What is your interpretation of Matthew 19:12? By abstaining from any sexual relations, can one become a eunuch for Christ? “For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother’s womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it” (Matthew 19:12 NKJV). The inquiry concerns the part of the verse that reads, “…there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.” Allegorically or figuratively, not physically or literally, these persons choose to abstain from marriage. H. Leo Boles cited these persons as “…those who voluntarily subdue the natural inclinations and practice self-denial for the sake of ‘the kingdom of heaven’” (Boles). “This means, for the sake of going to heaven, some have chosen to live celibate lives” (Webster 417). There are a number of possible circumstances wherein these virtual eunuchs may either opt to remain celibate or perhaps even involuntarily find themselves required to adopt celibacy, for instance, to comply with God’s law on marriage, divorce and remarriage. These are those normal people who, while sexually perfectly capable of consummating marriage, have the gift to live the single life happily in special service to God, and choose to do so. Paul had the gift and used it for more effective service in the Kingdom by leaving himself free to carry on a wideranging evangelistic ministry. (See …

Someone inquired, “On what day did Jesus ascend back to heaven?” In the first place, it does not matter on what day of the week Jesus Christ Ascended. We are not trying to be dismissive, but simply acknowledge that the Scriptures do not revere the day of our Lord’s Ascension as an occasion as a special day on which to worship. Manmade religions, even those claiming an affinity for Christianity, have manufactured a number of holy days that God through the Bible has not designated. This is not a new practice, but it was occurring in the first century, too (Galatians 4:10-11). Secondly, for centuries beginning with the Catholic Church, Thursday has been associated with Jesus’ Ascension and set aside as a manmade holy day as well. Two days prior to the Sabbath the year Jesus Christ was crucified, our Lord observed the last divinely authorized Jewish Passover meal, instituted the Communion and was later arrested. The following day (Friday) He was crucified and died. On the third day (including Friday), Jesus Christ arose from the grave on the first day of the week (1 Corinthians 15:4; Matthew 28:1). On the 40th day after His resurrection (including the day of His resurrection), Jesus Christ Ascended back to heaven (Acts 1:3, 9). Forty days from the resurrection of Jesus Christ on the first day of the week (Sunday on our calendars) occurs on a Thursday. In addition, the church was established on the first Pentecost following the death, burial, resurrection and Ascension of Jesus Christ. …

My specific reason for sending the book was to then discuss with you the subject of using multiple cups in the observance of the Lord’s Supper, and how we must follow the pattern in all things – including the Lord’s Supper. Am I correct in saying that you currently believe the use of multiple cups is acceptable? I firmly believe that the only way to follow the pattern is to do exactly what Jesus did when He instituted it. He took a single cup, had each person drink from that one cup, and then concluded by telling the Apostles to “DO THIS” in His memory. When someone chooses to use multiple cups, they have CHANGED how Jesus did it. They are no longer doing “THIS” but are instead doing “SOMETHING ELSE.” If we can CHANGE a practice that comes from the very words of Jesus, why could we not do the same for any other teaching in the New Testament? I think you will agree that we may not change anything that was commanded of us. If you believe that using multiple cups is acceptable with God, please tell me, what scriptures do you rely on to reach that conclusion? ~ Jim Rogers Jesus and 12 disciples drank from one cup, it is true; I agree with you. However, 3000 Christians did not drink from one cup; my common sense says that it is impossible for a large congregation to make a large cup containing a thousand liters. So, dear …

A reader of Gospel Gazette Online wrote and asked, “Did Methuselah Die after the Universal Flood?” Methuselah was the grandfather of Noah, and he lived 969 years (Genesis 5:25-29). Genesis 5 provides the ages of the first 10 patriarchs, between and including the Adam and Noah, when their firstborn sons were born. Adding together the ages of those patriarchs when their firstborn sons were born provides, plus adding the 600 years that Noah lived before the flood occurred, shows that the age of the earth at the time of the flood was 1,656 years since creation. Now, adding together the ages of the first seven patriarchs when their firstborn sons were born, through the father of Methuselah – Enoch, one learns that Methuselah was born in the year 687 since creation. Next, add the number of years that Methuselah lived – 969 years, and the result is 1,656 years since creation. Hence, it becomes clear that Methuselah died the same year as the universal flood of Noah’s day. Some suppose that Methuselah died months before the great deluge occurred, whereas others wonder if, instead, Methuselah died in the flood. There is not enough biblical genealogy and chronology to determine whether Methuselah died in the year of the flood before it occurred, or whether he died in the flood with the rest of humanity – except the eight souls on Noah’s Ark (1 Peter 3:20). It is clear, though, that Methuselah did not survive the flood, and he died the year of the flood.

Someone asks, “What is our relationship to the Law of Moses?” Most denominations today persist largely on not knowing the correct, biblical answer to this question. Therefore, this questions is both timely and extremely important. Typically denominational doctrine consists of pulling portions of the Old Testament from the respective contexts of the Bible books that comprise that testament and likewise extracting pieces of the New Testament from their contexts, too. Then, personal opinions and human desires intertwine with the extractions from both testaments to produce distinctive, manmade (rather than divine) doctrines. Hence, each denomination, going through the same procedure with its own concoction of snippets from biblical text in both testaments with the admixture of human ideology, comes up with a different denominational doctrine from other denominations. More importantly, that procedure also results in manmade religions that differ from the church that Jesus Christ died to establish and about which we can read in the New Testament. The Old Testament or the Law of Moses is not the law of God to which Christians must turn today to ascertain divine instruction. The Old Testament or the Law of Moses has been replaced with the New Testament (2 Corinthians 3:6-11; Ephesians 2:15; Colossians 2:14). Specifically, Romans 7:6-7 inform us that the Law of Moses is no longer effective for people living today. “But now we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not …

Someone inquired, “Is the church building sacred?” Church buildings or meetinghouses are not mentioned in the New Testament, and commonly it is agreed that historically there were no churched-owned buildings for the first 200 years after the establishment of the church of the New Testament. Hence, church buildings are not sacred or holy. The New Testament church, instead, was and is a spiritual entity, also sometimes referred to as the kingdom (John 18:36; Colossians 1:2, 13, 18). The word in the Greek means an assembly or those who have been called out. Though the term in a different context refers to any group of individuals called out for a specific purpose, religiously, the word church refers to those who have been called out of the world by the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Those who repent of their past sins and are baptized (immersed, Colossians 2:12) for the remission of their sins (Acts 2:38) are added to the church by Jesus Christ Himself (Acts 2:47). Biblically speaking, the word “church” is used in three senses in the New Testament, none of which occasions refers to a building. First, the word “church” refers to the spiritual body of Christ that our Lord promised to build (Matthew 16:18) and over which He is the Head (Colossians 1:18). This is the church in its universal sense, spanning all places and from generation to generation. Secondly, the word “church” refers to a particular congregation of Christians in some place (1 Corinthians 1:2). Therefore, customarily “the churches of …

Someone inquires, “What are the steps to salvation?” For we who live in the Christian Age, the New Testament holds the answer to this question. There is no more important question, and consequently there could be no more important answer or answers than to this question. There are a number of elements to which the New Testament attributes saving qualities. For some of these elements there is a discernible sequence of steps leading to the forgiveness of past sins. Following is a list of these saving components. God’s Redemptive Plan GOD’S PARTLove (John 3:16)Grace (Ephesians 2:8)Mercy (Titus 3:5)Gospel (Romans 1:16) CHRIST’S PARTThe Blood of Christ (Revelation 1:5)Our Mediator (1 Timothy 2:5) HOLY SPIRIT’S PARTRevelation (2 Peter 1:20-21) MAN’S PARTBible Faith (John 8:24)Repentance (Acts 17:30)Baptism (1 Peter 3:21)Obedience (Hebrews 5:8, 9)Purity (Revelation 22:14)Faithfulness (Revelation 2:10)Love (1 John 2:10)Hope (Romans 8:24)Works (James 2:24)Endurance (Matthew 10:22)Confessing Christ (Romans 10:9-10)Being Born Again (John 3:3-5)Laying Aside Evil (James 1:21)Preaching (1 Corinthians 1:18, 21)Calling on the Name of the Lord (Romans 10:14)Knowledge of the Scriptures (2 Timothy 3:15) As components, all of the above work together toward the salvation of a soul, rather than being a shopping list from which one might select only some of them that one found desirable to the exclusion of the rest. In addition, there is a point at which one receives the forgiveness of sins. Everything before that juncture leads in the direction of salvation. A person must turn exclusively to the Word of God – for we who live …

Clearly, the word “saint” in the New Testament refers to a follower of God, and after the establishment of the Lord’s church, “saint” was a synonym for “Christian” (Acts 9:13). However, the Catholic Church uses the word “saint” in a way different from how it is used in the Bible. In Catholicism, the word “saint” refers to someone who has lived a virtuous and exemplary life, has died and now is in heaven. Furthermore, that person is said to have performed at least two miracles after death from heaven, for which reason the Catholic Church officiates his or her sainthood through its process that it calls canonization. Following canonization, these Catholic saints become the object of veneration or worship to whom prayers are offered. One miracle qualifies a person for the Catholic Church to solemnize one for beatification, and a second miracle leads to canonization. What the Catholic Church or some other manmade religious organization decrees, though, does not alter biblical truth. Jesus Christ, not a man or a group of men or women, is the Head of the church (Colossians 1:18) for which He died (Acts 20:28; Romans 5:8), about which we can read in Scripture (Acts 2:47) and for which He will return someday to take back with Him to heaven (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17). Only Jesus Christ has all authority in heaven and on earth (Matthew 28:18 NKJV). That authority of Christ is related to mankind through the Holy Scriptures (2 Timothy 3:16-17; Jude 3). There are no more new …

A reader put forth the question, “Should women be part of the church business meeting in a congregation without elders?” Presumably, the inquiry means to ask if Christian women should have an equal part with Christian men in making decisions in congregations that do not have elders. It seems implicit that the one asking the question would acknowledge that in congregations where elders serve that only men – the elders who are all men, per Scripture (1 Timothy 3:1-7; Titus 1:5-11) – ought to make the decisions for those congregations. That is an indirect concession that God has designated male leadership in the church (1 Timothy 2:8-14; 1 Corinthians 14:34-35) – as He has done likewise in the home (Genesis 3:16; Ephesians 5:24). God has decreed male leadership religiously and domestically (1 Corinthians 11:3, 8-9). Can a local church exist and function without elders? Yes, it can, and even first century congregations did so for a while before biblically qualified men were appointed to the roles of elders (Acts 14:23). Nevertheless, something important is lacking in every congregation wherein elders have not been appointed (Titus 1:5). Until such time as elders are appointed, it still remains the responsibility of male leadership to make congregational decisions. May women be present when men in a congregation without elders make the actual decisions? In my opinion, it is no more wise to permit such than is it prudent to have men who are not elders or women present in elders’ meetings when they …

A reader inquired, “How many denominations are there?” Doubtlessly, no one truly knows the answer to that question. Estimates range from above 20,000 to move than 30,000, with possibly five or six new ones being established each week. Synonyms for the word “denomination” include “unit” and “brand.” A religious denomination is perceived to be a unit of a larger collection of units that are imagined together to comprise Christianity. Further, religious denominations essentially are thought to be differing brands of Christianity. In truth, though, Jesus Christ died to establish only one church, which belongs to Him (Acts 20:28; Matthew 16:18). He alone is the Head of it (Colossians 1:18). Only He has the authority to govern it (Matthew 28:18 NKJV). Jesus Christ will return someday to take His church back to heaven with Him (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17; John 14:1-3). That church is the one about which we can read in the Bible; it is clearly revealed in the New Testament. Sometimes in Scripture referred to as “the church of God” (1 Corinthians 1:2) or “the churches of Christ” (Romans 16:16), it preceded the Catholic Church by hundreds of years and the first Protestant denomination by about 1,500 years. Wherever today men and women simply obey the Gospel in the New Testament and worship God in His own prescribed way, “the church of God” or the “churches of Christ” assemble in our time. However, the one true church of the Bible is more difficult to discern today than it was in …

Please, I need a biblical answer to this question. Here in Southern Nigeria youths of the Churches of Christ have grouped themselves and started organizing youth forums and evangelism. The youths elect their chairman and other executives annually. The youths would plan and finance the youth lectureship and other evangelical works. The youth would then use their own letterhead and issue invitations to youths and other congregations. The main aim of this youth gathering is to revive the church through evangelism and assist weak congregations. Some gospel ministers are members of this gathering. But there is an influential minister and a few brethren who preach against the activities of the youths, calling it unscriptural. The church is almost divided by this problem. Please, are the activities of the youth unscriptural? Please help me and the churches here. Thanks. This question is not an easy one to answer for a couple of reasons. First, there is not enough comprehensive information provided to be fully aware of some details that could materially affect one’s response. Secondly, brethren who otherwise agree about most aspects of practicing pure, New Testament Christianity disagree about the extent of freedom an individual Christian or individual Christians may have to demonstrate their Christianity without the direct and constant oversight of the elders of the congregation of which they are members, or in the absence of elders, without the consent of the body of faithful, male members. Of course, what members of the churches of Christ do or do …

I would like to know more about the cost of true worship. Is there a cost for true worship? The question is a little vague; it is not clear to me precisely what the one posing the question is asking. However, we will attempt to offer some insight from one perspective at least respecting the cost of true worship. One important ingredient for truly worshipping God is the complete investment of one’s self into his or her Christianity. About 2,000 years ago, Christians in Macedonia, despite extreme poverty, voluntarily contributed from their meager means some funds to relieve the poor saints in Judaea. Once a child of God completely devotes himself to Christianity, dispensing with some of his material possessions is not a challenge. Moreover, brethren, we make known to you the grace of God bestowed on the churches of Macedonia: that in a great trial of affliction the abundance of their joy and their deep poverty abounded in the riches of their liberality. For I bear witness that according to their ability, yes, and beyond their ability, they were freely willing, imploring us with much urgency that we would receive the gift and the fellowship of the ministering to the saints. And not only as we had hoped, but they first gave themselves to the Lord, and then to us by the will of God. (2 Corinthians 8:1-5 NKJV) So, one significant cost of true worship is one’s all submitted to God. This corresponds with the words of our …

Someone inquired, “Did the eunuch from Ethiopia receive the Holy Spirit?” The account of the conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch appears in Acts 8:26-40. The Holy Spirit advised the evangelist Philip to speak to the Ethiopian (v. 29), and later after his conversion, the Spirit somehow whisked Philip away from the presence of the new convert (v. 39). The context in which we read of the conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch does not specify whether he received the Holy Spirit. Other passages indicated that the Holy Spirit in some manner dwells within the Christian (Romans 8:9-16; 1 Corinthians 3:16; 6:19; 1 John 4:13). However, there is widespread confusion as to what it means that the Holy Spirit dwells in one or how that indwelling occurs. Miracles had as their purpose the validation of new revelation from God – the New Testament (Mark 16:20), and the reception of new revelation and validation of it is complete. Therefore, miracles no longer occur today (1 Corinthians 13:8-13). In addition, Christians differ in their understanding as to how the Holy Spirit dwells in them – literally and bodily or through the Word of God. Not at issue is the biblical fact that the Holy Spirit indwells Christians, which would include the Ethiopian eunuch.

Someone muses, “When and where was the pastorate form conceived?” The word “pastorate” relates to the denominational designation of “pastor” for a congregation’s minister or religious leader. “Pastorate” came into use in the English language between 1785 and 1795, according to various dictionaries. The word “pastor” is used in the New Testament as a synonym for the term “elder” (Ephesians 4:11). The Catholic Church redefined its use in the 14th century to apply instead to a minister or priest, according to a number of dictionaries. That is, the word “pastor” came to be applied to a minister before the rise of the first denomination breaking away from the Catholic Church. Subsequently, denominations have continued to apply the word “pastor” to their ministers or religious leaders, but from the beginning of Christianity it was not so. The New Testament uses the terms “elder” (Titus 1:5; James 5:14), “bishops” (Philippians 1:1; 1 Timothy 3:1-7; Titus 1:5-9), “presbytery” (1 Timothy 4:14) and “pastors” (Ephesians 4:11) interchangeably to refer to the plurality of men who meet biblical qualifications and have been appointed to lead a local congregation. There is no biblical basis for using the words “pastor” or “pastorate” to refer to a minister or his work. Anyone interested in doing Bible things in Bible ways and using Bible words in Bible ways will take note and not use the terms “pastor” and “pastorate” in unscriptural ways.

As you see in scripture, dunamis can be applied to the power of the gospel (Romans 1:16), strength from Christ through weakness/affliction (2 Corinthians 12:9), and the power to work miracles (1 Corinthians 12:10, 28-29 – a first century phenomenon). My question is: Would the fact that dunamis is used in a miraculous context as well as receiving strength from Christ (non-miraculously) be justification for one to say that God still works miracles today, if they are meaning that one receives strength according to Romans 1:16 and 2 Corinthians 12:9? I ask this, not from any thought that I would say God worked a miracle, sign, or wonder today (in light of 1 Corinthians 13:8-10).  I ask, though, on the basis of dunamis and anyone who may attempt to make an argument from this word, that miracles can be applied today, but in the context of other works beside what God does DIRECTLY. The Greek word dunamis means, “force (literally or figuratively); specially, miraculous power…” (Biblesoft’s). Vines’s adds that dunamis especially refers to “inherent power” (“Dominion”). Another Greek resource includes these variances in the meaning of dunamis: “ability” (2 Corinthians 1:8), “power” (Acts 1:8), “mighty deed” (Acts 2:22), “ruler” (Romans 8:38-39), “supernatural power” (Ephesians 6:12) and “meaning” (1 Corinthians 14:11) (“Dunamis” Greek-English). Likewise, Thayer’s Greek Lexicon denotes several variables to the way in which dunamis is used in the New Testament: inherent power, the power of miracles, moral power of excellence, the power and influence of riches, power arising from numbers, military power, the meaning of a word. “Words deriving from the stem ‎duna‎- all have the basic …

A reader asks, “Should a Christian attend shows with dancing and music?” The question is too vague and also indicates some misunderstanding as well. The definition of “dancing” is, “a successive group of rhythmical steps or bodily motions, or both, usually executed to music” (“Dancing”). Nowhere in Scripture are Christians forbidden, aside from singing hymns, psalms and spiritual songs in worship (Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16), from enjoying or playing instrumental music. In addition, successive rhythmical steps or bodily motions accompanied by music are not necessarily sinful; whether it is sinful depends on the type of bodily motions and with whom (if anyone) the dancing occurs. The type of dancing forbidden by Scripture are “revelries” (Galatians 5:21; 1 Peter 4:3), which are associated with “drunkenness” (Galatians 5:21) and “lewdness” (Galatians 5:19). Christians ought not to subject themselves to the influence of or participate in bawdy gyrations with or without music and with or without alcoholic beverages. The type of behavior between persons that is immoral is no more acceptable if plied with booze or set to music. Yet, Christians may well enjoy shows with dancing and music that are not characterized by the vices contained in the Sins of the Flesh in Galatians 5:19-21, etc. Works Cited “Dancing.” Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. 01 Sep. 2014. <Dictionary.com https://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dancing>.

I stopped at a fast-food joint following an evening preaching appointment many miles from home. Though I had dispensed already with my jacket and tie, perhaps my long-sleeved white shirt betrayed me as a preacher. A fellow diner in line ahead of me at the counter asked if I was a preacher, and I acknowledged that I was. Then, he asked for what church I preached. When I mentioned the church of Christ, he said, “So you’re one of those fellows who thinks that only the church of Christ is going to heaven!” Sometimes the joke is told of new arrivals in heaven being given the grand tour by the apostle Peter. Upon approaching one chamber, Peter puts his finger to his lips and whispers, “Be very, very quiet because over there are members of the church of Christ, and they think that they are the only ones up here.” Both the statement uttered by a fellow fast-food consumer and the little joke are attempts to ridicule and mock Christians. Spontaneously, I answered my new acquaintance at the restaurant, “Why would you say something so prejudicial and unkind?” He was taken aback and said, “What do you mean?” I asked him, “Do you believe the Bible is the Word of God?” He said, “Yes.” “I do, too!” I responded. “Do you have religious conviction based on what you read in the Bible?” I blurted out, which he also affirmed. We must not be ashamed (Romans 1:16) to affirm and stand …

Someone inquired whether it was proper for there to be a female soloist at a funeral. Presumably, the question implies the singing of a religious song at a funeral of a Christian and attended by church members, perhaps in the auditorium of the church’s meetinghouse. It is impossible to know all of the particulars that the one posing the question had in mind from the brief information provided. First, a funeral is not precisely a worship service such as we experience upon the first day of each week (Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 16:1-2). Prayers and singing hymns are worshipful activities, but a funeral is no more a worship service than is each of the meals that we eat daily because we preface them with prayers. Therefore, strictly speaking, strictures for congregational singing that are applicable to Sunday worship may not apply with the same force for a funeral, irrespective of the location or in what building it transpires. However, to avoid confusing non-Christians who may be aware that we religiously refrain from instrumental music, solos, etc. in our worship periods, it may be prudent to abstain from any of those things in funerals. This may be especially true when the general public may construe it as a religious activity of the local church due to the number of members present, those officiating or the funeral commemoration occurring in the church’s meetinghouse. Even Christians may register a complaint through doubts or strongly held opinions. Similarly, weddings, strictly speaking, are not equivalent …

Brother Rushmore, I just read the article in Voice of Truth, “Did Dinosaurs Really Exist?” I noticed two conclusions that I cannot reconcile with the Job passage. Please know that my intent in writing you is not to be argumentative! And I certainly am not trying to say what this creature may or may not be. Just trying to be careful. It is my habit to look up scriptures that are cited in an especially interesting article as I study it more. Then I also see what other translations say, in case the conclusions from the article’s author were drawn from a particular translation. In doing this today, in paragraph three each verse has quotes about the animal’s descriptions. But verse 17 has no quote – just a comment. When I read it from three translations (KJV, NASB, NIV), they all speak of the movement of the tail, not the size. The picture developing from verse 16, where it speaks of his strength being in his hips and stomach (with thighs that are knit together) seems to show how this movement is strongly caused – as if a cedar tree were back there being swung about. The second place in question is in verse 19. The Bible says the animal is “chief of the ways of God” (KJV), “ranks first among the works” (NIV) and “first of the way” (NAS). There is no mention of mass or size that I can see. I guess my point is really this: As an older adult who has “grown up in the church,” I want …