A crucial question is coming to the forefront in America today that is becoming a major concern for Christians, or at least it should be a major concern. The question is: How tolerant should Christians be of sinful practices (as identified in the Bible) and when and to what extent may Christians manifest intolerance? This matter can be, and is, taken to two extremes: On the one hand, there is the extreme of complete tolerance for everybody and everything someone may choose to believe and/or practice within the framework of their religious beliefs, political preferences and moral standards, to the point of saying, “They have the personal right to do as they think; God will accept them if they are honest and sincere about it, and if that is what they want, more power to them.” On the other hand, there is the extreme of intolerance for everybody and everything they choose to believe and/or practice that is outside the framework of one’s own religious beliefs, political preferences and moral standards, having the desire to enforce conformity to the extent of using all available means of coercion, persecution and violence, lawfully or unlawfully in regard to the law of the land. Both extremes are totally outside the letter and spirit of Christianity as set forth by directives from the Lord and by his examples. Certainly, Christians are not to be “weak as water” flowing with the “tide,” but neither are they to be radical “rabble-rousers.” Christians must know what is …

The first year we were in Italy, I had a Bible study with two teenagers in Cervignano. We were studying the parable of the Prodigal Son. I will never forget the exclamation of Michele Zanel, who having read Luke 15 for the first time ever in his life said, “Che Padre!” (What a father!) And the parable reveals the heart of the Father, God. It is the heart of the Father that Hosea experienced in the heartbreak of his marriage to his unfaithful wife Gomer. The name given to the second child born was “Lo-Ruhama,” which means ‘no mercy.” The name given to the third child was “Lo-Ammi,” which means “not my people.” They were terrible names! But they were names of truth, telling of the unfaithfulness of Gomer to Hosea. And they were names symbolizing the spiritual adultery of the Israelites who had forsaken God to follow the idols of the Canaanites. But the Book of Hosea doesn’t end with just an indictment of Israel’s unfaithfulness. No, the greatness of the prophecy is found in the revelation of God’s continuing love for his people. In Hosea 2:23, God declares: “And I will have mercy on her who had not obtained mercy; then will I say to those who were not My people, you are My people! And they shall say, ‘You are my God!’” Again God says,”I will heal their backsliding, I will love them freely, for My anger has turned from him” (Hosea 14:4). Che Padre! It is …

I. Four Definitions The dictionary gives four definitions of the word “saint”: 1. a holy person; 2. a person who is exceptionally meek, charitable, patient, etc.; 3. [S] a member of certain religious groups calling themselves “Saints”; 4. in certain churches, a person officially recognized as having lived an exceptionally holy life, and thus as being in heaven and capable of interceding for sinners; a canonized person. II. Comments 1. There are holy people in all religions: “consecrated or set apart to a sacred use” (Webster). Christians are told: “as he who called you is holy, you yourselves be holy in all your manner of life, for it is written, ‘You shall be holy, because I am holy’” (1 Peter 1:15-16). But more than holiness is required to make a Christian saint. 2. There are people “exceptionally meek, charitable, patient, etc.,” in all and out of all religions. Christians are told: “Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth” (Matthew 5:5, KJV). “And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity” (1 Corinthians 13:13, KJV). “Be patient, therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord” (James 5:7). But more than meekness, charity, and patience are required to make a Christian saint. 3. Outstanding among the religious groups who call themselves “Saints” is the Mormon Church, with the name “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints,” founded in 1810 in Fayette County, New York State, by Joseph Smith, Jr., 1800 years too …

A particular emotional appeal as to the value of the Olympics takes the form of focusing on poorly trained athletes from underdeveloped countries who come with an abundance of heart to at least compete in the world’s spectacle of their sport. These athletes are poorly trained because they don’t have the practice time (due to work schedules) or the opportunity (due to facility deficiencies) equal to their competitors from advanced societies. In those economically advanced regions, athletes may be able to train all day, every day at state-of-the-art facilities with well-funded coaches and programs. They, therefore, should be contenders. But, no one expects these highlighted individuals from the third-world countries to do well in a sport. Why point them out? Because these are those who come for more glorious reasons than a medal. They come to represent the upward progress of a nation which warrants their patriotic loyalty. They represent the virtue of effort in the face of horrible odds. They shine with values of selflessness–building upon their losses (and possible embarrassment) to pave the way for others who will come after them. The appeal of such athletes does strike a heart-chord in many spectators. As one is reported to have put it, these are not here to win their races, but simply to finish. Can the Bible student help but be reminded of the analogy the apostle Paul drew from the games of his day? Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but …

If you ask the average person in the Lord’s church what is meant by the term “dispensation” in the Bible, if he is a preacher or a person who has done personal evangelism, he will probably tell you that it refers to one of the three dispensations or time periods in the Bible, called the Patriarchal Age, the Mosaic Age and the Christian Age. That probably does very little damage, but is an indication of how most of us are accustomed to hear some idea that catches our fancy, and assume that we have learned some valuable biblical truth. Many of us have done this with such words as “atonement,” “justification” and various other terms. It is said that the basic meaning of atonement is “at-one-ment” showing that we are now “at one” with God. Justification is said to mean, “just as if I had never sinned.” Neither of these statements is accurate. It is true that the result of atonement is that we are “at one” with God. If a sinner is justified from his sins, the result is that he is treated as if he had never sinned. But the word “justification” does not mean that, for one may “justify God” (Luke 7:29). To justify simply means “to reckon righteous.” These errors are not serious enough to accuse anyone of teaching false doctrine nor will they cause some soul to be lost. However, they are a symptom of a serious disease. That disease is a widespread satisfaction with mediocrity and partial truths …

How do we know that the sixty-six books that make up our Bible are the only writings that should be included in Holy Scripture? Do the Apocrypha, the Gnostic Gospels, the Gospels of Thomas or Barnabas belong in the canon? Why should these books not be included in the Bible? The answer to these questions lies in the concept of canonicity. The English word “canon” comes from Hebrew and Greek words both of which mean, “a measuring rod.” This signifies that there is a standard that must be met by all books that make up the Bible. There are several inadequate views of what the standard for canonicity should have been, such as the age of the writing, its agreement with the Torah, if written in Hebrew or its religious value. But each of these criterions is reached by making a common mistake, which is, they confuse God’s determination of what Scripture is with man’s recognition of what it is. In the final analysis, whatever the Holy Spirit moved a servant of God to write is inspired and belongs in the canon, and whatever is the mere writing of man does not! There are several crucial questions that have been asked by scholars in the church in determining which books are to be accepted as canonical. The first and most basic is, “Was the book(s) written by a recognized prophet of God?” Deuteronomy 18:18 tells us that only a prophet of God will speak the Word of God. And we …

The other day I was talking to one of the older men from our community. We were wrapped up in the usual small talk about how wet and dreary the weather was or how we like fresh onions out of the garden, when Bud said, “You know what I heard the other day while I was having coffee down at the store?” When I heard “down at the store” a red flag went up because it’s one of the gathering places for the older fellas like Bud and there’s usually not a shortage of tall tales, gossip and lies around those small tables setting over in the corner of our local grocery store. “They’re puttin’ a McDonald’s in that new school building!” Bud said working himself up into a lather. Then he went on about how he was tired of that school using all his tax money for all the fancy stuff they have in schools now days. I’m sure Bud was one of those poor individuals who had to walk ten miles to school barefooted, in the snow, uphill both ways. A friend of mine was sitting there with me and we tried to tell Bud that it was probably illegal to have a business located in a public school building, but this didn’t put a dent in Bud’s belief that what he’d heard at the store was anything short of the Gospel truth. The story that Bud had heard was harmless enough, though it did get him riled …

Our Lord Jesus Christ instructs us in this important matter as recorded in Matthew 7:1-2: “Judge not, that you be not judged. For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you.” This passage of Scripture is often referred to by many who endeavor to prove that we should never condemn the actions of others. Usually this is the case when teaching is being done against doctrinal error and/or immoral living. A person may be guilty of fornication and efforts are made to correct such sin in a person’s life and the response is generally something like this, “You ought not to be judging your fellowman.” Especially is this true in our pluralistic society in which we presently live. Relatively to the varied doctrines of different denominations, many religious leaders/authors will teach that we should let everyone alone in what they teach and practice in the field of religion. It is sad to note that this liberal attitude has even permeated the church of our Lord. One preacher in a large metropolitan church prayed to God following his sermon on worship in song and asked God to forgive us of our being so critical and judgmental of those churches that use instrumental music in their worship to God. Often such reasoning is based on what Jesus said in the passage that we are now discussing. But, is this really what Jesus was saying? One rule of biblical …

Choices in life are inevitable. Many times, we are not conscious that we are making a choice because we have done the same thing for so long. God’s Word records the decisions of his great characters throughout biblical history. Adam chose to eat the forbidden fruit; Noah chose to obey and build an ark; Abraham chose to obey and leave his home country. The writer of Hebrews tells us of the choice of Moses. He chose to leave Egypt and to cast his lot with the people of God. Then there is the choice of Jesus as he prayed in the Garden of Gethsemane: “O My Father, if this cup cannot pass away from Me unless I drink it, Your will be done.” This choice gave you and me the hope of eternal life with God. Sometimes choices are not easy to make, and God never promised that they would be. He did promise, however, that if we will make the proper choices, the crown of life will be ours. Such a choice was given to, and by Joshua in the long ago. “And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD”(Joshua 24:15). Let us learn some things from his statement. …

[The Mountain Messenger, Volume 2, Numbers 3, March 2005, Crum, WV] Just because one claims to be something in particular, does not necessarily mean that person is what he claims to be. For instance, here in the Crum, WV area some years ago a man came and claimed to be a doctor. He seemed to have all the necessary documentation, and he set up an office and began seeing patients. He administered medicines, and even gave shots. In fact, he became rather popular among the area folks before he was shown to be a fraud. He had not graduated from medical school, and had not passed the necessary boards in order to practice medicine. He had been a medic in the Navy, and had forged the documents. Needless to say, many folks were surprised and amazed at the revelation of this man’s pretense. Not long ago I was talking with some of the older folks about this, and one of them said, “You know, I liked him. He was a really nice guy, and he WAS a good doctor…” Well, the fact is …HE WAS NO DOCTOR AT ALL!!!! He was only pretending to be one, and defrauding people in this area. No matter how nice and kind he was…no matter if he might have correctly diagnosed someone’s illness and treated it properly…he was NOT a doctor, for he had not met the necessary conditions to be one. Just because one says he is a Christian does not necessarily make it so either. …

In the book Seventy Years in Dixie, T. W. Caskey recounts the general opinion of preachers and styles in the early 1800’s, when he said, “The people formed their opinions of a sermon, not so much from what the preacher said, as the way he acted.” The serious business of saving men’s souls demanded the utmost fervency in their minds. A mistake was made then, and now, of preferring style to substance. In contrast to the fiery prophets of that by-gone era, Alexander Campbell, a contemporary, held audiences in rapt attention for hours with an unaffected simplicity of manner almost wholly without gesticulation. One of the greatest preachers of our generation, in my judgment, is a man whose speaking style might be called monotone, and who hardly moves an inch in any direction behind the pulpit, but whose knowledge of the Bible, preparation and use of words are nothing short of amazing. To expect this man to throw fire down the isles while running all around the pulpit would be like mixing oil and water. As I recall, the New Testament teaches us to take heed how we hear (Luke 8:18), and what we hear (Mark 4:24). This places the weight of importance on substance rather than style. In many cases, error is camouflaged in pleasing personalities and powerful appeals. It is still a problem that many times people are not listening to what a preacher says as much as how he says it.

I am outraged! My anger is due to an affront from within religious academia against our Savior. Dr. Theodore W. Jennings is an ordained minister with the United Methodist Church. He is also a professor of biblical and constructive theology at Chicago Theological Seminary.1 This past May, Dr. Jennings published a book entitled, The Man Jesus Loved.2 The title relates only the very “tip of the iceberg” in terms of what the author affirms. According to Jennings: Jesus not only condoned homosexual relationships, but He was actually involved in one with John (cf. John 13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20). To exclude people from our fellowship on the basis of their sexual practice is to “distort the Bible generally and the traditions concerning Jesus in particular.” There is a preponderance of biblical evidence (especially in the gospel accounts) that endorses same-sex relationships.3 Permit me to briefly respond to each of the professor’s assertions. Consider: It is blasphemous to insist that our Lord engaged in any form of fornication. Jesus lived under the Mosaic regime (Galatians 4:4; cf. Luke 2:21ff). He revered, endorsed and perfectly obeyed the law in all respects (John 5:46-47; Matthew 5:17-18; 7:12; 22:36ff; 23:23). How then could He engage in that which Mosaic legislation explicitly condemned and forbid (Leviticus 18:22; 20:13; Deuteronomy 23:17)? The Bible is distorted when men wrench it from its original context. “As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which those who are untaught and unstable …