Questions Asked, Biblical Answers Given
There are many in this world who are willing to compromise the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the church He bought with His own blood. We present the Word of God to man in its purest, most honest form. The answers given are consistent, grounded firmly in the Bible, speaking where the Bible speaks and silent where the Bible is silent.
Below are some questions frequently asked concerning the position of the church of Christ. If you would like more information, or have an additional question, please contact us and we will reply (please include a way to contact you, if not by reply in email).
Is the church of Christ the only ones who will be in Heaven?
It is written, "...Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?" (I Corinthians 1:20). Christ states in one of His discourses to the disciples, "You shall know them by their fruits (Matthew 7:16). In I Corinthians, Paul ennumerates a great many sins, of the which none who are guilty of such will be in heaven. He then tells the recipients of the epistle, "And such were some of you." (I Corinthians 6:11). It is only through one's obedience of the Word that we can be cleansed of sins, washed free of this sinful body and clothed in righteousness. In the book of Revelation, one reads that there are those under the alter who are the souls of the martyr's of the early church. They gave their life in defending and standing for the Gospel. Those who are willing to follow Christ and His teachings will be in heaven. To be in Christ is to be in His church, the kingdom of our Savior, and in His body. Those who will be in heaven will be part of the body of Christ.
How can I become a member of the church of Christ?
It is not a popular vote. It is not a decision that anyone on earth can make. Only the Lord can add to the church, His kingdom (Acts 2:38,47). But how can one be made worthy of being added to His kingdom, the church? The plan of salvation is spelled out in the Word of God. Each step is important and the order is very much important.
Plan of Salvation
What is the "church of your choice"?
"Attend the church of your choice" in the media (newspapers, on the internet, on the radio stations, and even in the television station commercials and advertisements) is a claim that is found in the hearts of men. There is no basis, or foundation of this “principle” in the pages of the New Testament. A warning that comes to mind that is found in the pages of the New Testament is in Matthew 15:9: "But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrine the commandments of men." Christ was casting out the teachings of the "religious leaders" of the day which were contrary to the teachings of God, from the beginning to the present (even unto today).
Since the establishment of the church of Christ, men have attempted to thwart the soverienty of Jesus Christ in His Kingdom.
There are five questions one can use to determine the authenticity of any religious organization claiming to be the true church:
For example, let us consider the catholic church. Is it a church that is one acceptable to God and part of His plan?
If any of the answers to the above questions is "No," then a resounding "No" must be the answer for it's authenticity. The catholic church is a man-made religion (founded on men, by men) that has attempted to overthrow the leadership of Christ. It claims that the first "Pope" was Peter, the apostle. It claims that the organization of the leaders of the catholic church are form the apostolic authority of Peter. However, if it is the real "church", setup by Christ, then why did it take almost 600 years for it to manifest itself in the world. The catholic church did not appear in history until around 660 A.D. The last pages of the Bible were written before 100 A.D., and just before the fall of Jerusalem. The catholic church follows a man, not Christ. It is not His church.
Only one church is the true church. It has Christ as the founder. It is founded on Christ and His soverienty. Its only doctrine is the Word of God, the inspired scriptures. It follows the plan of God. It follows the Word of God as the acceptable pattern of worship.
What is the Catholic church, if it is not the church found in the pages of the New Tesament?
The church read about in the pages of the Bible, the New Testament, which Christ taught and gave example to through His teachings, and through the Holy Spirit, is the only church which Christ promised to build. The Catholic church is founded and can be traced back to a false assumption that Peter was the leader of the first century New Testament church. Paul refutes this in saying, "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you, than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed" (Galatians 1:8).
It is important to note that Christ has all power and authority (Matthew 28:18-20; I Corinthians 15:24) given to him from the Father, God in Heaven (Matthew 28:18). Peter states that he, Peter, is an elder in the church of Jesus Christ; not the lead apostle, lead elder, or the founder. It is not founded on Peter, he did not die for the sins of mankind. Rather, Peter preached those words which inspired by the Holy Spirit. That is why, in Acts 2:33-36, he says, " 33Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. 34For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, 35Until I make thy foes thy footstool. 36Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ".
The Catholic church is founded on a man, and falsely attributes it's authority to the man Peter. Many religious organizations want the world to believe that they are the one true church. If this is so, why are they striving so hard to join hands of fellowship with other in the denominational world? The very word fellowship discounts the validity of their claims. "4There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; 5One Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all" (Ephesians 4:4-6). "16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17That the man of God may be perfect, throughtly furnished unto all good works" (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
Is baptism essential to one's salvation?
Only one, Jesus Christ has can tell us what is essential to enter the Kingdom of heaven. Man has no authority to make of change the rules and commandments of God. Every soul added to the church of Christ was and is baptized (Acts 2:38). After the day of Pentecost, Acts 2, The requirement did not change: those who will be saved must be baptized.
Baptism is an outward sign of inward cleansing (1 Peter 3:21). By putting off the old law of sin and death (Romans 8:2), we are raised to walk in newness of life (Romans 6:4)". That walk is in righteousness. All the commandments of God are righteousness (Psalms 119:172).
Baptism is where we meet the symbolic blood of Christ and His death (Romans 6:4). Just as one is buried in water, one is symbolically buried into His death, and raised to walk as a new creature (2 Corinthians 5:17; Galatians 6:15).
The power to save is only in the blood of Christ. Only through baptism does one meet or come in contact with the shed blood of Christ (Matthew 26:28;Romans 6:4). Therefore, baptism is essential to salvation.
Is it sinful for men to be called Reverend?
In our bulletin article (Vol. 56 No. 9 - 2 MARCH 2003), we dealt with the use of the word, "reverend". Reverend is not the name of God. Reverend is how we are to treat His name and our view of Him. God's name is holy and reverend (Psalm 111:9). The idea here is to respect God and Who He is. The title of "Reverend" is another product of the thinking of man and has no authority from God. It will always cause worship to become in vain (Matthew 15:9). One thing, among many, which God has always guarded closely is the respect that is due Him. When man strives to take the glory of God, disaster will follow.
Jesus, in His public ministry, condemned the Scribes and Pharisees. Matthew 23 is an entire chapter devoted to the rebuke by Jesus of this group of people. The Sadducees were not listed among them because the Sadducees had long ago left the Word of God. The Pharisees at least paid lip service to what the law said (Matthew 23:2,3). The Sadducees were the religious liberals of the day. In this setting of verses (7-10), Jesus forbade the use of titles that would separate brethren, one above another.
We are not to elevate men above that which is written (1 Corinthians 4:6). The reason, Paul warns, is that otherwise brethren will be "puffed up", one against another. Later on, in the same book, Paul points to the fact that all of us are members of the same body and should not be divided (1 Corinthians 12:12-25). Titles placed on men will lead to division, if not in the body, then in our treatment of one another. Current ads that I am seeing now listing a certain brother as "doctor so and so" is out of keeping with the way of the Lord. In academic circles where the title has been earned, it is right. In the church it becomes the same thing as "reverend" and should be avoided.
We teach that nothing should be added to our service and that we should have a scripture for everything. Where are the scriptures for plants on the pulpit and for song books?
We, indeed, should have scripture for all we do in worship (Colossians 3:17). No one should promote the idea of adding anything to that which God has ordered or authorized (Galatians 1:8,9; Revelation 22:18, 19). The nature of the question, in my judgment, mixes two different things or ideas. We can only have five acts of worship in our public devotion to God. If we change any of those acts or add additional acts, then we are operating in an area for which we have no authority. The idea of plants on the pulpit area is not an addition to the prescribed acts called for by God, nor is it a change of any existing act of worship.
God does not tell us to build a building, lease or rent a building or use an existing building. He tells us to assemble for worship. What then becomes necessary to carry out the command to assemble is a place to assemble. God leaves the "where" of it up to each local congregation of the Lord's people. In the same vein, the color of carpet, light fixtures, water fountains and number of classrooms are all things to be decided by the brethren on a local level. Since elders are in charge, it would fall into the realm of their authority to decide such matters (Hebrews 13:7, 17).
God requires that worship directed to Him be "decent and in order" (1 Corinthians 14:40). We are to sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs (Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16). A songbook provides a means for us to all sing the same song at the same time and hence, be in order. Worship, which is spontaneous is not authorized by God. A songbook, like the flowers, in no way changes the act of singing, nor does it produce a different act of worship. It is an aid to our singing. The instrument in public worship is not an aid because it produces a different "kind" of music than that which God ordered.
The denominations take Matthew 24:6, Mark 13:7 and Luke 21:9 and say these are the wars of our days; or were they speaking to the jewish nation?
The three passages cited all deal with the idea of wars. Since the world has always been plagued by wars, such a sign would have no particular significance. However, these passages have to do with signs that the people of God would recognize. These signs (of the wars) came about as a result of questions that came to Jesus. Jesus explained the destruction of Jerusalem (Matthew 24:2). Later on the disciples asked Jesus when these events would take place (Matthew 24:3). Jesus did not want the disciples to be deceived. He states in verse 4 that they should take heed or be careful.
Starting with verse 5, there is a listing of various signs that the Christians would be able to see as part of the taking heed from verse 4. One thing by itself would not attract their attention. However, when all of these things began to take place, they would know the words that Jesus had told them. There was political unrest prior to A.D. 70. Hence, the idea of wars and rumors of wars were things that were constantly coming in to Jerusalem. In our world today we see on television events that happen halfway around the world in an instant. Their world did not have such knowledge. Hence, rumors were often the means by which people learned of things in other places.
The key to understanding that the wars and rumors of wars were for then and not now is found in verse 34 of Matthew 24. Jesus, in that verse, declared that the generation He was talking to would not pass until these things (verses 5-33) were fulfilled. The only way to avoid the impact of that statement is to change the meaning of the word "generation". If one goes back to the previous chapter, Jesus said that their house would be left desolate (Matthew 23:38). The wars and rumors of wars refer to the events just prior to the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
Is instrumental music in worship a non-fellowship issue?
When God is specific in His commands, then we, as His creatures, have no right to alter or change in any way what God has stated (Deuteronomy 4:2; Revelation 22:18,19). The issue of music in worship must fall into one of two categories. Either God was not specific and we are free to have the kind of music we choose or else God is specific and we are not free to choose. Once individuals understand this principle, the matter of instrumental music can easily be solved.
God told Noah to build the ark out of gopher wood (Genesis 6:14). God was specific as to the type of wood to use. The only wood that could be used was gopher wood. Had God told Noah to build the ark and not been specific as to the kind of wood, Noah could have selected what he wanted. Nadab and Abihu got fire from some place other than where God said to get it. They ignored the specific command of God and paid for it with their lives (Leviticus 10:1,2). If one claims that they love God, then obedience to God is the proof of that love (John 14:15).
What kind of music did God want when men worship Him? God is the One to whom worship is directed and, hence, we should do what He wants to please Him in that worship (1 John 3:22). God specifically ordered vocal music (Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16). No one can worship God acceptably who ignores this specific command. It is, therefore, very much an issue of fellowship. Those who reject the commands of God are not pleasing to God. How, then, could I have fellowship with those who are displeasing to God? It is sad that the level of ignorance has risen in many congregations and brethren are forgetting time honored principles about worship and service to God.
Why do some believe Jesus is about to return soon?
The problem arises when individuals surrender the blessing of being able to study the Word of God, and leave it in the hands of men. What should always be a part of the makeup of a Christian's life is a willingness to search the scriptures to see if these things are so (Acts 17:11). Whatever is taught in the name of God should be backed up by what God has revealed (1 Peter 4:11). What, then, did God tell us about this matter? The day of the return of Jesus the Christ in judgment of the world is known by no man, not even angels (Matthew 24:36). Jesus taught that it would be like it was in the days of Noah, no sign until the universal flood hit.
Peter tells us that in the last days scoffers would come (2 Peter 3:3). What generation since the first century has not seen its share of scoffers? The idea is that Jesus could come back at any time. We, as faithful children of God, need, therefore, to always be ready for His return (Matthew 24:44). It is part of the thinking of Christians to look forward to the appearing of Jesus once more to judge the world (2 Timothy 4:8). We do not, however, spend our days with our view fixed on the sky. We spend our days with our hearts fixed on the Word of God and the world around us; watchful for His cause and applying His Word that we might be ready to meet Him.
Are times bad right now? Is immorality on an upswing in the hearts of many? Is God being disregarded by the majority of the world? At this present time, the answer for the most part is "yes". Because of this, there are those who want to convince us that because of the exceeding wickedness around us, surely the Lord is about to return. Peter tells us that Lot was vexed every day by the unlawful deeds of the evil (2 Peter 2:5). The point is that evil is in our world. There are times when it increases and then other times when God's will becomes stronger. The increase of evil is not a signal of the return of the Lord. It could very well come any day now. When It does, it will be God's decision and not mans. Let us strive to be ready whenever it happens.
What role does the current conflict with Iraq and Saddam Hussain have to do with biblical prophecy?
Jesus taught that not one "jot or tittle" would pass from the law until all had been fulfilled (Matthew 5:18). At this point in time, the law of Moses is under consideration.The law of Christ had not yet come into effect (Hebrews 9:16, 17). Was the law of Moses destined to be removed? Indeed it was because until the first covenant had been removed there would be no place for the second (Hebrews 8:7). God planned to make a new covenant with the house of Israel (Jeremiah 31:31; Hebrews 8:10). God would make a new covenant. The law of Moses was nailed to the cross (Colossians 2:14).
Jesus taught after His resurrection that all things must be fulfilled that were written in the law, the prophets and the Psalms concerning Him (Luke 24:44). He said they were fulfilled. All the prophets declared about the suffering, death and resurrection of Christ had been fulfilled. All the prophecies concerning the kingdom were being, at that time, fulfilled. Paul declared there was coming a "unity of the faith"(Ephesians 4:13). No such unity could occur until revelation from God ceased. There was coming a time when no more messages (including prophecies) would come from God.
Twice in the book of Revelation, God declares these events must shortly come to pass or happen (Revelation 1:3; Revelation 22:6). Included here is the idea of 666 that is supposed to be some leader's name in code. Those events have already happened as per the passages cited above. Saddam Hussain is just another one in a long line of individuals who cross the world's stage and leave destruction and pain. He has nothing to do with Biblical prophecy any more than Adolph Hitler or Joseph Stalin. The world will always have an ample supply of evil men. The prophecies about Jesus have been fulfilled; the law has been changed and we are now under the new law of Jesus Christ.
What is meant by the 69 weeks found in Danial 9:25?
The religious world place great importance on this passage in Daniel. They do so for the reason that they are expecting Jesus to come back to the earth and establish His kingdom. When they read the statements made by Daniel they know there is a period of a time gap. By way of example I have these footnotes in one my Bibles. Here is the understanding given in those footnotes. "Once the times of the Gentiles (Luke 21:24) are complete, the clock of God's judgment will count off the remaining week." They have then the 69 weeks cited in the question and then when God gets ready He will start the clock again and count off the final "week". The "clock" as they call it has to be stopped at the present.
There were three efforts to rebuild the city and walls of Jerusalem. Zerubbabel, Ezra and Nehemiah at different times lead expeditions to rebuild the city. The decree to rebuild, the city came during the time of Cyrus, king of Persia (Ezra 1:1). Whatever is meant by the 69 weeks, certain things are known. The Messiah (Jesus the Christ) would come to earth. This Messiah would be "cut off" or killed (Daniel 9:26). Following that would be the destruction of Jerusalem. In the destruction of Jerusalem, the sacrifice and the oblation (evening sacrifice) would cease or no longer be practiced. From a standpoint of Biblical history we know these events occurred just as the Lord said that they would.
Jesus taught while on earth that the generation to whom He was speaking would have to pay for all the righteous blood shed from Abel to Zechariah (Matthew 23:35). What about all the righteous people who have died since the close of the Old Testament? Jesus narrows it down by referring to Abel and Zechariah. They were the beginning and end of the Old Testament scriptures. Jesus then in verse 38 says that their house (that generation) would be left, desolate. We may disagree about the meaning of the 69 or 70 weeks but the fulfillment is evident in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. In A.D. 70 the house of the Jews was left desolate. This is the strength of what Daniel saw.
Should the continued support of missionaries be tied to the number of conversions?
In a simple answer, "no". Men who move their families to foreign soil do so at a great sacrifice both to them and their families. Men on foreign soil could not effectively labor were it not for their wives who stand with them. Once the decision has been made to work in a foreign field, families are left here in our country plus many of the freedoms and nice things that we have in this country. Most of them are not financially secure and, hence, must spend a good deal of time raising money in order to get to the mission field.
Once there, they have to deal with different cultures and different rates of exchange on money. Most of them that I am aware of live well within the money they have raised to take care of their families and the work as well. Congregations back at home are faced with budget problems of one kind or another. The foreign mission work will sometimes suffer in these budget crunch types of problems. The missionary is doing his work but the church back stateside must make some "cuts". The criteria for making a decision on which works to cut should be made by godly men (elders) who love the Lord and His church.
Setting aside this initial problem there are cases when some elders will look for a standard as to who to cut. I had the honor of working for the Cottondale congregation (near Tuscaloosa) for a little over 14 years. During that time, Cottondale was the sponsoring congregation for Roger Campbell. We read his monthly reports and knew that the ground in Taiwan was very difficult. In terms of work ethic and work effort no one doubted Roger's production.
I say this to make the point that numerical growth is wonderful but not always a fair measuring tool. Read the papers the missionaries send, and if possible go to the work itself. If this does not produce satisfactory results, then give him a fair time frame and inform him of loss of support. Most missionaries deserve our prayers and support.
Why was the flood of Noah's day, a universal flood?
Many good books have been written on this topic. Scientific knowledge plus what is found in the scriptures makes for good reading and increased knowledge for the sincere Bible student. If I ventured into such fields, I would truly be out of my element. I, then, would like to answer it based on what I read in the scriptures. This is not to discount in any way the fine books that have been written that discuss the flood of Noah's day in great detail.
When we come to Genesis 9, God is speaking with Noah. God commanded Noah and his family to multiply and replenish the earth (Genesis 9:1). Such a command would not have been necessary if the flood had been a local flood, only. God declares that he is making a covenant with Noah and his seed after him (verse 9). Why would such a covenant be necessary if the flood was local? There would have been other people out there if this were just a local flood. Why, then, did God make the covenant with Noah? God then tells Noah, as a part of this covenant, never again will all flesh be destroyed by the waters of a flood (verse 11).
If the flood was local in nature, then any time there is a flood that takes human life, God has not been faithful to the covenant He made with Noah. God promised that "all" flesh would never again be destroyed by waters of a flood. Many people have died as a result of floods since Noah's day. However, the rainbow in the cloud is there to remind us of God's promise. Since the days of Noah there never has been a flood that destroyed all flesh. The flood was universal. This covenant made by God proves that such is the case.
Will the world ever be won for Christ?
Based on the scripture, the answer is "no". There is a broad way that leads to destruction (Matthew 7:13). The majority of mankind falls into this category. There are times when the Word of God is more popular than others. Jesus spoke about the signs that would come before the fall of Jerusalem. One of the signs was that the love of many would wax cold (Matthew 24:12). In the context, then, this would refer to Christians who fell away from God just before Jerusalem fell in A.D. 70. Other passages speak about the departing from faith and still others about the falling from grace.
What, then, should be our attitude toward a world that is lost in sin? Paul spoke about "o?=#8364;that I might by all means save some" (1 Corinthians 9:22). The world now, or any time, will not be brought to the Lord. What we must strive to do is bring as many as we can to the Lord. We use every opportunity we have to spread the truth both by teaching and example of life. We give as generously as we can in order that money might be available to spread the gospel to other lands. Our prayers should always ascend that we might have the wisdom to see the opportunities that are in front of us (James 1:5).
If we live in a time when the Word of God is not popular, then we need to seek for patience to not give up our pursuit for lost souls (Luke 9:62). We just have to commit ourselves to trying to save as many as we can. We can plant and water but the increase must be left up to God, according to His Word (1 Corinthians 3:6). We make every effort to get the Word into the hearts of men. Once we have done that, then we have discharged our duty to God. God does not want anyone to be lost (2 Peter 3:9). Our efforts to evangelize are a testimony to God's effort to try to save as many as He can. One soul at a time will change the world in a very good day.
What about the effort to rebuild the temple back in Jerusalem?
A portion of the doctrine dealing with the return of Christ to earth to reign for a thousand years requires the building again of the temple in Jerusalem. Those who teach this doctrine state that Jesus was unable to establish the kingdom when He first came to earth. At His second return, Jesus is supposed to reign over all the earth from the city of Jerusalem for a thousand years. My reaction to the rebuilding is "so what". Even if they are able to find the exact location and put everything back the way it was, this in no way changes plain Biblical teaching.
The scriptures teach that the Priesthood of Jesus the Christ is after the order of Melchisedec (Hebrews 7:17). The less is always blessed by the better or greater (Hebrews 7:7). Abraham paid tithes to Melchisedec, hence, Melchisedec was greater. Melchisedec was before the law of Moses, wherein the tribe of Levi was selected to receive tithes. Jesus, then, is the Priest after the order of Melchisedec. Now in order for that Priesthood (Melchisedec) to change, there would have to be a change in the law of God (Hebrews 7:12). Since Christ is a Priest, forever, there will be no more changes in the law of God.
How could one return to Jerusalem as a focal part of worship toward God without changing the law of God? The people of God today are from every walk of life as well as every nation (Galatians 3:28). Those who have obeyed the gospel, no matter what land they are from, are now the children of God (Galatians 3:27-29, Romans 2:28, 29). If the emphasis shifts back to Jerusalem, then these and many more passages are destroyed. God's promise was that neither the law nor the lawgiver would depart from Judah until Shiloh came (Genesis 49:10). Shiloh has come (Jesus) and the next time He comes will be in judgment, not to set up a kingdom.
The question in the box for this week dealt with forgiveness. The nature of the question dealt with our forgiving one another and what is our responsibility?
Are we to forgive those who have done us harm? Forgiveness is, in a sense, the releasing of a debt. The language used by our Lord was we are able to forgive our "debtors" (Matthew 6:12). The reason being that we need God to forgive us our "debts". Then in verse 14 of the chapter, we are to forgive those who have trespassed against us. Forgiving others, then, is a necessary part of the Christian life. Forgiveness from God is based on man meeting conditions laid down by God. When those conditions are met then we have the assurance from God that He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins (1John 1:9).
Implied in this is the thought that in order for forgiveness to take place, the one who does the offending must make things right. There are times when we are injured and the person who harms us seeks no such forgiveness from us. Paul tells us that Alexander the Coppersmith did him much evil (2 Timothy 4:14). Paul left the issue of this man to God and the judgment of God. In the same chapter Paul declares that Demas had forsaken him, having loved this present world (verse 10). There is no evidence from scripture that either man sought to make things right with Paul. What then should have been Paul's attitude toward these two men?
As an example, when I was growing up, my dad would come home from work with sawdust in his coveralls. Today, when I pass by lumberyards or smell that smell of sawdust it reminds me of my dad. There are things in our hearts that something out there may "trigger" a memory of one kind or another. Things happen that may remind us of harm done to us by someone in the past. The proper attitude is that we are not like the people who call us on the phone and demand payment on a debt. We can hope the debt will be paid but we do not spend our daily lives demanding the debt be paid. Demas and Alexander had a debt with God for what they had done to Paul. That is where Paul left it, and so should we.
Where do christians draw the line in matters of judgment?
Drawing the line has to do with a Christian refusing to go beyond a certain point. The issue here is in matters of judgment. In matters of faith God has already drawn the line for us. Each of us must abide within the doctrine of Christ or else we forfeit our fellowship with Him (2 John 9). Matters of judgment are those areas where proper Christian growth is expected. As we learn more, we may change our ideas about thinking or conduct. As individual Christians we should allow for others who have not come to our understanding to continue their growth without consigning them to Hell.
We are to abide in what the Lord has taught us by means of the written Word (John 15:7). We do not come into the kingdom of our Lord knowing all things, but rather as newborn babes (1 Peter 2:1). We continue our journey after we have become Christians by continuing to learn of the will of God (2 Peter 1:5-7). Our efforts to stay in the Word should cause each of us to be fully persuaded in our own minds as to how we should conduct our individual lives (Romans 14:5). The growth rate would be tied to the amount of study and application of the Word (2 Timothy 2:15; James 1:22).
We are not to do anything that would cause our brother to stumble or fall away from the Lord (Romans 14:21). Exercise caution as to who you give the right to decide which issues cause someone to stumble. In matters of judgment we must allow for our own growth and the growth of others. Drawing lines is based on Biblical principles. Where you draw the line or where I draw the line should be based on the level of knowledge we have concerning the will of God. In matters, then, which have no bearing on one's salvation we should continue to encourage each other to greater knowledge through deeper study.
God told Noah to build an ark as a direct command. Did that mean Noah, and him alone, was to build the ark? What about the other people; did they have a chance to change their ways and get in the ark, or was their fate sealed?
During the time of the patriarchs, God spoke to the heads of the family. God, for example, told Abraham to leave his country, kindred and father's house (Genesis 12:1). In verse 4 we find that Lot went with him along with Sarah. There is no indication that God spoke directly to Lot or Sarah. Abraham told them what was going to take place as a result of hearing from God. Later on God says about Abraham that he will command his children to keep the way of the Lord. So it was that God spoke to Noah and not necessarily to his wife and children.
The period from the announcement of God to Noah about the coming universal flood was 120 years (Genesis 6:3). At the end of that time, Noah's sons all had wives of their own (Genesis 7:7). As surely as Sarah went with Abraham (Genesis 12), then the grown sons would have helped Noah in the building of the ark. He built the ark in accord with the commands of God and he did so for the saving of his family (Hebrews 11:7). It would be hard to believe the sons entered into the ark had they refused to help build it.
During this 120 year period, Peter describes for us the longsuffering of God (1 Peter 3:20). Peter also tells us, that during this time, the Lord preached to them (1 Peter 3:19). How did the Lord preach to the spirits bound in Satan's prison? Peter calls Noah, a preacher of righteousness (2 Peter 2:5). While the ark was being built, Noah, likewise, spent time trying to reach those around him with the message of salvation in the ark. Sad commentary is that only eight were save from the flood. God tried to reach the world through Noah, but no one outside of Noah's family accepted the warning.
What is blasphemy against the Holy Ghost as mentioned in Matthew 12.31,32?
The context of this statement goes back to the fact that the Pharisees accused Jesus of casting out devils by the power of Beelzebub (Matthew 12:24). We see, in part, a group of men who were disturbed by what Jesus did and taught. Jesus responded to this false charge by showing that a kingdom which is divided against itself will fall (verse 25). The summation would be that if Satan cast out Satan how could his kingdom stand (verse 36)? Jesus, therefore, made his argument that He did His miracles by the Spirit of God (verse 28). The conclusion to reach was that the kingdom of God was come to them.
Mark's account is that these enemies said that Jesus had an unclean spirit (Mark 3:30). The blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, then, is to attribute the works of God to Satan. Jesus taught that those who did this sin would never receive forgiveness. One must see it, however, in the context of that generation. It was a generation that would have to pay for all the righteous blood from Abel to Zechariah (Matthew 23:35). Because they would not respond to who Jesus was, then their house would be left desolate (Matthew 23:38).
On the day of Pentecost the apostles told the audience to save themselves from this untoward (crooked) generation (Acts 2:40). When they repented and were baptized, all of their sins were removed, remitted or forgiven (Acts 2:38). Obeying the gospel would remove all sins of any kind. What did Jesus mean then about never receiving forgiveness? Those of that generation whose heart was gone out of their relationship with God would never seek forgiveness and, hence, could never be forgiven. Those who comply with God's law can be forgiven of any sin.
What is DEJA VU?
The dictionary states that it is a feeling that one has had an experience previously, although it is actually new to one. A feeling that one has been in a particular place or had a specific experience before. We sometimes use the expression when something happens that has happened before. As the dictionary shows us, it is, indeed, a feeling. The key word implies a lack of evidence. In the sense of the definition rendered in our common dictionaries, the heart of it lies in the teaching that you had a prior life or that you are traveling through time.
Some false religions of men teach that one builds up karma (deeds). If you build up enough good karma then you come back in the next life as something else. Variations of this doctrine teach that you come back again as a human. When you experience something new that seems familiar in some way, this is because you lived before in another life under another name. This comes face to face with what God shows us. It is appointed unto man "once" to die and after this the judgment (Hebrews 9:27). Reincarnation or vudoo is nonsense created by man to solve mysteries in his own mind.
On one occasion in the life of Jesus, He came in contact with a man born blind from birth (John 9:1 ). The disciples want to know why this man was born blind (verse 2). Did he or his parents sin to cause this? If he was born blind, he could not have sinned unless he lived before. This, then, was what the disciples were thinking. This man had lived before and had done wrong and, hence, now in this life, he was born blind. Jesus, of course, said that neither the man nor his parents had sinned to cause this. We are alive now, have not been alive before nor are we time travelers. We have only one life and it needs to be lived for God. No vudoo or reincarnation.
The Bible speaks about there being no tears in heaven, pain, sadness, or sorrow. What about tears of joy?
The above truth is found in Revelation 21:4. In spiritual application we would look to the church, while the ultimate meaning of course would be heaven with God for all eternity. The items of tears, pain, sadness and sorrow are all related to suffering endured by God's people. When we finally get to that home with God, He assures us that He will take away all that suffering. None of the items listed in verse 4 deal with joy. This is just a list to allow us to know of God's concern, love and His great power to right things so that we can enjoy heaven.
The book of Revelation contains much in the way of accommodative language. God explains things to us in order to encourage us to desire being with Him for all eternity. We do, in this life, at times, shed tears of joy. Yet, in this context the issue is doing away with sadness. Hence, there will be no more tears brought about by sorrow. There will be joy in heaven. Our spirits will be able to express our joy based on whatever kind of bodies the Lord prepares for us.
The Psalms speak about the children of God in the Old Testament era coming to the house of God with joy and praise (Psalm 42:4). Again we are told that they served the Lord with gladness and came before His presence with singing (Psalm 100:2). James tells us if any is happy or merry let him sing (James 5:13). When the ceaseless ages of eternity roll on, we shall have continual joy and, by God's arrangement, whatever that is, we will be able to express that joy to Him that we love and worship.
Is it wrong to be concerned with food, clothing and shelter?
The passage in Matthew 6 has Jesus telling us, "...take no thought for your life" (Matthew 6:25). The context here must be shown. In the prior verse, Jesus made a point of saying that no one can serve two masters. The two masters cited here were God and mammon, the word mammon being money. Jesus sought to teach us all about what is important in life. There were those in Jesus' audience who were losing their trust in God. Jesus reminds them of what they could see in nature. The birds are taken care of by God even though they do not sow, reap or put into barns. Will not God care for you, as well?
See how He describes this issue. Who can grow a single inch by worrying about it? The answer is obvious. The flowers of the field do not toil nor spin and, yet, they are to God very beautiful. If the flowers are noted by God, how much more will we be seen by God? The idea here is not that it is wrong to be concerned about food, clothing and shelter. It is wrong to allow those things to become the center of our thinking. Hence, Jesus teaches us to seek first the kingdom of God (Matthew 6:33). God will take care of us if we center our lives on Him and His Son.
In what sense does God take care of us? Paul said if a man does not provide for his own family, he is worse than an infidel and has denied the faith (1 Timothy 5:8). How could one provide for a family if they will not work? There were Christians in Thessalonica who were refusing to work (2 Thessalonians 3:11). We work at our jobs to obtain money to provide for our families and promote the work of the Lord. No, it is not wrong to be concerned about food, clothing and shelter. The point at which it becomes wrong is when food, clothing and shelter become the master, and us the slaves through our hearts.
What about drama teams in public worship?
What purpose would such efforts serve? A group of actors and actresses conveying the truth of God through drama has no merit in terms of authority from God. A careful reading of 1 Corinthians 1 will show the danger involved in this practice. Corinth was a very worldly type city. It has been said that Rome's armies conquered Greece but Grecian culture conquered Rome. The growth of acting as an art form grew out of the wisdom of the Greeks. Corinth was one of those cities greatly affected by the thinking of the Greeks. If drama teams were a scriptural means of conveying God's truth, then Corinth would have been the place to start it.
God tells us that the preaching of the cross is foolishness to them that perish (1 Corinthians 1:18). It is not the acting of the cross but the preaching of the cross. One does not parade through the streets of a city carrying a cross on their back to show the world about Jesus. Instead, he lives a "Christ-centered, cross-bearing" daily life for the Lord. Such a life will cause people to ask questions that can lead to their conversion (1 Peter 3:15). Once led to the life, it is still teaching that brings one into an awareness of God's will. Worldly wisdom causes man to reject the wisdom of God (1 Corinthians 1:21).
God, then, chose the foolishness of preaching to save man (1 Corinthians 1:21). What is the means of conveying that truth? The Holy Spirit taught the apostles "words" by which He compared spiritual things with spiritual things (1 Corinthians 2:13). They used those "words" to spread the gospel to the world. Drama teams composed of men and women both would, likewise, violate 1 Timothy 2:11, 12. The church in far too many places is moving away from what the Lord said, to have drama teams and reading of material that is not scriptural. The idea will become "feeling good" instead of what does the Lord want me to do to be in submission to His will. Actors need to go to the stage and stay out of worship.
What about the singing of christmas carols?
By definition, a carol is a song of praise, especially a Christmas song. During the month of December, people speak about going "caroling". This certainly arises from the view of the religious world as a whole that December 25th is the birthday of Jesus. We have long contended with the religious world that such a date is unknown in Scripture, and for that reason it should remain as something that God has not chosen to reveal to us. The Scriptures still show that the secret things belong to God, while the things that are revealed belong to us (Deuteronomy 29:29).
Our next area of concern should be whether the church of the New Testament ever honored the day on which Christ was born. The answer is, it did not. Christians came together on the first day of the week and gave their money (1 Corinthians 16:1, 2). They came together to teach and to partake of the Lord's supper (Acts 20:7). The day that the church came together to worship was on the Lord's day. Each Sunday then the church came together to honor the death of Jesus. Now note, they did not honor the day He died, but rather His death. So, on the Lord's day we remember what Jesus did for us when He died, we give no thought to the actual day He died.
When we sing in worship, the songs are to be psalms, hymns and spiritual songs (Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16). If songs relating to the birth of Christ fit these categories, then they could be sung by the church. If, however, the only time we sing such songs is in December, it would leave the wrong impression on the world and on us. Some songs are secular in nature such as "Jingle Bells" or "Frosty the Snowman". Those kinds of songs could be sung without embracing the idea that December the 25th is the birthday of Jesus. Secular songs would have no place in public worship.
Explain Romans 8:24.
Salvation is a direct result of obeying the will of God (Matthew 7:21). The will of Christ could not come into effect until after He died (Hebrews 9:16, 17). His will came into effect beginning in Acts 2. Jesus taught, as a part of that will, that no man can be saved who does not do the will of God. It is the will of God the Father that all humanity bow to His Son (Philippians 2:10, 11). The issue, then, of salvation, turns on how we respond to the Son of God (Hebrews 5:9). When God describes for us salvation, it is referred to in different ways.
We are saved by the blood of Christ (Ephesians 1:7). We are saved by faith (Romans 5:1). We are saved by grace (Ephesians 2:8).
We are saved by baptism (1 Peter 3:21). The context will tell us what part of the plan of salvation is under discussion. The passage in Ephesians deals with us being adopted into the family of God through our obedience to the gospel of Christ (Ephesians 1:5). We could not come into the family of God unless we were changed. We have been redeemed (purchased) through the blood of Christ. That blood washes away our sins (Ephesians 1:7). The scriptures could not list every part of the scheme of redemption in every verse.
Paul tells us in Romans 8:24, we are saved by hope. The hope here is confident assurance that God will do what He promised. Our lives are lived knowing that heaven with God, for all eternity, will be ours. This does not arise from our own moral goodness but rather the knowledge of what God will do. He will forgive us when we obey His will. Each day, as our faith grows, so also should our confidence in the promises of God. Hope is that precious anchor that keeps us from drifting from God (Hebrews 6:19). We will be saved by the confident assurance we have that God will do what He says. It is but one part of the Christian life. Grace, faith, the blood and baptism all make up the whole picture.
What does it mean in 1 John 3:9 that one cannot sin?
The context of this section of Scripture deals with those who are righteous and those who are sinners. The person who does righteousness (practices the will of God) is a righteous person (1 John 3:7). The person who continues to commit sin, that is, live in sin, is of the devil. He is not a righteous person (verse 8). Jesus, as the Son of God, was made known in order to destroy the works of the devil. Those who accept the truth about Jesus and order their lives after Him, are accepted by God (Luke 6:46).
In verse 10, we are told that the children of God are made known. Here is God's definition. The person that does not do righteousness is not of God. The individual who hates his brother, likewise, is not of God. The child of God would be made known to the world by his righteous conduct. Since the righteousness of God is revealed in Scripture, then the person who does righteousness is the one who obeys God through the Scriptures (Romans 1:16,17).
The passage, then, in verse 9, deals with those who were born of God (1 Peter 1:22,23). The seed is the Word of God (Luke 8:11). The ones who will be saved are those who hear the Word, keep the Word and bring forth fruit unto God (Luke 8:15). The idea that one "cannot sin" in the context means that if one does righteousness, then he will not live in sin. John had earlier taught us that Christians do sin (1 John 1:8). We just do not live in sin, that is, in constant rebellion to the righteousness of God as revealed in Scripture (Colossians 3:6,7).
WHY ARE THERE SO MANY FACTIONS AMONG FAITHFUL BRETHREN?
When we use the words, "faithful brethren", the idea of teaching the truth should be understood. Faithful brethren do not teach different things relative to salvation. There is and always will be a "common salvation" (Jude 3). It is not in the area of a failure to understand truth. To argue that we cannot understand the truth is to charge God with giving us His will that we cannot know. Salvation depends on knowing and doing that will (Matthew 7:21). We must look to other areas, then, for the cause of so many factions springing up among faithful brethren.
One problem may be that local difficulties among brethren spread and others become involved. It is spread because one group or another begins to write about what happened and explain their side. Then the other group or individual feels the need to respond. With the bulk of material coming out, it is hard for the brethren removed from the problem to know what really happened. We can read material and listen to tapes, but in the final end, local problems should stay local. Brethren who do not know both sides often will come down on the side of those they know via friendship.
Another cause could be the issue of pride. Since we know this is one area that Satan comes at us, we all need to exercise caution and not get caught in his trap (1 John 2:15, 16; 2 Corinthians 2:11). Pride can cause us to not repent when we know we are wrong. It, likewise, can cause us to not seek solutions when we are right. At any rate, the factions among faithful brethren are caused by faithful brethren. Only faithful brethren can find viable solutions. Those who are not faithful could care less what happens in the brotherhood.
When Jesus was baptized, the Bible says that the Spirit of the Lord descended like a dove. Was it a dove descending, or just a spirit?
Matthew's account is "...the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him" (Matthew 3:16). Mark states, "...Spirit like a dove descending upon him (Mark 1:10). Luke says, "...the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him (Luke 3:22). Taking all three statements together, it was the Spirit of God that descended on the occasion of Jesus being baptized. When we go to John's account we find the reason behind this action of God.
John declares that when he baptized Jesus he saw the Spirit descending like a dove (John 1:32). Why was it necessary for John to see this? John was told by God that Whoever he saw the Spirit descend upon and remain on Him, would be the One who would baptize with the Holy Spirit (verse 33). Prior to this John had said that when he saw Jesus, "behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). The coming of the Holy Spirit on Jesus was the confirmation John needed to have this testimony that Jesus was indeed the Christ.
God is a Spirit (John 4:24). We cannot see a Spirit. Therefore, the Spirit has to take some form in order for man to see. On one occasion the prophet Elisha was surrounded by the Syrian (2 Kings 6). His servant was scared, seeing the number of the Syrian host (verse 15). Elisha told him not to be afraid because there were more with Elisha than the Syrians (verse 16). Elisha prayed that God would open the eyes of his servant that is to allow him to see into the spirit world. The servant looked and the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire around Elisha (verse 17). The Spirit of God took the form of a dove to allow John to see what God promised that he would see.
IN GENESIS 6:6, THE BIBLE SAYS THAT GOD WISHED THAT HE HAD NEVER MADE MAN. DIDN'T GOD KNOW HE WAS GOING TO REGRET MAKING MAN?
Whatever we know about God must come from that which is revealed, that is the scriptures (2 Timothy 3:16). One may observe in nature many proofs of the existence of God but one must go to the revelation (Bible) in order to know Who God is and what He is like. There are secret things that belong to God. However, the things that are revealed are given to us by God and we can impart that knowledge to others. God chose the use of "words" to convey to mankind the truth (1 Corinthians 2:13). Nothing as subjective as feelings or what I think will ever suffice to bring peace to the mind of man.
God does not think as we do (Isaiah 55:8, 9). My task is to learn how to think as God does or see things as He sees them. I must make an appeal to language to know as much about God as I can. The events in Genesis 6 speak about how far man had left the way of God. God had Moses to write that every imagination of the thoughts of man's heart was on evil continually (Genesis 6:5). Further explanation is that God looked upon the earth and it was corrupt (verse 12). Though God sees everything, His desire at this point was to record the fact that He took notice of the evil that man was doing.
In the same way, the word in Genesis 6 is "repented". Rather than saying God wished that He had never made man, our efforts should be to see it as it really is. The word repent here carries the idea of one having a "deep sigh". Hence, it grieved the heart of God to see how far man was continuing to move away from His ways. In my judgment, the use of the phrase, "...it grieved him at his heart", was God's way of telling us about the sadness He felt rather than God having made a mistake in forming man. If the idea is that God made a mistake, then why leave Noah and his family alive? God does not change, but He can be grieved with our actions (Malachi 3:6; Ephesians 4:30).
WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT THE FRUIT THAT ADAM AND EVE ATE OF THAT CAUSED THEM TO BE CAST OUT OF THE GARDEN OF EDEN?
Most of the world has been trained to accept the idea that the tree was an apple tree. Hence, the material being produced shows the fruit being an apple. A major problem we have with the religious world is getting them to accept the Scriptures as being from God (2 Timothy 3:16). In accepting those Scriptures, we must learn the value of silence on Gods part. The things that are revealed can be passed on while the secret things remain with God (Deuteronomy 29:29). For instance, we do not know what day Jesus was born on. The religious world teaches and promotes the idea of December 25th. God, however, is silent about the day when Jesus was born.
What kind of fruit was it? God did not reveal it. We can gather certain things from Eves view of the tree. She saw the tree was good for food (Genesis 6:6). God had instructed them that they could eat of every tree of the garden (Genesis 2:16), the only exception being the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (verse 17). Eve saw the tree as being pleasant to the eye. Neither description could make it an apple as opposed to any other kind of fruit. She, likewise, saw this particular tree as having the ability to make her wise.
I know of no fruit that can pass that test. It is the knowledge of good and evil connected to this tree that caused her and Adams failure. When they chose to eat of it, they violated Gods will for them. Rather than spend time trying to call it an apple (which is not revealed), it would be better to understand the fruit of disobeying God as seen in the aftermath of their eating from this tree. Respect the silence from God and let us spend energy trying to know those things that God has revealed through His Word.
WHAT DID JESUS MEAN WHEN HE SAID THAT HE CAME NOT TO SEND PEACE, BUT A SWORD?
The above idea is expressed in Matthew 10:34. Jesus is, in the Old Testament, designated as the Prince of Peace (Isaiah 9:6). When He was born, the angels praised God by saying, "...on earth, peace, good will toward men" (Luke 2:14). Jesus told the apostles, "Peace I leave with you..." (John 14:26). Reading these statements should cause us to realize there is peace which comes from God and there is peace which the world speaks about. When there is an end to a war or conflict, peace is said to have come. Was the promise of Jesus regarding peace an end of world fighting or conflicts within the human family? Peace, offered by Jesus is tied to justification (Romans 5:1). If one is not justified, they do not have peace.
Let us look at the context of Matthew 10. Jesus called on all those who would follow Him, to confess Him before men (verse 32). We know, for instance, that among the chief rulers there were many who believed in Jesus. However, because of the Pharisees, they would not confess Him before others (John 12:42). This became, as we say, the "acid test". Do you believe in Jesus? If you do, then you must confess that trust in the Saviour. In this context, then, Jesus states that He did not come to send peace, but rather a sword. If one is willing to affirm, by the life they live, faith in Christ, then they will have peace. If, on the other hand, they refuse to so live, a sword will be in the place of peace.
Jesus goes on to explain that a man's foes may very well be those of his own household (verses 35 & 36). The sense in which Jesus speaks about it is that some within a family would obey the truth while others did not. Those who did obey would be opposed by those who did not. Jesus then calls on us to not love anyone more than we love Him (verse 37). Christ has brought peace to countless thousands. Others in rebellion to His will have never known the peace of God which passes understanding (Philippians 4:7).
DO ALL CHRISTIANS HAVE A THORN IN THE FLESH?
We find this expression in connection with the life of Paul (2 Corinthians 12:7). No one knows what the thorn in the flesh was. We may engage in speculation but the answer cannot be found with any surety. Whatever this was, kept Paul from being exalted because of the abundance of revelations that he received from God. Paul wanted this thing removed and he asked the Lord three times (verse 8). He wanted it to "depart from him". God answered by telling him that God would provide the help he needed to deal with this thing, whatever it was (verse 9).
None of us today receive direct revelation from God. God's answer to Paul (verse 9) also included the idea of "weakness". That is something that we all endure in one form or another. We have a High Priest that can be touched by the feelings "of our infirmities" (Hebrews 4:15). If God can be so touched, then I must assume such infirmities do exist. We know, for example, in terms of temptation, God provides a way of escape (1 Corinthians 10:13). The burdens in life, not related to temptation, are to be cast upon the Lord (1 Peter 5:7). So, whether we are tempted or burdened down by life, we have assurance from God that His grace is sufficient.
My conviction is that in life we are faced with things (temptations or burdens of life) that, of our strength, we cannot handle. We must trust in the Lord to see us through the difficulty whatever it may be. It is faith in Christ that comes through the Word (Philippians 4:13). We tend to get ourselves into trouble when we become too self-sufficient that, in our thinking, we do not need God. Such thinking leads to men falling away from God (1 Corinthians 10:12). In times of hard temptation, we must look to the Lord for His help. God will never leave us or forsake us (Hebrews 13:5).
MAY THE FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT (GALATIANS 5:22, 23) BE APPLIED TO THE NON-CHRISTIAN?
We are to study to show ourselves approved to God (2 Timothy 2:15). In our study it will be necessary to interpret what we read. A basic rule in studying the Word of God is to see things in their context. If one takes things out of context the meaning will be corrupted and error will follow. What, then, does the context of Galatians 5 deal with?
In verse 7, Paul addressed the idea that these Christians were beginning to get away from the one faith. He calls on them to walk in the Spirit (that is, serve Christ) and do not fulfill the lust of the flesh (that is, walk after the law of Moses) verse 16. Verse 17 speaks about the battle between justification by the law of Moses and justification by the law of Christ. Hence, if we are led by the Spirit, then we are not under the law of Moses (verse 18).
The person who does not serve Christ is a sinner. In verses 19-21, some of these sins are listed. The person who does serve Christ is not a sinner. In verses 22 and 23 there is a list, as well, of what a righteous man is. Applying verses 22 and 23 to the non-Christian is not a good handling of the Scriptures. The one who abides in the Word of God is led by the Spirit through that Word. The issue in chapter five does not deal with what the Spirit does in the life of the non-Christian.
Does it really make a difference if the days of creation in Genesis 1 are literal 24 hour days or eons of time?
The heart of this question makes a great deal of difference. We can know there is a God by observing the physical world around us (Psalm 19:1-3). Who that God is and what our responsibility to that God is can be ascertained by just looking at the physical world. God had to speak to us. It has to be in a form that each generation can have access to in order for all men to be saved by responding to God (II Peter 3:9). If God chooses to speak to certain individuals, then each generation must have these individuals for us to know God's will. We must, likewise, have confirmation that God is speaking through these individuals. If God speaks to us today through a divine written Word, then salvation is tied to that Word to find out what God expects.
God speaks to us today through the written Word called the Bible (II Timothy 3:16). We have come to a unity of the faith because there is no more revelation coming from God, that is direct knowledge from God (Ephesians 4:13; 1 Corinthians 13:8-10). Our faith comes from an understanding of and application of the truths of God found in Scripture (Romans 10:17). Since God cannot lie we must depend on the evidence within Scripture to form our view of God and the proper living of our lives for Him. It requires us to trust that which is revealed in order for us to defend the faith and pass it on to the next generation (Deuteronomy 29:29; 1 Peter 3:15).
How much time was involved in creation? God said twenty-four hour days. How do we know that? God said each day was composed of an evening and a morning. On the seventh day, God rested. If each day was eons of time how could the world have survived if God "rested" for long periods of time? The Sabbath day was to be used to remember that God created the world in six days (Exodus 20:11). God said it and that settles it. It does, indeed, make a difference what we believe about those days or any other event in the Scriptures. Always come down on the side of what the Scriptures plainly say.
What is the documentary hypothesis?
The above refers to an effort by many to say that Moses did not write the first five books of the Old Testament. This hypothesis claims there are some four documents out there somewhere which are the source ground for the first five books of the Old Testament . They are called the "J, E, D and P documents". The "J "refers to the Jehovahist document; the "E" to the Elohim document; the "D" to the Deuteronomist and the "P" to the Priestly document. All of these documents (?) were written according to them much later than the events of the first five books of the Old Testament.
The purpose of such efforts is to discredit God and the valuable proof of prophetic language found in those books. How, for instance, could Moses know that God would raise up a prophet in the last days like unto Moses (Deuteronomy 18:15), that prophet being Jesus the Christ? How could Moses know that neither the law nor the lawgiver would leave Judah until Shiloh came (Genesis 49:10)? Jesus Christ being Shiloh when He gathered God's people in the Christian age (Ephesians 1:10). Those who want the Bible to have been written by men with no God involved cherish the foolishness of the documentary hypothesis.
You see, if the Bible is written by men, with no God involved then we are free to see it as we please. However, if the Bible is the mind of God revealed to man, we are not free to see it as we please (Isaiah 55:8, 9). We would be bound to go by what God has said and not by how we feel about something. Have any of these documents been found, that is, J, E, D and P? They have not. Here is man making arguments and inventing his own evidence to prove it. Sounds a lot like evolution, don't you think? Where is the evidence that Moses did not write the first five books of the Old Testament? I recommend an excellent book by Eric Lyons entitled, "The Anvil Rings". Eric deals with this in chapter 3 of this book. It can be ordered through Apologetics Press in Montgomery, Alabama.
Are there contradictions in the Bible?
The battleground, at present, is whether or not the Bible is inspired. The Bible has withstood the onslaught of skeptics ever since it came into existence. The child of God argues from a standpoint of evidence to say that the Scriptures are God breathed, that is, they came from God (2 Timothy 3:16). We have the Scriptures because the Holy Spirit gave men the words to write down (2 Peter 1:20, 21; 1 Corinthians 2:13). The original copies of the Books are no longer with us. We have instead of the autograph, (original), copies made from the autograph.
We can, by putting together all of the copies, form what is the Word of God. This is as Jesus promised, that heaven and earth would pass but not His words (Matthew 24:35). It is the truth revealed in those words that set men free to love and serve the God of Heaven (John 8:32). God, over the years, has protected His Word so that in each generation men may find their way to God. To accept an idea that the truth is lost is to say we cannot find God. Paul tells us that God is very near and, hence, we can find Him through truth (Acts 17:27).
In order for there to be a contradiction you must have two things in which there can be no way to harmonize what was said. If there is a plausible (reasonable) explanation then a contradiction does not exist. Due to translations, language problems and, on occasions, time difficulties, some argue there are contradictions. It is a false statement that cannot be supported. There are no contradictions in the Bible because the Bible is from God and He protects His Word. When there are difficulties, just study a little harder and you can find a plausible explanation.
What is meant by peacemakers in the sermon on the mount?
The will of a man does not come into effect until after he dies (Hebrews 9:16, 17). The Father above gave the instructions for us to hear or listen to His Son (Matthew 17:5). Jesus based discipleship on the issue of abiding in the Words that He gave mankind (John 8:31). The doctrine or teaching of the Lord is the standard by which a person either does or does not have the Lord (2 John 9). What we then have recorded in Matthew 5-7 is the will of Christ that would come into effect after His death. The teachings, then, have to do with kingdom living.
What would it mean, then, to be a peacemaker? When two parties are warring over something, it is good to have someone step in and bring them together. Such a person would, indeed, be a peacemaker. The statement, however, that shows us what the Lord meant is found in the expression "...they shall be called the children of God" (Matthew 5:9). Just because someone brings peace to a family or peace between individuals does not necessarily follow that they are children of God. Many individuals have brought peace to others but such does not make one a child of God.
The peacemaker is the one who brings the gospel of peace to a lost soul. When we strive to teach others about the Lord, we, then, by the Lord's language, become peacemakers. We are the children of God because we bring the gospel of peace to a lost world. Happy or blessed is the person who brings peace to others through the gospel of peace.
What does it mean to be saved at the point of faith?
The way it is used by the religious world, for the most part, refers to one being saved at the moment they believe. Some songs convey the idea by saying"...the hour I first believed". Salvation depends upon us obeying the will of God (Matthew 7:21). We must, then, be sure that we have complied with the will of God. If one is saved at the moment they believe, then the Scriptures must teach such. We, then, look at what happens in the first century to come to a correct understanding of the will of God. We must handle the Word of God in a right manner (II Timothy 2:15).
A case in point is Agrippa. Paul brings his efforts toward Agrippa to a close. He asks the question if Agrippa believed what the prophets had taught about Jesus the Christ (Acts 26:27). Paul had spoke about Christ suffering, dying and being raised from the dead on the third day (Acts 26:23). Paul wants to know if Agrippa believed what the prophets said about Jesus. Then Paul asserts that Agrippa does believe. Now, according to the thinking of most of the religious world today, Agrippa was then saved because he believed what was said about Jesus.
Agrippa responds in this manner. He did not deny that he believed what the prophets said concerning Jesus. He said to Paul, you almost convinced me to become a Christian(verse 28). What did Agrippa know that most religious leaders today will not accept? That belief, by itself will not save you. Agrippa believed, but he would not obey the will of God (Mark 16:16). We are not saved at the point of believing, but rather at the point of obedience that is shown in being baptized for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38). Until we obey, we cannot be saved.
Why are churches having traditional and contemporary services?
Leading people away from God is a gradual process. One must be careful and remove barriers slowly. If one moves too fast, the older heads would sense what was going on and stand against it. If, for example, a person wanted to get the congregation to believe in the direct operation of the Holy Spirit, how would they go about it? If they stood up and said we now believe in speaking in tongues, most older heads would rebel and say you cannot do that. The church must be led slowly to reach the conclusion of direct operation of the Spirit. You do not want to lose the ones who are contributing the bulk of the money. Once you get the hearts conditioned to accept error, then it will not matter what older heads think.
If you begin to have songs that convey the ideathat the Spirit of God is in this place today, the door is opened. We should understand that worship is directed toward God. Such being the case, God is always present in proper worship. The idea that, on this occasion, the Holy Spirit is here, shows something different is going on. The songs lead to an emotional appeal to the mind of the worshippers with the Word of God being omitted.
The contemporary style of worship is set up by those who want a different church than the one they grew up in. They see worship as dull and boring. We need more spirituality, more heart in our religion. What is their solution? They begin with songs that are nothing more than warmed over Pentecostalism that appeal to emotion and not a heart founded in the truth of God. We saw the precursor to this years ago when youth groups had to turn off the lights in order to have prayer. It is the same attitude but under different names. The result, however, will be the same, individuals and churches being led away from God.
If we have enough faith today, can we not heal the sick?
As we spoke about in our bulletin article today (Volume 57, Number 07, 15 February 2004), faith cannot occur without the Word of God. Faith is, as God tells us, that which is based on evidence (Hebrews 11:1). If there is no evidence, there cannot be proper faith. Faith is not, therefore, "a leap in the dark". It must rest squarely upon solid evidence. The evidence, based on Hebrews 11, is evidence from the Word of God. The cases cited in that great chapter are men like Abel, Noah and Moses, to name a few. In all of the cases in Hebrews 11, the individuals heard from God and acted on what they heard.
We must hear from God. How does God speak today? Is it by dreams, signs or feelings? God speaks to us today by means of His written Word revealed to us by the Holy Spirit (II Timothy 3:16). Any claims we make, must arise from what God has told us. If God, therefore, tells us we can heal the sick, then we can. If, on the other hand, God does not tell us we can heal the sick, then we cannot. The answer, then, would be to look to the evidence provided by the Word of God.
Healing the sick directly, that is beyond the established laws of nature, would have to be a miracle. God used three particular kinds of miracles to represent all of what was being done in the first century. They were prophecies, tongues and knowledge (I Corinthians 13:8). These were things called, "...in part". When that which was perfect was come, then the "in part things" would be done away (verses 9 & 10). That which is perfect (the written Word of God) has come, the things (miracles) in part have been done away. We cannot heal today directly. It is a matter of faith. That is not going beyond what is revealed.
Do you believe that John the Baptist knew that Jesus was not sent to be a king on this earth?
We begin by seeing what the Scriptures show us about Jesus. He, indeed, came to be a king (John 18:37). Paul declared that Jesus was King of kings (I Timothy 6:15). Those who became Christians were added to the kingdom of God's dear Son (Colossians 1:13). Jesus would give the apostles the keys to the kingdom (Matthew 16:19). Such keys He could not have unless He was the King in possession of those keys. Jesus taught that some in His audience would not die until they saw the kingdom of God come with power (Mark 9:1). All of these verses show, then, the existence of the kingdom in the first century world.
The question above cites the idea of Christ being a king on this earth. Such was never the plan of God. God promised to raise up Christ to sit on David's throne (Psalm 132:11). The proper application of this truth is that Jesus would be raised from the dead (Acts 2:30, 31). It is further explained in verse 33 that Jesus was exalted and sat down on the right hand of God. Daniel saw in visions the Son of Man (Jesus the Christ) ascending to the Ancient of Days (Daniel 7:13, 14). When Jesus so ascended there was given to Him a kingdom. The kingdom of Christ is on this earth now, it is the church of Christ. Christ has all power in heaven and in earth and reigns from heaven over His kingdom, the church (Matthew 28:18).
So, did John the Baptist know that Christ would not be a king on earth? The answer is "yes". When John declared that Jesus was the Lamb of God that would take away the sins of the world, it was declaring the plan of God for man's salvation (John 1:29). John knew he had to decrease so Christ would increase. Increase to what? John knew what Jesus was doing. The plan of God was for Jesus to come back to heaven and sit down on His right hand and rule over His kingdom.
What is theistic evolution?
Let us begin with the basic idea of evolution, itself. In the book entitled, unformed and Unfilled by Weston W. Field we find this definition, when they use this term, the vast majority of modern scientists refer to the idea that two or three billion years ago lifeless chemicals in the sea, acted upon by sunlight and other cosmic energy , formed themselves somehow into one or more single-cell organisms , which have since developed (by natural selection of favorable mutations) into all living and extinct plants, animals and men. That is a mouthful of words but all it means is we are here by accident and there is no God. Our children are exposed to this kind of thinking throughout the years of their formal education and more so if they go to higher learning institutions.
We live in a time when people want to change the truth to make it compatible with other religious books. They desire to change the church for the same reason. The theistic evolutionist wants to find some way to make the Scriptures acceptable and compatible with current scientific thought. The problem is that evolution (as described above) is an entirely different system of thought than what is portrayed in the Scriptures.
Theistic evolution regards God as the creator but evolution as His means of doing it; that is bringing all life into existence. The problem one runs into based on Genesis 1 is there is not enough time (six twenty four hour days) to get all the time in necessary to have evolution be correct. Hence, the idea of twenty-four hour days is rejected and taking different forms, the theistic evolutionist tries to get millions of years into Genesis 1. God created the world and everything in six twenty-four hour days (Genesis 1).
What is our responsibility to the false teacher?
First of all, we have to verify that a person is a false teacher. We do this by proving all things, or that is testing what it is a person is saying with the Word of God as the standard (1 John 4:1; 1Thessalonians 5:21). In Bible times there were those who claimed they were apostles, but in reality were not. The brethren at Ephesus tried some of these and found them to be liars (Revelation 2:2). We do not serve the cause of Christ if we go around and accuse people of being a false teacher and we have no evidence to support such a charge. If one is a false teacher, then the evidence will be there in what he teaches.
Once a person is revealed to be a false teacher, our responsibility is made clear. We are to mark such a one and then avoid them (Romans 16:17). We are to be sure that the church has no fellowship with an individual who refuses to live the way God wants them to live (II Thessalonians 3:6). We are to do nothing that would leave the impression that we accept this person and their conduct that is against the will of God (II John 9, 10). The idea being here that this action on our part may cause the wayward to reconsider the life they are living and change by coming back to Christ (Galatians 6:1; 1 Corinthians 5:5).
Again, we do no service to our Lord by allowing such individuals continual access to the body of Christ through meetings, lectureships, workshops, seminars and so forth. The message is that when an individual has received two warnings, such is enough. They must, after the second warning, be rejected (Titus 3:10). Continual warnings with nothing being done about it will lead the wayward one to think they are getting away with rebellion. As the old expression used to be "all accounts are not settled in October." Judgment is coming.
I am departing a little from our usual routine of questions and answers. We will return next week with questions and answers.
I had the honor to attend the funerals this past week of Dorris Kemp and Bernie Grubb. From a human view, I believe both of these individuals to have been saints who died in faithful accord with the will of God. There were things that occurred at sister Kemp's funeral that caused me a good deal of sadness. There was a selection of songs that I doubt that sister Kemp, herself, would have recognized. There was one rendition of "Amazing Grace" that had "humming" in the background during part of the song. Over the years that brother Kemp served as an elder here at Garfield and later at Shelbyville Road, no such thing as humming would have been allowed. Though funeral services as such are not worship, it appeared to me that the selection of songs were not kind to her memory.
The preacher conducting the service noted that some of the grandchildren had found sister Kemp's Bible with certain favorite passages marked. He then proceeded to read those passages. The only thing was he read from the NIV. It is a version that neither brother nor sister Kemp would have been comfortable with at all. Again, my judgment is that such an act was not being kind to the memory that the Kemp's left behind of faithfulness to the Word of God.
As I sat in the audience that day, I observed that present were two men who served as elders who watched for the soul of sister Kemp. Who better to have spoken of the kind of life she lived and the service she rendered the Lord at Shelbyville Road than those two elders. Their absence from participation in the service was personally disturbing to me. I had to leave early in order to get to brother Grubb's funeral and perhaps they participated at the graveside. Ben Vick and Bobby Davis watched for her soul and it should have been them who aided the audience in saying "good-bye" to this faithful child of God.
How was Christ nailed to the cross without having any bones broken?
Psalms 34:20 tells us that, "...not one of them is broken", an isolated statement that we would be hard pressed to understand until we come to the New Testament. Here, by inspiration, John writes that when the soldiers came to break the legs of Christ, they found that He was dead already, whereupon, they did not break His legs. John declares that this is the fulfillment of the passage in the Psalms (John 19:32-36). Since God cannot lie, we know that Jesus' bones were not broken. The question then becomes, how did they nail His body to the tree without it breaking some of His bones?
There is an excellent article on the web page of Apologetics Press. You can reach it at www.apologeticspress.org. The article is written by Brad Harrub and Bert Thompson and is entitled, "An Examination of the Medical Evidence for the Physical Death of Christ". In the article is discussed that the Romans used something like a 7-inch spike to do the nailing. The evidence is that, in regard to the hand, the nail was probably driven through the wrist area. Had it been through the palms of the hand, the body would have had a hard time remaining in place due to the tearing of the hand. There is a socket that begins at the wrist and goes through the back of the hand. A spike driven here would have supported the weight of the body.
If one can picture a place on the foot about where one ties their shoes, you can get an idea of where the spike was driven. The spike, thus driven, would not have broken the bones in the feet of our Lord. Regardless of the physical understanding of the human body, the Lord revealed that not a bone was broken and that settles it.
If the wife of an elder or deacon passed away, would he be able to maintain his position if he remarried?
In the case of both elders and deacons, it is required at the time they qualify for the work, that they be married (I Timothy 3:2; 11; Titus 1:6). Christian wives are to be in submission to their husbands (Ephesians 5:22). It would, therefore, be enjoined upon the wife to be one that is faithful to the Lord who can aid her husband in the work he has chosen. If she controls him and overrules him, she could destroy his effectiveness in serving the Lord in this great work. Hence, Paul speaks about the wives of deacons showing that they must, likewise, be in possession of Christian character in order to aid their husbands in the work he has chosen.
When the death of a wife occurs, each person must decide about the office. If, for instance, a moral problem arose, an elder would be expected to step down. If a problem with attitude developed, such as a love of power, likewise, he would step down. However, with the death of a wife, the individual (whether elder or deacon) remains the same person he was when he qualified for the office. As long as the character of the individual has not changed, it is his decision.
When the issue of marriage comes up, here then would be the consideration. His wife (elder or deacon) must be a faithful Christian who exhibits the characteristics outlined by Paul in Timothy and Titus. If one's wife is an integral part of his qualifying to take the work to begin with, then the second wife would be of the same requirements as the first.
What is meant when Jesus said, "Let the dead bury the dead?"
The statement is found recorded in Matthew 8:22. The context of the verse begins back in verse 18 Jesus saw great multitudes and ordered the apostles to depart to the other side. While carrying out this command a certain scribe came to Jesus. He said that he would follow Jesus wherever Jesus went (verse 19). Jesus pointed out to this would-be-faithful disciple the cost of following Jesus. The Lord told him that Jesus had no place to lay His head, in other words, he did not own property. Those who follow Jesus cannot be in love with things of this world (Matthew 19:21, 22; 1 John 2:15).
In this context, the second man comes to Jesus. He asked permission of Jesus to allow him to go and bury his father. On the surface, the answer of the Lord does not appear to be kind; however let us strive to draw some conclusions based on what we see in this incident. If this man's father had just died, what was he doing standing here and talking with Jesus? The death of a loved one causes the family to come together; such is not the case here. Hence, the likelihood is that his father was still alive and this man was asking permission to delay his following of Jesus.
Since it came on the heel of the scribe who had asked Jesus something similar, it stands to reason this man was looking for a way to avoid responsibility. If Jesus was indeed the Christ, and in possession of the words of eternal life, why would anyone delay following Him (John 6:68)? The man's father was but an excuse. Today we must be willing to follow the Lord and allow nothing or no one to stand between us and Him.
Would it be wrong to go see Mel Gibson's movie about the passion of Christ?
The movie portrays, in a very graphic way, the physical suffering of Christ from the garden of Gethsemane to the cross. The Scriptures provide us with a written record, whereas the movie, of course, is a visual account of the suffering. No doubt, the written record found in the Scriptures could have been very graphic had God chosen to do so. The absence of such graphic details reveal to us the mind of God as to what He wanted people to focus on. By that I mean it would be an historical matter to find the details of what the crucifixion was all about in terms of the suffering of the victim. God chose to give us words to convey the suffering, but not at the expense of forgetting what was really going on.
What was really happening? God tells us that the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy (Revelation 19:10). One of the many infallible proofs of Who Jesus is deals with the prophecies of the Old Testament that were fulfilled in the life of Jesus. One such prophecy comes from the 22nd Psalm, wherein it is prophesied that Jesus would cry out to the father and ask why the Father had forsaken Him. This was fulfilled on the cross. Jesus tasted of spiritual death for us all (Hebrews 2:9). As bad as the physical things associated with the cross were, there would be no comparison of the pain connected with Jesus tasting spiritual death for us.
There would be nothing wrong in seeing such a visual presentation. I would just add caution that seeing the physical visual account should not cause us to overlook the truth of Hebrews 2:9. We are, by His stripes, healed through obedience to God.
Why is there so much discussion now about us being under grace and not under law?
Have we discovered grace after all these years? From inexperienced youth ministers to older preachers, we are hearing that we have now found grace as though it is something like an archeological find that has been buried for all these years. These preachers need to take a good look at the passage found in II Corinthians 4:3. It states that if the gospel is "hid", it is hid to them that are lost. If grace has been lost to their searching eyes, it is because they have not been searching the truth. Jesus explained that our salvation would be on the basis of our knowing truth (John 8:32).
The shift in thought has a sinister action behind it. If the Scriptures reveal that all Christians are to sing in the public assembly, how could you have solos or praise teams? Those who are working to change the thinking of God's people know that Scriptures forbid such practices as praise teams and or solos. What they have to do in order to accomplish the change is to somehow convince Christians to view the Scriptures in a different way (that is, a new way to interpret the Scriptures). We have often gone to the days of Noah to show how when God told Noah gopher wood, it excluded all other kinds of wood. Hence, we established the authority of the Word of God.
What else do we see in the case of Noah? He was the man who found "grace" in the eyes of the Lord (Genesis 6:8). The liberals stay away from preaching about Noah because of the command issue and right there is the case of grace that they claim has been hidden from their searching eyes. Dare I say it? The commands of God and the grace of God in the same incident in the life of Noah? Be assured that emphasis on grace (as they define it) is nothing more than trying to find a way to change the thinking of God's people. They strike out in research and in application.
Why are there some congregations here in town having Easter and Christmas services?
A simple answer is because they have left the Word of God. God gave us the Scriptures to furnish us with all we need to answer our questions (II Timothy 3:16,17). Once one leaves the Scriptures we do not have authority. How can I trust the "voice" in your head? How could I base my salvation on what you "feel"? The times in Scripture when men did what they thought was right according to their own view, did not meet with approval from God (Judges 21:25; Romans 10:3). If one would be a disciple of Jesus, he must be willing to listen to the voice of the Lord as revealed in the written Word of God (John 10:3; Ephesians 4:13).
When I come to those Scriptures, the church, at no time, had anything like Easter or Christmas services. I must, then, leave the Scriptures to find such holidays or the church practicing such things. As we cited in our question from last week, the effort is to change the thinking of God's people. We teach about the birth, life and death of Jesus. Each Lord's day we allow our minds to focus on what Jesus did for us by dying on the cross. You might ask, "well, don't you think it would be great to honor the birthday of Jesus, or His resurrection?". Therein lies the problem. It is not what man thinks but what God said that matters (Isaiah 55:8, 9).
God establishes the memorials, not us. The birth of Jesus is an answer or fulfillment of prophecy. It is an historical fact, by the presence of one Jesus, two thousand years ago. Those things I can teach. Yet, God chose to keep hidden from us what day His Son came to the earth. Why, then, would I set up a memorial day that God has not revealed? There was a man by the name of Jeroboam who had this same idea about memorials. A careful reading of Scriptures shows he had an ulterior motive behind his actions; so do the ones who promote Easter and Christmas. No authority from God should cause the practice to cease.
Did Jehu and Jehoram have the same father?
The passage in II Kings 9:14 declares that Jehu is the son of Jehoshaphat. In II Kings 9:20, Jehu is said to be the son of Nimshi. Then, the passage in II Kings 8:16 refers to Jehoram being the son of Jehoshaphat. As is true in our times, men can bear the same name. We find a Jehu mentioned in I Chronicles 2:38, who time wise has nothing to do with the Jehu under consideration. Then, in Davids personal army, a Jehu is mentioned who was an Antothite. When we come across names, we must make every effort to know which Jehu is under consideration.
It helps, likewise, to find where the names of individuals intersect with each other in some period of history. We would know, then, that the man who served in Davids army was not the military man connected to Ahab, king of Israel. Too many years separate the two historical events. My research shows that Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, made an effort to form an alliance with Ahab, king of Israel. When these unity efforts by Jehoshaphat were taking place, Jehu was a soldier in Ahabs army. This Jehu could not have been the son of Jehoshaphat.
Jehoram succeeded his father to the throne in Judah. His having the throne indicates this was indeed the son of Jehoshaphat. Time wise or events in history, I can find no place where Jehu and Jehoshaphat intersect with each other as being father and son. Jehu and Jehoram did not have the same father.
What about the cavemen?
At different times, people of God, in fleeing for their lives, hid out in caves. Elijah, when fleeing for his life, hid out in a cave (1 Kings 19:9). Hebrews 11 speaks about how certain people of God wandered about in deserts, mountains, dens and caves of the earth (Hebrews 11:38), however, the term caveman does not refer to such individuals. The term, more often than not, arises from evolutionary thinking wherein our ancient ancestors lived in caves. According to evolutionary thought, they did not know how to make tools and use natural resources to build houses. The caveman, then, is often portrayed as something evolving from ape to man.
Most of the pictures provided by the imagination of man shows some kind of hairy creature slightly slumped over in posture. The Scriptures declare that Adam was the first man (1 Corinthians 15:45). That leaves no place for some pre-Adamic race of man, Adam was the first. What, then, can we learn about the first man? Adam had the ability to recognize words. God told him (that is Adam and Eve) to be fruitful, multiply, replenish the earth, subdue it and have dominion over it. One problem among many that the evolutionist has is where did the ability to speak come from? You see, it is not only in speaking words, but it also is the ability to recognize the words being spoken to you. Adam possessed both.
When God placed Adam in the garden, Adam was instructed to dress and keep it (Genesis 2:14). Does this sound like a cave dweller to you? He had the intelligence to understand words and how to use those words to obey God. The creature bent over with a club in his hand and grunting is a product of evolutionary thinking that denies the existence of God. This caveman does not exist in human history. Man was created with knowledge and a free will despite the claims of evolutionists.
Why are some churches dropping the name of "CHURCH OF CHRIST" and using such things as community church or Family of GOD?
First, let us understand the meaning of church of Christ. In Bible times this spiritual organization was referred to in terms of ownership (Christ) or location (such as Ephesus). The sublime truth on which the church was to be built was that Jesus was, indeed, the Christ, the Son of God (Matthew 16:18). On the day of Pentecost, the apostles told their audience that Jesus had been made both Lord and Christ (Acts 2:36). The word Christ means the anointed One of God and connects with the Messiah of the Old Testament. Hence, when Jesus came, He built His church which is His kingdom. He paid for it with His own blood (Acts 20:28). Why, then, would any disciple of Christ be embarrassed to be known as such a church?
We are told today that people of the religious world are turned off by those words, church of Christ. Hence, if we change the name then they will come and perhaps we can teach them. I hope you can see the folly of this. If you change the name and get them in and teach the same doctrine, will they not then leave? However, when you change the name, you must change the doctrine, as well. The Scriptures still teach that we obey that form of doctrine that was delivered to us in order to be free from sin (Romans 6:17, 18).
On a personal note, I am glad they are changing the name out in front of their buildings. When you change the doctrine on the inside, people on the outside do not need to be fooled into thinking this is a church that belongs to Christ.
Do some people use the term CHURCH OF CHRIST in a denominational sense?
The simple answer is yes. People will say things like, he is a church of Christ preacher or it is a church of Christ school. Such language is wrong. I am a member of the body of Christ. I wear the name Christian in my service to Jesus the Christ. There are individuals who use the expression in the above manner that arise from denominational ideas. To them, a church is an organization started by some man. You are a member of said church because your parents were or because someone influenced you to join their church. There is none of this kind of language that is in accord with Scripture.
One cannot join the church of Christ. One must be added by God upon their obedience to Christ the Lord (Acts 2:38-47).What are we religiously? Again, the religious world wants the name of some kind of church. The truth is that we are Christians. We serve the Lord Christ. Religiously, I am a Christian who adheres to the religion of Jesus the Christ. What kind of preacher are you? I am the one that belongs to Jesus the Christ and I serve Him by what I teach and how I live. There is no name of any church in front of the word, preacher.
Yes, there are those who misuse Bible language and truth. Their misuse does not in any way change the truth. The church was established by Christ; bought and paid for with His blood. It belongs to Him. By my obedience to the gospel, I have the blessing of being in the church of Christ.
What about fasting?
There were times under the Old Testament era when God.s people got away from His will. When they desired to return back to God, it was often accompanied by fasting. The idea of fasting was to demonstrate the concern one had over some given issue. We often read of those who did .sackcloth and ashes. as a similar demonstration of the concern that people had. Two more cases in the Old Testament are Hannah and Ahab. Hannah, because she could not have a child, cried and did not eat (1 Samuel 1:7). While the case with Ahab was because he could not get Naboth to sell him his vineyard, resorted to pouting and would not eat bread (1 Kings 21:4).
We know, that following His baptism, Jesus was in the wilderness and fasted for 40 days and nights. We find, then, in this setting, an individual doing the fasting. When it came time to send out Barnabas and Saul (Paul) on the first journey to expand the gospel, some brethren in the church were fasting (Acts 13:2). It was then that the Holy Spirit told those present about the work that He was calling Barnabas and Saul to do. We must make, at this point, a distinction. The distinction is that individuals fasted, but a record of the entire church being called upon to fast is unclear.
The fasting done by individuals was regulated by the Lord. The individual was not to fast with a sad countenance (Matthew 6:16). The hypocrites that Jesus faced wanted everyone to .know. they were fasting. Jesus told His audience to wash their faces and anoint their heads. What was the reason here? He did not want them to appear to men to fast, but rather to fast in secret (verse 18). Fasting, then, is a private issue between an individual and God. It is not to be used as some kind of badge. of righteousness. We fast to show our concern to God about some issue on our hearts.
We hear today about the Pharisees and their attitudes. What about the Sadducees?
The effort on the part of some is to establish how bad the Pharisees were. They can easily point out the many times that Jesus confronted them by their hypocrisy (such as Matthew 23). The liberals try to show how these men were so evil because they stuck to the letter of the law. Whereas, if one leaves the letter of the law and goes to the spirit of the law, then they are the ones who are right. Such language comes from an ignorance of the Word of God. The Pharisees, indeed, corrupted the Word of God. They corrupted it by their traditions. (Matthew 15:3).
The Sadducees, on the other hand, were the religious liberals of Jesus' day. They denied the resurrection (Matthew 22:23). Think of the implication of such a belief. It was by His resurrection from the dead that Jesus was declared to be the Son of God (Romans 1:4). If one did not believe in the power of the resurrection or the meaning of Jesus' resurrection, there could not be much spiritual life in such a one. The liberals today deny the power of the gospel. It is, to them, a love letter rather than a declaration of Who God is and What God is like.
If I am having to deal with someone who is either of the Pharisee mindset or the Sadducee, give me the Pharisee any day. At least with the Pharisee you have the appeal to the standard of God's Word. The Sadducee would reject such an authority over his life. I wonder why we do not hear sermons about the Sadducees? Could it be it would reveal the liberals of our day? The problem with the Pharisees was a failure to apply God's Word in the right way. The Sadducee rejected the Word and, hence, no need to apply it.
Why did God, under the Old Testament, order the deaths of people who were not soldiers, like women and children?
God does not think like we do (Isaiah 55:8,9). Our task is to learn how God views things.We may serve up a lot of speculation based on our feelings.If one really wants to know how God views things, then one must go to the Scriptures to find the answer (Romans 15:4). One evident thing about the nature of God is that He does not change (Malachi 3:6). When we investigate the Old Testament, it becomes a vital reference point about the God we serve.
One reason God gave to utterly destroy the people (both women and children) inside the land of Canaan was to eliminate their ungodly influence.God did not want the people of the land to teach His people about their abominations (Deuteronomy 20:17,18). There could not be from God’s view a way for His people to have a co-existence with those of the land. Such co-existence would lead to a weakening of His children.Hence, God ordered them utterly destroyed.I wonder where the current crop of liberals stand who keep telling us to co-exist with the denominational world?
On still another occasion, God’s Word was at stake.God wanted Saul to utterly destroy the Amalekites, the reason being that God had promised during the days of Moses that He would repay them for what they had done (I Samuel 15:2,3). God had to keep His Word because He is God and does not lie (Titus 1:2). God is always right in His judgments and actions.He does not make mistakes.We just need to spend more time studying and finding out how God views things.
Are there contradictions in the Bible?
We begin from the foundation that Scripture (sacred writings) are from God (II Timothy 3:16). God chose to use men in a direct way to receive truth. They got their messages directly from God (Hebrews 1:1). These men were guided by the Holy Spirit as to what to write down being the truth from God (II Peter 1:21). God chose to continue this method using these inspired men to write down the Scriptures. God’s ultimate plan was for this method to cease and that we would have a final revelation of God’s will (Ephesians 4:13; 1 Corinthians 13:8-10).
It is important to understand that the Holy Spirit gave them the very words to write down (I Corinthians 2:13). God’s thoughts are higher than our thoughts and, hence, God did not allow the thoughts of men to be the conduit of truth. God chose the words needed to convey to mankind His will. Jesus taught that it is the truth that sanctifies and delivers us from sin (John 8:32; John 17:17). The truth that we need for salvation and the living of our daily lives is from the very words that God provided through inspired men into inspired Scriptures (II Peter 1:3).
Do we have the original copies (autograph) of the Scriptures? The answer is “no”. How then do we have the truth of God today? It is because of the huge amount of copies that have been discovered by which we have been able to put together the Scriptures. If it is a copy, then someone had to be copying from the autograph copies. Men were inspired to receive and write the truth. Men were not inspired in the copying of truth. There may be problems at times regarding numbers or some name because of similarity in the alphabet itself. There are no contradictions regarding truth that has come from God. He has protected His Word and today we have the total truth about God that He desires for men to know.
I know that baptism is important, but is it really for salvation?
The fact that baptism is a subject that comes from Scripture declares its importance. All Scripture is given to us by God (II Timothy 3:16). It is to the Word of God that we must go to discover how important something is from the view of how God sees a thing (Isaiah 55:8, 9). Over the years, in the discussion's I have had with individuals in trying to bring them to Christ, I have encountered very few, if any, who would say that baptism is not in God’s plan at all. Baptism is in the will of God, the question is, what is it for?
The religious world has found it difficult to place baptism. They want to argue that one is saved first through believing. Then you should show that you are saved by being baptized. The Scriptures will not allow such a view. Keep in mind that it is God’s will we are searching for to understand. God teaches us that one must believe and be baptized (Mark 16:16). Salvation in that passage comes after baptism.
God, through Peter, tells us that baptism saves us (I Peter 3:21). If one is in possession of a good and honest heart, that settles the question forever (Luke 8:15). The problem is not in the plainness or the lack, thereof, of words that God used to convey the truth on this issue. As always, the problem rests in the application of truth. Baptism is for salvation. If one refuses to do the will of God, then, if they shall leave this life, they do so unprepared to meet God (Matthew 7:21; II Thessalonians 1:8).
What about children running in the building?
The building where we worship is not sacred. There is not a "sanctuary" and then the rest of the building. The holiness of the building is in the hearts of those who worship God. Sometimes, in trying to instruct small children, we can convey the idea that we are in "God's House", which to the mind of a small child is certainly within the keeping of how they would understand things. We come to this building to worship God. We teach them that God is here. Hence, to little minds, the idea of the building is "God's House". As they get older we can show them from Scripture that the church (the people) is indeed God's house (I Timothy 3:15).
Having said that, the building must be respected in view of what goes on in the building. For instance, when one takes a child to a public library, at least two things confront the child. One is silence and the other is no running. Because the library is a place of information gathering, noise is to be avoided. Running is something done on a playground and the library is no such place. When one goes to a funeral home to be with the family, again there is an atmosphere that calls for a certain kind of conduct. Children should be taught to respect what goes on in such places. The assembling of the church to worship would fall into the proper mindset and what it is that goes on in the building.
Children should not run in the building. Not because the building is sacred but because such running may injure some older person. With our large foyer the temptation is certainly greater for little children to take off and start running. The safety factor should prohibit such conduct. By the same token, when we assemble for worship there does not need to be a steady stream of children or others going to the bathroom. Get all that kind of thing done before worship and then enter worship to worship God.
What does it mean in 1 John 3:9 that one cannot sin?
John reveals to us that if a Christian argues that they do not sin, then we make God a liar and His Word is not in us (I John 1:10). When the Christian sins, he has an advocate with the Father, which is Jesus Christ the righteous (I John 2:1). He appeals through that advocate by confessing his sins (I John 1:9). When we bring such a disposition of heart to the throne of God, then God is faithful and just to forgive us. We might add the point here that this is not how one becomes a Christian rather it is how the Christian deals with sin in his life.
Paul tells us that sin is not to have dominion or rule over us (Romans 6:14). He used this example to show the futility of trying to be saved by the law of Moses instead of the law of Christ. The principle, however, is true in life, itself. Sin is not to have dominion over us. When we become Christians by obeying the gospel we become the servants of righteousness, no longer slaves to sin. Each Christian then must keep a close watch on his heart.
John was teaching in I John 3:9 that Christians are not to allow sin to have dominion over their souls. As long as the seed (which is the Word of God) (Luke 8:11) remains in our hearts then sin cannot rule over us. The presence of the Word of God being acted on in our daily lives leaves no room for sin to take control. In verse 10 the children of God are those who do righteousness and love their brother. The "cannot sin" means sin does not rule over us.
Can one display an attitude of arrogance and live the christian life?
The idea of arrogance is contrary to the way any Christian should live. We are to have "humbleness of mind" (Colossians 3:12). We are, in our spirits to be poor, that is, humble (Matthew 5:3). We are to esteem others better (Philippians 2:3). If one chooses to be a disciple of Jesus, the road begins with a denial of self (Matthew 16:24). Those who are arrogant tend to believe that the world revolves around them.
We have an example of such arrogance in the life of Diotrephes recorded in III John. The heart of his problem was that he continued to love to have the preeminence among God's people (III John 9). He said "who" and "who not" could be accepted by the church (verse 10). In the next verse, John states we are not to follow that which is evil. Since he had just spoken about Diotrephes, the message should be understood. Do not follow such people or give them power by silence.
If a person is arrogant, they need to change and adopt unto themselves the Spirit of Christ. If they are not arrogant, but simply leave the wrong impression on people, then they need to change and work on their people skills. It is wrong to display an attitude of arrogance while trying to live the Christian life.
A
woman marries a man who does not have a scriptural divorce. She
divorces him and later marries a man who was scripturally divorced from
his mate. May she remain in the second marriage? (THE
QUESTION THIS WEEK DEALS WITH A SPECIFIC CASE. I WILL ANSWER IT FROM
WHAT I UNDERSTAND TO BE THE WILL OF GOD. IT IS NOT INTENDED TO BE A
DECLARATION ABOUT ALL CASES, BUT JUST AS IT RELATES TO WHAT I WAS ASKED
ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR CASE.)
Marriage is a contract between a man and a woman, not two men or two women. It is also a contract with God. When two individuals who have the right of marriage enter into a contract of marriage with each other and with God, then God joins them together (Matthew 19:6). We all need to get back to the principle stated in verse 6, and that is that when one enters the contract with God in marriage, do not break the agreement you have made with God and your mate.
As I understand, the question, the woman's first marriage could not have been joined together by God because her husband did not have the right of marriage. It is a marriage via the laws of the land. Marriage, however, is a contract between two people and God. She could not have entered into that contract. She would certainly need to repent of having done so. Her second marriage, according to what I understand the question to be! saying, is that she married an individual who had the right of marriage. She then enters the contract with him and with God. If both parties have the right of marriage, she should keep the agreement she made with God.
What about all the storms that have been hitting our coasts here of late?
God's natural laws that He put into place result sometimes in violent storms or upheavals in the natural world. Peter spoke of those who would be scoffers who would come in the last days. They would not be evolutionists because they saw everything around them as a result of creation and not accident (II Peter 3:4). The scoffers had a serious problem. They knew that, at one time, God destroyed the world of humanity, save eight souls, with a universal flood (verses 5 and 6). In verse 5 they choose to be willingly ignorant. Ignorant of what we ask.
It was by the Word of God that the world of Noah's day perished. Here is what they were ignorant about concerning these matters. That same "Word" keeps our world in store (verse 7). God's natural laws were put into place in order to preserve our world. As long as the world stands, hot and cold, summer and winter will continue (Genesis 8:22). The laws of God cause the sunshine and the rain by which the crops grow and life continues day by day (Matthew 5:45). Those same laws cause storms, likewise, which can threaten the lives of humans.
Man's increase of knowledge, again by God's power, has enabled us to come up with early warning systems to track the storms and avoid the loss of life. Our warning systems, however, cannot force people to safety. It would seem to me that in the face of these storms or other natural disasters, our minds should turn toward reverence and respect for God and His power. Our respect should cause us to love and trust God. The storms that destroy are always followed by the sunshine and the help from others because God's image and likeness are stamped on humanity.
Are Iraq and all the other war's fulfilling scripture?
The quick answer is “no”. Today there is much in print and on television regarding the end times. The false doctrines of men have long promoted the idea that, at some future date, Jesus will come back to earth and set up His earthly kingdom. Once He does that, then He will reign for a “thousand years”. The place where they often go and misapply the Scriptures is Matthew 24. The favorite verse is verse 6. Here Jesus speaks about “…wars and rumors of wars”. They (the false teachers) like to key in on the idea of earthquakes in various places cited in verse 7. Anytime, then, there is upheaval in the political world or in nature itself, the false teachers begin to warn that the signs are now present and the Lord is about to return at any moment.
Let us see if we can clear the air just a bit. Jesus said to His audience, “…ye shall hear”. Does not language cause us to see that Jesus’ audience was under consideration? If they were the ones to hear of wars and rumors of wars, why would we apply it to us? In Jesus’ audience were those who would live in Judaea. Hence, Jesus taught about the signs of Matthew 24; that those in Judaea were to flee to the mountains. How would this apply to our times? They were, likewise, taught to pray that this event would not occur on the Sabbath day or during the wintertime (Matthew 24:20). Since the Old Law was nailed to the cross and is no longer in effect, what possible difference would the Sabbath make (Colossians 2:14)?
The final answer is Jesus’ own Words, that generation would not pass until all those signs were fulfilled (Matthew 24:34). Some go back to the book of Revelation and try to find Iraq, Russia or China as being nations God spoke about. John was told in the first century that the events of the book of Revelation were at hand (Revelation 1:3). God sent His angel to show the things that must shortly be done (Revelation 22:6). John was not to seal the things of the Revelation because the time was at hand (Revelation 22:10). The prophecy we need to be concerned about is the one where Jesus is coming again in judgment on the whole earth.
Did the church eat in the building in New Testament times?
Christians, in Bible times, shared meals with one another. Those in Acts 2 ate their meals together with gladness and singleness of heart (Acts 2:36). When Jesus fed the four thousand and then the five thousand it was in the same place where He had been teaching. Jews came to Jerusalem three times a year for their feast days. Eating together, both from the law of Moses and under Christ, was a common event.
Now, where did they eat together? In the case in Acts 2, they were meeting in private homes and having their meals together. The congregation at Corinth came together at some location and had a meal together. This was condemned by Paul because they mixed together the common meal with the Lord's supper (I Corinthians 11:17-34). The church in Troas ate in the building and was not condemned by Paul because there was no mixing together of the common meal and the Lord's supper (Acts 20:7-11). The church, then, did eat in the building, as well as homes.
What if a Christian has a problem with eating in the building? Then, for conscience sake, they should refrain from the practice. My judgment is that they are missing out on being with fellow Christians in a wholesome atmosphere. One will not lose their soul if they refuse to eat at the location of the building. Why ten or twelve Christians can sit together after worship at MCL Cafeteria, but cannot walk thirty feet from the auditorium to have a meal is confusing to me.
Is it a sin to write things in a bulletin article that are not true?
Those who write should be aware of the laws of the land regarding libel. All of us in our service to Christ are to be obedient to the laws of the land (Romans 13:1). The point at which we would ignore such laws is if they caused us to disobey God in order to obey them (Acts 5:29). As long as we are not required to violate God's will, then we must be obedient to the laws in the land in which we live. When we write something, we must always exercise caution as to attitude and content. None of us, as writers, should have any desire to be anything less than the Christians God would desire.
On occasion, we may get our facts wrong. Such is not a violation of the laws of the land. We may argue from a position of passion for that which we believe; again, such in not violation of libel laws. The dictionary defines libel in this way. "Any false and malicious written or printed statement, or any sign, pictures, or effigy tending to expose a person to public ridicule, hatred, or contempt, or to injure a person's reputation in any way." This directs our attention to the matter of attitude. When the intent is to do what libel is stating, then a Christian should repent and cease the practice.
The issue is not about being sued at law. If no lawsuit was ever brought, the Christian should have no desire to violate the law. A lawsuit would mean the individual had been caught or charged with the violation. The Christian does not break this law or any other law, because his Master is in heaven. If we, by our writing, seek to destroy the reputation of any individual, it is time to look to our hearts and shut our computers down until we get things right with God.
What about having performers come in for public worship?
The coming together of performers and worshippers is a contradiction in terms. As Christians our spirits are to be involved in worship toward God (John 4:23). We do the right acts of worship and we possess the right attitude in carrying out those acts as per the statement in John 4. When we come into worship it is to worship God and not us (Revelation 19:10). The acts of worship (some five in number) are designed to bring glory to God and to lift our own spirits as we turn toward God. The acts of worship are not aimed at the spectacular but rather are simple. The appeal is to be poor in spirit as we honor God in worship.
The Franklin church recently had a comedian come in and perform. Since the ad told the community that church can be fun, I assume this performance was in the place of worship. The public was charged $14 in advance or $18 at the door. Perhaps the brethren there did not see it as worship. However the ads clearly implied to the world that such was the case. Charging admission for people to come to worship is in and of itself a departure from scripture. There is a greater problem. It is the problem of the heart when individuals believe that worship can have performers and still be pleasing to God.
Special singing groups or praise teams fall into this same category. Churches may not charge admission but the problem is the same. When we leave the foundation that God is the object of worship, no good can come. Those who lead in public worship should be prepared to do what is required of them. The purpose of such preparation is to do the best job we can at leading the congregation toward God by doing things decently and in order (I Corinthians 14:40). If our mind set is to compete with the religious world and their "concert mentality", we will fail both ourselves and our God. Let us stay focused on worshipping God and not entertaining ourselves.
WHAT MAKES THIS ELECTION ANY DIFFERENT AND WHY SHOULD WE, AS CHRISTIANS, GET INVOLVED AND VOTE?
The times we are living in causes this election to be very different in many regards. The courts of our land are now involving themselves in the lives of Christians by trying to redefine what marriage is. Courts, and not Congress, are telling us that same sex marriage is the right of those in this country who wish to do that. God is the source of our morality. He declared, by the hand of Moses, that marriage was between a man and a woman and not two people of the same sex (Genesis 2:24; Matthew 19:5). The courts, not Congress, have already declared the "danger of prayer to God". Some wish for His name to be removed from our buildings, activities and our lives.
This becomes an important topic because the next President may have the opportunity to appoint federal judges to the bench. If that President holds with "same sex marriages" the courts and, hence, our individual lives will be affected. When did Congress pass a law that states that abortion is legal? They did not. The courts pass that edict down as they interpreted the law in "Roe verses Wade". If the next President believes you can kill the baby in the womb, then his appointments to the bench will reflect that view, as well.
I cannot vote for any man that stands for same sex marriages or abortion. His economic policies or his foreign policies should never take first place over his own moral stance. Each of us must pray and look at the platforms of the individual parties. See where the candidates stand on these vital issues and then vote accordingly. Our votes will not be wasted if, by those votes, we take a stand with God. The right man may not win but God will know where we stand.
WHY ARE THERE SO MANY TRANSLATIONS OUT ON THE MARKET NOW
One would be naïve if they believe that the new translations come about because men love the truth and want to help humanity. When one sits down and compares the new translations with, say, the KJV or the American Standard of 1901, one is confronted by new and false ideas. It is one thing to take a word that may have become archaic (that is, no longer in popular use) and replace it with a word that conveys the same idea. What we are faced with in many of the new translations is not just changing from one word to a word more common to our language, but rather an interjection of error into the text, itself.
At the heart of the new translations (not all, but some), is the matter of "dollars". People see that they can make a profit and they go for it. There is no concern for being faithful to the Word of God. If you have a large portion of the religious world that believes in faith only, then a Bible that states such has the potential of making money. Other man made doctrines find their way into the text for the same reason. It is appealing to the audience with a product that they like, hence, the sales.
There may be some sincere efforts in this field to get the Scriptures into the language of the people, of such efforts be careful of one man translations and those that do not translate word for word, but rather thought translations. The King James Version and the American Standard of 1901 are reliable translations to measure the new ones by as to accuracy and truth, itself.
WHAT ROLE DO THE BOOKS OF MATTHEW, MARK, LUKE AND JOHN HAVE IN THE NEW TESTAMENT?
Some
today would push the point that the four accounts of the gospel of
Christ were Old Testament and, therefore, should not be in the New
Testament, but rather the Old. This is a very subtle way to avoid the teachings of our Lord regarding marriage, divorce and remarriage. If Matthew, Mark, Luke and John belong to the Old Testament, this, in my mind, raises some important questions. We must go to the Scriptures to see what the Lord has revealed to us.
Jesus spoke about John the Baptist, that is, the one who baptized. In His praise of John, the Lord declared that the prophets and the law were until John (Matthew 11:13). The coming of John on the scene signaled something different was indeed taking place. Before John, who was ever baptized to deal with his sins; yet John preached such a baptism (Mark 1:4). John was the one who was crying in the wilderness and calling upon the people of God to get ready for the coming of the Messiah.
Jesus told the apostles about the coming of the Holy Spirit. Part of the work that the Spirit of God would do in regard to the apostles is that He would guide them into all truth (John 14:26). The efforts by God in this regard were to bring all things to the remembrance of the apostles that Jesus had taught. Where do you go to find such teachings? Would we disregard all the things that Matthew recorded when Jesus said, "the kingdom of heaven is liken unto...?" The divisions in our Bibles have to do with 39 books dealing with the Old Testament era while 27 books deal with the time of Christ and His teachings. It is a safe place to divide the material in our Bibles.
WHAT IS MEANT IN 1 CORINTHIANS 7:14 ABOUT THE UNBELIEVING HUSBAND BEING SANCTIFIED BY THE BELIEVING WIFE?
Paul, in this chapter, answers questions sent to him by the brethren in Corinth (1 Corinthians 7:1). What happened to this particular letter we are not told but it did not come to be a part of the sacred text. When we come to verse 14, we see the answer and must make some conclusions as to the nature of the question. The question, based on verse 14, must have been something to do with whether God accepted the marriage of a non-Christian to a Christian. Paul answers that the unbelieving husband is set apart by his marriage to the Christian. I take this to mean that Paul's answer was that the marriage was accepted by God and, therefore, they could remain married.
Such an answer would make no sense if one or both parties had no right to be married to each other. The idea expressed here is that both individuals had a right to be married to each other. The fact that one is not a Christian was not grounds to exclude them from their marriage. Hence, the thought is given to us that the children would be clean. That
is because God accepted the marriage between the Christian and the
non-Christian, then their children would be holy or having come as a
result of an accepted marriage before God.
Peter writes that a Christian wife married to a non-Christian husband should do all in her power to influence him toward the Lord (1 Peter 3:1). If the Christian excluded the non-Christian from the marriage, this instruction would have no meaning. Having said this, it is vital to warn our youth as they approach the idea of marriage, the more things that couples have in common, the better it is. The existence of a mutual faith in God is no guarantee of a successful marriage. Those, however, who do have a mutual faith in the Lord have a help from Him through the Word that will enable them to remain together. The Christian is far better off being married to another Christian who shares the same value about the Lord than those who do not.
DOES A CHRISTIAN SIN WHO ATTENDS ANOTHER CONGREGATION IN TOWN ON A VISIT?
Let us clear the field before we can answer this one. One, there are those who are what I call "floaters". They never are under an eldership, but simply float around attending here or there. No one can watch for their souls or be there to help lead them back to the right way. They are the kind who never gets involved in local efforts to spread the gospel or make the church stronger. Their sin is not "where" they attend but rather it is the sin of the heart. They avoid responsibility to God and to fellow Christians. The very purpose of the local work is toprovide us an avenue of worship and a place to WORK.
Some congregations, because they have left the way of the Lord, are not a safe place for anyone to worship. The truth is not upheld, neither is the pattern of New Testament Christianity taught nor practiced. Faithful brethren should avoid such places because it cannot make us stronger or closer to God.
Having cleared the field, it is not forsaking the assembly if one attends another faithful congregation of the Lord's people. It may be a special occasion or sometimes something to do with families. If one did sin, then how could one go on vacation and not attend the local work? Sometimes an eldership may think they are the only sound congregation in the city, such being the case, their members could not attend anywhere but with them. This is not the will of God in most cities for the simple reason there is more than one faithful congregation in most cities.
WHAT IS MEANT IN MATTHEW 5:17 AND EPHESIANS 2:15 REGARDING THE LAW OF MOSES?
The passage in Matthew 5:17 has Jesus saying that He did not come to destroy the law. The
statement in Ephesians is that Jesus, by His death on the cross,
abolished the enmity even the law of commandments contained in
ordinances. As in all studies of the
Scriptures it is imperative that we keep things in their context; so
let us look first at the statement in Matthew.
Jesus purpose in coming was not to take the law away from man in order that man could do as he pleased. Jesus came to fulfill what the law and the prophets had said concerning Him. The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy (Revelation 19:10). In Matthew 5:18 Jesus further explains that nothing of the law would pass away until it was all fulfilled. When the law was fulfilled then it could pass away and it did.
The passage in Ephesians deals with the effect that Christs death had. He had taken and nailed the Old Law to His cross and, thereby, removed it (Colossians 2:14). Paul declares that Christ in His flesh abolished the law of commandments. We are still under law today. It is called the law of Christ, perfect law of liberty and the law of the Spirit (Galatians 6:2; James 1:25 , Romans 8:2). He abolished or removed the Law of Moses. He did so by fulfilling all the law and all the prophets said about Him. We now serve under the Law of Christ.
DID OUR FOREFATHERS HAVE IN THEIR MINDS THE IDEA THAT AMERICA WAS TO BE A CHRISTIAN NATION?
Much has been written to disprove the above idea. Our forefathers were striving to establish a new nation. At
the heart of the desire was that the Church of England would not
dictate to the colonies the religion of the Church of England. Though
our founding fathers did not understand Christianity as we do from the
Scriptures, they were constantly speaking about God and His Son, Jesus
the Christ. Their perception was the
religion of Jesus the Christ was the one true religion and that this
nation would survive down through the years if we kept that religion
uppermost in our minds.
All one needs to do is look around the world. Could one today go into any Moslem country and build a building to worship God, or a synagogue or temple? Could
one go into any country where far eastern religions are dominant and
expect to have no trouble establishing another religion? Yet,
in this country, men can build mosques, synagogues, temples and
churches with no threat from reasonable men in this country. That is what our forefathers had in mind and they knew the practice of the religion of Jesus Christ would insure that attitude.
We are far from a God-fearing nation, but we are a religious nation. The
next time there is a natural disaster, stop and see how many of our
local saloons collect things to be sent to the disaster relief. The relief comes from a religious nation of people who have been influenced by the teachings of Jesus the Christ.
DURING THIS HOLIDAY SEASON DO WE NEED TO EXERCISE CAUTION REGARDING THE RELIGIOUS WORLD AROUND US?
The religious world has long held the idea that December the 25th is the birthday of Jesus, hence, on or around that day, they have special services to commemorate the birthday of Jesus. We should, as Christians, know that the Bible nowhere reveals to us the day on which Christ was born, as to month or year. That His birth should be preached about should go without saying. We should teach men on occasions about the virgin birth of Jesus and its implications to us today. We can teach lessons about the character of people like Joseph and Mary and the courage they both exhibited.
However, when we choose to do it only on or around December the 25th, we leave the wrong impression with the world that we are striving to influence toward truth. If “Silent Night” is a proper song to be sung, then we do damage if the only time we sing it is the last two weeks or so of December. Songs that are psalms, hymns and spiritual songs should not be regulated to something called “Christmas carols”.
We do not help the world to understand the truth by allowing ourselves to join in with them in their false notions and practices. While we are here, there is, likewise, no need to have a “sunrise” service at something called Easter.