“What is the sin that cannot be pardoned?  What is blaspheme?”  ~ Glen Gannon Your inquiry doubtless refers to the following passages. “Then was brought unto him one possessed with a devil, blind, and dumb: and he healed him, insomuch that the blind and dumb both spake and saw. And all the people were amazed, and said, Is not this the son of David? But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils. And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand: And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand? And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges. But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom is come upon you. Or else how can one enter into a strong man’s house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house. He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad. Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever …

There is no confusion among brethren of which I am aware regarding who the Holy Spirit is.  Scripture clearly identifies the Holy Spirit as one of three Divine persons who comprise the Godhead.  Matthew 28:19 represents the three persons of the Godhead as Divine equals of the same unit or Godhead, by whose authority the “Great Commission” baptism is authorized and commanded.  “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.”  In short, the Holy Spirit is no more rightly an “it” than the “Father” or the “Son,” and Scripture otherwise attributes personal qualities to the Holy Spirit. The Spirit Attributed with Characteristics of A Person The Spirit descends: Mat 3:16, “And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:”  Joh 1:32-33, “And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him. And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.” The Spirit leads: Mat 4:1, “Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.”  Rom 8:14, “For as many as are led by the Spirit of …

Let’s say that a non-Christian couple gets divorced.  Then one of them gets remarried to another non-Christian.  Then the new married couple study and get baptized.  Must they separate or can they remain married?  This is a question that is causing a lot of problems in our congregation.  Thank you for your assistance. At least two questions relate to the inquiry above:  (1) “Are non-Christians obligated to obey God’s marriage law?” and (2) “What is involved in biblical repentance and baptism?” (Acts 2:38).  Answering these two questions will provide an obvious and irrefutable solution to the dilemma. First, this sort of inquiry is affected by extreme emotional investment that tends to overshadow the unobstructed use of reason and will-power.  Every religious question deserves a strictly biblical answer.  We should not want anything else, and we ought to surrender our emotions, reason or intellect and will-power to the mind of God on every matter that is addressed by divine revelation.  After all, when each of us crosses the threshold of eternity, we will be judged by God’s law under which we lived–not by what we wished God’s law permitted.  Therefore, it behooves each of us now, irrespective of how painful the decisions may be, to ensure that we bring ourselves into compliance with the mind of God–revealed upon the pages of inspiration. Second, “Are non-Christians obligated to obey God’s marriage law?”  In other words, “Are non-Christians amenable to the Gospel of Christ?”  God’s marriage law is part of the Gospel of …

My husband and I are both members of the church.  This is my second marriage and after many years of studying, I feel we are in an unscriptural marriage.  We have been married 22 years and have three children.  We have a wonderful marriage and family and love each other very much.  I also love God and want to do what is right so that I can someday have eternal life with Him.  Could you please advise me on how to handle this situation?  Would a divorce be necessary or could we continue to live together but no longer share the same bedroom and have sexual relations? A divorce would present several problems.  Financially, it would be very hard for us to have two households.  We have a large room we could turn into an apartment for one of us.  This would save us from upkeeping another home.  I have never worked outside the home so I would not have health insurance.  I have an illness called systemic lupus which makes it hard to get insurance.  My husband now has me under his insurance at work.  Of course, emotionally, it would be so hard on the entire family. I have read many articles on marriage, divorce, and remarriage.  Not one has dealt with the problem of how to get out of an unscriptural marriage and how it affects the family.  I would greatly appreciate your help and look forward to hearing from you soon. P.S. Please recommend any books that …

Hello.  I would appreciate it if you would read the following and get back to me on your thoughts about it. I am a member of the Church of Christ and I am very concerned over the status of the church in which I attend.  You see a few months ago, we had Elders (2 in number).  One of those Elders felt that he, due to his age and recent sickness was no longer able to serve as an Elder.  The other Elder was also the preacher.  The Eldership of the Church was dissolved because Brother Bell resigned as Elder.  There are still no Elders today.  Yet there are men qualified, who desire the office.  Is it right for the Church to go on without Elders.  The preacher (who was one of the Elders) preached many sermons on the Eldership and Deaconship (which was dissolved due to this also).  He preached that there should be a committee of 2 men to be over the appointment of Elders.  At first he taught that the faithful Christian men of the Congregation would okay 2 men and then it would be brought before the Congregation for 2 weeks, then Elders would be appointed.  Is committees right and is the Church right for having gone on this long without Elders?  Should Elders have been selected before the Eldership was dissolved?  I would appreciate your thoughts on this subject, because I am very concerned about the Church in which I attend.  Thank you and I …

I am researching the Bible translation controversy involving the King James Version of the Bible Vs the new translations.  The New King James, NIV, NASB, etc.  Do you have any articles or debates that you could send me regarding this issue?  Do you have an opinion on which Bible is the best to use and whether the new translations should be used?  I would sure appreciate any help you could give me in this regard. All Bible translations have some weaknesses and most translations have some strengths.  The weaknesses of many Bible translations are significant either because (1) they adversely affect Bible doctrine or (2) the weaknesses are so numerous.  In my opinion, three Bible translations whose weaknesses are far overshadowed by their strengths, and which do not contain doctrinal error, are the: King James Version, American Standard Version and the New King James Version.  Most of the rest of the Bible translations have varying degrees of weaknesses that: (1) make them unreliable as translations, (2) compromise Bible doctrine in favor of denominational dogma, (3) are not really translations at all, (4) are actually vulgar, and/or (5) are the products of translators who do not esteem verbal inspiration and consequently have little compulsion to preserve the actual message through the translating process. The sheer number of new Bible translations in modern time is itself suspicious.  Our language does not undergo dramatic changes as often as new English translations are marched off the assembly lines of the publishers.  Hence, a motive …

John’s baptism was for the remission of sin. Did those who obeyed John’s baptism have to be rebaptized on the day of Pentecost? Thank you so much. I enjoy the good web-site you have. ~ Mack Bennett As the questioner correctly notes, “John’s baptism was for the remission of sin.” Mack Bennett poses a valid and interesting question (“Did those who obeyed John’s baptism have to be rebaptized on the day of Pentecost?”), though, a question of merely academic significance, since everyone now living has always and only been subject to the baptism of the Great Commission. Below is an excerpt from my book, The Church Divine, which addresses the question before us. In the closing days of the Jewish dispensation, a prophet of God initiated what became known as “the baptism of John” (Acts 18:25) or “John’s baptism” (Acts 19:3). This water baptism was practiced by John the Baptist, his disciples and the disciples of Jesus. Everything John the Baptist did, including the baptism he administered, prepared the way for the Messiah and his kingdom (Matt. 3:1-6). John the Baptist urged his auditors to: (1) repent and be baptized for the remission of sins (Mark 1:4) and (2) believe on the Christ who would come after him (Acts 19:4). However, this baptism was preparatory and temporary; it was valid only if practiced before the establishment of the church (Acts 19:1-6). John’s baptism was for the remission of sins in prospect of the death-burial-resurrection of Christ, much the way people formerly living under …

This could develop into a very serious issue here if not resolved successfully. . . . We have a brother in a congregation planning to write a book advancing the proposition that women are to remain absolutely silent in the worship service.  He believes the Scriptures forbid a woman from making comments or answering questions in a Bible class even when under the authority of a man teaching that class. . . . There are some others with a similar stance.  These brethren want to see some hard core evidence that they are wrong before they will change. ~ Richmond, VA Presumably the brethren whose proposition is represented above do not prohibit women from singing in the worship assembly.  If I understand correctly, the doctrine being advanced is that since women are biblically required to be silent in the worship assembly (except for singing), the same restriction regarding silence applies equally to women in the Bible classes typically conducted in our church buildings. First, as I indicated in the preceding paragraph, the question at hand involves a doctrine (teaching) which brethren desire to enjoin on other Christians.  The task at hand is to ascertain whether this is a biblical doctrine.  I submit, and propose to demonstrate below, that it is not! Second, the doctrine being advanced in the question above results from a fundamental misunderstanding of the distinction between a worship assembly and studying the Bible outside the worship assembly.  Once it is clearly established that the Bible class and the worship assembly are not the …

Bev Weddle writes in response to an article of mine appearing on the internet: I read your comments about the role of women.  I’ve been reading the same thing for years and you have a right to your interpretation of the scripture.  I would like for you to understand though that your words are wrong in my case when you say those that have a problem with women’s submission have “diminished respect for the authority of God and his holy word.”  I have the highest regard for God and his Word and believe it and will live by it.  But, I believe in the mutual submission of all people men and women alike.  Christ is the head of my home and has the last word in all that is done.  I lived under the heavy hand of male oppression for years and have found freedom in Christ.  I’m not using it as license to do as I please but I’m am no longer willing to be under the bondage the church and it’s leaders have tried to put on me for years.  There are some like me out here who do have the highest regard for God and his word yet do disagree with you.  Chaplain Bev Weddle First, I respectfully submit that the reason that you have heard for years about the submission of women in the home and in religion is because Scripture teaches that doctrine.  In recent years, largely due to societal changes, contemporary modifications have affected …

God created Lucifer “the devil”. He obviously knew that Lucifer would try to overthrow Him, and that He would eventually banish him to. When humans do something “wrong” they attribute their behavior to the devil, “the devil is to blame, the devil is the father of evil and the devil made me do it,” they say. The devil is responsible for everything bad, everything that is not good. Ask yourself this: what, where or who was the evil influence on Lucifer when he was a “good” angel and why? Why are people to this day saying that the devil is the worst when he was created like all of us, from the same heavenly body? People say that everything that God creates is good. Ha,ha. respond with a intellectual explanation. One thing that your statement and inquiry appears to overlook is the topic of free will.  God neither created robotic angels nor robotic humans.  Though God through omniscience has the capacity to know the future, inclusive of the fact that Satan and other angels would rebel, and that humanity, likewise, would rebel, he still chose to create angels and humans–with free will. Both Satan and humans bear respective responsibility for their sinful actions.  Despite the fact that Satan introduced temptation to sin into the world, Adam and Eve were punished for their transgressions–because they were guilty. Every passage that calls upon mankind to respond in a designated way implies the capacity of mankind to satisfactorily respond of his own free …

Strictly speaking, there is no “Sunday-Sabbath” or “Christian Sabbath” (pertaining to a day of the week). When God inaugurated Judaism upon Mt. Sinai, he established the seventh day of the week as the day of worship. “Keep the sabbath day to sanctify it, as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee. Six days thou shalt labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, nor thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thine ox, nor thine, nor any of thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates; that thy manservant and thy maidservant may rest as well as thou. And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the LORD thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the LORD thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath day” (Deuteronomy 5:12-15). God patterned the Jewish Sabbath according to God’s creation of the world in six days, ceasing from his creating on the seventh day. “For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it” (Exodus 20:11). However, both Patriarchy and Judaism (the Old Testament, inclusive of the Ten Commandments or so-called moral law) have been replaced with the …

“How do you explain Romans 5!? in relation to Original Sin. How do you explain from the psalms, ‘In sin did my mother conceive me and in sin was I born.  Psalm 51.’ How do you explain the verse that says this promise is for you and your children?  How do you explain 1 Peter 3:21 This baptism now saves you. and Go and make disciples of all nations-  i.e.  the means of making a disciple is baptism and teaching.  Infants are included in all nations. The fact is that you are still under the guidance of Rome.  You want to explain away the true gospel by adding in your own work of reasoned assent to the Gospel.  Any decision we make for Christ was urged and guided upon us by the Holy Spirit creating faith within us.  We have nothing to do with it.” I am personally acquainted with the doctrine of original sin, as I was reared in Catholicism.  However, based on the following biblical principles, it is no longer my belief that original sin is a divine doctrine.  Further, the doctrine of original sin was unknown until introduced in the 14th century according to Merriam Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, among other resources.  Obviously, that doctrine, then, was introduced too late to be divine and eternal in origin.  The doctrine of Immaculate Conception was not devised to shield the mother of Jesus from the supposed original sin until the year 1687.  The doctrine of total depravity, which is Calvinism’s …

Jesus addressed two subjects in Matthew Chapter 24.  In verse 1, Jesus and his disciples observed the magnificent temple and its associated buildings.  It was a mammoth structure that had been under construction for decades.  In verse 2, Jesus remarked that the facility would be utterly destroyed.  The astonished apostles imagined that such could not occur short of the end of the world.  This prompted them to ask Jesus questions in verse 3.  Grammatically, they asked three questions.  They thought they were essentially asking one question with related parts.  Really, the asked two distinctly different questions: (1) about the destruction of the world, (2) about the end of time when the Messiah would return. The balance of Matthew 24 is devoted to the answers to these two questions.  In verses 4-34, Jesus primarily answered the query regarding the destruction of the city of Jerusalem.  In verses 35-51, Jesus primarily answered the question about the end of time and when the Messiah would return.  All of Matthew Chapter 25 also concerns the end of time when the Messiah would return. Verse 34 signals the close of the discourse about the destruction of Jerusalem by announcing that the events mentioned in the preceding verses would be fulfilled within the generation of the disciples to whom he was speaking.  “Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.”  Appropriately, so-called signs of the times  were to be discernible prior to the destruction of Jerusalem (i.e., “For nation …