By: T. Pierce Brown In a recent meeting with a group of preachers, one of them mentioned that for a person to use the phrase “total commitment” now puts him under suspicion. If that is true, and it probably is, I want to use that example to protest and to admonish. It seems to me that far too many of us are prone to react rather than to act. We take our cues on what to do or say from some side with whom we wish to stand aligned and identified, rather than with God and His Word. Of course, we are aware that “birds of a feather flock together” (whatever that means) and that certain groups of people tend to use certain kinds of phraseology. One can almost identify certain persons from certain schools or areas by the expressions they use in prayer. One may make a fair guess (sometimes) as to the modernistic tendencies of a person by the expressions he uses. It is true that in many areas “…by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned” (Matthew 12:37 NKJV), and “…your speech betrays you” (Matthew 26:73). However, it seems a shame and even a tragedy that Christians would allow the misuse of a scriptural concept by someone to prevent their using that concept properly. Whether we like it or not, Jesus said, “…If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow

By: T. Pierce Brown Why it is assumed that there are not degrees of sin when both the Bible and logic assure us otherwise, I do not know, but I have heard it denied all my life, with such profound accompanying assertions as: “Sin is sin, and there is not any difference in sin in God’s sight,” and “Any sin will send you to hell, and therefore, there are no degrees of sin.” “It is no hotter in one part of hell than it is in another, and this proves that there are neither degrees of sin nor degrees of punishment.” If this article helps anyone to see that the strong assertion of any assumption proves nothing about what the Bible teaches, it will be worth something. I am not concerned with an examination of the assumption that one part of hell has a specific temperature or that another part is or is not any hotter. You do not know anything about how hot any part of hell is and could not prove anything about whether some part is any hotter than another. However, if you could, it still would neither prove anything about degrees of punishment nor anything about degrees of sin. Let us examine some of the teachings of the Bible about the degrees of sin, starting in the beginning of the Old Testament and working into the New, but not attempting to exhaust the subject at any point. As we examine the records in Exodus and Deuteronomy of the

The word “send” is translated by at least 10 different words in the New Testament. The most common is “apostello” with and without prepositional prefixes. Because the word “apostello” is defined as “send in an official way” and is the same word God used when He sent His Son, some may have assumed that it always involves a divine call and sending as when Jesus “sent” his apostles. Although the word was the normal one used for an official sending, it did not necessarily involve either divine or miraculous activity. It is the word used when Pilate’s wife sent a message to him. It is the word used when Herod sent and seized John. The word was used when the church sent Judas and Silas to Antioch. Barnabas, as well as Paul, was called an apostle apparently because they were sent by the church in Antioch and had previously been sent by the church in Jerusalem. After having read the more than 700 times the word “apostello” is used in the Septuagint, and the more than 400 times the various forms of the word “send” are used in the New Testament, I am convinced of the following things: 1. Paul was not in Romans 10:15, teaching anything at all about the necessity of a local congregation sending or supporting anyone before he is authorized or able to preach. His emphasis here was upon the original proclamation of the Gospel, which he called “the word of faith, which we preach.” His

As a preacher and teacher of the Bible, it is my considered judgment that we should make a clear-cut distinction between the exegesis of a particular passage of Scripture and what we think is good advice. Paul did this in 1 Corinthians 7:25–26. In the first place, we need to make that distinction because our listeners need to know the difference between what the Bible actually says and what we think about any matter. In the second place, our listeners need to know that God is not usually simply giving good advice but tells us how and what to do, and sometimes when and why to do it. A case in point is a statement of Paul in 1 Thessalonians 5:22 in which we find, “Abstain from all appearance of evil” (KJV). For more than 50 years, I can remember hearing preachers talk about that, saying something like this: “As most of you know, the Bible plainly teaches in 1 Thessalonians 5:22, ‘Shun the very appearance of evil.’” One well-known preacher and educator spent about 15 minutes of a sermon explaining that it very clearly taught, “Stay away from anything that appears to be evil.” The truth of the matter is that it does not. That is probably good advice, in general, although Jesus may not have always done it, for he ate with publicans and sinners, and that no doubt ‘appeared to be evil’ to some. One problem is in the different meaning of “appearance” as we use it in English. If we

Have you ever heard of anyone trying to train a computer to do something or even to teach one a new fact? Even if you know practically nothing about computers, you will surely recognize that this is an improper use of words. You do not train or teach a computer. One must program it. If you give it the wrong input, you get the wrong output. “Garbage in—garbage out” is often expressed. However, this article is not about computers but about the conscience. All my life I have heard, and most of my life have taught, that “the conscience is a creature of training,” and “the conscience is not a safe guide unless it is trained right.” What I meant is true, but I am convinced that what I (and thousands of other Gospel preachers) said is not true. I do not know how much difference it makes, but I am also convinced that it is always better to be right than wrong, even on insignificant matters. So, I wrote this article for your consideration. My thesis in this article is that the conscience is not a “creature of training,” for the idea in “training” is that the thing trained can learn to do something that it could not otherwise do. I trained my fingers to type. Now they can do what they could not do before. An ax may function to cut down a tree. I can sharpen or dull it and make it do a worse or better job, but I cannot train it to shoot a deer! I am confident that the conscience cannot be trained to

It is interesting to note some instances in the Bible where persons had hidden agendas or charges they wanted to make but were unable or ashamed to state the charge in a coherent and specific way. Let us look at two such cases and see what lessons we may get from them. In Acts 4:7, after the apostles had cured a man and were put in prison by the priests, captains of the temple and the Sadducees, they were brought out the next day, and we find these words, “And when they had set them in the midst, they asked, By what power, or by what name, have ye done this?” (KJV). It seems apparent that they did not want to specify exactly what had been done, for if they had asked, “Why have you preached about the resurrection?” it would have sounded as ridiculous as it really was, for there is nothing about preaching the resurrection that was unlawful or improper. Also, if they had asked, “Why have you cured a lame man?” it would have sounded equally ridiculous, for almost everyone would agree that curing a lame man was a good thing to do. Therefore, they simply asked, “Why have you done this?” It is interesting to note Peter’s response as recorded in Acts 4:9-10. If we this day be examined of the good deed done to the impotent man, by what means he is made whole; Be it known unto you all, and to all the people

Do you want to be a part of the Lord’s church or apart from it? There seems to be an increasing number of those connected with it in some fashion who would like to have all the blessings connected with being a part of the church, yet who by their language and actions indicate that they would rather be apart from it. It is one thing to call attention to the shortcomings and failures of those who are or claim to be members of the Lord’s church, and it is another thing to ridicule the Lord’s church. If one determines what is the Lord’s church or even determines who is a Christian simply in terms of how well it or he functions in all respects, there is no church or Christian on earth today, and in fact, there never was. I have been in a class where the teacher pointed out what the Lord’s church was doing in Jerusalem. For example, Acts 2:46-47 reads, “So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart, praising God and having favor with all the people…” (NKJV). The teacher made the point that they taught daily from house to house and did various other things that we apparently were not doing. His conclusion was that this thing of which we are members is not the Lord’s church. He could have just as easily pointed to verses 44-45 where

For more than 40 years, I have been involved in correspondence Bible school work. Most of the work I have seen being done was by the elderly women of the church. The philosophy probably was something like this: Since the elderly women have been relegated to the background and have not been given much of anything to do in the church that is important, why not get them involved in this kind of secondary work, whether it be local, national or worldwide? If that is your philosophy, it is a tragic mistake and needs correction for three reasons. First, this work is not secondary. It is one of the ways of carrying out the primary task of the church. Second, elderly women can do many other kinds of things of value to the church. Third, this sort of work should receive the interest and participation of every segment of the church. Of course, retired men and women may be able to do more in this area than those who are working at two or three other jobs, but all should be encouraged to participate if possible. Can you imagine the fantastic results that would be achieved in carrying out the commission of our Lord if the young people of our congregations were challenged with the wonder, joy and value of getting involved in mission work through correspondence Bible school work in China, Africa, India, South America or anywhere in the world with the assistance and the encouragement of older ones?

Paul, in speaking of the salvation of the Jew and Gentile, said in Romans 3:22, “…There is no difference” (NKJV). There are many things in which there is difference, but it may be of value for us to consider the common lot of mankind and think of some things in which there is no difference. It may not only help us to sympathize with those in sorrow, help those in trouble but also to aid those in a search for salvation. There is no basic difference in the physical processes and needs of mankind, whether he be rich or poor, black or white, wise or foolish, old or young. We all have sorrow and gladness, hope and despair, fear and courage, love and hate. Those are common, although they may not be about the same things or to the same degree. Second, there is no difference in the fact of sin in every accountable person. Romans 3:23 says, “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” All mankind needs Christ as a Savior. Many times, we have heard persons say, “Sin is sin, and there is no difference in sin for it will all cause you to be lost.” It is true that sin is sin, and any sin for which one does not repent and for which he is not forgiven will cost him his soul. It is true that there is no difference in the fact of sin. It is not true there is no difference

Because there is such a close relationship between our thinking, talking and acting, we need to use words with extreme care. Not only do preachers and teachers need to realize this, but we also need to teach our listeners to practice thinking and talking more accurately. Although many connected with the church of our Lord may now ridicule the idea of calling Bible things by Bible names, it is especially important that we use Bible words in the proper way. Such things as saying, “We do not believe in music in the church” has led some who are not familiar with our services to think we do not even sing. Expressions such as, “The church of Christ teaches (some particular doctrine)” do disservice to the cause of Christ, for they imply that the church of Christ is some entity that originates doctrine. Just now, I read an excellent article on discouragement. The author so aptly pointed out the dangers of discouragement and suggested that it was one device of Satan to destroy our effectiveness. That is true, but I want to suggest an additional thought. Many of us use the words “discouragement” and “disappointment” as if they were synonyms. They are not. If we do not recognize the difference, we may use the expression, “I am discouraged” then act that way and be defeated. Even Jesus was disappointed, but who would be so bold as to say He did not have courage? If a person is “discouraged,” he loses his

Most of my life, I have heard and taught that the Great Commission as recorded in Matthew 28:18-20 has four commands in it. They are 1. Go, 2. Teach, 3. Baptize and 4. Teach. Even if the following remarks are not earth-shaking, it may be that they will encourage deeper study of God’s Word. It is my present judgment that there is one command in that commission, and the other parts of it are words or phrases telling how that command is to be obeyed. To start with, the word “Go” is not an imperative – a command – but is from the Greek word poreuthentes, which is a first aorist participle, and basically means, “When you go or wherever you go.” Of course, one still has to go, but Jesus does not have to command us to go. Each of us is doing that and will be doing that no matter what Jesus commanded! It is unscriptural to suggest that “If you can’t go, send,” as we have heard most of our lives. It would be just as scriptural to say, “If you can’t sing, play.” The fact of the matter is that you can go, even if it is from the hospital room to the room where the iron lung is. We heard of one who had to be in the iron lung the rest of his life who converted 13 souls! In the second place, the term “teach” is from the Greek matheteusate, which is first aorist active imperative and means “make a disciple.”

I do not know of anyone who is more concerned than I am, and sometimes also dismayed, by what I consider doctrinal errors that have made large inroads into the church of our Lord in recent years. Of course, we can truthfully say, “It is not just recent years. It has been going on ever since the days of Paul,” and then, perhaps shrug it off as insignificant. Paul did say in 2 Thessalonians 2:7, “The mystery of lawlessness [“iniquity” KJV] is already at work” (NKJV) and in 2 Timothy 4:3 “The time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers.” The fact that it was happening then does not make it less reprehensible now. However, the thrust of this article is somewhat different. We think we see preachers and elders who are so concerned with doctrine that they seem to forget that their responsibility is to attend to the total spiritual welfare of the flock – not just make sure it has pure food to eat. A farmer may get so concerned with keeping his fence repaired and his fence row clean that he may forget that his cows, hogs and sheep need more than to be kept in the right pasture. They can stay in the right field and still die of neglect. Likewise, a person can stay in the right church and hear the right doctrine and still

As far back as I remember, I have concluded that the Bible teaches that we die physically because Adam sinned. As far as I know, I got that conclusion from reading the Bible, not from some preacher or commentator, for I had read the Bible for many years before I even knew there were such things as commentaries. A few days ago, I received a letter from a preacher friend who suggested that it is not so. He concludes that Adam would have died, and all his posterity would have died because they were mortal men, created to die, whether or not Adam had sinned. He bases his conclusion on four Scriptures. First, Genesis 3:19, “In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread Till you return to the ground, For out of it you were taken; For dust you are, And to dust you shall return” (NKJV). Second, Hebrews 9:27, “And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment.” Third, 2 Corinthians 4:18, “While we do not look at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen. For the things which are seen are temporary, but the things which are not seen are eternal.” Fourth, 1 Corinthians 15:50, “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption.” Before we examine those Scriptures and see if they must lead to the conclusion to which our brother comes, let us look at

The record of the blind man in John 9, whom Jesus cured, is significant from many standpoints. We probably can gain as many lessons as we consider it as representative of all those who are spiritually blind as we can by studying it as a literal event. We shall touch both aspects in this article. An examination of theories that would allow a person to assume that a man might sin before he was born might be worth something to us, but we shall not discuss them in this article. However, there are two interesting assumptions that may need our attention. First, there is the assumption that there must be a direct connection between a person’s sin and his misfortune. The friends of Job made this mistake, and there are many that still make it. Of course, there is a direct connection in some cases. A person who gets drunk and has a wreck in which he dies suffers a direct consequence of sin. Yet, you may have heard the plaintive cry many times, “What did I do that this came upon me?” The answer is, “Not necessarily anything.” The second apparent assumption is one that has far-reaching consequences, yet I have never read an article that dealt with it. It is the assumption that the two alternatives suggested exhausted the possibilities. Either this man or his parents sinned. Here is a two-valued orientation that is limited and blinding. We find that attitude in persons who think all things must

There is a statement in John 12:20-24 with far more profound implications than most of us realize. No doubt Jesus was talking about His own death, but the principle of which He spoke touches almost every aspect of life. The Greeks had come to Philip saying, “We wish to see Jesus” (John 12:21 NKJV). Doubtless, they wanted to do more than merely look at Him with the natural eye, for they would not have needed to ask Philip about that. We could probably better understand our Lord’s response to them if we understand that their philosophical ideals were embodied in those like Apollo, Hercules, Ulysses and others endowed with beauty, strength and self-sufficiency. He wanted to impress upon them and all mankind that it was by dying that great things were produced, not by self-gratification, human wisdom and philosophy. When He used the simple, natural, self-evident truth about the grain of wheat, He was emphasizing principles that are broad and deep in their implications and applications. The seed looks no more alive than a stone, but it has within it the mystery and the power of life. Man cannot make a seed with the germ of life in it. Yet, in it is a paradox. It appears to be dead or non-productive because it has not died (been planted). It must die in order to live. It must be buried in the earth where its outer form decays before the life within it can be manifested. Note another paradox. It

One of the many “exceedingly great and precious promises” (2 Peter 1:4 NKJV) that God has given us is in Romans 8:1. “There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.” Although in the ASV the expression, “who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit,” is here omitted, it is in verse 4, and it is inherent in the meaning of “in Christ Jesus.” We may have allowed the false doctrine of the impossibility of apostasy to cause us to react in denial of it in such a way that we lose sight of some grand truths that are affirmed here and in other places. I believe in the security of the believer and have no intention of allowing some perverted teaching to denude me of that wonderful truth. It is our considered judgment that we have sometimes done the same thing with other mountain peaks of God’s revelation. The great truth of salvation by grace through faith is not simply a doctrine that we should talk about negatively in denial of false doctrine. A winning team does not simply take the opponent’s rebound when it misses the goal and dribble down the court with the ball, making all its points primarily on the other team’s missed ones. In all probability, part of the rash of articles in the last few years by those who seem to have discovered as a new

There are few stories in the Bible more poignant and heartbreaking than the story of David, ‘a man after God’s own heart’ (Acts 13:22) whose sordid affair with Bathsheba still shocks and moves me even after having read it for 60 years. One reason it may be so touching to many of us is that we may be saying, “There but for the grace of God go I.” There may even be those who say, “There in spite of the grace of God went I.” In any case, it may be helpful to examine the story and to see some of the circumstances that may have led to this sad debacle in David’s life. These principles need to be taught to our young people from the earliest age. First, a contributing factor in his fall may have been the prosperity and indolence to which he had come. There are some expressions in 2 Samuel 11:1-2 that suggest it. “When kings go forth.” “David sent Joab.” “David remained in Jerusalem.” “One evening…David arose from his bed.” The usual place for David was leading his army, but this time he apparently had been lying in his bed while someone else was fighting his battles. I do not remember whether it was Ben Franklin who said, “An idle mind is the devil’s workshop,” but he did say, “Troubles spring from idleness, and grievous toils from needless ease.” David had said in Psalm 55:17, “Evening and morning and at noon I will pray, and

Much has been written about God’s ordained plan for qualifications and duties of the shepherds of God’s flock (although that has not seemed to have had much effect in many quarters), but we have not noticed very much about what procedure might be used in the actual appointment. We suppose this is because God has not legislated about a specific procedure, and most of us who think of ourselves as conservative feel that most of our writing should be exegetical in nature, and not merely an exposition of our opinions about matters not revealed. However, there is a place for setting forth what we have discovered by observation and practiced as an appropriate or an effective manner of expediting a particular command of God. This article deals with one method that we would recommend for consideration in the mechanics of appointing additional elders. First, a series of sermons should be preached on the qualifications, responsibilities and duties of elders to the congregation, and the relationship of the congregation to the elders. Second, a form should be prepared with something like the following reminders in it: No one has a right to be considered as a shepherd of God’s flock who does not meet God’s standards. “We must have elders” is no excuse for placing unqualified men in positions of leadership. Although there are no specific procedures set forth in the Scriptures for the appointment of elders, the following words and ideas are suggestive of some principles that should be applied. (1) Acts 6:3 says, “Therefore, brethren, seek out [episkepsasthe]

May I share with you what I tried to teach my grandson about how to live an abundant, successful life? He was about ready for his final little league game. When his daddy was that age, I never saw him play, I shamefully confess. I always had a Bible study or some such thing. However, I decided I would try to help my grandson face the game, and the game of life. I said, “Bryan, do you want to know how to be a winner in every game you play?” He replied, “Yes.” Notice that I did not say, “Win every game you play.” Nobody wins every game, but I wanted him to know that he could be a winner, even if his team made the lowest score. I said, “Remember, and learn how to practice three little words.” Of course, he wanted to know what they were. Do you? I told him, “The words are ‘And then some.’” Then, I tried to explain to him something of what that means. In the life of every man who is judged great by almost any standard one wants to use, we find the practice of that formula. They did all the things that might normally be expected of them – and then some. The principle was taught and exemplified best by the One who always taught and exemplified everything the best way. Jesus Christ said in Matthew 5:41, “And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two” (NKJV).

If most of us who consider ourselves sound, conservative Gospel preachers were asked the question, “Do you think I need to change churches?” by a member of some denomination with whom we were studying, probably at least 99% of us would answer with a resounding, “Yes!” The primary problem with that is that about 99% of the time, we would not be answering the question he thinks he has asked. In his own mind, he has asked, “Do you mean to tell me that I need to leave my denomination and join yours or some other one?” Deeper in his mind is this thought, “You think that the Church of Christ church is better than any other denomination.” If you merely answer his question, “Yes,” as a large number of persons who claim membership in the Lord’s church would, you have confirmed his opinion. If you found a person living on the street in a pasteboard box or under an overpass, if you wanted him to come into the house where food and warmth were found, would you say to him, “You should change houses?” The very idea that a pasteboard box is in the same category as a house is erroneous. Any time we use language that suggests that any manmade institution is in the same category as the Lord’s church, we do damage to the Gospel truth. The more nearly correct, although partial, answer would be, “Merely changing churches would not do you any good.” Surely, anyone who

It has been said that a mother once asked, “At what age should I begin to teach my child?” The person replied, “How old is he now?” The mother said, “Two years.” His response was, “You have already lost about two years.” Recent studies indicate that babies may begin to learn some things even before they are born. However, it is a fallacy to suppose that children will love their homes and learn properly from them just because they eat and sleep there. Wise parents will not only try to make their children satisfied and happy in their home environment, but they will also try to make home a place where good memories will be created that will serve good purposes in the difficult years that lie ahead. Parents should provide room and occasion somewhere in the house for indoor activities that will charm, educate and improve the child so that he will not be restless for the street when school hours are over. Projects should also be included to broaden his interest in nature, hobbies or other things that will enrich his life as he grows older. If parents would deliberately find ways to create in their children a love and a respect for nature as part of God’s heritage, and a love of study and learning about all that is around them, great results could follow. The child will then be interested in where we came from, what our purpose in life is, how to achieve that purpose

In Nehemiah 1, we find that Nehemiah was a cupbearer to the king. We are, in a sense, cupbearers to the King. When James and John wanted to sit on the right and left hand of Jesus, He asked them, “…Are ye able to drink the cup that I am about to drink?” (Matthew 20:22 NKJV). When they replied that they were, our Lord replied, “You will indeed drink My cup” (Matthew 20:23). They drank of the cup in the sense that they endured the bitter affliction and suffering that came as a result of following Him. To the extent that we suffer for the cause of Christ, we also drink of that cup. Most of us may not do more than sniff the contents of it. The same basic thought is in the expression in Luke 14:27, which reads, “And whoever does not bear his cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple.” It may be that some of us, instead of taking it up, merely drag it along behind, but we are supposed to be cupbearers and cross bearers. With that in mind, a study of Nehemiah 1 became more personal to me. First, I was impressed with Nehemiah’s sympathetic inquiry in Nehemiah1:2. He did not allow his prominence, promotion, position, prestige or power to turn his heart in selfishness to his own interests and become indifferent to the interests and welfare of his brethren. That may happen to cupbearers today. We may become more interested in

A few moments ago, an incident happened that thrilled and disturbed me beyond expression. I had written an article on prayer and had given a copy of it to one of my sons, for we had been discussing prayer a little while before. He had it on his desk, and my granddaughter who just finished the second grade was reading it. She discovered a passage from the Bible that I had used, in which I said, “You are aware that James 4:15 says, ‘The prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.’” I had hit the wrong key, and the reference should have been James 5:15. My son just called me and said, “Chelsea has found an error in your article.” To say I was astounded and thrilled would be an understatement. The fact that she read it was wonderful. The fact that she looked up the Scripture references and read them was not only more wonderful but also amazing. Probably not one adult in 10,000 would do that. For a little girl ready for the third grade to do it is so unusual and thrilling that I almost cried. However, I do not write this article to tell about one of my precious grandchildren. I write it to emphasize two especially important points. First, I urge all those who read articles and listen to sermons to check the Scriptures they use to

The inspired and inspiring story of the choice of Solomon as recorded in 1 Kings 3:1-16 is worthy of our intensive study. He had had a long and solemn time of sacrificing offerings to God, with a great sense of gratitude and an awareness of his weakness and unworthiness. He exemplified Jesus’ statement, “Blessed are the poor in spirit” (Matthew 5:3 NKJV). The importance of making the right choices at the right time is beyond comprehension. Every new opportunity or circumstance that confronts us demands a choice, or usually, many choices. Even for a somewhat insignificant event, many choices are involved. Suppose a friend says, “Let us go out and eat.” You have to choose first whether you go. Then, you choose the time to go, the place to go, what to eat and many other things. Every choice, no matter how little it may be, involves your character. The things you choose and the basis on which you choose them depends upon and suggests the kind of character you have and will have. Often a seemingly small choice will determine the direction of your whole life. I am told that there is a place in Europe where a person might stand and throw a piece of wood in one of three directions. If it falls in one stream at that point, it will flow north into one sea. If it falls into another stream nearby, it will flow south into another sea. If it falls into another stream within reach, it will

In the last year or so we have found an increasing number of persons who have decided that the church as a whole is no longer (if it ever was) the Church of Christ, but it is either a “big, sick denomination” or something equally reprehensible. This is different from the position that the churches “listed in the yellow pages” do not necessarily contain all Christians. The first position is that the churches “listed in the yellow pages” are not churches of Christ at all, but they may have a few Christians in them. We have no doubt that there are denominational tendencies in the church, and they have been from the beginning. We have no doubt that there are churches of Christ and individual Christians in the world who know nothing about the churches in America, and may not even know that there are “yellow pages.” We have no doubt that there are cultish tendencies and worldly tendencies in the church, but that does not prove that the church of the Lord is a denomination, a cult or the same as the world. We are sympathetic toward those who hold the view we are now denying. For when we look at the average congregation and find such a contrast between what is and what should be, we are saddened. We may give a Bible examination to a group of teachers (the cream of the crop!) and find them woefully ignorant of even simple Bible facts. Few give more than lip-service, if

When I was growing up on a little farm in Walling, Tennessee, I accidentally learned something from my father that has been of value to me ever since, and which I have tried to teach my children, grandchildren and students. Until I was about 6 years old, we were sharecroppers. We did not get much of the share, but we did a lot of “cropping.” When we would load a wagon load of corn to take to the owner’s barn, my father would always raise up the sideboard on the wagon bed by sticking an ear of corn under it so the landowner would always get what was due him and then some. When we would throw shocks of hay on the wagon to take to his barn, I would notice that we always threw an extra shock or two on the wagon that went to the barn of the landowner. I never asked my father why, but I knew he always gave the owner all that was due him and then some. When I was about 7 years old, I began to read the New Testament through and found that Jesus had said in Matthew 5:40-41, “If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also. And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two” (NKJV). I do not know that my father was deliberately practicing that principle, but I began to deliberately practice it. When I finished the

Although David was a man of many troubles, he was a man of great faith and a man after God’s own heart. In Psalm 31, we catch a glimpse of the life of faith that should characterize every child of God and give him a life that is blessed. We can emulate those things in David’s life that are worthy and shun those that are not. First, in verse one, there is an expression of confident faith. “In You, O Lord, I put my trust” (NKJV). When Solomon said in Proverbs 3:5-6, “Trust in the Lord with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct your paths,” he was not just giving a good Scripture for preachers to quote. He was expressing a fundamental principle that is a prerequisite for a blessed life. It involves confidence in all that the Lord has said, not only for us to do, but what He will do. We not only have power to become sons of God through faith in Him (John 1:11-12), but we have power to become blessed, happy, useful and productive sons of God. Both the basis and results of this confidence are found in Psalm 31:2-3. The psalmist said, “…Be my rock of refuge, A fortress of defense to save me. For You are my rock and my fortress…” That expression may appear strange until you think through its implications. How can he say, “Be my rock, for

In Matthew 10, we find a record of Jesus choosing and giving a commission to His apostles. Although their qualifications and original commission are different than ours, their basic job was the same. It was to proclaim a living Christ to a dying world. In view of that, it is probable that a study of some similarities between their calling and ours would be profitable. First, they were chosen of Christ, not in view of what they were, but in view of what they could become. It is hard to see in any of them except Paul any indication of any exceptional qualities or fitness for the remarkable task that confronted them. This should give great hope for all of us. Titus 3:5 probably puts this in as clear a fashion as the pen of inspiration can do. “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit” (NKJV). When He first called them, before He made them apostles, He said to them, “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew 4:19). I do not think this point can be over emphasized. He did not say, “Come after me, and if you work hard enough studying how to use film strips, or do an open Bible study, you may become a fisher of men.” He said, “Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew 4:19). It seems apparent that

Many times, I have said as I preached about some duty, “When you have done what you can, where you are, with what you have, this is all God expects of you.” I may have added on various occasions something like, “What more can you do? One can only do what he has the power to do.” Those statements may be basically true, but there is a more tremendous and significant truth in 2 Corinthians 8:3 where Paul said of the churches in Macedonia, “For according to their power, I bear witness, yea and beyond their power, they gave of their own accord.” When I discovered that truth several years ago, although I continued to teach that every one of us should do what we can, where we are and with what we have, I added another greater truth. That is, when you do what you can, God will enable you to do what you cannot with what you did not have. You will be able not only to give beyond your power but to do many other things beyond your power. We could give examples from our own experiences and observations that prove this is true, but two illustrations from the Bible will be better. Peter did not have the power walk on water, but he did walk on water (Matthew 14:29). The key to it is simple. When he heard the command of Jesus, he did it. He did what he could, where he was, with what he

While meditating on how little I do for the Lord, I thought of 1 Corinthians 15:58, which says, “Wherefore, my beloved brethren, be ye steadfast, unmovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labor is not in vain in the Lord.” Since I did not seem to be abounding in the work of the Lord, I decided I would start by seeing what specific things God has revealed in which I should abound. I found that there are four words translated “abound” in the Authorized Version or King James Version, two of which are used as we are admonished to abound in various things. It is interesting to note that we are told to abound in love more times than any other thing. First Thessalonians 3:12 is a fair sample of that admonition. Verse 13 gives one of the primary reasons for it. “And the Lord make you to increase and abound in love one toward another, and toward all men, even as we do toward you: To the end he may stablish your hearts unblameable in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his saints.” Note that when we abound in love, the end result is that our hearts are established unblameable in holiness. This indicates why love is the most important thing in which we are to abound. It includes or touches all aspects of our lives, and when we abound in

Sixty-five years ago, when I read about the barren fig tree in Mark 11:12-14, I was disturbed a little by the expression in verse 13, “For the time of figs was not yet.” I wondered why Jesus would pronounce a curse on a tree that was barren when it was not time for it to have figs. The only solution that occurred to me is that those fig trees normally have figs before they have leaves, and this one had an appearance that was deceptive. Even if that is not the correct explanation of the reason, He cursed a fig tree though it was not the time for it to bear. There is a valid lesson in principle. A prominent tree that could be seen from afar, and according to its promise, should have been full of fruit was a living lie. We could dwell at length on the lesson that should have been evident to the Jews. They had the oracles of God, were children of the covenant, with all the promises, privileges and hopes the covenant gave them. They not only had the opportunity to do great things for God but also made abundant profession. They gave much alms and for pretense made long prayers and did many other things to make it appear that they were very godly. Yet, when we look for real fruit bearing for God, we find none. Jesus discussed this exact point in Luke 13:6-9 and various other places, indicating that Israel would

In Psalm 118:22, there was a prophecy made, “The stone which the builders rejected shall become the head of the corner.” Matthew 21:42, Acts 4:11, Ephesians 2:20 and 1 Peter 2:6 leave no doubt that the prophetic reference was to Christ. We want to examine in a little more detail what was meant by “the head of the corner.” There are at least two theories about it. First, it referred to the keystone of an arch that holds the arch together. Second, it is the chief stone at the angle or corner of the building that joins the two walls and is a part of the foundation. The reference in Psalm 118:22 is presumed by some to refer to a historical event in the building of the Temple, at which time those who built it found a stone that they did not recognize as fitting at any particular place. They cast it to one side, for all the stones had been previously cut before they were brought there (1 Kings 6:7). When they came to the place in the building where it was needed, they eventually found it. I find no reference in any biblical literature to uphold that assumption. I find some tradition of a few Rabbis that suggest it. It seems probable that David is merely using a figure of speech in a Messianic prophecy, not referring to some actual historical event where the builders rejected the chief stone. However, whether it was an actual historical event or

In reading Mark 8:34, the thought occurred to me that I do not ever remember hearing a sermon that really emphasized the two points in this verse, which in order to follow Jesus, one would have to deny self and take up the cross. I have heard and preached often about the blessings one would receive, such as forgiveness of sins, eternal life, joy and peace. Yet, the absolute necessity of self-denial and cross-bearing, I do not remember hearing. I hear, “I’m O.K; You’re O.K,” “How to Enjoy Life More” or even occasionally by some “old time” preacher, “What Must I Do to Be Saved?” including faith, repentance, confession and baptism, but not much from anyone on what is involved in following Christ. It is my opinion that many us do not even realize what “self-denial” means. I think I grew up thinking it was denying self some things that I might want that were wrong to have. When I would pass the neighbor’s watermelon patch on some hot summer day and knew he did not want me to get one (which was unusual, for most neighbors were happy to have a hungry boy get one melon if he needed it), self-denial seemed to mean that I would not take what I wanted. In fact, I think I was probably preaching for several years before it really dawned on me that to deny self is not to deny self some things but to deny self himself! The middle of sIn is

There is an interesting expression in Colossians 1:19-20 about which I have been unable to find any commentator who seems to have a satisfactory answer for its meaning. It says, “For it was the good pleasure of the Father that in him should all the fullness dwell; and through him to reconcile all things unto himself, having made peace through the blood of his cross; through him, I say, whether things upon the earth, or things in the heavens.” The problem has to do with the question, “What are the things in the heavens that need reconciling to God?” While I am not arrogant enough to assume that I can give a definite answer to a question that has puzzled some of the greatest Bible scholars in all ages, there are a few things I can suggest that may be helpful in reaching some sensible conclusion. The simplest and easiest answer may be the best solution. It may be that Paul was simply saying all things that are in the whole universe (thought of as on earth or in heaven) will be made right as a result of Christ’s dying for us. Even the curse of Genesis 3:17, which may be the cause of all disorders such as the thorns and thistles, storms, hurricanes and earthquakes, will be removed when we have the “new heavens and the new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness” (2 Peter 3:13), which will result from Christ’s death for us and our ultimate redemption. However, we would

Although we do not remember which song book we used as we sang about it, we feel sure that most of our readers will remember the song that says, “I shall know Him by the prints of the nails in His hands.” We have a feeling, too, that some of the poets or classical writers have alluded to the nail-scarred hands of Jesus as if they would be a mute witness of His love for us throughout eternity. One of my most beloved Bible teachers, the late R.C. Bell, tried to teach us that the body of Jesus that He showed Thomas and the other apostles was His glorified body that He now has. We doubted it 50 years ago and still do. The reason we bring it up now is not because we consider it worth an argument, but because we think it suggests a very important principle. We need constantly to examine our opinions and see if we can determine whether we got them from Milton, Moses, men, the Jesuits, Jews or Jesus. Our own conviction is that it may be better to be wrong about some trivial matter and have the right attitude toward truth than to be right about it and have the wrong attitude. We are not implying that it is more important to have the right attitude than it is to teach true doctrine, but we are saying that many false and dangerous doctrines have been believed because of a wrong attitude toward truth.

Sometimes when I write an article, I ask my wife Tomijo to read, criticize and evaluate it, or make whatever suggestions she thinks might improve it. Sometimes I even follow her advice, and when I do not, I still value it. A few moments ago, I took three recent articles to her, in which she found a sentence she thought could be improved. I confess that even gentle criticism from a loving wife, though requested, may sometimes hurt a little, but Solomon said it properly in Proverbs 27:5-6. “Better is open rebuke than love that is hidden. Faithful are the wounds of a friend.” I then picked up a book I had been reading. My attention was caught by a paragraph that says, “There is a substitute for criticizing. It’s called love. Love heals. Love protects. Love builds up. And more changes come with love than with criticism.” I agree with what I think is the general intent of the author of the paragraph, but having just asked a loving wife to criticize some articles, I felt constrained to write another one dealing with some implications of the first two sentences of the above paragraph. If one thinks of criticism as a destructive, negative or nagging action, which it often is, then the statement may have validity. However, we have no right to assume that criticism and love are antithetical or mutually exclusive, or that one needs to be substituted for the other. Can my wife find fault with my

The account in 1 Samuel 16 reveals some great lessons about success and failure. Saul’s rejection and failure because of his turning aside from obedient faith is a warning to each of us. None of us can get so high on the scale of righteousness that we cannot fall. In verse 1, the Lord said to Samuel, “How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel?” There is a proper season and reason for mourning, and there is a time to stop. Even when Jesus said in Matthew 5:4, “Blessed are those who mourn,” He indicated a time to be comforted. We should mourn for our sins, failures and mistakes, but when we repent and are forgiven, we should stop mourning. This does not mean we should forget them in the sense of pretending they were not so. Yet, there are those who cannot seem to stop mourning over sins that have been forgiven. It is proper to mourn for the dead. When they are gone and other tasks that need doing confront us, we should stop mourning. We do not stop missing them, but we should not continue to mourn. We should mourn for the loss of another’s soul. There comes a time when we should stop mourning. This does not mean that we stop being sorry for them, but we ought to stop spending time grieving about it as if we could do something about it. This relates to what Jesus said in Matthew

I do not know how many hundreds of times we have sung “Just As I Am” as an invitation song. Close to the same idea is another song, “Only come as you are and believe on His name. Jesus will give you rest.” When I heard Dan Rather’s program about the Christian right with the homosexual church pastor saying that God loves all of us and takes us just as we are, without any special mention of what is involved in that, except that he said that God has special love for homosexuals, I decided to enlarge on the subject of God taking us just as we are from a biblical perspective. It never entered my mind, nor the minds of most Christians, that anyone would ever teach or preach in such a fashion that when we sing, “Christ receiveth sinful men,” that it is suggested that Christ receiveth sinful men who continue in sin. Nor would most of us ever have dreamed of anyone who would suggest that God taking a person as he is implies or suggests that because God takes him as a sinner, He leaves him that way. That was almost the idea that caused Paul to apparently recoil in horror as he said, “Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? God forbid!” If we ever use the expression, “God takes a person as he is,” we should be careful that we explain (though most of us can scarcely conceive that we would ever

There is so much loose and liberal thinking today suggesting that we must never condemn anything because Jesus said “Judge not, that ye be not judged” that I hesitate to write anything that might be used to justify the false idea that the Bible offers hope that almost anyone can be saved eternally even without obeying the Gospel, especially if they mean well. The fact that 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9 says that God will come “rendering vengeance to them that know not God, and to them that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus: who shall suffer punishment, even eternal destruction from the face of the Lord and from the glory of his might” does not seem to mean anything to some who are connected with our brotherhood. However, we need to understand something else that many conservative brethren do not seem to understand. That is, that there is a difference in teaching what the Bible teaches about a general truth and assuming that we have either the right or the responsibility to apply that general truth to a specific person in Judgment Day. God committed that judgment to His Son, not to you or to me (Acts 17:31). For example, all liars, thieves, fearful and various kinds of sinners will be consigned to the fires of everlasting Hell (1 Corinthians 6:10; Revelation 21:8). In Matthew 25:25, we find a picture of a man who hid his talents and said, “I was afraid, and went away and hid thy talent

For those of us who are familiar with Paul’s life, perhaps 2 Corinthians 12:10 is one of the significant things we remember when he said, “Wherefore I take pleasure in weaknesses, in injuries, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ’s sake: for when I am weak, then I am strong.” Although we may never have thought of it, that is a theme that runs through the whole Bible. What were the midwives who saved Moses compared to the power of Pharaoh? What was David’s sling compared to the spear of Goliath? What was the fearful group of disciples who fled from Jesus when He was arrested compared to the combined forces of the jealous Jews and the rapacious [brutal] Romans? If we have built our lives on the foundation of the powers of this world, we will be lost. Banking on money will not work. Politicians may have had a catchy slogan when they said, “It is the economy, stupid,” but the truth is that the last word in that sentence describes the philosophy of the first four. Those who assume that the solution to the problems of drugs, racism or any other will be solved by edicts of the Supreme Court, legislation from the halls of Congress, giving away more money or pontifical and political pronouncements from the President are all wrong. Pharaoh is gone (though his mummified body may still exist), but God’s people were delivered from captivity by one who was born in captivity and cradled

That’s what he said. The words, plain and sharp, were spoken with a smile, and for a moment I thought, “He’s just kidding,” because he has a wet sense of humor (in contradistinction to those who have a dry one). Then, I realized he really meant it! Here was a preacher whom I liked and even admired who said he did not like me! What should my response be? The first thing that came to my mind was, “It does not matter too much, as long as you love me,” so I said it. He did not reply to that, so I was left with the problem of how to react. I asked myself the question, “Why do you like and admire him?” There were several reasons. First, he is a Christian gentleman, albeit blunt at times. Second, he is a thoughtful Bible student, sound in the faith and concerned about the lost and the kingdom of God. Then, a simple truth came to mind that might be of value to you. The fact that he did not like me in no way changed those things about him that caused me to like and admire him in the first place. In fact, it may have added a third and fourth.  He apparently was more astute and discerning than the average person, for he was able to see in me something that the average person did not see, for the average person seems to like me. Fourth, there was no sense

Having just returned from a meeting in Florida, and preparing to leave for one in Alabama, I found a request from Brother Warren to have this article on his desk in about 20 days. So, I suggested to my wife, Tomijo, that she write it, and I would review it and take credit! I thought that would be appropriate, since most of the credit I have received over the years is due to her anyway! She declined but did suggest most of the points herein discussed. My invitation to her was actually an illustration of our first point. In Matthew 25:14-30, we find a principle that illustrates how to show our children (or wives) that we respect them. That is, ask for the accomplishment of a difficult or challenging task, commensurate with their ability or talent. Have and express to them a “you-can-do-it” attitude. When we expect the best from them, we not only show them respect, we teach them God’s will regarding work and help them to have a good self-image. Second, give special privileges on special occasions, when special efforts are made or as goals are achieved. One needs to be careful not to do this in such a way that it seems to be a bribe to do good or to be good. Yet, it is important to show proper respect and appreciation in this way. Third, in Matthew 25:23, the lord in the parable says, “Well done, good and faithful servant.” We need to praise work

Most parents know that there are at least two ways to ask a “why question.” When my oldest son was small, I would say, “Frank, it is time for you to go to bed.” If he replied, “Daddy, why do children have to go to bed before older people?” I would take him on my lap and explain. But if he whined, “Why do I have to go to bed before you?” he got a different response! We may not be as conscious that there are at least two ways to answer a “why question.” One is with reference to a backward look that deals with “because of” something(s), and another is with reference to a forward look that gives a purpose for which the thing is done. We need to understand the value of both. A question debated by Lipscomb and McGary many years ago has not died, but Lipscomb, Srygley and many good and brilliant brethren of today overlook one or two very important principles that we want to notice today. Almost 40 years ago I read everything I could find in the Gospel Advocate and Firm Foundation in the running debate concerning the question of baptism for the remission of sins between Lipscomb and McGary, but I do not recall Lipscomb adequately addressing the specific points we want to consider today. Both Lipscomb and Srygley were right in their conclusions that man can have no higher motive than to obey God and that one does not have to understand all the results, designs

There is an interesting expression in 1 Corinthians 7:14 that may need clarification. It says, “For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in the brother: else were your children unclean; but now they are holy.” The most basic thing we need to know is the meaning of “sanctified.” It simply means, “set apart.” It does not mean sinless or saved. The vessels of the tabernacle that were set apart for God’s use were holy or sanctified. The saints (Christians) at Corinth had been called and set apart for God’s use, but they committed many sins. What is meant by the statement that the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife? It is not “by the wife” as if she were the agent by whom the sanctification took place, but “in the wife” because it is the marriage relationship of which he speaks. It is noteworthy that the words “sanctified” are perfect tense. That denotes the present state that results from a past action. Apparently, the past action to which he refers was the sanctification that took place when the couple married and still is in effect. He is simply saying that the wife who has an unbelieving husband does not need to put him away as she would if the relationship itself were wrong or unholy. Although he is an unbeliever, the marriage bond was and is still sacred, so the unbeliever is set apart in a sanctified relationship. In this context,

Once there was a good doctor. In fact, he was a great doctor. He could cure all sorts of diseases, including leprosy, cancer and AIDS. He even took patients whose heart had stopped beating and who were pronounced dead and brought them back to life. His prescriptions were unorthodox, but effective. He once had a leper to dip seven times in a river and cured him. He made many friends, but some of them were a little skeptical of what they thought were extravagant claims about him. Let us examine the case history of some of those who claimed to be friends. Some of them felt very close to him, and just called him, “Doc.” Friend No. 1 told people, “He is my personal physician. I would trust him with my life and do anything he told me to do. He has told me on many occasions, “Just trust in me, and I will cure whatever disease you have. In fact, just being with him and following his advice has pretty well kept me from having any disease.” One day, however, he noticed that his skin was unusually yellow, he had some slight headaches, upset stomach, discomfort around his heart and a few other symptoms. He at last sought the doctor’s advice. He was told, “You have a fatal disease, but just trust in me and you will be okay. Take these red, white and blue pills three times a day for your disease, and you will receive all sorts of benefits.

Regrettably, I do not now seem to find time to read as widely in classical literature as I might. However, yesterday I again picked up some of Shakespeare’s writings for a few moments and was impressed again with what I had noted many years ago when I read more from great authors. Practically everyone I remember would frequently allude to some biblical story or character. A person reading their writings without a familiarity with the Bible would have found it “flat, stale and unprofitable,” as Hamlet put it. The assumption of those great writers that their readers would be familiar with the Bible reveals a great deal about their own familiarity with it, as well as the great esteem in which they held it. A lengthy article could be filled with specific quotations from multitudes of great men of literature, art, sculpture, science and various other disciplines that show their respect or reverence for the Bible. It is at least as impressive to me to find literally thousands of allusions to some remote biblical circumstance with the awareness that their readers did not need a footnote with an explanation of the time and place of its occurrence. One might expect to find this in the writings of Alexander Campbell, Moses E. Lard or others of the great Restoration, or even those of the Reformation movement, but to find it so widely in men of general literary fame is instructive. If there is any one thing that more readily shows the

Jeroboam, the son of Nebat, could have been a man of greatness, but he perverted God’s way and became a ringleader in sin. We may think of the religion he began as a type of all manmade religions and get lessons that will help us to be on guard against such in every generation. First, we may note that it had its origin in the human heart. “Jeroboam said in his heart” (1 Kings 12:26). There are only two types of religions in the world. One has its origin in the will of God, and the other is in the will of man. Isaiah 55:8 says, “My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are my ways your ways,” and this has always been so. Jeremiah 17:9 reads, “The heart of man is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked.” Out of the heart of man can never come a system of religion that meets the demands of God or the needs of the human soul. We constantly need to be aware that not only anything opposite but any deviation from or substitute for what God wants is presumptuous and rebellious. The advice of Proverbs 3:5 is still so valuable for us. “Trust in the Lord with all thy heart, and lean not on thy own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge Him and He will direct thy paths.” A strange question that faces us is this: Why would a person want to worship God at all if he was not sure

In 2 Kings 18, there is a powerful truth that needs to be called to our attention. There is a story of a brazen serpent on a pole. It had been ordained of God and could have served for good as a reminder of the love of God for them and as a warning not to turn aside after their own ways, but instead, it had been perverted into an idol. The background of this incident is in Numbers 21 when the people were grumbling, and God sent fiery serpents to punish them. Then, for their deliverance, He had commanded that there be lifted up a brazen serpent on a pole so whosoever looked upon it would be saved. So important was it that it was mentioned again in John 3:14-15 as a type of Christ. However, Hezekiah was not afraid to simply call it by its right name—Nehushtan, “a thing of brass”—and remove it from its idolatrous position. Whole articles could be written or sermons preached about the effect of calling things by certain names. I remember when a person could say, “This is my affair” without meaning he had an improper relationship with some woman. A person could be thought of as gay or even slightly queer without engaging in homosexual activity. Calling it “an alternate life-style” does not keep it from being sinful. Some time ago, a woman told me her daughter was “in a family way.” Since it had been many years since I had heard

Stop worrying. Be happy. Rejoice. Love your enemies. Those are just some of the many admonitions found in the Bible about which preachers often preach. However, it is far easier to tell a person what he should do than it is to tell him exactly how he is to do it. When I tell a person to stop worrying because it is a sin, he may respond, “I know it. That is what worries me the most.” If I tell a person, “Love your enemies,” he may reply, “It is hard enough to love my friends. I do not know how I can love my enemies.” There are at least two values in quoting these commandments directly from the Bible. First, we need to impress upon those who hear that they are not merely good suggestions or advice, but they are commands of God. Second, with the command, we often find hints or directions about how to accomplish the command. For example, in Matthew 6:25-34 when Jesus instructed not to worry, He told in verse 26 that the Heavenly Father feeds the birds and values us more than He does them. Meditating on that fact will help us to obey the command. Then in verse 27, He said, “And which of you by being anxious can add one cubit unto the measure of his life?” He indicated that worry is useless because it accomplishes nothing. Keen awareness of that may help us to stop it as we set our minds on ways

If we were to ask 100 Christians, preachers or elders what is the central purpose or primary task of the church or the individual Christian, we would probably get many different answers. If we asked it of all the speakers in a Personal Evangelism Workshop, most would probably answer, “The primary function of a Christian is to win a soul.” For about 25 years, I attended every Personal Evangelism Worship in the nation about which I read. In almost all of them, most speakers would make statements like, “The purpose for which Christ came was to save souls. For what purpose did you come?” I have made and applauded similar statements most of my life. Now, I want to suggest a better approach to it, for I think that slight error in emphasis was the basis of much of the Crossroads and Boston errors.* It is improper to talk about the purpose when there are at least thirty reasons given in the Bible for Christ coming and dying. There is probably only one more important thing in the universe than saving a soul, but it is always improper to substitute the good for the better or the better for the best. As I watched the first few minutes of a Super Bowl football game, I remembered an event that I saw in a game last year that made me think of the importance of this principle. A man had caught a pass and was prancing along toward the goal line with no one

The following are some prophetic references to Jesus that the Jews recognized as referring to the Messiah for whom they were looking. The New Testament shows the references to be fulfilled in Jesus. Genesis 3:15 says, “and I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: he shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” Galatians 4:4 is one of the several references that indicate that Jesus was the seed of the woman who was to “bruise the head” of the Old Serpent, who is known as Satan. In Genesis 18:18 God said, “Seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him.” Acts 3:25 indicates that it was through the Jewish nation that the Messiah was to come Who would bless all nations. “Ye are the sons of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with your fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed. Unto you first God, having raised up his Servant, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from your iniquities.” Among many other passages, the Messiah was shown to be an heir to the throne of David in Isaiah 9:7, which reads, “Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to establish

The grass was turning brown, for it had not rained for many days. As the lightning began to flash and the thunder rumbled, I sat on the front porch and watched and prayed. When I said, “God, if you see fit to let a few drops fall, I will be grateful, but if not, thank you for the thunder and lightning,” it began to rain. I am not implying that my prayer had anything to do with that, but it did have to do with the title of this article as well as some of the thoughts that came to shame me. We have sung many times, “There shall be showers of blessings. Showers of blessings we need. Mercy drops round us are falling, but for the showers we plead.” The thought struck me with force: We have had showers of blessings all of our lives and have in blind ingratitude only thought of them as “mercy drops,” always wanting more, but not properly grateful for what we have. I sat there with tears in my eyes. Perhaps tears of gratitude for God sending the rain, but also probably tears of shame for not being as grateful as I should have been for God’s infinite grace and thinking of the multitude and magnitude of His blessings merely as “mercy drops.” Not a day passes that I do not thank God for many blessings, but when I examined my heart, I am ashamed to confess that probably many of those expressions

In 1981, I wrote an article about the power of using audiovisuals. A few moments ago, the thought came to me that we are teaching with audiovisuals whether or not we planned it that way. What we say and what we do are constantly teaching, either for good or for bad. The Lord’s Supper and baptism are audiovisual aids that God designed to help us appreciate the supreme sacrifice of Christ and respond properly. It is impossible for a person thoughtfully and regularly to meditate on the loving sacrifice of Christ and remain unmoved. With that thought in mind, I designed a little box that folds into a “piggy bank” with a message on it to serve as a visual aid to be used in every home and classroom that wants to use it. It is to be placed on the table or where it can be seen every day or week, and each time it is seen, it calls attention to the fact that Christ made a sacrifice for us, and we need to make some sacrifice for Him. The bank reminds children of the love of Christ and permits them respond to it. How you talk about it and use it will also be a vivid audiovisual presentation. Remember, “The love of Christ constrains us” (2 Corinthians 5:14). [Editor’s Note: Even without electricity and corresponding equipment, the sermons presented in our worship assemblies or via mass media of various kinds (e.g., TV, DVD, Internet) are all audiovisual presentations. Each

Some time ago, the following questions were asked of me, and I could not recall that I had ever heard anyone speak or write anything definitive about the subject. “Does the church today have the right to settle questions by lot as the apostles did in Acts 1:26? If not, why not? If so, how should it be done?” Historically, the common method of casting lots was by writing the names of persons on pieces of stone or wood and putting them in an urn. Then, they were shaken and drawn at random. David decided the division of priests by lot as 1 Chronicles 24:5 indicates. The land of Canaan was divided by lot (Numbers 26:55). Achan, who took a silver wedge and garment, was apparently discovered by lot (Joshua 7:14-18), and there are other places where God seemed to approve of the use of the lot. It appears that on every such occasion it was when God wanted a specific thing done that man’s wisdom could not discover, and this was God’s way of making a special revelation to him. In no case do we find this method used simply to determine what course man might think God wanted him to pursue. In the case of Matthias (Acts 1:26), it seems evident that even if God did not ordain this method, He approved of the result. Serious objections have been raised concerning this procedure, such as: 1. There is no record of Jesus asking them to choose another man to replace Judas. On every other

A few moment ago, while reading Titus 3:4, I was struck by three things that I had never noticed before in over 50 years of Bible reading. I am convinced that if I lived for a thousand more, I would keep on finding new things. First, when the older women are told to “teach” (KJV) the young women, the word is neither “matheuteusate” as in Matthew 28:18 nor “didaskontes” as in Matthew 28:20, both of which are translated “teach” in the Authorized Version. The word here is “sophronizosin.” This word involves more than verbal instruction. Its approximate meaning is “to train to have sound judgment, wisdom, prudence and discretion.” This training would doubtless involve example, action, correction as well as instruction. Second, the text does not merely say that the older women are to teach the young ones how to love their husbands and children, but to teach them to be lovers of their husbands and children. This involves both the teaching them what they should be and how to wisely accomplish that which they should be doing. Have you considered the importance of both those concepts in many areas? To love your enemy is commanded, but one needs to know how to do it. To give as prospered is commanded, but one may have to do more studying to find how to give as prospered. To take the Lord’s Supper is important, but how is also important. So, when older women teach younger ones to be lovers of husbands

In these days, one may hear of one group that is more “spiritual” than another because they sing songs to a livelier tempo, because they greet each other with a holy kiss, or because they produce a sort of “exalted feeling” by something they say or do. However, what does the Bible mean by the term, “spiritual?” In most of our conversations and prayers when mention is made of “spiritual” and “material” things, they are assumed to be mutually exclusive. If we look in the dictionary, we find the first definition of spiritual to be “of or pertaining to or consisting of spirit, not material, incorporeal.” If it is not made up of matter, then it is probably spiritual! Is that what God meant in Galatians 6:1 when He said, “Ye which are spiritual, restore such a one in a spirit of meekness?” Surely not! Much of our thinking and language is built upon Socratic, Aristotelian or Platonic concepts rather than biblical ideas. The most apparent meaning of the word in Galatians 6:1 is, “The word ‘spiritual’ means that which is produced, directed, or controlled by God’s Spirit.” Let us see how close that comes to fitting every use of the word in the New Testament. In Romans 1:11, Paul mentioned “some spiritual gift.” If he was talking about the same thing of which he spoke in 1 Corinthians 12:1, 11, 30, 31; 14:1, 12 (and who can doubt that he is?), then the thing that made the gifts “spiritual”

Recently, we again heard the argument that since our society is so diverse, with so many different kinds of persons with so many different needs, we need a variety of denominations to meet those needs. We have little doubt that some of our own members will be advancing that argument, if they have not already done so. We admit that there are multitudes with various needs, attitudes and feelings. However, we raise the following questions: First, did not Jesus know that was also true when He built His church? There were twelve apostles, each about as different from the other as one can imagine. Why did He not tell each one of them to start a different denomination? Second, what need does anyone have that could not be met in the Lord’s church? Let us admit that there may be congregations that are so fossilized in their traditional way of thinking and doing that they might oppose having only one song and a prayer before the lesson. It is not improper for us to examine our traditional way of doing things and strive to find a more effective way of presenting the Gospel. Those of us who have been in other nations or cultures recognize that we may do things in various ways without the necessity of forming a denomination. If we were in a society in which there were those who were accustomed to taking their shoes off and sitting on the bare floor with crossed legs, there would

The tires screamed an awful wail as the drunken driver at the last moment sought vainly to avoid a head-on collision with the other car. The preacher, who stood over the mangled body of the innocent baby whose life was thus prematurely snuffed out, tried vainly to comfort the anguished parents with these words: “Find strength and comfort in submitting yourselves to the will of God, and rejoice in the fact that God took your precious baby. We cannot see any purpose in it, but we can be sure that God always has a purpose in these things.” I am frank to confess that I am disturbed by apparently well-meaning but ignorant people who blame God with the sins of a drunken driver. The plain Bible truth is that not everything that happens is according to the plan and the purpose of God. John Calvin may have assumed the false doctrine that all things, including the salvation or damnation of all men and angels, are predestined of God, but that many Christians, and occasionally a man we think of a “Gospel preacher,” express a doctrine, which so nearly approaches blasphemy, is disturbing. Surely, we do not have to be a theologian and read or write a learned treatise about the difference between God’s “intentional will,” His “circumstantial will” and His “ultimate will” to know that from Adam’s time to now men have been doing things contrary to the will of God, which causes the innocent to suffer. One may say, “God took him”

After reading the Bible for almost 65 years, I continue to be amazed and thrilled with the unsearchable riches one may find in one verse or even one word. In Jude 3, there are at least seven different words or expressions that deserve extended comments, although our limited ability and limited space prevent us from doing justice to them. Even the expression, “beloved” with all its implications needs emphasis. We may be so callused as to feel that it would seem effeminate or a mark of affectation to use it. Or, we may use it lightly, disregarding its real significance. I heard a clerk say to a foreign customer, “Y’all come back, honey.” He immediately drew back because he did not understand why she used what he understood as a term of endearment. There is little doubt that when Jude, Peter or Paul said, “beloved,” they were expressing a kind of loving concern that is sadly lacking in much of our communication to and about our brethren. Even when we feel the need to rebuke a brother, it should be done in the gentlest, kindest terms possible, and not in a sarcastic, bitter, harsh and unloving manner. One does not need to be soft and “mealy mouthed” or indifferent to false doctrine and ungodly living in order to write and speak in a kind manner. When Jude said, “it was needful for me to write” the ASV says, “I was constrained.” The words “diligence” and “constrained” in the same context

There is a short story in 2 Kings 8:7-15 that I have never heard discussed, but in which there are a few lessons for us. Benhadad, king of Syria, was sick. He sent Hazael to Elisha to find out if he would recover. In the 10th verse we find, “And Elisha said to him, ‘Go, say to him, ‘You shall certainly recover.’ However the Lord has shown me that he will really die.’” One may assume the prophet was telling a lie or condoning lying by Hazael. That is not so. It was true that he may certainly recover as far as the disease was concerned, but Hazael would kill him. Hazael did not tell the king what Elisha said. The king wanted to know his future. This is a common thing among the children of men. This is one reason fortune tellers and astrologers read tea leaves, examine the lines in the hand or look at the stars. Even little children may pull the leaves off the daisy, saying, “Loves me; loves me not,” until the last one reveals what they hope is the truth about the present or the future. Black cats may cross paths, persons may break mirrors or people may walk under ladders and assume that they then know more about their future than they did before. These tend toward lack of faith in God and may lead to direct dependence on evil spirits, witchcraft and such things. If “All things work together for good to

In Psalm 139:23-24, the psalmist said, “Search me, O God, and know my heart: Try me, and know my thoughts; And see if there be any wicked way in me, And lead me in the way everlasting.” The word “heart” is used over 800 times in the Bible, translated from more than six different words. Most of the brethren whom I have heard speak on the matter have equated the heart with the intellect. That is not as definitive and exact as it should be. It is more nearly accurate to think of the heart as the subconscious mind, the wellspring of all activity. As Proverbs 4:23 puts it, “Keep thy heart with all diligence, for out of it are the issues of life.” However, that is not my subject today. I will neither have time or space to deal with the sixty different kinds of hearts mentioned in the Bible nor with the dozens of allusions to other kinds. There are hard and soft hearts, pure an impure, wise and foolish, dark and enlightened, single and double, trusting and faithless, fixed and wavering, and faint and strong. Since God will search and try our hearts, it behooves us to do some heart-searching first and make sure we have the kinds of hearts that please Him. Let us view some kinds of hearts for which we should strive. First there is the grateful or thankful heart. Without this, none of the other kinds God wants will ever be developed. The

Those who ridicule God’s command to be baptized in order to be forgiven would do well to consider at least seven occasions when God used water to separate those who followed Him from those who rejected Him. The first outstanding example is the flood. If one only read the Old Testament story, he could easily see that principle. It is made more certain, striking and significant when we read of it again in Hebrews 11:7 and especially in 1 Peter 3:20-21 where we are told in specific terms that the water that saved them from the wicked world is a type of the baptism that saves us. The second outstanding example of the use of water to separate God’s people from others is in the story of Israel crossing the Red Sea. In Exodus 14:30, we find, “Thus the Lord saved Israel that day from the Egyptians and they saw the Egyptians dead upon the seashore.” Paul referred to this in 1 Corinthians 10:2 when he wrote, “They were baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea.” The third example is in Judges 7 where God had Gideon’s army to undergo a “water test.” Those who were watchful and careful and lapped the water in their hands were separated from those who did not. There are many lessons we can get from that story, such as the fact that God does not need large numbers to do any job He wishes to do, but our lesson today is

This morning as I was passing through the living room, I heard a few minutes of a talk show in which the guest taught that man has a natural inclination to sin. In my judgment, there are thousands in the church who believe the same thing, but they would be startled to know that they believe in John Calvin’s theory, rather than what the Bible teaches. One of my dearest Bible teachers of more than 50 years ago said, “Surely, if it can be put into human speech, here is a man handicapped with a radical defect in nature, yea, an inherent evil tendency in his flesh.” He taught that the “law of sin which dwelleth in my members” is “a power, which is impregnably entrenched in human nature.” He quoted several passages, such as Ephesians 2:3, which says, “and were by nature the children of wrath, even as the rest.” I pointed out to him what I think he already knew–that “phusis” (translated “nature”) means, “a mode of feeling and acting which by long habit has become nature” (Thayer 660). It has nothing at all to do with how one was born or what one’s inherent qualities are. However, he was so filled with the idea that man has a “fallen nature” and just “naturally” inclined to evil that it seemed to him every passage we would read dealing with man’s depravity and sinfulness led him to conclude that it taught the hereditary depravity of man. Romans 5:12 says,

Years ago, I wrote an article dealing with the question of whether we have a right to do wrong. Today, I wrote a letter to the editors of some area newspapers suggesting some of the same thoughts. I sent this one in the form of an article for two reasons: 1. Everyone needs to understand the facts mentioned in the letter. 2. Every Christian needs to be aware of the tremendous opportunities available to you to write to the editor of your local paper and express some eternal truth. Many editors will not publish anything that seems to have biblical origin, but many will. If enough Christians would speak out when they have the opportunity on issues that are significant, we could be the kind of salt and light in the world Jesus desires. Remember that it is better to light one candle than merely to curse the darkness. If you are not willing to do that now, when will you? I have had over three dozen letters published in various papers, most of them calling attention to some biblical principle. I have sent the letters to every member of Congress, every major newspaper and many radio and TV stations in the United States. How much good it will do, we do not know, but that is God’s business. Ours is to sow the seed; His is to give the increase. He will if you will. Here follows my last letter to “the Editor.” Dear Editor, One reason for our

Most of the writing we have seen by our brethren on this subject over the past 40 years dealt primarily with the fact that James and Paul were not contradictory though Paul teaches justification by faith and James teaches justification by works. Paul nowhere even implies that we are justified at the point of faith or by faith alone. Nor does James suggest that the good works a man may do are the grounds for his justification or that it was not based on his faith. In fact, he specifically affirms the necessity of faith demonstrated by obedience. In our judgment, this aspect of the subject has been well covered by our brethren. The reasoning has been something like this: Abraham was justified (declared to be just) when he offered his son on the altar (James 2:21). This shows that “faith without works is dead,” and that faith was perfected by obedience (James 2:20). The principle is true in our justification (salvation from past sins). We trust in God, but until that trust leads us to obey God in baptism, we are not justified by our faith. The reasoning is true, and the conclusion is valid. However, it seems to me that there is an additional truth that needs to be emphasized. Neither Moses, Paul nor James were talking about Abraham being saved from his past sins and being translated into a different kingdom or a relationship as in the case of an alien sinner today. We have heard it discussed in

Jesus said, “Every plant which my heavenly father hath not planted shall be rooted up” (Matthew 15:13). That this applies to denominational organizations is certain. Yet, the context suggests that it includes every doctrine, practice, organization, tradition and attitude not authorized of God. Paul wrote in Colossians 3:17, “Whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name (by the authority) of the Lord Jesus.” So, we must conclude that anything not authorized by Jesus is condemned. However, the point of this article is that Jesus is the one who said so! I have written a workbook on The Mind of Christ, designed to help us develop the mind of Christ rather than just talk about it. In almost every lesson, we see that He was not only kind, loving, gracious, tender, compassionate and understanding, but He was plain, straightforward, bold and uncompromising in His language and actions about sin and error under all circumstances.  It is a false concept that since Jesus was meek and lowly in heart (Matthew 11:29), if we have the mind of Christ (Philippians 2:5), we must be so soft and “mushy” that no one can tell for sure what we condemn, if anything. Too many of us have preached in a bitter, arrogant, sarcastic or hateful way, almost totally negative and derogatory. Our refusal to do that kind of preaching does not release us from the responsibility to “speak the truth in love” (Ephesians 4:15). Many present-day preachers, if they had been at

About 60 years ago, I was reading 1 John 3:8-9 and 5:18, both of which say that the person begotten of God does not commit sin. I was considerably disturbed, for I was just a little boy who had not yet obeyed the Gospel, but I was studying God’s Word, and it appeared to me that since John had just finished saying in 1 John 1:8, “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us,” there was some terrible problem somewhere. Because of my simple, childlike faith in God, I felt sure that the problem was with my understanding and not with the apparent contradiction of the text. Since a nationally known Gospel preacher was in a nearby town preaching on the radio, and my neighbor had a radio, I wrote him a postal card asking him about it. He did not reply, so I asked a younger preacher, and he told me that the idea of “cannot sin” in 1 John 3:9 meant “cannot afford to sin,” very much like Exodus 19:23 where Moses said, “The people cannot come up to Mount Sinai.” It appears evident that they could come up, but if they did they would die, so they were prohibited and could not afford to ascend the mountain. A mother might tell her child, “You can’t play in the street” without meaning that it was impossible to do so. Since that was the best explanation I could get,

We are reasonably sure that almost everyone who reads this believes that the Lord is coming back. There are so many thoughts we should be thinking and kinds of preparation we need to be making in view of that wonderful fact. However, we want to challenge your thinking with a new kind of thought that crossed my mind a few days ago. Every few days there comes to my desk an appeal of one congregation or another for money. There seems to be thousands or maybe millions of souls who could be won for Christ if we just had the money! I am firmly convinced that neither money nor the lack of it is our big problem. If everyone who claims to be a Christian would invest about 10 cents worth of shoe leather and perhaps 2 cents worth of conversation (if we can assume that what you say is worth 2 cents) the church could at least double in less than a year’s time. However, this article is concerned with money and what we might do with it. We also see notices every week concerning congregations who are willing to borrow from $20,000 to $2,000,000 to build buildings, which serve as cathedrals, meeting places (occasionally) or “church plants”—whatever they are. Now, just suppose (if the effort does not blow your mind) that half of us were half as concerned with winning souls as we are with perpetuating an image, ministering to our pride, comfort, etc. Now, suppose the elders of a

Today we need for both young and old some vital lessons on faith that are involved in the story of the walls of Jericho falling down. First, let us notice the foundation of faith. In Joshua 6:2 the Lord says, “See, I have given into thine hand Jericho.” Note carefully an important principle that is true today as well as then. The Lord gave it to him. He could do nothing to earn it, for it was a gift. However, he had to take it according to certain stipulations and rules ordained by God. This is true with every gift God gives, including salvation. The wonder of it is that so many brilliant men, theologians and Bible students, do not seem to grasp it, for it is a universal and timeless truth. The air you breathe is a gift of God, but you must breathe it—accept that gift on the terms of God’s law. The water that gives you life is a gift of God, but you accept and use it according to God’s laws, or it will bring death instead of life. So, the foundation of Joshua’s faith and ours must be what God has actually said, rather than some guess, opinion, feeling or notion we may get. Most religious persons, and not a few connected in some fashion with the Lord’s church, seem to think they can act in faith without any revelation from God about the matter. However, faith still comes from hearing God’s Word (Romans 10:17). It

In Acts 2:42, we read, “And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread and in prayers.” For all those who are interested in the idea of having a life or a church patterned after what Christ ordained, a continued emphasis on the four aspects of Christianity mentioned here should be valuable. In this article, we will have space for only the first one. First, we need to consider the apostles’ doctrine. What was it? How do we discover it? What difference does it make? Is it good for us to continue steadfastly in it? I never thought I would live long enough to hear those who claim membership in the Lord’s church to teach that doctrine is not important. Paul said to Timothy, “Take heed unto thyself and unto the doctrine; continue in them, for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee” (1 Timothy 4:5). If Paul’s language to Timothy does not teach that doctrine is important, what does it teach? In taking heed to the apostles’ doctrine, we need to make some significant distinctions. First, we need to make distinctions between the Old and the New testaments. It is amazing that there are still those connected with the Restoration Movement who try to prove their practices (like those of using mechanical instruments of music in worship) by the Old Testament. I received a letter recently from a preacher who said something like this, “If God approved of

In the congregation where I did my first full-time preaching many years ago, I tried to encourage the members to give as they prospered. On one occasion when we needed to make an organized and concerted effort to raise a specific amount to do a job that we all agreed needed to be done, I suggested that we share with each other the information about how much we felt able and willing to contribute toward the job. One precious lady whom I continued to love dearly criticized the idea vehemently, saying, “What I give is nobody’s business but mine and God’s.” That idea I have heard expressed and have seen practiced in many ways since that time. In connection with that, I should like to raise a few questions. In the last year or so, we have seen a spate of articles (whatever that is) on the eldership, raising all sorts of questions from “Who Calls the Shots?” to “What Do They Do?” However, I believe, in spite of all of the varied opinions about what kind of leadership we should have, there is practically unanimous agreement in all sections of our brotherhood (which includes the “sisterhood”) that the elders are to shepherd the flock, watching after its spiritual welfare. Surely no one would deny that whether or not a person attends the services is the elders’ business! Why? Because that relates to one’s spiritual welfare. It is true that a person can bring a warm body (or a cool

Although there seems to be an increasing need for teaching on the subject of the kind of music God authorizes and with which He is pleased, this article is not primarily for the purpose of emphasizing why we should not use mechanical instruments in worship of God. It is to emphasize how, what and why we should sing unto the Lord. It was suggested by the reading of Psalm 95:1-3, “Oh come, let us sing unto Jehovah; Let us make a joyful noise to the rock of our salvation. Let us come before his presence with thanksgiving; Let us make a joyful noise unto him with psalms. For Jehovah is a great God, And a great king above all gods.” This does not suggest that David is our authority for singing, or for how, what and why we sing. However, the principles he stated are still valid for us. Let us notice how we should sing unto the Lord. First, it should be joyful. This does not mean it should have a handclapping or foot stamping accompaniment. We may need an extended study of the words “joy” and “rejoice” to see how far they are from the general concept that most of us seem to have. Without dwelling on it, let us just mention Hebrews 12:2, where it reads, “Jesus the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame.” We need to make a clear distinction between rejoicing

Although I am totally opposed to the idea that our preaching and teaching must be of such a wishy-washy, generalized platitudinous nature that our listeners neither know what is wrong in their lives nor how to correct it, I strongly urge all preachers and teachers to consider the scriptural basis, psychological and pedagogical values of the proper kind of praise for the proper kind of attitudes and action at the proper time. While recognizing the value and necessity of the admonition of Paul to “Reprove, rebuke and exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine” (2 Timothy 4:2) and that the One who loved us above our ability to comprehend said, “As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten” (Revelation 3:19), my thoughts today deal with another scriptural theme—the value of proper praise. We cannot read the Bible without seeing that God is set forth throughout as One to be praised and honored. Why? It is because He has superlatively done that which is worthy of praise! There are some who seem to think that since God deserves all that praise, men do not deserve any. Yet, Paul wrote in Romans 13:7, “Honor to whom honor.” We not only have the right, but the responsibility to give honor and praise to those who act in a praiseworthy manner. Even when Solomon presented a negative side, the positive is evidenced when he said, “Let another man praise you, and not your own mouth, A stranger, and not your own lips” (Proverbs 27:2) The virtuous

In our first article we dealt with the origin of Satan. Although our opinion is that the Lucifer spoken of in Isaiah 14 is not Satan, there seems to be little doubt that he belongs to the angelic order of beings and was among the sons of God (Job 1:6). He has fallen, apparently through pride as 1 Timothy 3:6 suggests. The very title, “Satan” means adversary, so he is opposed to God in every aspect of his being. As one with a high degree of intelligence and power, he has exercised great power over other beings, including other angels who sinned (2 Peter 2:4). In this article, we want to deal with the character and the works of Satan, for we need to understand his methods in order to defeat him. The names or titles by which he is called evidence a large part of his character. He is called Tempter in Matthew 4:5 and 1 Thessalonians 3:5. He is called Beelzebub, the prince of the demons (Matthew 12:24). In other places he is called the Enemy, the Evil One, the Father of lies, a Murderer, a Deceiver, the Great Dragon and Belial. That last word seems to be related to the Hebrew word “beliar” and means “worthlessness.” In this article we shall not be concerned primarily with the ability of Satan during the time Christ was on earth to control the actions of individuals in what is called “demon possession.” We simply point out that there is no

Since I have not seen anything recently written in any gospel papers about Satan, and yet I find he is still operating, I decided it would be appropriate to call attention to him again. First Peter 5:8 says, “Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour.” Many operations are “downsizing” for economic or other reasons. His seems to be adding workers from all sections of society.  Almost always when we are studying with a person who knows little about the Bible, the question is raised about the origin of Satan. Is he eternal or co-existent with God? If he is not eternal, then why did God create an evil being? The answer is reasonably easy if we read all that the Bible has to say about the matter. It may surprise us that the Bible says so little about how he began to operate. There are many things the Bible does not say that are assumed by preachers and theologians. First, let us look at the simple answer, and then we will examine various aspects of the question of Satan and his work. God did not create an evil being, but He created both superhuman and human beings that possess the power of choice. One of those superhuman beings with the power of choice rebelled against God and became His adversary (which is the meaning of the term “Satan”). It is assumed by many Bible scholars and theologians

In recent years, there have been a few persons who have said that they have found no evidence to indicate that Jesus ever existed. My research has led me to conclude that there was more evidence for the historicity of Christ, and even for His resurrection, than there was that Napoleon fought the battle of Waterloo. Since it would take a whole book to deal properly with the evidence, let me suggest now only one aspect of the subject. One of their primary objections is that there is no Roman or Jewish writer contemporaneous with Jesus, except the New Testament historians, who wrote of Him. They knew Josephus did, but they suggest that since we do not have the original of Josephus, it is probable that his reference to Jesus was added by some early Christians who wanted to propagate this so-called “myth.” Aside from the fact that a person who rejects the historical accounts of the apostles is required by honesty to give logical reasons for rejecting them, if we took this approach, no historical record of anything would have any value. One could not prove that we have a valid Declaration of Independence, for it is possible that someone forged a document and forged the signatures of everyone, including John Hancock, and that the story of the origin of this nation is but a myth. Of course we can prove logically that such a theory would be ridiculous. Anyone with any knowledge of mythology can tell immediately the

In Genesis 43:11, there is a statement that made a special appeal to me. Jacob was giving his sons some instructions about what to take back to Joseph. He said, “Carry a little honey.” I remember brother Marshall Keeble saying to me about 40 years ago, “You can catch more flies with honey than you can with vinegar.” I replied, “When I am preaching, I am not particularly interested in catching flies.” So, I continued my usual caustic way of preaching. I have little doubt that I have turned persons away from the truth, not because they hated the truth, but because of the harsh way I have presented it. I hope I never live long enough to learn how to preach the soft, “mealy-mouthed,” watered down doctrineless speeches that are called sermons in many places today. I also hope I do live long enough to learn what brother Fred Barton tried to impress on me when James Walter Nichols and I were debating against another team in his class. I had rather sarcastically attacked the logic of our opponents, implying that a person with enough brains to fill a peanut could present a more logical argument than they. Brother Barton said in his slow Alabama drawl, “Pierce, a person can be a Christian and a gentleman at the same time.” Sarcasm and ridicule was never practiced by great debaters like Alexander Campbell and need not be practiced by any Christian. Knowing his sons as Jacob did, he could well

During the Gulf war we heard of several occasions where several men from our armed forces were killed by “friendly fire.” This to many of us seems even worse than being killed by enemy fire, but of course the ultimate end is the same—they are dead. As I thought about that, the realization came to me that it has a tragic application in the Lord’s church. We are all supposed to be on the same side, fighting the enemy, but many times it seems that we are killed or wounded by what might be termed “friendly fire” inasmuch as it comes from those who are supposed to be in the same army. As in the case of the armed forces, it does not seem too friendly, and the consequences may be the same as, or in some cases worse than, if it had been the enemy fire. For example, a person speaks or writes something about the teaching of the Bible with which I disagree, or think I disagree. Instead of first finding out if I understood his meaning properly, or if it was merely a matter of misusing the English language, I write him up as a false teacher and advocate withdrawal of fellowship from him. I do it under the guise of “contending for the faith once delivered to the saints,” and slashing around with the sword of the Spirit, I bring division, heartache and confusion to the Lord’s family. A specific example of this in a minor

Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 2:4-5, “And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the spirit and power: that your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.” He had said in Chapter 1:17, “not with wisdom of words, that the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.” I have come very near envying those preachers who apparently have a special gift of eloquence. (I expect most “special gifts” have been developed by long arduous hours of study and work.) When I come to some grand theme of the Bible and my heart is almost bursting with the desire to express more adequately the inexpressible love and grandeur of God, I feel like a tongue-tied moron. Then, I wish the Spirit would do for my preaching what He does for my praying (Romans 8:26). However, as I was musing about my weaknesses and shortcomings in this and other areas, I thought of what Paul said, and the language of Jesus and the apostles as they taught. Then, I remembered hearing an eloquent elderly evangelist engaging in earnest entreaty to the Eternal One. He began something like this: “Our omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent and ever-to-be-adored heavenly Father.” He continued in that style for several minutes, capturing (or at least intriguing) my mind with adjectives I had almost forgotten. He closed with something like this, “And when we come to the end of the

Almost forty years ago I knew a preacher whose brilliant mind, apparent soundness in the faith and insight into God’s Word was a joy and an inspiration to me. Then, for reasons unknown to me, he departed from the faith. My last memory of him was as he stood bearded and unkempt, looking about half drunk. I had wept and prayed about him as I tried to find a way to reach him. Then, I stopped after about ten years. My problem may have been threefold. It is probable that I really did not care enough. In my arrogance or pride, I may have thought like Peter, “Though all may forsake thee, I never will” and looked upon my brother with contempt, thinking myself to be so far beyond his spiritual or intellectual problems that I could not bother with him. Second, it may be that I had a theological problem. I knew the Bible said in Hebrews 6:4-6, “For as touching those who were once enlightened and tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the age to come, and then fell away, it is impossible to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.” I knew that 1 John 5:16 says, “There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.” I

Alexander Pope said in the early 1700’s, “A little learning is a dangerous thing: drink deep, or taste not the Pierian Spring. There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again.” The principle he was suggesting is probably true, but the problem is, all of us have to start at zero, and no one ever is possessed of much learning that does not first have a little. Furthermore, all of us have to stop somewhere, and since “shallow draughts” and “drinking largely” are relative terms, we simply have to do what we can, where we are, with what we have. What caused me to start this article was that last night, one of our good Bible teachers was teaching from 1 Timothy 3:2 concerning the qualifications of a bishop. He had been told by some student of the Greek language that “dei,” which is translated “must” in the KJV, is present tense. Therefore, he said, “It is necessary that the bishop continue to be the husband of one wife. Then, it follows that if his wife dies, he must resign.” I come to a different conclusion about that, the reasons for which I shall discuss shortly, but regardless of whether I am right or wrong about that conclusion, the principle about which I am writing is far broader. The principle is: Rules of Greek grammar are not made by some scholars and imposed on the text. They are determined by what we find as we examine the way the language was used. For

There is a very interesting statement made in 1 Peter 1:21 about which I never remember hearing anyone comment. It says, “Who through Him are believers in God, that raised Him from the dead, and gave Him glory; so that your faith and hope might be in God.” Have you ever considered the implications of that statement? It is only through Jesus that you can have the proper understanding of God and thus have the proper faith in Him. If you do not believe in the God that Jesus revealed, you do not believe in God in the Bible sense. It is amazing to discover the number of persons who claim to believe in God, but they have very little concept of the God that Jesus revealed. There are those who believe in a god who overlooks sin. He would not allow anyone to be lost eternally. Many believe in a god who either has not given a revelation of his will, or he made it too difficult to understand. Others think he does not really mean what he says. For example, when he says, “Baptism doth also now save you” (1 Peter 3:21), he really means that baptism has nothing to do with salvation. The God Jesus revealed is a God of grace. He graciously provided the way to be saved for every sinner who is willing to forsake his sin. The God that Jesus revealed is One who loves mankind enough and hates sin enough that He allowed

This morning as I was walking, with the temperature about 20 degrees, the cold wind hit my face and I looked down. I saw a dime, which I picked up and put in my pocket. For a few minutes I continued to look down until I suddenly thought of a story I heard about a man who found a dime, and for the next 20 years he went around with his head down. He acquired 12,000 bottle caps, five pennies, one nickel, various assorted items, a crooked neck, a humped back and a soured, disappointed outlook on life. Then, I thought of Psalm 5:3, “In the morning I will direct my prayer unto thee, and will look up.” Also Psalm 121:1 came to mind, “I will lift up my eyes unto the hills from whence cometh my help.” Since I needed a lesson on looking up, I decided to share some thoughts with you. Many times I have felt like Elijah who thought he was the only one left who was serving God. When I see the Lord’s church being led into apostasy on every hand, and almost every false doctrine one can imagine being introduced, I write articles and preach sermons against those things. Then, I realize that one can look down so much that he may almost lose the power to look up. It still bothers me very much to hear preachers who advocate positive preaching so much that they never preach against anything except those who preach

There is a very close relationship between the way a person thinks, talks and acts. If one can change any of them, he can influence the other two. The difference in defeat and victory may depend on our thinking, talking or acting. I want to consider some examples in the Bible and in our lives where the language used was a primary factor in the defeated lives that we find. In Exodus 14:12, we find a group of fearful, faithless Israelites who saw the Egyptians marching after them. They said, “Is not this the word that we did tell thee in Egypt, saying, ‘Let us alone that we may serve the Egyptians?’ For it had been better for us to serve the Egyptians than that we should die in the wilderness.” There are two things in this statement of defeat that are especially significant in terms of our present lesson. First, “We told you so.” Before they left Egypt, they had their minds made up that they would fail, and nothing had happened that had changed it. Psychologists sometimes call this, “Self-fulfilling prophecy.” When a person looks at some program that has been designed for the advancement of the cause of Christ and the progress of the Gospel and says, “It will not work,” many times his subconscious mind gets in tune with his words to see that it does not work. Then, when some aspect of it fails because of his opposition or indifference, he says, “I told you

Perhaps many of us are familiar with the parable of the city fathers who were concerned about the large number of persons who kept falling over a cliff to the rocks below. So, they had a meeting and voted to spend several thousand dollars to provide ambulance service to carry the injured to the hospital. After several years of wailing and spending money for ambulance and hospital services, a young lad suggested to the aged fathers that they build a fence at the edge of the cliff to keep people from falling, rather than being so concerned with keeping the ambulances ready to pick them up after they had fallen. The story appealed to me. I have seen elders who seemed more concerned with providing help for those who have fallen than doing the things necessary to prevent them from falling in the first place. First Corinthians 10:12 says, “Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.” It is also true that after one is fallen, Galatians 6:1 says, “Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of meekness.” As I was meditating on that, another thought occurred to me that might be worth our consideration. Although it is good to be concerned with the welfare of those who are fallen, perhaps it is better to be concerned with the means that we can use to keep persons from falling. It is possible that in focusing on

The longer I live the more convinced I am that one of the reasons for the greatness of the Bible is its wonderful balance. This balance is so remarkable in many cases as to be paradoxical. Jesus’ teaching is filled with such examples. The way up is down. The way to save life is to lose it. The poor are rich. Jesus is the Lion of the Tribe of Judah, but the Lamb of God. By grace we are saved (Ephesians 2:8), but we shall be judged according to the deeds done in the body, whether good or bad (2 Corinthians 5:10). We are to bear one another’s burdens (Galatians 6:2), yet each man must bear his own burden (Galatians 6:5). The fact that the words for burden are different does not negate the fact that there are two facets of truth, and balance must be achieved if one is to understand and practice the truths of God. We must “contend earnestly for the faith” (Jude 3), yet not be contentious (Romans 2:8). Those who sin are to be rebuked before all (1 Timothy 5:20), yet we may hide a multitude of sins (James 5:20), and love covers a multitude of sins (1 Peter 4:8). The failure to properly appreciate and practice the balance taught in such verses has caused untold damage to the cause of Christ and resulted in a perverted and emasculated form of Christianity. Solomon expressed many such apparently contradictory truths. “Answer not a fool according to

How many hundreds of times we have sung, “There’s a beautiful place called heaven. It is hidden above the bright blue”! We are probably allowed a great deal of “poetic license” in our singing, for it is doubtful that any preacher or author could make a serious statement that the Scriptures teach that heaven is hidden “out yonder somewhere beyond the stars” without being called into question. Yet, today I want to examine the thesis that the thing that is described in Revelation 21 is a place at all! Do not misunderstand me! I cannot conceive of heaven not existing in some place. Neither can I conceive of the church not existing in some place. However, surely any student of the Bible knows that an adequate description of the church is not a description of the place in which it meets. One may say, “The church is the place where the saved worship God” but does not mean by that some geographical locality, but a spiritual relationship. Note first that the description we are about to read in Revelation 21 and 22 is that of “the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven, made ready as a bride adorned for her husband” (Revelation 21:20). Verses 8 and 10 show clearly that John is about to see a vision of the “bride, the wife of the Lamb, the holy city, New Jerusalem.” Now, is the “bride” a place or a people in a place? Assuredly, we have only one serious answer to that! Of all

The hardest thing about the following list is trying to resist the temptation to write a paragraph or page about each reference listed. We shall try to list as concisely as possible every reference in the Bible we can remember that deals with admonitions, commands and examples of proper and improper conduct of parents, with a short comment on the lesson indicated. Note on Proverbs Proverbs is full of wise sayings that Solomon said should be taught to our children. We shall note a few of the outstanding ones: 4:7 – Get wisdom and insight; 4:17 – Shun evil companions; 4:24-27 – Talk and live straight; 5:8 – The value of chastity; 5:9-11 – The dangers of idleness; 5:14 – The danger of sowing discord; 10:19 – The value of restraining their language; 11:24-26 – The value of being liberal; 11:28 – Not to trust in riches; 23:30 – Not to be a winebibber or glutton; 24:21 – Fear and obey the Lord and earthly rulers.

Today, we notice Elijah in 1 Kings 19:9-16. It would have been normal for Elijah or for us to assume that the Mt. Carmel experience would have convinced and turned the people to God. It did not. We can sympathize with and understand Elijah’s feelings, yet they reveal the weakness of humanity, even of a great man like Elijah. He knew the strength of his God. He had experienced the quiet guidance through hard places. He had many proofs of God’s providential care and infinite power. Ravens had fed him. He had seen fire come from heaven. He had even raised the dead and had in so many ways tasted that the Lord is gracious. Yet, in this period of apparent crisis, he threw up his hands in despondency, discouragement and despair, wishing to die. Some of us can sympathize with him, for we have been there. The searching question of verse 9, “What are you doing here?” may have had two purposes. It may have been a stern demand of the Lord. He may have meant, “What are you doing here instead of out there encouraging the people to continue in the little start they have made? What are you doing here hiding away like Jonah, pouting under the gourd vine, when the scattered flock needs your care?” It may have been a question of tender mercy, attempting to get Elijah to examine his fears and needs so God could provide the answer. It was probably some of both,

Paul gives an admonition to Timothy that has special application for us today. In 2 Timothy 2:14 he said, “Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers.” Often when we find persons striving about words, we find that the statement in Jude 1:10 applies. “But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves.” By this we mean that very often when there is this sort of strife, those on one or both sides of the controversy speak evil of the other person, not understanding what he is saying, but assuming he means what he does not mean. It seems reasonably certain that the statement of 1 Timothy 1:7 applies to them. “Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.” Let us try to give some illustrations that may help us to see and to correct this problem. Suppose a person says, “The United States only has one ambassador to Germany.” Another person says, “Every American soldier in Germany can be an ambassador of good will to the Germans.” It should be easy to see that two persons could argue and fuss about that, although most of us can see that there is nothing about which to fuss, for they are using the word “ambassador” in a

Since teachers may occasionally be afraid that they will fail, and since each student needs to learn how to have the courage to stand, I started to entitle this article, “How to Overcome Fear.” Then, I realized that we do not need to overcome fear as much as we need to be courageous. There is a difference! There are various kinds of fears. Hebrews 5:7 says about Jesus, “Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to deliver him from death, and was heard in that he feared.” So we do not need to overcome all kinds of fear, but we do need to have courage. Developing courage will help us to overcome the fears that need to be overcome, and more importantly, to function properly in spite of the fears that may still remain. Courage is not the absence of fear. Courage is the will to go on in spite of fear. Let me suggest some things about fears in general, and how to remove some of them. Then, we need to know how to have the courage to serve God and our fellowman in spite of fears. Most of us have fear of failure. In addition to that, we have fear of someone finding out about our failures, sins and shortcomings. Keep in mind that those fears are related, but different. There are rational fears, such as fear of stepping out of

or the past 60 years, we have read an occasional reference to the so-called scandal connected with the birth of Christ. An article, “Christmas at Matthew’s House,” has more speculation and erroneous implications than any I remember reading from any source. I have seen several critical reviews of the article, but I do not remember any of them pointing out one simple fact that would make all such speculative writing vain, even if it were not false or blasphemous. When Mary was known to be with child by the Holy Spirit, and Joseph was minded to put her away, it is often assumed, without any biblical reason, that the whole community knew she was with child, though unmarried, and therefore assumed that she was immoral. There is nothing in the record or secular history of which I am aware that suggests that anyone except Joseph and Mary knew that she was with child when they married. How long she had been in that condition is not stated, but one may look in vain for any of the friends or enemies of Jesus in that day bringing such charges against either Mary or Jesus. In fact, in Luke 3:23, it specifically says that it was supposed that he was the son of Joseph, but it does not suggest that anyone supposed that he was an illegitimate son. All of the scandalous insinuations and blasphemous remarks were never made in any historical record in or out of the Bible, as far as I can

Many of us who are familiar with the tactics of modernists know that they frequently use what may be termed “weasel words.” These are words that may have double meanings, sometimes special private meanings defined by the person using the word. This practice is reprehensible in ordinary communications. It may have a place in humorous repartee where a pun or double entendre is used in the awareness that the audience realizes what is being done. It has no place in serious writing, especially of a religious nature. As an example of these weasel words, in a graduate course in Homiletics I heard a denominational divinity student make a speech about the resurrection of Christ. When he was almost through, he revealed that he did not believe in an empty tomb. He was not talking about the bodily resurrection, but what he called a spiritual resurrection. He failed to define that phrase. It apparently was something that happened to the spirit of the apostles, rather than to the body of Christ. Another preacher strongly affirmed that he believed in the inspiration of the Bible. I assumed that he meant what I did until he revealed that he believed that Shakespeare and Milton were also inspired. Another preacher, who claimed to be a preacher of the Gospel, said, “I am not too concerned about the virgin birth of Christ; I am concerned with His virgin life.” That may have been his effort to express an interesting point in a unique way, but

In Ephesians 3:20-21, we read a passage that is so astounding that we even hesitate to write about it. It says, “Now unto him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us, unto him be the glory in the church and in Christ Jesus unto all generations for ever and ever.” One reason we hesitate to write about it is that when a thing is beyond anything we can ask or think about, it is very difficult to write in any way to do justice to it. Then when it abounds in those qualities, we feel even more difficulty. When it exceedingly abounds in them, then we find it impossible to write without actually feeling a sense of awe and impotence approaching fear and trembling. However, there are a few things in the passage that need our attention, although giving anything resembling a comprehensive exegesis of it is impossible. First, we need to recognize that the blessings available to us in Christ go beyond even the things that the words of the Bible reveal, and even what the Bible reveals are so fantastic that they almost defy the imagination. Just salvation from past sin is a subject about which a book or two could be written and still not touch all aspects of it. The barest discussion of it would need to involve salvation from the guilt of sin, the punishment for sin, the love of

In a recent Bible class, the question was raised about whether God knows all that will take place, and if so, how can man do anything except what God knows he will do? We tried to point out that foreknowledge and predestination are two different things, and that what we call “foreknowledge” is simply “knowledge” with God, for with God there is neither past nor future. God is. However, that caused another question to be raised that may need to be addressed. That is, if faith comes by hearing the Word of God, and a person is himself responsible for hearing, believing and obeying the Gospel, is there any value in praying for the conversion of a sinner? That is, what will God do that He has not already done, inasmuch as we have no scriptural authority for assuming that the Holy Spirit is going to have an influence on the heart of a person separate from the Word of God? Let us address two aspects of that question. First, if we never are able to answer the question, “What will God do, or how will He answer our prayer on behalf of the sinner?” we may with full assurance know that it is proper for us to pray for the conversion of a sinner, or anything else good for all men, for God has specifically commanded that in more than one place. When God told us to pray for daily bread, we are not to understand that there must

Solomon made many interesting statements, few of them more intriguing than the one in Ecclesiastes 1:17-18, “And I applied my heart to know wisdom, and to know madness and folly: I perceived that this also was a striving after wind. For in much wisdom is much grief; and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.” How does that fit with his statement in Proverbs 3:13, “Happy is the man that findeth wisdom, and the man that getteth understanding?” Proverbs 4:7-8 says, “Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom; yea, with all thy getting get understanding. Exalt her, and she will promote thee; she will bring thee to honor, when thou dost embrace her.” Does it make any sense for Solomon to tell us to strive for that which will bring sorrow? If “happy is the man that finds wisdom,” how can it produce sorrow? In digging for answers to those questions, we uncover tremendous truths, but the mine of wealth cannot be exhausted by this article. First, let us be aware that the searching for and acquiring anything of value may increase sorrow. Solomon also said, “Whoso findeth a wife findeth a good thing, and obtaineth favor of Jehovah” (Proverbs 18:22). I found one many years ago, and she has brought happiness and the favor of Jehovah of which I had not dreamed. If I should lose her, it would increase sorrow many fold. In fact, the degree to which I esteem or value her is the degree to which

This article deals primarily with teaching every person who may be teachable. Prospects may be located through friends of members, visitors at church services, a religious survey, through responses to a mass mailing or many other ways. However, we need to be aware of the vital urgency of following up all who may be teachable, no matter from where the names come. Let us consider some principles and procedures that need to be understood and applied with regard to those who respond from close by as well as those who respond from another locality. We also need to consider responses in terms of helping the person with his problems as we strive to lead him to Christ, then helping him to become an active member of the local congregation. This, of course, is in keeping with the Great commission, which has to do first with making him a disciple, then teaching him to observe all things commanded (Matthew 28:18-20). Let us first address the issue of what may happen when 100 to 300 million persons grasp the simple message of the Gospel, with an awareness that the Creator and Lord of the universe is concerned about them personally, and offers a solution to their problems. We anticipate that up to one million or more may respond to that message, for there are millions who are not aware that there is One who cares about them or has any real solution to their problems. Some will respond who are merely curious about

A few days ago I received a book written by a man who claims to be a minister of the Gospel and a practicing homosexual. He gave many arguments (?) for his conclusion that homosexuality was not only condoned, but it was commanded! I do not want to take the time to refute his blasphemous contention that when the word “servant” is used in the Bible it suggests the activity of the one who serves homosexually, and when the word “Servant of servants” is used, it suggests the ultimate of Christlikeness in serving another’s homosexual advances and refers to Christ! But it does remind me of one who suggested to me that at least half the homosexuals would be saved according to the implication of Luke 17:34, “I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed: the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left.” Two men in one bed must refer to practicing homosexuality! If you think that exegesis is “off the wall,” let me point out some examples of sloppy exegesis (or eisegesis) which abounds in some things that come to our attention. I just read from an article by one who thinks he has the right to use instrumental music in worship (or do most anything else he wants), for the Bible says in 1 Timothy 1:9, “Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient.” He says this proves again

Yesterday, I was visiting with a friend who was almost killed and paralyzed from the chest down when struck by a drunken driver. She, with great courage, faith and determination continued to study, write and go to school. After I baptized her, although she was a poor widow whose husband had been a Baptist preacher, she decided to finish her high school education. Afterwards, she continued her studies in Abilene Christian University in Greek and Bible (having received her degree from a Junior College after she suffered the injury), then received her Master and Doctor of Ministry degrees. She is now working on a Ph.D. and a Th.D., almost ready to submit a thesis. She looked in her Greek Testament at 1 Timothy 6:6 and read, “But Godliness with contentment is great gain.” She pointed out to me what I had never noticed before. The Greek word translated “contentment” is “autarkeia,” which Thayer defines as “a perfect condition of life in which no aid or support is needed.” She was checking Thayer, Vine’s and Young’s Concordance for the various related meanings, and I suggested that she write an article about it. Since she is so busy with school work, attending to her own physical, mental and spiritual needs (she is in a wheel chair in her own apartment now) she may not get around to it for some time, so I decided to write one, which she can probably improve on when she does get to it. We usually think of contentment merely as