When we speak of New Testament Christianity, we are speaking of the authority God and His Word has in our lives. We live in a world where everything is viewed as being subjective, where the ultimate authority for many is oneself. Such a view has led to distorted understandings about the role of Scripture in one’s life and what a proper response to it should be. Many individuals and many denominations use Scripture to legitimatize their desires, but they are not willing to go to Scripture to allow God to mold their desires in Him. Christianity in the worldly sense may have been tried and found wanting, but New Testament Christianity has yet to be discovered and lived by many. Does doctrine matter? Of course it does! God’s will is not subject to humanity’s whims; it has been once for all delivered (Jude 1:3). Only by allowing Scripture to be authoritative in one’s life can God accomplish His good will in us, to make us “thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16-17). To alter the teaching of Scripture is to pervert the Gospel and to subject us to eternal condemnation (Galatians 1:8-9). God takes His Word very seriously, and so should we take it very seriously (Revelation 22:18-19). Why does doctrine matter? Only correct doctrine produces a correct lifestyle. “Hold fast the pattern of sound words which you have heard from me, in faith and love which are in Christ Jesus” (2 Timothy 1:13). Only by holding fast …

“Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about its own things. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble” (Matthew 6:34). “Be anxious for nothing…” (Philippians 4:6). A word from one who has trouble practicing these Scriptures: Be thankful they are there. Awareness of evil in the world generally increases with age. Some precious children are exposed to humanity’s injustices earlier than are some pampered adults. Still, the more one knows about the world, the more one knows people mistreat people, the relatively innocent suffer at the hands of the oppressors (cf. Ecclesiastes 4:1), and the privileged and powerful exalt themselves at the expense of the lowly (cf. Matthew 23:14; 2 Timothy 3:6; James 5:5-6). This wicked phenomenon even happens within the Lord’s church (3 John 9-10). It is enough to depress one’s spirit beyond recovery, were it not for the Word of God. The multiple exhortations of divinely offered comfort include: “Do not fret because of evildoers, Nor be envious of the workers of iniquity” (Psalm 37:1). “And why not?” the persecuted might object. “The evil seem to be getting their way! Their riches increase! People believe their slanderous lies!” (cf. Job 21:7-16; 12:6; Jeremiah 12:1; Psalm 109:1-5). Why not fret? Because the God who had the power to create and uphold the world with His Word (Psalm 33:6; Hebrews 1:3) is the One Who has the power to deal – and here’s the key – in His own good time with the wicked. “For they …

Why do Christians listen to the preaching of God’s Word? One reason should be that we might learn, consider and apply the teaching of God’s Word. In 2 Chronicles 18, Ahab (Israel’s king) asked Jehoshaphat (king of Judah) to go with him in battle to Ramoth Gilead to retake the city from the Syrians. Jehoshaphat said I am with you, “but inquire first for the word of the Lord” (v. 4). He said in essence, “Let us check with God first!” In Jeremiah’s time, King Zedekiah did at least one right thing; he asked, “Is there any word from the Lord?” (Jeremiah 37:17). Though he got bad news, it was the truth because it was the Word from the Lord. Today, we too should consider the Word of the Lord. Why consider God’s Word? We should consider God’s Word because it can and will change or impact our lives. The Word of the Lord is described in many ways, but none more interesting than in Jeremiah 23. Jeremiah wept over his people, for they would not consider the Word of God. He wept for them because his people were going to experience God’s wrath if they did not change their ways. They hated Jeremiah for preaching God’s Word, the Truth. They did not want to hear the Truth from God. They wanted to hear the false prophets who said, “Peace, peace when there is no peace” (Jeremiah 6:14). In Jeremiah 23:28-29, God’s Word is described in vivid terms. False prophets …

What about Bible authority? Can one know Bible truth? Is it important that we know Bible truth? These are fair questions. The answer to these questions and other questions about Bible truth are contained in the Bible. Some have the idea and even teach that Bible truth is relative or subjective. What are they saying? They teach that truth to one person is not necessarily truth to another. What this philosophy says is that you can do, teach and practice whatever you desire and God will accept it. If this is the case, there can be no false belief, teaching or practice. If the Bible is relative or subjective, why did Jesus say, “Beware of false prophets…” (Matthew 7:15)? How can we “try the spirits…” (1 John 4:1)? How could we all “speak the same thing…”(1 Corinthians 1:10)? Would it be possible to do all this if the Bible is relative or subjective? The fact is, these verses cannot be obeyed without believing and understanding the Bible alike. The truth is – Bible truth is absolute and objective. Some would have us to believe it is impossible to attain fully Bible truths. Can we all attain Bible truth? Jesus says we can (John 8:32). Yes, truth can be known. Not only can one know truth, one must know it in order to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4). If truth is not attainable, why is study required (2 Timothy 2:15; John 5:39; Acts 17:11; Psalm 1:1-2)? The fact is, Bible truth can be known, that is, …

Perhaps you recall in 2009 the media hype about the discovery of an alleged “missing link” fossilized skeleton, dubbed “Ida” (Franzen, et al., 2009). The media boldly issued statements, with no disclaimers, such as, “Scientists have found a 47-million-year-old human ancestor” (Public Library of Science, 2009). Ida was added to the list of alleged missing links in the line between humans and our supposed distant primate ancestor – one by one of which have proven to be false, though many have not gotten the memos on the matter. ScienceDaily unabashedly dubbed Ida “a transitional species,” as though the case had been closed and the truth had been conclusively substantiated (2009). In 2009, Jorn Hurum, world-renowned Norwegian fossil scientist of the Oslo Natural History Museum and co-discoverer of Ida, said, “This is the first link to all humans… truly a fossil that links world heritage” (Public Library of Science, 2009). Philip Gingerich of the Museum of Paleontology at the University of Michigan and co-discoverer of Ida said, “It’s really a kind of Rosetta Stone” (Public Library of Science, 2009). Pretty grandiose claims, to be sure, but hardly uncommon among evolutionary paleontologists today, who tend to be quick to claim evidence for evolutionary theory without adequate evidence. According to ScienceDaily, Ida lacked “two of the key anatomical features found in lemurs: a grooming claw on the second digit of the foot, and a fused row of teeth in the middle of her lower jaw known as a toothcomb” (2009). Instead, supposedly Ida’s talus bone linked …

Since the beginning of time, mankind has been unwilling to take credit for his own actions when there was a question of right and wrong and the wrong was chosen. If an action is not right, we want to blame someone else. Of course, that is not true when good may come of a decision, because we are quick to jump out front and take credit for that action. However, let us look at Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. God had given strict instructions (Genesus 2:17; 3:3, 17) for them not to eat of nor even touch the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, which grew in the midst of the garden. Yet, we all know the story. Satan came and convinced Eve that she would not die if she disobeyed God and ate of the forbidden tree. Contrarily, the Devil convinced her that she would become as a god if she ate of it. Therefore, she succumbed to Satan’s temptation and did eat it. She then saw that it was good for food and gave it to Adam, and he ate it also. There is no indication that he even questioned about where the fruit came from. He just ate it, but when God came to them and questioned them, Adam said, “The woman whom You gave to be with me gave me of the tree and I did eat” (Genesis 3:1). Not only was Adam quick to blame his woman, but in the …

I have always believed that the Bible is a many-faceted book. I know that there are difficult doctrinal passages. Peter affirmed that some of what Paul wrote was “hard to be understood” (2 Peter 3:16). There is an abundance of Bible “stories” (word used advisedly, since true characters doing real things is the actual fact). These all help us to be patient and comforted in God (Romans 15:4). However, I also truly believe that beyond the deep theological matters, that are there of necessity, and that answer many of our questions, and beyond the doctrinal discourses, such as the nature of God, His Son, the church, etc., that the Bible is truly an owner’s manual, written so that we can better know how to live every day and deal with every day issues in our lives. One simple example would be to any of us that are employed at all. Have you ever been so frustrated with your boss that you just found yourself giving up and not wanting to try anymore? Have you ever been mistreated over a mistake you made, or even worse, maybe one you are being accused of making that you did not make? I would say that most of us have been in the boat where we find it difficult to work for the boss we have. When the Scriptures speak of the master-slave relationship, as the New Testament does often, the exact application does not exist today; yet, the passages on this subject serve as …

Throughout history, God has called various men to fulfill His purposes. We are probably familiar with the question God raised to the prophet Isaiah when he said, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” to which Isaiah responded, “Here am I, send me” (Isaiah 6:8). Likewise, when God spoke to Moses out of the burning bush, Moses also said, “Here am I” (Exodus 3:4). However, instead of saying, “send me,” as did Isaiah, Moses basically said, “Send Aaron” (Exodus 3:13-14). One man made himself available to God, while the other man made excuses. While God does not call us in the same manner today as he once did, he calls us nonetheless. God still needs men and women to fulfill his purposes. Will you say, “No” to God? When your help is needed in your local church, when you’re called upon to meet a need (e.g. teach a class, publicly serve in the worship, maintenance at the building, promote and attend special services through the week, visit the sick, transport people to and from church, prepare meals for the sick and shut-ins, etc.), do you make excuses? Do you say, “No”? Or, do you say, “Here am I, send me?” When examining the life of Moses, it is easy to see the error of having a “Here am I, send Aaron” attitude. However, like many things, it is just harder to see the same error when we embrace it ourselves. Take a good look at your own …

The following story came across my email the other day, and although it is not true, I would like to make an important point with it. The story goes as follow: In Florida, an atheist created a case against Easter and Passover Holy days. He hired an attorney to bring a discrimination case against Christians and Jews and observances of their holy days. The argument was that it was unfair that atheists had no such recognized days. The case was brought before a judge. After listening to the passionate presentation by the lawyer, the judge banged his gavel declaring, “Case dismissed!” The lawyer immediately stood, objecting to the ruling saying, “Your honor, How can you possibly dismiss this case? The Christians have Christmas, Easter and others. The Jews have Passover, Yom Kippur and Hanukkah, yet my client and all other atheists have no such holidays…” The judge leaned forward in his chair saying, “But you do. Your client, counsel, is woefully ignorant.” The lawyer said, “Your Honor, we are unaware of any special observance or holiday for atheists.” The judge said, “The calendar says April 1st is April Fool’s Day. Psalm 14:1 states, ‘The fool says in his heart, there is no God.’ Thus, it is the opinion of this court, that, if your client says there is no God, then he is a fool. Therefore, April 1st is his day. Court is adjourned!” As I was thinking about this fictitious story, I realized that this year April Fool’s Day …

I have been amazed, discomfited, disturbed, chagrined and even dismayed at times when I read articles or hear discussion that implies that the grace of God somehow frees us from law or from the necessity of obeying law. As we have tried to point out many times, it establishes law (Cf. Romans 3:31) for without law one would not know how to accept that grace. It is almost impossible to conceive of one who cared about God at all becoming enmeshed in the blinding folds of denominationalism to the extent that one would deny the importance of obeying the commands of God! For preachers in the body of Christ to do it staggers the imagination. In my efforts to try to discover how brethren can get that way (for my natural tendency is to try to justify or excuse my brethren rather than criticize or condemn), I came across this thought: Are some who are teaching freedom from law really trying to say “freedom from the bondage of the law”? I would like to affirm that, in a very marvelous sense, we are, in Christ, freed from bondage of law. Yet, that sense needs to be explained or understood in the light of all God says about it, or one may, even there, fall into egregious error. An illustration or two may help to clarify how we are, in a sense, freed from bondage of law. Back before the speed limit was set at 55 mph, I was accustomed to …

John Calvin, famed 16th century reformer, taught many preachers who attended his theological school in Geneva, Switzerland. Since the teaching of German reformers heightened Calvin’s interest in theology, he decided to continue his study in the realm of religion instead of pursuing law. Over some 25 years, he wrote, edited and set his beliefs down in a formal record known as The Institutes of the Christian Religion. His influence continues to be felt more than four centuries after his death by tuberculosis, while the doctrines he made so popular have found a place in the heart and creeds of as many as 80 to 90 percent of mainline denominations. Calvin’s doctrine held that every man born into the world upon birth became infected, as it were, by Adam’s sin, often referred to as “Original Sin.” It is claimed that we do not only experience the effects of Adam’s sin, but we also inherit his guilt of sin (cf. Ezekiel 18:20), and our very nature is totally depraved upon birth. Therefore, upon birth, we supposedly were totally depraved and hateful toward God and everything good and holy, deserving God’s condemnation and the wrath of hell. This is his doctrine of total, hereditary depravity, the unbiblical foundation upon which everything else (equally unbiblical) in his system is built. Calvin’s doctrine imposes limitations on the power of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, which was commissioned by the Lord to be carried into the entire world and delivered to every person. The doctrine of this uninspired, human system suggests …

When men have attacked the veracity of the Bible, they have done so on every level. They have claimed that it is replete with misinformation historically, scientifically, geographically, geologically and every other way known to us. Yet, when its histories are investigated, it is found to be historically correct; when its scientific utterances, though it is not a textbook on science, are investigated, again it is found to be scientifically correct. There is no true scientific discovery known to man, upon which the Bible speaks, that has been found to be false so far as the Bible is concerned. Someone will ask, “Well, what about evolution?” Friends, evolution is not science. It is guesswork based on some peculiarities in nature. It is more voodoo than science, but that is not the point under discussion today. The Bible has been attacked geographically also. It has been claimed that the Bible is not geographically correct when it makes statements dealing with geography. Again, it must be pointed out that the Bible is not a textbook on geography, but when it speaks regarding geography, especially of the middle-eastern world, it speaks correctly. There are those who mock the Bible because it speaks, for example, of going down from Jerusalem to such cities as Caesarea, Tyre or some other city to the north of Jerusalem (Matthew 20:18; Acts 8:1, 5; 9:26, 30; 12:19; 14:26 with 15:1-2; 21:4, 8, 10, 12; 25:9). They say, “We do not go down to the north, we go up!” …

Most of us who have been around awhile have witnessed a hatchet job. For those who may not understand this term, let us define what a hatchet job is. One definition I found said it is, “A false accusation of an offense or a malicious misrepresentation of someone’s words or actions.” A further definition is, “A piece of criticism that destroys someone’s reputation is a hatchet job.” It has been my observation that the one or the group that spreads the hatchet job will slyly leave off any truthful part, thus adding more color to the malicious falsehood. The hatchet man or group is by nature great at being con artists. Some bosses or supervisors have been known to use a hatchet man to do the dirty work. As an example, the hatchet man will get rid of a good worker in order to make room for one who is in the clique. Honesty and integrity are not part of the moral makeup of such a type of people or organization. It is better for all of us if we practice the “Golden Rule.” “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them; for this is the law and the prophets” (Matthew 7:12 KJV). A component of a hatchet job is propaganda. The party line and half-truths have been used for a long time in order to bury truth and righteousness. For Christians, the Word of God, the Bible, is the …

Does the term Ornithorhynchus anatinus mean anything to you? That is the scientific name for a strange looking animal known to most of us as the platypus (often called the duck-billed platypus). The platypus looks like an animal that was put together by some sort of sadistic committee. It has fur, four legs and other features of a mammal (and is classified as such), but it has a bill that looks like a duck’s bill and it lays eggs like a duck and other birds. In their rush to combat secular humanism, militant Islamists, political correctness, and other principles and ideas, many religious leaders, politicians, and others have put together an intellectual platypus. In solemn tones, they tell us that our nation was founded upon Judeo-Christian principles and that these principles are worth preserving. In more excited tones, they will tell us that our Judeo-Christian heritage is at stake and is worth fighting for. It seems ironic to me that, in an attempt to combat such things as political correctness, these people are, themselves, practitioners of a certain kind of political correctness. The thinking seems to be that, since Jews and Christians all claim to worship the same God, they (we) have been lumped together in the public arena of ideas and discussion. However, before we adopt the language of the politicians, theologians and others, it would seem logical to ask a very basic question, “What, exactly, is a Judeo-Christian?” There are some good corollary questions to this one. Here are a few that come to …

I heard a Gospel preacher remark one time that during one of his many missionary trips to India, he spoke to a denominational body of believers who had discarded the use of instrumental music during their periods of worship. Also, they were partaking of the Lord’s Supper on the first day of each week. He instructed them more accurately of the way and immersed the preacher and most of the members into Christ. A few years ago, I read in a brotherhood publication (Restoration Quarterly) that a congregation of the Lord was in existence in Canada during the early to middle part of the 19th century that was not comprised of brethren who had moved there from the United States. For many years, we have known of congregations existing in various parts of Europe and Asia that were not in any way connected with the Campbell-Stone movement in this country during the 19th century. In the study of the Restoration Movement, there is concrete evidence that New Testament churches were in existence before the Campbells became influential in different states (Examples: the Rocky Springs church, Bridgeport, AL was established in 1807 and the Oak Grove church, Rincon, GA was started in 1819). Why am I drawing your attention to these matters? Because there are numerous brethren who are saying that the church of Jesus Christ is so aligned with the Campbells and to culture (mostly southern) that we are merely a denominational body like the rest of the Protestant world. …

Many of the preachers of our day have promoted what they call “The Sinner’s Prayer.” At the close of their sermons, they invite those who are not saved to come forward. Those who do so are then asked to repeat after them a prayer that goes something like this: “Father in heaven, I come before you as a sinner, believing that your Son, Jesus, died on the cross to save me from my sins. I ask you now to forgive me of my sins and accept me as your child. In the name of Christ, I ask this. Amen.” The preacher then announces that those who said the sinner’s prayer have been forgiven of their sins and are now children of God. There is just one thing wrong with the procedure I have described. The Scriptures nowhere talk about “the sinner’s prayer,” and the Lord has not promised to save anyone from his sins through the process of saying such a prayer. This is a prayer – and a doctrine – that has originated with man alone, and those who say such a prayer are deceived into thinking that they have been saved. They are not only not saved, but because they have been deceived into thinking they are saved, they themselves remain lost. Then, they influence others to follow their example, saying the same prayer and thereby remaining in their lost condition as well. Read through the Book of Acts and study carefully the 11 stories of conversion that …

The biblical definition of “repentance” is “to change one’s mind.” The Bible also tells us that true repentance will result in a change of actions (Luke 3:8-14; Acts 3:19; cf. Acts 26:20). The full biblical definition of “repentance” is a change of mind that results in a change of action. In terms of the kingdom, it involves several things. A Change in One’s Allegiance. Kingdom citizens submit their own wills to the will of the King (cf. Matthew 6:10; Romans 6:12-18; Matthew 6:24; 7:21). The King deserves our loyalty, obedience, honor and praise. A Change in One’s Expectations. If all one lives for is today, tomorrow will grow very unappealing. If there is no hope for the future, there is no power for today (cf. Acts 1:9-11; John 14:1-6; 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9). The King deserves our anticipation. A Change in One’s Values. Our culture values success, appearance, image, wealth and independence. The values of kingdom citizens adopt the King’s values and make decisions and choices that reflect His values. The King deserves our cooperation. A Change in One’s Priorities. Priorities reflect personal allegiance, expectations and values. It also determines how I will spend my time and money. Kingdom citizens prioritize their time and money to benefit the King and His kingdom (cf. Matthew 6:24-34, especially vs. 33). Unless the King occupies first place in our lives, He occupies no place. The King deserves our full attention. A Change in One’s Long Mission. Those with no mission in life are aimless and unproductive. James calls them, “double minded.” The King wants His followers …