, security, and hope. It survives until this day, where it still offers the same possibilities.

When they found “everything as the Lord had told them”, it must have struck their senses. Probably, it struck them in such a way, that later, when Jesus said “I go and prepare a place for you”, or “I will come again and receive you unto myself”, or “I am with you always, even to the end of the age”, they were hearing promises from a credible, and dependable source.

Jesus made many promises. Many were made to us. Will He let us down? Can we be secure in His promises? Do we live in expectation of the fulfillment of those promises?

One day, in heaven, and every day until then, we will find everything as the Lord has told us. Jesus is a promise keeper.

In the beginning was the Word

During some recent study and research, I began looking more intently at one of my favorite passages from the gospel of John.

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it. 6 There came a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness, to testify about the Light, so that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light. 9 There was true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. 11 He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. 14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.” (John 1:1-14, NASB)

There are several elements, or phrases, that I want to focus on in this article.

First, let’s look at verse 1. John establishes the fact of an eternal being that was uniquely different than God, yet was God. Alfred Marshall’s interlinear translation of this passage, says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and God was the Word.” Ralph Earle’s work, Word Meanings in the New Testament, from which much of the content below is obtained, begins John’s gospel with a focus on the Greek word “logos”. He states that the word “logos” is found 330 times in the New Testament, and is translated 25 different ways, in the KJV, including 218 times as “word”, with a small w, and 50 times as “saying”.

But, in Ephesus, 600 years before John penned his gospel from there, Heraclitus used the term “logos” for “the rational principle, power, or being which speaks to men both from without and from within”. Plato used it for the “divine force creating the world”, and Aristotle used it for “insight”. Earle says, “in general, the Greeks thought of “logos” as reason, or thought, whereas the Jewish emphasis was on “logos” as word.” Philo, a Jew who lived in Alexandria at the time of Jesus, “sought to combine” the ideas of thought and speech in “logos”. He used the term over 1300 times in his writings. But with Philo, as Earle states, “the Logos is often personified but never truly personalized”.

John, through divine inspiration, goes beyond Philo, and those who came before him. John presents Jesus as the eternal Logos, “the true concept of God and also the Word, expressing that concept fully in His incarnation in verse 14”. Of all the New Testament writers, only John, and only on three occasions, applies “logos” to Jesus (John 1:1, 14; 1 John 1:1; and Revelation 19:13)

Notice the imperfect tense “en” in verses 1 and 2. This is the Greek word for “was”, but it implies continuous existence. In fact, “in the beginning” implies eternal existence. Also, note the word “pros”, our word “with”, which notes “close proximity”. The Logos was “face to face” with God, eternally and continuously.

At the end of verse 1, our versions read, “and the Word was God”. The Greek actually states “God was the Word”. Either rendering is correct, boldly acknowledging the deity of the Word, identified in verse 14 as Jesus.

I would draw your attention to verse 5, to the phrase “The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.” The Greek word is “katalambano”, for which two meanings are prominent in the New Testament. Basically, it means “to take hold of”, but is used in the mental sense, “comprehend”, or in the physical sense “seize hold of”. The KJV translates katalambano as “comprehend”, and the NIV translates it “understood” but margin notes state “the darkness has not overcome”.

The context (verses 9 through 11) requires, to me, the mental aspect of the word. Jesus is the Light and the world is darkness. And the darkness doesn’t grasp, or understand, the Light.

Prior, in verses 1 and 2, we looked at “was” (en) and its continuous, eternal existence. Now look, in verses 3 and 6, at “came into being”, ginomai in the Greek. Ginomai is translated, in verses 3 and 6 in the KJV, as “was” also. Yet, this time, “was” is different. In verses 1 and 2, the Logos eternally and continuously existed and exists. “All things that were made”, the creation, came into being. This is the reason for the differences in the KJV and NASB translations. Then, most interestingly, in verse 14, in reference to Jesus, “the Word became flesh”. Again, this is not “en”, but “ginomai”. The Logos always existed, but He became flesh at His incarnation.

Finally, in verse 14, the word for “dwelt” is similar in the Greek, “skenoo”, to our words “tabernacled” or “tented”. The NIV captures the thought of tenting, with its translation, “lived for a while among us”. The Logos became flesh and temporarily lived among us. He lived with us for a short while, and brought Light to darkness. Those of us who receive Him, He has given to us the right to become children of God. He has given us the ability to see our way in darkness.

Jesus said, in John 8:12, “I am the Light of the world; he who follows Me will not walk in the darkness, but will have the Light of life.”

Jesus also said he came to give sight to the blind (Matthew 11:5). Do you think he was speaking of physical sight or blindness?

Stand Firm

I don't know if anyone comes here anymore considering none of us has posted in...well, it's been awhile. Because of that fact, this post is mainly for Scott, but if you read this, take a second to leave me a comment. In the Roman army, one of the main tactics used was a formation called a phalanx. In this formation, there would be a block of men 10x10 (100 men) that would all hold their shield in front of them, with the outside border all facing to the outside, so as to make a walking tank. A term they were taught (that is, those in the phalanx) was "stand firm". They were taught that if one of the front men fell, they must move into their place and stand firm. You'll notice often in Paul's writings that he will use many military terms. Well, this is one of them. He says in Philippians 1:27, "...standing firm in one spirit..." Paul makes reference to the Roman phalanx because the church at Philippi was predominantly Roman war veterans. He makes sure they know, and that we know, that a Christians battle is one where those on whom you rely may fall, but you must always stand firm.

The Righteous and the Good

Romans 5:7, “For one will scarcely die for a righteous person though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die” Although these are beautiful words, I’m not sure if we always completely grasp their meaning. To us, as non-Jews, these two words “righteous” and “good” seem almost as synonyms. What did the apostle mean by making an obvious distinction between the two? A better question: what did the Jews at Rome understand verse 7 to mean? A few thoughts…

The Jewish people made a distinction between “righteous men” and “good men”. A section from the Talmud reads, “…there is a righteous man that is good, and there is a righteous man that is not good…” Obviously Paul was playing off of this idea of the difference between the two seemingly similar genres of persons. He is also obviously trying to teach us a greater lesson than we may grasp about the love of Christ-one that I believe would be beneficial to us all. Another section from the Talmud reads: “three things are said concerning the paring of the nails: ‘a righteous man’ buries them, ‘a good man’ burns them, ‘a wicked man’ casts them away.” What does this quote mean? A righteous man did just what the law obliged him to do: bury the nails. He followed the law to the letter and no more. Sound familiar? These are the Pharisees. Paul says that scarcely would one die for these people! He may even be alluding to his former life when he was more zealous than his fathers were (Gal. 1:14). The good man, however, went a step further: he burned the nails. This is a very generous man! He gives to the poor out of his own pocket! He helps out with the temple of his own expense! There are some, Paul says, that would die for this man to live. But, we must ask ourselves, who dies for those who cast the nails away? Who would die for the hated of the world, the outcasts? No one. Paul doesn’t even mention them as possible candidates in this verse! We need to realize the beautiful gradation that exists in Romans 5:7! Some will die for those who are law keepers AND generous before they die for one who merely keeps the law, and no one will die for those who break the law. Enter Jesus and consequently verse 8: “…but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” We, brothers and sisters, are the wicked people who cast the nails away. We are the ones who know the law and still mess it up. Yet, even in our sins, Christ died for us. Not because we are good people and not even because we are righteous people, but- why Paul? Because, verse 5 tells us, He loves us. May we, as children of God, never think more highly of ourselves than we ought, and may we never forget the sacrifice that was made on Calvary for our sins.