With a federal election fast
approaching in Canada, candidates are busy going from door to door,
talking with constituents, attempting to rally support in their
campaigns. A local MP hopeful, Rob Hutchinson (NDP) stopped by a few
weeks back. I politely, but firmly informed him that he would not
receive my vote, as we fundamentally disagree on important moral issues.
We briefly commented on same-sex marriages and capital punishment, but
the majority of our conversation focussed on abortion. Mr. Hutchinson
had trouble reconciling my support of capital punishment with my utter
detest of abortion. Sadly, he fails to acknowledge two things:
1) when a criminal is put to death, it is not an act of murder, but
an exercise of justice afforded to governing authorities (Ro 13:1-7)
2) when an unborn child is put to death, it is not merely a
collection of tissue called a “fetus”, but an innocent human being (Jer
1:5)
To strengthen his position on abortion, Mr. Hutchinson informed me that
the early church supported abortion. He stated that ample evidence
could be found in quotes from antiquity to demonstrate that the early
Christians were not opposed to the act of aborting a pregnancy. When
asked for the evidence, our MP want-to-be said he would likely be too
busy to supply me with any specifics, but that the testimony of early
Christians should be easy enough to find.
Indeed, evidence of what the early church believed on abortion was not
difficult to find. However, Mr. Hutchinson will not like what the
evidence reveals. Notice:
Thou shalt not slay the child by procuring
abortion; nor, again, shalt thou destroy it after it is born. (74 AD —
Letter of Barnabas 19)
There are some women among you who by drinking
special potions extinguish the life of the future human in their very
bowels, thus committing murder before they even give birth. (170 AD —
Octavius 30, Minucius Felix)
Among surgeons’ tools there is a certain
instrument, which is formed with a nicely-adjusted flexible frame for
opening the uterus first of all and keeping it open; it is further
furnished with an annular blade, by means of which the limbs within the
womb are dissected with anxious but unfaltering care; its last
appendage being a blunt or covered hook, wherewith the entire fetus is
extracted by a violent delivery. There is also a copper needle or
spike, by which the actual death is managed in this furtive robber of
life: they give it, from its infanticide function, the name of
embruosphaktes, ‘the slayer of the infant’, which of course was alive.
(210 AD — The Soul 25, Tertullian)
To hinder a birth is merely a speedier
man-killing, nor does it matter whether you take away a life that is
born, or destroy ont that is coming to birth. That is a man which is
going to be one; you have the fruit already in its seed. (210 AD —
Apology 9, Tertullian)
(Christians) marry, like everyone else, and
they beget children, but they do not cast out their offspring. (250 AD
— Letter of Diognetus, Diognetus)
The man, or woman, is a murderer that gives a
philtrum, if the man that takes it die upon it; so are they who take
medicines to procure abortion; and so are they who kill on the highway,
and rapparees. (374 AD — First Canonical Letter 8, Basil the Great)
Wherefore I beseech you, flee fornication...
Why sow where the ground makes it its care to destroy the fruit? –
where there are many efforts at abortion? – where there is murder
before birth? For even the harlot you do not let continue a mere
harlot, but make her a murderess also. You see how drunkenness leads to
prostitution, prostitution to adultery, adultery to murder; or rather
to something even worse than murder. For I have no names to give it,
since it does not take off the thing born, but prevents its being born.
Why then do thou abuse the gift of God, and fight with His laws, and
follow after what is a curse as if a blessing, and make the chamber of
procreation a chamber of murder, and arm the woman that was given for
childbearing unto slaughter? (391 AD — Homilies on Romans, John
Chrysostom)
Some go so far as to take potions, that they
may insure barrenness, and thus murder human beings almost before their
conception. Some, when they find themselves with child through their
sin, use drugs to procure abortion, and when, as often happens, they
die with their offspring, they enter the lower world laden with the
guilt not only of adultery against Christ but also of suicide and child
murder. (396 AD — Letters 22, Jerome)
Thanks to Steve Rudd for his work in
compiling quotes from antiquity regarding the topic of abortion. More
quotes may be found at: www.bible.ca/H-Abortion.htm
Though the Bible does not specifically address the issue of abortion,
it certainly does supply information which necessarily infers that God
is opposed to such an action, and that all who would serve Him should
likewise appal such a deed. Note:
God knows us from before our birth, even before our conception:
“For You formed my inward parts; You covered my in my mother’s womb. I
will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; marvelous are
Your works, and that my soul knows very well. My frame was not hidden
from You, when I was made in secret, and skillfully wrought in the
lowest parts of the earth. Your eyes saw my substance, being yet
unformed. And in Your book they all were written, the days fashioned
for me, when as yet there were none of them.” (Ps 139:13-16)
“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; before you were born I
sanctified you; I ordained you a prophet to the nations.” (Jer 1:5)
God values the life of an unborn child the same as the life of a
grown man:
“If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth
prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished
accordingly as the woman’s husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as
the judges determine. But if any harm follows, then you shall give life
for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.” (Ex 21:22-25)
Was Mr. Hutchinson misinformed or lying? I do not know. What I do
know, is that the evidence clearly shows that the church in the first,
second, third and fourth century was opposed to abortion. More
importantly, the Bible plainly establishes that God considers the
aborting of a pregnancy to be an act of murder, and under the law of
Moses, it was punishable by death.
What a calamity that our nation is willing to put to death over 100,000
unborn children each year, calling it a woman’s “right to choose”,
while criminals, deserving of death enjoy benefits unbecoming of their
sorry state! What twisted madness has caused our nation to act so
corruptly?
“Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who put darkness for
light, and light for darkness; who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for
bitter.” (Isaiah 5:20)
____________________________ In a recently televised leader’s debate, the
issue of abortion came up, but no leader would dare use the word. The
coined phrase was “a woman’s right to choose”. What a cowardly
phrase!! I believe in a woman’s right to choose. She is free to choose
what clothing she will wear. She is free to choose what hair style she
will have. She is free to choose what school she will be educated at.
She is free to choose where she will work (if she is so inclined). She
is free to choose the name given to her child. But by no means is she
free to choose to kill her unborn child! It is an act of murder!!!
ANSWERING THE
ATHEIST Vol. 4, Iss. 25 -- 06/20/2004
The Atheist's
Complaint:
How old was Benjamin when his clan migrated to Egypt? Some
verses say he was an infant (Genesis 44:20, 22), while other verses say
he was a grown man with ten sons (Genesis 46:8, 21). Is there a
contradiction?
Response:
Consider the words used of
Benjamin which cause the questioner to think that he was an infant:
“child” - Heb. yeled, which is used of a child, or descendent.
Though commonly used of those who are young, it need not be of an
infant. Benjamin was indeed a child to his father, and even to the rest
of his brothers, as he was the youngest.
“young” - Heb. qatan, which can mean small or insignificant,
but with regard to people, refers to one who is young, younger or
youngest. Although it may commonly be used of those who are very young,
it is likewise valid to use it of Benjamin, as he was indeed the
youngest of all Jacob’s sons.
“lad” - Heb. na’ar, used of a boy, a servant or a young man.
Though Benjamin had his own children, he was still Jacob’s boy, and
comparatively, a young man before his brothers.
An older man might refer to his forty year old son as “a child of his
old age”. That does not make the forty year old an infant. He might
likewise be called “young”, and even a “lad”; these words do not change
the fact that he is a forty year old. Words used to describe age are
relative.
Note the reason why “the lad cannot leave his father”. It was not
because Benjamin was an infant, but “if he should leave his father, his
father would die.” Jacob had already lost Joseph, and could not bear
to lose Benjamin also. Perhaps Jacob was overprotective, maybe even
“babied” Benjamin, but that does not change the fact that he was a
grown man.
There is no contradiction.
When in Kingston, Ontario, worship with the Limestone
Church of Christ assembling at 332 Montreal Street MEETING TIMES: Sunday Bible Classes..........................10:00
a.m.
Sunday Worship Assembly...................11:00 a.m.
Sunday Bible Classes............................6:00 p.m.
Wednesday Bible Classes......................7:00 p.m.
--
''~``
( o o )
+oooO--(_)--Oooo-----------------------+
| William J. Stewart |
| 332 Montreal St. |
| .oooO Kingston, ON K7K 3H3 |
| ( ) Oooo. Phone: 613-542-4271 |
+--\ (----( )------------------------+
\_) ) / www.lookinguntojesus.net
(_/
We live in a society where
forbearance is stressed. Canadians pride themselves as being a
multicultural country, and as such, a land where folks can expect and
enjoy tolerance. I appreciate the opportunity to meet new people, to
learn about diverse customs, and to taste foods from various cultural
backgrounds. I firmly believe that “...He has made from one blood
every nation of men to dwell on the face of the earth...” (Acts 17:26),
and that partiality based upon race, gender, class, and culture have no
place in the Christian life.
That being said, I recently received an e-mail wherein it was said,
“...you should be ashamed of your apparent intolerance of other’s
beliefs.” Understand, the intolerance of which I am accused has naught
to do with any of the above factors, but deals exclusively with
religious truth.
THE NATURE OF TRUTH
Jesus said, “...you shall know the truth, and the
truth shall make you free.” (John 9:32) Again, “I am the way, the
truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.”
(John 14:6). Where will we find “the truth”? Once more, the words of
the Lord Jesus, “Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth.”
(John 17:17). Among the definitions which Webster gives truth, we find
“a transcendent fundamental or spiritual reality.”(1)
Of the rudimentary characteristics belonging to truth, we might include
consistency, objectivity and exclusivity.
Truth does not contradict itself. If two statements or positions are
opposed to one another, we must conclude one of three things:
1) Position A is right and position B is wrong;
2) Position A is wrong and position B is right;
3) Position A and B are both wrong.
It is not possible that opposing positions can both be “truth”. Truth
is consistent.
Truth is not based upon personal fancies, but upon discernible facts.
Simply, 2+2=4. A preacher several years ago divulged to me his crooked
ways by slyly commenting that he could easily demonstrate that 2+2=5.
How? If you round 2.49 to the nearest whole number, you will have 2.
However, if you add 2.49+2.49, and then round to the nearest whole
number, you will have 5. Therefore, he concluded, 2+2 can equal 5.
Like his mathematics, this man was willing to bend the word of God, so
as to teach what will tickle the ears of men rather than glorify the
God of heaven (2 Timothy 4:2-4). God’s word is not to be rounded off!
Truth is objective.
As noted above, Jesus identified the Bible, God’s word, as the source
of truth. If we accept Jesus’ statement as valid, then the Bible is the
only source for religious truth. Creed books and other writings of man
may reiterate some of the truth which is revealed in the word of God,
but none of these are the source of religious truth. Anything which
exalts itself as equal to or greater than the Bible (ie. Koran, Book of
Mormon, Watchtower Society, Pope, etc.) ought to be an offense to those
who seek to walk according to the truth. Truth is exclusive.
RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE OR
INTOLERANCE?
When an accusation of religious intolerance is
levied, it is useful to take a look into the Bible to see what the
demeanor of the Lord and his disciples was toward those who’s religious
doctrine or practice opposed what they taught. Did they tolerate
departures from the truth, or did they condemn such?
Jesus did not tolerate those who taught people contrary to God’s word
(Matthew 5:19-20; 15:1-9). He taught that the way of God is “narrow”
and “difficult”, and that “there are few who find it” (Matthew
7:13-14). He said that only those who do “the will of My Father in
heaven” have the hope of heaven (Matthew 7:21). Matthew 23 is perhaps
the best known of several texts where Jesus laid into the religious
leaders of the Jews, because they taught and did contrary to the will
of God.
After the disciples had spoken the gospel message, the council of the
Jews commanded that they do so no more (Acts 4:13-22; 5:27-29). Their
message (the resurrected Christ, 4:10, 33; 5:30-32) offended the
religious leaders. The council also put Stephen to death, because he
was unwilling to tolerate their corrupt ways, but instead boldly
exposed them (Acts 7:51-53).
Consider Cornelius, a Gentile from Caesarea. He was described as “a
devout man and one who feared God with all his household, who gave alms
generously to the people, and prayed to God always” (Acts 10:2). With
such commendable words by the Spirit of God, surely he was fine as he
was, and any religious peculiarities ought to simply be tolerated. But
what do we see? The Spirit sent Peter to preach the gospel to him (v
5-6, 19-20, 33-35, 47-48; 11:13-17). Cornelius had to respond to the
same gospel message as others.
After Saul of Tarsus became obedient to the Lord, he journeyed
preaching and teaching the gospel. He went to areas where a variety of
religions were accepted. Perhaps the climaxing experience Paul had with
the myriad of religions which existed in his day was at Athens. There,
Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus and declared, “Men of Athens,
I perceive that in all things you are very religious; for as I was
passing through and considering the objects of your worship, I even
found an altar with this inscription: TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Therefore,
the One whom you worship without knowing, Him I proclaim to you...”
(Acts 17:23-23). The apostle proceeded to tell these idol worshippers
that God is not worshipped in the fashion which they worshipped (v
24-25), and that they should seek the Lord (v 27-28). He concluded,
“...these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men
everywhere to repent, because He has appointed a day on which He will
judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained.” (v
30-31). Paul did not see it fit to tolerate their false religions, but
to expose and call them from such things.
Numerous other examples could be cited, where the truth is exalted and
those who walk contrary to the truth are called to forsake their own
way, that they might walk in accordance with the word of God. It was
not religious tolerance that was called for; it was unity (Romans 15:6;
1 Corinthians 1:10; Ephesians 4:1-6; Philippians 1:27). Jesus revealed
that the true worshippers of God must “worship in spirit and truth”
(John 4:23-24). Nothing short of this was tolerated by the Lord.
Neither should we accept less.
In love, we need to preach the truth and expose error. As Paul was
surrounded by a myriad of false religion at Athens, so the true
worshippers of God are surrounded by a throng of false religions
today. Some are opposed to Christianity, worshipping other gods and
deriving their authority from sources other than the Bible. The
segments of denominationalism claim to be Christian, but in both word
and deed, set themselves contrary to the word of God.
Rather than accept religious diversity, we should follow the Bible
pattern of seeking unity in doctrine and practice. There is a truth;
there is an acceptable pattern and standard. Any departure or variation
from God’s plan is not tolerated by the Lord, nor shall such things be
tolerated by those who desire to serve God.
We have the God-given freedom to believe what we desire. Some choose to
believe the lie (2 Thessalonians 2:9-12). Let us choose to believe the
truth, and encourage others to do likewise.
ANSWERING THE
ATHEIST Vol. 4, Iss. 26 -- 06/27/2004
The Atheist's
Complaint:
Was John the Baptist Elijah? Sometimes yes (Matthew
11:13-14; Matthew 17:12-13; Mark 9:13), and sometimes no (John 1:21).
Is there a contradiction?
Response:
Was John the Baptist Elijah? The
answer is both yes and no. Those who questioned John sought to know
who he was. He told them he was not the Christ (v 20). They asked,
“Are you Elijah?”, to which he said, “I am not.” (v 21). How can he
say that, when other verses clearly identify him as the Elijah who
would come?
Malachi had foretold that “Elijah” would come (Malachi 4:5), and the
New Testament applies this to John (Matthew 17:10-13). We are told that
John would come in the spirit and power of Elijah (Luke 1:17). He was
not (nor did he ever claim to be) the actual person of Elijah.
It would appear that as the representatives of the Pharisees questioned
whether he was Elijah or not, they thought that Elijah was to literally
return to the earth. He denied being Elijah come back to earth, just as
he denied being the Christ or the Prophet (Deuteronomy 18:15). What
did he confess of himself? That he was “...the voice of one crying in
the wilderness...”, spoken of by Isaiah. That is, he was the one who
would come in the spirit and power of Elijah, turning the people back
to the Lord.
There is no contradiction.
When in Kingston, Ontario, worship with the Limestone
Church of Christ assembling at 332 Montreal Street MEETING TIMES: Sunday Bible Classes..........................10:00
a.m.
Sunday Worship Assembly...................11:00 a.m.
Sunday Bible Classes............................6:00 p.m.
Wednesday Bible Classes......................7:00 p.m.
--
''~``
( o o )
+oooO--(_)--Oooo-----------------------+
| William J. Stewart |
| 332 Montreal St. |
| .oooO Kingston, ON K7K 3H3 |
| ( ) Oooo. Phone: 613-542-4271 |
+--\ (----( )------------------------+
\_) ) / www.lookinguntojesus.net
(_/
Webster’s dictionary identifies a
pack rat as “one who collects or hoards especially unneeded items.”
The term was primarily applied to the wood rat (Rocky Mountain area),
on account of it’s tendency to hoard food and miscellaneous objects.
THE PHYSICAL PACK RAT
Ask a pack rat to give up some of his inventory, and
you will have a substantial fight on your hands. Though his collected
treasures consist of things that are broken, worn out, too big, too
small, outdated, and generally useless; they are nonetheless his
fortune. I don’t think that Solomon had the pack rat in mind when he
wrote the following words, but regardless, the principle holds true:
“There is a severe evil which I have seen under the sun: riches kept
for their owner to his hurt.” (Ecc 5:13). It is heart wrenching for
the pack rat to give up any of his hoard, and yet by keeping it, he
becomes a slave to it. He literally has no room for life, for his
stored goods have taken over.
THE SPIRITUAL PACK RAT
Have you ever considered that we might become pack
rats when it comes to our souls? How sad when a person crowds himself
out of house and home by storing up things which are of no use, but how
much more lamentable when we hoard things which are for naught to the
ruin of our souls. James commanded, “...lay aside all filthiness and
overflow of wickedness, and receive with meekness the implanted word,
which is able to save your souls.” (Jms 1:21). Taking into account the
“great cloud of witnesses”, those who have faithfully served the Lord
before our time, the Hebrew writer enjoins us to “...lay aside every
weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us...” (Heb 12:1)
Paul asked the Romans, “Do you not know that to whom you present
yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey,
whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to
righteousness?” (6:16) He went on to compel them, “...just as you
presented your members as slaves of uncleanness, and of lawlessness
leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves of
righteousness for holiness.” (v 19).
Friend, do not store up treasures which will bring about sorrow. The
goods of this life will pass away (Mt 6:19). The honour and prestige of
men will vanish (Ecc 4:13-16). Sin is but a passing pleasure (Heb
11:25). Let us store up treasures in heaven (Mt 6:20), that we might
from our heavenly Father reap great reward.
ANSWERING THE
ATHEIST Vol. 4, Iss. 27 -- 07/04/2004
The Atheist's
Complaint:
When did the cursed fig tree die? Immediately (Matthew
21:19-20) or the next morning (Mark 11:13-14, 20-21)? Is there a
contradiction?
Response:
As with many cases, one gospel
writer gives more information to us than another. Both Matthew and Mark
record the cursing of the tree (Matthew 21:19; Mark 11:13-14), and both
record the disciples reaction to seeing the withered fig tree (Matthew
21:20; Mark 11:20-21). However, Mark records details which Matthew
does not.
The tree had no fruit on it because “it was not the season for figs”
(Mark 11:13). As such, perhaps the disciples had walked right by the
tree without so much as a look. Mark indicates that the disciples
heard Jesus’ words (v 14), but did not see the withered tree until the
next day (v 20). Between the time of the curse against the tree and
the disciples seeing the outcome, they had entered Jerusalem, where
Jesus cleansed the Temple.
When did the fig tree die? Immediately, as Matthew said (v 19). It is
the questioner’s assumption that the disciples also saw the withered
tree immediately. Matthew does not distinguish between the day of the
curse and the day when the disciples saw the dead tree, but neither
does he necessarily infer that the two events happened at the same
time. The words “when the disciples saw it” (v 20) do not tell us
when. We need to go to Mark’s account to determine “when the disciples
saw it.”
There is no contradiction.
When in Kingston, Ontario, worship with the Limestone
Church of Christ assembling at 332 Montreal Street MEETING TIMES: Sunday Bible Classes..........................10:00
a.m.
Sunday Worship Assembly...................11:00 a.m.
Sunday Bible Classes............................6:00 p.m.
Wednesday Bible Classes......................7:00 p.m.
--
''~``
( o o )
+oooO--(_)--Oooo-----------------------+
| William J. Stewart |
| 332 Montreal St. |
| .oooO Kingston, ON K7K 3H3 |
| ( ) Oooo. Phone: 613-542-4271 |
+--\ (----( )------------------------+
\_) ) / www.lookinguntojesus.net
(_/
Please accept my apology for the bulletin abruptly stopping, and further, for my not informing you of such. Regardless, the bulletin has been brought up to date, and will continue weekly, as it ought to, Lord willing. I will be sending out the missing issues shortly.
Thank you for your patience, and may God bless you in every good work.
______________________________________________ William J. Stewart Limestone Church of Christ Kingston, Ontario, CANADA www.lookinguntojesus.net 613-542-3354
Having exalted the name of Jesus before the Jewish rulers, the apostle Peter concluded, "...nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved." (Acts 4:12). Years later, the apostle Paul, having spoken of Jesus’ death on our account to the Philippian brethren, penned, "Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." (Philippians 2:9-11).
Jesus is translated from the Greek iesous, which originally came from the Hebrew yahowshua, means "Jehovah is salvation". There have been many who have worn the name, but only One can satisfy the high calling which the apostles spoke of. Joshua, the great military captain of Israel, shared the name with our Lord, but as valiant as he was in the service of God, he was not the salvation of God unto all men. A first century Christian, a companion of Paul (Colossians 4:11) wore the name Jesus, but neither could he fill the wonderful words which are accomplished in Jesus of Nazareth.
Why is Jesus the name given among men whereby we must be saved? Why is the name of Jesus exalted above every other name, so as to be worthy of adoration from all tongues? It is not merely the name, but the man who wore the name. Consider just a few things the Hebrew writer tells us about Jesus. He "...was made a little lower than the angels...that He, by the grace of God, might taste death for everyone." (2:9). He is "...the Apostle and High Priest of our confession..." (3:1). We have been "...sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ..." (7:22). We can have "...boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus..." (10:19). He has become for us "...the Mediator of the new covenant..." (12:24).
What a glorious Saviour! Below are the words to "Jesus, Name Above All Names", including some verses we’ve added. Let us praise the name of Christ Jesus our Lord!!
- - - - - - - - - -
Jesus, name above all names, Beautiful Saviour, glorious Lord; Emmanuel, God is with us, Blessed Redeemer, Living Word.
Advocate, God blessed forever, Alpha, Omega, Almighty God; The Bread of Life, desire of nations, The King eternal, My Lord and my God.
My Helper, He’s the good shepherd, The hope of glory, Heir of all things; Anointed One, Faithful and True, Lord of harvest, David’s offspring.
The Son of Man, Man of sorrows, Our Mediator, My strength and my song; Our Passover, promised of Abraham, Salvation’s author, To Thee we say "come".
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST Vol. 4, Iss. 28 -- 07/11/2004
The Atheist's Complaint:
Where did Aaron die? Numbers says he died on Mount Hor (Numbers 20:27-28; 33:38), but Deuteronomy 10:6 says he died at Mosera. Is there a contradiction?
Response:
Indeed, Aaron died on the top of Mount Hor. Numbers 33:38 clearly says, "...Aaron the priest wend up to Mount Hor at the command of the LORD, and died there in the fortieth year after the children of Israel had come out of the land of Egypt..." The name Mosera only appears one time in Scripture, that being Deuteronomy 10:6.
Given that Deuteronomy 32:50 specifically says that Aaron "...died on Mount Hor...", it should be safely assumed that Mosera is either an alternate name for Hor, or an encampment which was in close proximity to the mount. Easton Bible Dictionary states of Mosera, "...one of the stations of the Israelites in the wilderness (Deut. 10:6), at the foot of Mount Hor. (Comp. Num. 33:37, 38). It has been identified with el-Tayibeh, a small fountain at the bottom of the pass leading to the ascent of Mount Hor."
There is no contradiction.
When in Kingston, Ontario, worship with the Limestone Church of Christ assembling at 332 Montreal Street MEETING TIMES: Sunday Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Sunday Worship Assembly...................11:30 a.m. Wednesday Bible Classes......................7:00 p.m.
Listen to our radio program, Sunday mornings at 10:00 a.m. on Oldies960
______________________________________________ William J. Stewart Limestone Church of Christ Kingston, Ontario, CANADA www.lookinguntojesus.net 613-542-3354
Friends, it is with great excitement that I tell you about our new radio broadcast, "...looking unto Jesus...", premiering this morning on Oldies960 AM. In this program, the Lord has opened to us an opportunity to enter many homes in our community on a weekly basis.
If you live in the Kingston area, you’re invited to tune in each Sunday morning at 10:00 a.m. to Oldies960. In fact, if you are as far west as Port Hope, as far east as Prescott, or as far north as Smith Falls and Perth area, be sure to listen in on 960 AM.
Perhaps you’re not in our area, but are still interested in listening to our program. If so, visit
The radio broadcasts are a joint effort between Tom Rainwater (Watertown, NY) and myself, with occasional guest speakers. It is our intention to address topics of interest to the average Christian or truth seeker, and to encourage and uplift those who walk with determination as the people of God.
May God bless this effort to spread His word in the Kingston area!
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST Vol. 4, Iss. 29 -- 07/18/2004
The Atheist's Complaint:
Is there an unforgivable sin? Matthew 12:31-32, Mark 3:29 and Luke 12:10 all indicate that there is, but Acts 13:39 says "...by him all who believe are justified from all things." Is there a contradiction?
Response:
Certainly, the Bible speaks of an unforgivable sin, the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. In Mark’s account, an explanation of why Jesus referenced this sin is given, "... — because they said, ‘He has an unclean spirit.’" (v 30). The Pharisees not only spoke against Jesus, but against the Spirit of God, stating on more than one occasion that Jesus’ works were accomplished by Beelzebub, the ruler of demons (Mt 9:34; 12:24; Mk 3:22; Lk 11:15; Jn 7:20; Jn 8:48, 52; Jn 10:20). This ongoing defiance against the Spirit of God results in condemnation. By rejecting the proof of Jesus’ identity which was given through the Spirit, the religious leaders also rejected any hope of salvation. They were guilty of unbelief.
The text is in some ways akin to this: "...For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame." (Hebrews 6:4-6). If one sins (and continues therein), they cannot come to repentance, and can never receive forgiveness. To perpetuate sin brings with it condemnation. Neither text infers that one can commit a sin which can never be repented of or forgiven. Both texts deal with unbelief in the heart.
Acts 13:39 reads, "...by him all who believe are justified from all things." Amen!! If we believe in the Lord, He is able to justify us. However, it should be noted that the questioner has left out the latter portion of this verse. It goes on to read, "...from which you could not be justified by the law of Moses." Contextually, the apostle is not dealing with the blasphemy against the Spirit, but the weakness of the law of Moses to deal with sin (it clearly revealed it, but no provision was made for forgiveness), and the strength of faith in Christ to cleanse us of all unrighteousness.
There is no contradiction.
When in Kingston, Ontario, worship with the Limestone Church of Christ assembling at 332 Montreal Street MEETING TIMES: Sunday Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Sunday Worship Assembly...................11:30 a.m. Wednesday Bible Classes......................7:00 p.m.
Listen to our radio program, Sunday mornings at 10:00 a.m. on Oldies960
______________________________________________ William J. Stewart Limestone Church of Christ Kingston, Ontario, CANADA www.lookinguntojesus.net 613-542-3354
A recent e-mail correspondent, influenced by Jehovah’s Witness doctrine, has stated, "...man does not live on after he dies..." The Witnesses case against life after death is primarily based on the claim that such is pagan philosophy, and not Scriptural. In addition, the misapplication of some Bible texts, in conjunction with the disregard of others, simulates support for this godless doctrine.
It may be true that pagans accepted the existence of an immortal soul. However, this fact does not automatically nullify the validity of such a doctrine in Christianity. If every thought which existed among the pagans invalidated a similar thought among God’s people, then we must of necessity reject the Bible account of creation, the flood, the virgin birth, and perhaps much more. Biblical truth needs to be determined by what the Bible says, not what the pagans believed.
IS THE SOUL MERELY THE BODY?
Having cited Genesis 2:7, the Witnesses conclude, "Clearly, the soul is not what a man has but what he is."
(1) The contention is made that the soul and the body are one and the same. When the body dies, the soul of necessity dies, for the soul is the body. Thus, it is stated, "Before God created him from the dust, Adam did not exist. After his death, Adam returned to the same state of nonexistence."(2)
If there is no distinction to be made between the soul and body, why did the apostle Paul pen, "...may your whole spirit, soul, and body be preserved blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." (1 Thes 5:23)? Surely if body and soul are synonymous, the apostle would have known it! Again, to demonstrate that the soul is distinct from the body, consider the death of Rachel. While giving birth to Benjamin, we are told that "...her soul was departing (for she died)..." (Gen 35:18). What was her soul departing from? Was it not her body, which was subsequently buried (v 19-20)?
THE SOULS WHO SINS SHALL DIE
These words can be found in Ezekiel 18:4, 20. Witnesses use this, and similar texts to support their doctrine of soul annihilation. The text certainly speaks of the soul dying, but it is NOT the same death which come upon the body. Our bodies die a physical death (Gen 3:19; Heb 9:27), the only exceptions being those who are alive at the Lord’s coming (1 Cor 15:51-53). The soul dies a spiritual death, not related to the physical design of the body (dust), but the actions of the person (Ro 6:23). From the text, note that the wicked will die, but the righteous will live. And yet our constant experience, when it comes to physical death, is that both wicked and righteous die.
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob all died (Gen 25:8; 35:29; 49:33), and yet the Lord speaks of them as living (Mt 22:32). They died physically, as all men do, but spiritually, they live (Jn 11:25), for they were faithful to the Lord.
A QUICK SUMMARY OF EZEKIEL 18:
the false proverb (inherited sin) in Israel (18:1-2)
each one is accountable for his own sin (18:3-4)
the man who lives righteously will live (18:5-9)
the wicked son of a righteous man will die (18:10-13)
the righteous son of a wicked man will live (18:14-17)
the wicked father of a righteous son will die (18:18)
Principle: the righteousness of the righteous is upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked is upon him (18:19-20)
the wicked man who turns from his evil will live (18:21-23)
the righteous man who turns and commits sin will die (18:24)
the ways of the Lord are fair (18:25-29)
God judges each according to his own ways, therefore repent and live (18:30-32)
THE DEAD KNOW NOTHING
Ecclesiastes 9:5 is another favourite text of those who believe the soul ceases with the death of the body. Solomon records, "For the living know that they will die; but the dead know nothing, and they have no more reward, for the memory of them is forgotten." This verse, by itself, appears to be a solid proof that those who are dead cease to be. But let’s set it in context. Verse 6 reads, "Also their love, their hatred, and their envy have now perished; nevermore will they have a share in anything done under the sun."
Solomon is not affirming that the dead have slipped into nonexistence, but that they have no more part on this earth. They "know nothing" about "anything done under the sun". Consider the circumstances of the rich man and Lazarus, as revealed by the Lord. Neither man is spoken of as annihilated. They existed in a different realm; Lazarus in Abraham’s bosom and the rich man in torments. Both had completed their allotted life on earth, and now reaped accordingly. The rich man could not effect the fate of his brothers, though he desired that Lazarus be sent back to them. "Nevermore will they have a share in anything done under the sun."
THE HADEAN REALM
Hades is a Greek word which has been translated "hell" in some Bibles, while others simply transliterate it. In Greek mythology, "Hades is the lord of the dead and ruler of the nether world, which is referred to as the domain of Hades or, by transference, as Hades alone."
(3) Again, the Witnesses will focus on the fact that the hadean realm is found in Greek mythology. Shall we set aside a Bible teaching simply because the Greeks had in their mythology something nigh to reality? Jesus taught that Hades was a real place (Mt 11:23; 16:18; Lk 16:23). The apostle Peter associated it with the Old Testament "sheol" (Acts 2:27; cf. Ps 16:10), the abode of departed souls.
In Luke 16:19-31, Jesus teaches about this hadean realm. Two abodes exist there, Abraham’s bosom (paradise) and torments. Souls in hades are not "asleep in the grave" as the Witnesses would tell us, but in fact are alert, able to receive comfort and torments (v 25). The body has gone to the ground (v 22), but the person has gone to a spirit realm.
The common argument levied against this text is that Jesus was simply teaching a parable. A whole complex explanation has been devised to give credence to this interpretation. However, the text does not fit the fabric of a parable. A parable is "a usually short fictitious story that illustrates a moral attitude or a religious principle."
(4) When Jesus taught via parables, He used examples that His audience were familiar with (ie. fishing, sowing seed, harvesting, etc.). Since the living have not died, they would not be acquainted with what He spoke. How were they to learn the spiritual principles involved if they didn’t understand the story itself? Furthermore, the Witnesses reject the existence of life after death, and yet, in Jesus’ "parable", He declares there to be. Did Jesus speak of things which were not (ie. lie) in order to teach this "parable"?
This is not a parable. Jesus taught in short about the diverse lifestyles of two men, and their respective rewards after death. The rich man, guided by greed (v 19, 21, 25) and wicked living (v 30), received condemnation; Lazarus, leading a troubled life (v 20-21, 25), but apparently faithful to the Lord, receiving comforts.
If we live faithfully, we also have the hope of comfort in Abraham’s bosom. While on the cross, Jesus promised the penitent thief, "Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise." (Lk 23:43). What a blessed hope, and thereafter, to be raised to dwell with the Lord eternally (1 Thes 4:16-18). ________________________________________________
(1) Jehovah’s Witnesses, "Should You Believe In Reincarnation?" (www.watchtower.org) (2) Jehovah’s Witnesses, "Should You Believe In Reincarnation?" (www.watchtower.org) (3) Micha F. Lindemans, "Hades", (www.pantheon.org) (4) Merriam-Webster Deluxe Dictionary
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST Vol. 4, Iss. 30 -- 07/25/2004
The Atheist's Complaint:
Was Jesus the first to rise from the dead? Acts 26:23 says He was, but a host of Scriptures reveal that others had risen from the dead before Him (1 Samuel 28:11, 14; 1 Kings 17:22; 2 Kings 4:32-35; 2 Kings 13:21; Matthew 9:23-25; Luke 7:12-15; Luke 9:30; John 11:43). Is there a contradiction?
Response:
Not all the texts listed are incidents where one was raised from the dead. Samuel was not brought back to life in physical form. His spirit was merely "conjured up" by a medium (1 Samuel 28:11, 14). Likewise, when Jesus spoke with two (Elijah and Moses) at the mount of transfiguration, these were not revived to life in their physical bodies, but temporarily appeared in their spirits (Luke 9:30). Every other instance mentioned, and others which are not listed, are examples of people who were brought back to life (ie. raised from the dead).
So, how can it be said of Jesus that "...he should be the first to rise from the dead..."? The word "first" (Gr. protos) certainly can mean first in regard to time, but also carries with it the idea of first in regard to importance (ie. preeminence). He is the "head" of all those who should raise from the dead. He is elsewhere called the "firstborn from the dead" (Colossians 1:18), and the "firstfruits of them that slept" (1 Corinthians 15:20). It is also noteworthy that Jesus is the first to have raised from the dead, never to die again. Each one listed above (and those not listed) who were raised to life again, died again. Jesus did not.
There is no contradiction.
When in Kingston, Ontario, worship with the Limestone Church of Christ assembling at 332 Montreal Street MEETING TIMES: Sunday Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Sunday Worship Assembly...................11:30 a.m. Wednesday Bible Classes......................7:00 p.m.
Listen to our radio program, Sunday mornings at 10:00 a.m. on Oldies960
______________________________________________ William J. Stewart Limestone Church of Christ Kingston, Ontario, CANADA www.lookinguntojesus.net 613-542-3354
A FAITH ALONE advocate penned the above words in a e-mail message I received this past week. The first clause, I can wholly agree with. Indeed, the Bible teaches us that Jesus saves. In fact, His name means "Jehovah is Salvation". The angel who appeared to Joseph, said of this Child who would be born, "...He will save His people from their sins." (Mt 1:21). And John the Baptizer declared of Him, "Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world." (Jn 1:29). Amen! Jesus saves.
Since I do not believe the latter clause (namely that baptism has no part in our salvation), I have been labelled by our correspondent as a BAPTISMAL REGENERATIONALIST. What is baptismal regeneration? It seems that my accuser has concluded that anyone who believes baptism to be necessary for salvation believes in the doctrine of baptismal regeneration. However, baptismal regeneration is not merely a belief in the necessity of baptism, but more precisely, a belief that baptism, apart from faith is able to save. In that regard, I applaud the words of the nineteenth century Baptist preacher, Charles Spurgeon, "We confront this dogma with the assertion, that BAPTISM WITHOUT FAITH SAVES NO ONE."(Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, No. 573, June 5th, 1864).
Baptismal regeneration is most commonly attributed to the Catholic Church, but it is not merely a Catholic doctrine. The doctrine can also be found among protestant groups, including the Lutherans and Anglicans, the latter of whom roused Spurgeon’s comment.
The existence of such a doctrine is the combination of a little truth and a little error. Those who hold to baptismal regeneration acknowledge the Bible teaching that baptism has a role in the salvation of man (1 Pe 3:21). However, they mingle this truth with the false doctrine of depravity (Mt 19:14). Thus, countless children, pure and holy before God, have been subjected to public washings which no more removed sin than their regular baths at home. The fact is, these children had no sin to be purged (Eze 18:20), and even if they had, such could not be accomplished unless they first believed (Mk 16:16).
Baptismal regeneration is the backbone to infant baptism, and depravity is the backbone to baptismal regeneration; but all three are false, humanly devised doctrines.
Rather than take mere portions of the Bible, we must take all of what the Bible says. Yes, the BAPTISMAL REGENERATIONALISTS are in error for exalting baptism above all else and making it the whole matter with regard to salvation, but equally, the FAITH ALONE advocates are in error for exalting faith as the sole agency in man’s salvation. No text can be found to support the thought that baptism alone affects the condition of man’s soul; neither can a text be found which stipulates that faith alone is sufficient. In fact, the phrase "faith only" appears but once, in the writing of James, where he emphatically declares, "You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only." (Jms 2:24)
"Ah,"
the FAITH ALONE cohort will contend, "James is talking about justification, not salvation." Is that so? Does James make the distinction which our friends have made? Consider:
"What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you says to them, ‘Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,’ but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. But someone will say, ‘You have faith, and I have works.’ Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe — and tremble! But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, ‘Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.’ And he was called the friend of God. You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only. Likewise, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead also." (James 2:14-26)
James does not make the distinction between salvation and justification that the FAITH ALONE advocate makes. Notice the question James pursues. Is the question not, can faith that does not have works save (v 14)? What conclusion does the inspired writer come to? "...Faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead." (v 17) "...Faith without works is dead." (v 20, 26) "...A man is justified by works, and not by faith alone." (v 24)
Does James contradict Paul, who wrote, "...by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast." (Eph 2:8-9). If Paul’s point is that we are saved by faith alone, he did not articulate it well. To convey this, simply including the word "only" or "alone" would have settled two millennium of debate and discussion. These words are not included, for his argument is not that we are saved by faith alone. This is the same Paul who wrote, "...God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered." (Ro 6:17). And if Paul is the writer of Hebrews, he also penned that Jesus has become, "...the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him." (Heb 5:9). These could hardly be the words of a man who taught salvation by faith only. So, what is the message? Salvation is not meritorious, and therefore, no room is available for boasting (Lk 17:10). We are but unprofitable servants when we have submitted ourselves in obedience to the Lord. We have done that which is our duty, or, as the apostle writes, "For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them." (Eph 2:10).
Does the Bible teach the necessity of faith? Absolutely (Heb 11:6; Jn 8:24; Ro 10:14, 17). Any doctrine which teaches otherwise (ie. baptismal regeneration) needs to be rejected. However, the Bible speaks of more than just faith. It also teaches the need for us to submit to the Lord’s command to be baptized, that we might be saved (Mk 16:16; Col 2:11-13; Gal 3:26-27). Any doctrine which teaches otherwise (ie. faith alone) must be rejected by those who determine to serve the Lord faithfully.
23 THINGS THAT SAVE MAN! WHICH ONE WILL YOU LEAVE OUT?
God has provided 14 things:
1. Father (Isa 12:2; Tit 3:4-5; Ro 6:23; 8:33...) 2. Son (Mt 1:21; 1 Ti 1:15; Heb 5:8-9; Lk 19:10) 3. Holy Spirit (1 Cor 6:11; Jn 14:26; 16:7-13...) 4. Grace (Ac 15:11; Ro 3:24; Eph 2:8-9...) 5. Love (Jn 3:16; 1 Jn 4:7) 6. Mercy (Tit 3:5) 7. Hope (Ro 8:24; Tit 1:2) 8. Life of Christ (Ro 5:10) 9. Cross (1 Cor 1:18; Gal 6:14) 10. Blood (1 Jn 1:7; Ro 5:8-9; Eph 1:7, 13-14...) 11. Name of Christ (Jn 20:30-31; Ac 4:10-12...) 12. Bible/Gospel (Ro 1:16-17; Jms 1:21...) 13. Preachers/Messengers (1 Cor 1:21...) 14. Truth (Jn 8:32; 2 Thes 2:10)
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST Vol. 4, Iss. 31 -- 08/01/2004
The Atheist's Complaint:
How old was Ahaziah when he took the throne in Judah, 22 (2 Kings 8:26) or 42 (2 Chronicles 22:2)? Is there a contradiction?
Response:
Though some English translations (KJV, NKJV, ASV), and thus presumably Hebrew texts age Ahaziah at 42 when he was raised to the throne, the NIV and YLT both read 22 in 2 Chronicles 22:2. These, based upon Septuagint and Syriac manuscripts agree with the record of 2 Kings 8:26. It would appear that a copyist error occurred in the Hebrew texts.
That 42 cannot be correct is evidenced by the fact that Jehoram, Ahaziah’s father became king at age 32 and reigned 8 years, before dying (2 Chronicles 21:5, 20). If Jehoram was 40 at the time of his death, he certainly did not have a 42 year old son who then took his place.
As has been admitted in the past, we again grant that copyist errors can and have occurred, and it appears such is the case with the age of Ahaziah. However, such a minor mistake from the copying pen of a man should not cause one to lay doubt on the entirety of Scripture. To do so would be to employ the discrepancy well beyond the weight of it’s importance.
When in Kingston, Ontario, worship with the Limestone Church of Christ assembling at 332 Montreal Street MEETING TIMES: Sunday Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Sunday Worship Assembly...................11:30 a.m. Wednesday Bible Classes......................7:00 p.m.
Listen to our radio program, Sunday mornings at 10:00 a.m. on Oldies960
______________________________________________ William J. Stewart Limestone Church of Christ Kingston, Ontario, CANADA www.lookinguntojesus.net 613-542-3354
Recently, a visitor to our web site rather extensively reviewed the
first affirmative argument in my debate on the necessity of baptism with Jason Peacock. Four times through his examination, the correspondent accused me of poor Bible hermeneutics. My position on Bible hermeneutics is very simple. I believe the Bible means what it says, and says what it means. When a verse links faith with salvation (ie. Mark 16:16), I believe that faith is necessary for salvation. Likewise, when a verse associates baptism with salvation (ie. also Mark 16:16), I believe that baptism is necessary for salvation. It appears that my accuser is using some new hermeneutic which allows him to conclude that the Bible doesn’t really mean what it says.
In his final remarks about my first affirmative essay, our visitor states:
The overwhelming testimony of scripture is that "FAITH" alone is both a necessary and sufficient condition for salvation. (John 1:12; 3:15-18, 36; 5:24; 6:40, 47; 7:38-39; 11:25,26; 20:31, Acts 10:43; 11:17; 13:39; 16:30-31; Romans 1:16; 3:22; 3:28-30; 4:2-6; 5:1; 9:31,32; Galatians 2:16; 3:2-9; 3:14; 3:24-26; 5:5; Ephesians 2:8,9; Philippians 3:9; 2 Timothy 3:15; 1 John 5:11-13).
Let us use the remainder of our article today to see whether these verses indeed teach faith alone. For lack of space, the text of the verses has not been included. Please be diligent in your study, and read this article with your Bible open to each text.
John 1:12
(the phrase "faith alone"/"faith only" appears 0 times in this text)
Certainly, the verse teaches that we must have faith (it is those who believe in His name and receive Him who have been given the right to become the children of God). Perhaps then, a valid question would be, how do we receive Him? Is it simply by faith alone (ie. no action on our part), or must we do something to receive Him?
Jesus cautioned, "He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him — the word that I have spoke will judge him in the last day." (Jn 12:48). Receiving the Lord requires that we hear, believe and receive His word (Ro 10:17). Of the Pharisees and lawyers who did not receive John’s baptism, it was said, they "...rejected the will of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him." (Lk 7:30). Have not those who today reject Jesus’ command to be baptized (Mk 16:16) not also rejected the will of
God for themselves?
John 3:15-18, 36
(the phrase "faith alone"/"faith only" appears 0 times in this text)
Cut and paste verses from John 3. Had the guest went back one more verse, he would have witnessed a wonderful example of the faith in action, which brings salvation. Simply believing that a glance at the bronze serpent would save was not sufficient to save the people of Moses’ day (Num 21:7-9). Had they believed such, but failed to look, they would be as dead as those who did not believe at all. It was their obedience to the Lord’s command that resulted in salvation, not their faith alone. So it is with us also.
That John 3 teaches that everlasting life is to those who believe is certainly not in dispute. However, does it teach "faith alone"? Again, had the visitor continued to read beyond verse 18, he would see "...he who does the truth comes to the light..." (v 21). Jesus is not teaching "faith alone", but action on the part of the one coming. As He said elsewhere, "Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven." (Mt 7:21).
John 5:24
(the phrase "faith alone"/"faith only" appears 0 times in this text)
What does it mean to "...hear...and believe..."? The apostle Paul gave his defense of the gospel before King Agrippa. Surely the king listened to the words spoken by Paul, and according to the apostle’s knowledge of Agrippa, he believed (Ac 26:25-27). Shall we therefore conclude that Agrippa had everlasting life? No, for he stated to Paul, "You almost persuade me to become a Christian." He had heard, he even believed, but he would not become a child of God.
John 6:40, 47; 7:38-39; 11:25-26; 20:31
(the phrase "faith alone"/"faith only" appears 0 times in these texts)
Indeed, it is God’s will that believers be raised to everlasting life in the time to come. However, as we have already noted from other texts in John, it is not the "faith only" belief which is spoken of by some, but the active, obedient faith which begets everlasting life. It is a faith that believes all the Lord has said, and responds appropriately. If these texts teach "faith only", then Matthew 10:32 equally teaches confession only. Just because faith is mentioned in these texts (and nothing else) does not make then "faith only" proof texts.
Acts 10:43; 11:17
(the phrase "faith alone"/"faith only" appears 0 times in these texts)
Speaking to Cornelius Peter said, "...whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins." But speaking to the Jerusalem crowd, he stated, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins..." (Ac 2:38). Is Peter contradicting himself? Or, perhaps the faith which Peter speaks of entails repentance and baptism? An active, obedient faith. Immediately, baptism was commanded by Peter (v 48).
With regard to latter text, are we to understand that the apostles had not "believed on the Lord" until the Spirit came upon them in a Jerusalem house? Peter himself, in the context o
f another verse given by our correspondent stated, "...we have come to believe and know that You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." (Jn 6:69). Were they a lost bunch the whole time they walked and served with Jesus?
Acts 13:39; 16:30-31
(the phrase "faith alone"/"faith only" appears 0 times in this text)
If this relationship of faith, repentance, baptism and remission of sins exists in the teaching of Peter, then likewise, we should expect to see it in the teachings of Paul (see v 38).
To answer the jailor’s question, "What must I do to be saved?", Paul said, "Believe." The same question, asked of Peter by the Jerusalem crowd, received an answer which mentioned repentance and baptism, but not faith. Why the difference? The Jerusalem crowd already believed (that was the purpose of Peter’s sermon). But, though they believed, they were not yet saved. They needed to repent and be baptized. The jailor did not yet believe. They proceeded to teach him (v 32), after which he repented and was baptized (v 33).
Romans 1:16; 3:22, 28-30
(the phrase "faith alone"/"faith only" appears 0 times in these texts)
Certainly, the gospel is God’s power to save all who believe, but Paul’s statement does not single faith out as the sole necessity for salvation. That is the faith only advocate’s wishful thought. Neither in Paul’s instruction from chapter 3 could one conclude that faith alone is responsible for salvation. A big deal is made about the "deeds of the law" — justification is by faith, not the deeds of the law. Amen! The law of Moses (which is the law Paul speaks of) saves no one.
(the phrase "faith alone"/"faith only" appears 0 times in these texts)
Luther’s Catechism reads, "We are justified and saved by faith alone, without works..." The Westminster Confession of Faith declares, "Faith is the only instrument is justification." The Anglican Book of Common Prayer affirms, "...that we are justified by faith only, is a most wholesome doctrine..." We could go on and on from doctrines of men which explicitly state that we are justified by faith only. Notice what Paul says in Romans 5:1, "...having been justified by faith, we have peace with God..." He does not establish faith as an exclusive instrument of justification. All the above, and those who believe faith only today must add to the inspired writer’s words.
Three times in the New Testament, Genesis 15:6 is quoted (Ro 4:3, Gal 3:6 and Jms 2:23). Faith only supporters will use the first two as proof texts for their proposition, while avoiding the third like the plague. Let us note the context of each. In Galatians, to a group intent on returning to the law of Moses (3:1-5), Paul reveals that Abraham was justified by faith apart from the law. In Romans, he likewise excludes the law of Moses as a means of justification, and specifically the covenant of circumcision. He asked, "Does this blessedness then come upon the circumcised only, or upon the uncircumcised also? For we say that faith was
accounted to Abraham for righteousness." (v 9). Abraham had not yet received circumcision (Gen 17), when his faith was accounted to him for righteousness (Gen 15).
So, are we to conclude that justification is by faith alone? That is not the point of either text, and would contradict James’ use of the same Genesis text. Paul, in both cases, has answered those bent on finding justification through the law of Moses. Abraham did not find justification in this way, nor will his seed. But notice how James speaks of Abraham, "Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." And he was called the friend of God. You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only." (2:21-24).
Had Abraham not left Ur of the Chaldees (Gen 12:1-5), he would not have stood justified before the Lord. Had he not been willing to sacrifice Isaac, his son, he would not have stood justified before the Lord. His faith in God prompted him to action, and thus it was accounted to him for righteousness. Justification comes not by the works of the law (as the Jews would contend), but by faithful obedience to God, in whatever He commands.
Galatians 3:24-26; 5:5
(the phrase "faith alone"/"faith only" appears 0 times in these texts)
In Galatians 3, Paul uses the word faith as a synonym for the gospel. Verse 23 reads, "...before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed." The "law" is that which came through Moses, the "faith" is that which came through Christ.
Justification, as mentioned above, could not be found in the law of Moses. The law revealed sin (v 19), and directed its followers to the Christ (v 24). Indeed, justification comes by faith (v 24), but again, Paul is contrasting faith with law, not faith alone versus faith and works.
From the context of chapter 5, notice again, the desire of the Galatians to return to the law. Paul explicitly warns, "You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace." (v 4). The hope which we have has naught to do with circumcision or uncircumcision, "...but faith working through love" (v 6), and obedience to the truth (v 7).
Ephesians 2:8-9
(the phrase "faith alone"/"faith only" appears 0 times in this text)
First take note, Paul did not say in this text that we have been saved through "faith alone". As much as some wish it did say such, it does not. Can we earn salvation by works? Absolutely not. Jesus said, "...when you have done all those things which you are commanded, say, ‘We are unprofitable servants. We have done what was our duty to do.’" (Lk 17:10). There is no place for boasting when we have done what is our duty.
Is it possible for salvation to be a gift, and yet for us to have to DO something to receive it? Sure. A father might decide to give his son a car as a gift. However, the son may have to unwrap the keys, get tags and insurance for the vehicle and maintain the vehicle. Do any of these "works" result in the son having earned the car? No, it is still a gift. And yet there are things which he must DO.
Philippians 3:9
(the phrase "faith alone"/"faith only" appears 0 times in this text)
The apostle wanted to be found by the Lord, not with self-righteousness, but "...the righteousness which is from God by faith..." In context, the apostle compares his days as a Pharisee, and the righteousness which he perceived himself to have obtained by the strict adherence to the law which was customary for the Pharisees. This, he willing laid aside, that he might gain Christ. The text is not a matter of faith alone versus faith and works, but of self-righteousness versus righteousness which comes through faith in Christ.
2 Timothy 3:15
(the phrase "faith alone"/"faith only" appears 0 times in this text)
It is through the things which Timothy had learned in the Holy Scriptures that he was made "wise for salvation through faith". Not just the learning and failure to practice, for James warns, "...be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves." (Jms 1:22). It is that active, obedient faith which we have mentioned over and over, whereby Timothy received salvation through faith.
1 John 5:11-13
(the phrase "faith alone"/"faith only" appears 0 times in this text)
As was discussed in the writings of John from earlier, there is no argument on the necessity of faith. Only those who believe in Jesus have eternal life. This fact does not establish that it is by faith alone though. This is an unwarranted assumption by those who seek to support a faith only doctrine.
Again, the visitor to our site expressly said, "The overwhelming testimony of scripture is that "FAITH" alone is both a necessary and sufficient condition for salvation." Not so. The Scripture certainly testifies to the necessity of faith, but not as the sufficient condition for salvation. Such a conclusion requires that one turn a blind eye to every text in the Bible which links anything but faith with our salvation. Such a cut and paste approach is surely "poor hermeneutics", and should never be engaged by those who seek to faithfully serve the Lord.
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST Vol. 4, Iss. 32 -- 08/08/2004
The Atheist's Complaint:
Was it OK to touch the risen Jesus before his ascension? Jesus tells some not to touch Him (John 20:17), but allowed others to do so (Matthew 28:9; Luke 24:39; John 20:26-27) Is there a contradiction?
Response:
Since Jesus allowed others to touch him prior to his ascension, it would seem very unlikely that He forbade Mary to touch him on account that He had not yet ascended. McGarvey has offered a paraphrase which may capture the essence of His command to her. "Do not lay hold on me and detain yourself and me; I have not yet ascended; this is no brief, passing vision; I am yet in the world, and will be for some time, and there will be other opportunities to see me; the duty of the moment is to go and tell my sorrowing disciples that I have risen, and shall ascend to my Father." (The Fourfold Gospel)
The Greek word used, haptomai, means "to fasten one’s self to, adhere to, cling to" (Thayer’s). Certainly, upon seeing her Lord risen, Mary might desire to simply cling to Him with great joy, but it was more needful at that moment for her to inform the disciples that He was risen.
There is no contradiction.
When in Kingston, Ontario, worship with the Limestone Church of Christ assembling at 332 Montreal Street MEETING TIMES: Sunday Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Sunday Worship Assembly...................11:30 a.m. Wednesday Bible Classes......................7:00 p.m.
Listen to our radio program, Sunday mornings at 10:00 a.m. on Oldies960
______________________________________________ William J. Stewart Limestone Church of Christ Kingston, Ontario, CANADA www.lookinguntojesus.net 613-542-3354
In just a few day’s time, we’ll be headed out on a camping trip. It’s been at least a couple years since we last took some time to enjoy the outdoors in this fashion, and thus, are looking forward to it. To be sure that we have the greatest pleasure from our trip, it is necessary to make preparations.
I have a list of items which we need to remember to take with us (towels, wash cloths, bug repellent, matches, flashlights (with batteries!!), lawn chairs, portable radio, cooler, pillows, knife, first aid kit, etc, etc, etc....). In addition, I have another list, on which I’ve begun to plan out our meals for the week. A simple breakfast is planned for Sunday morning (to allow sufficient time to travel to services). What kind of snacks will we have around the campfire? What foods will we need to take, and how much of each? It’s important to make adequate preparations.
Now, if we miss something in preparing for our camping trip, perhaps it will not be as fun as it otherwise would have been. Maybe, whatever we forget, we’ll be able to pick up at a local store. But it is wise to make ready beforehand, to know what we need, and to have supplied it.
Jesus taught,
"...the kingdom of heaven shall be likened to ten virgins who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom. Now five of them were wise, and five were foolish. Those who were foolish took their lamps and took no oil with them, but the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps... at midnight a cry was heard: ‘Behold, the bridegroom is coming; go out to meet him!’ Then all those virgins arose and trimmed their lamps. And the foolish said to the wise, ‘Give us some of your oil, for our lamps are going out.’ But the wise answered, saying, ‘No, lest there should not be enough for us and you; but go rather to those who sell, and buy for yourselves.’ And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came, and those who were ready went in with him to the wedding; and the door was shut. Afterward the other virgins came also, saying, ‘Lord, Lord, open to us!’ But he answered and said, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, I do not know you.’ Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour in which the Son of Man is coming." (Matthew 25:1-4, 6-13)
Friend, have you made the necessary preparations for your soul? Are you ready to meet the bridegroom?
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST Vol. 4, Iss. 33 -- 08/15/2004
The Atheist's Complaint:
Where does God dwell, in Zion (Psalm 9:11; 76:2; Joel 3:17, 21) or in heaven (Psalm 123:1; Ecclesiastes 5:2)? Is there a contradiction?
Response:
Does the Lord dwell in Zion? Absolutely. Zion is a name commonly used for Jerusalem through the Old Testament Scriptures. God had chosen Jerusalem to be His city (1 Kings 11:36; 2 Kings 21:4). The Lord had clearly said in the texts cited above and others (Zechariah 8:3) that He would dwell in Jerusalem.
Is it therefore contradictory for the Lord to also dwell in heaven? The Psalmist stated, "Where can I go from Your Spirit? Or where can I flee from Your presence? If I ascend into heaven, you are there; if I make my bed in hell, behold, You are there. If I take the wings of the morning and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, even there Your hand shall lead me, and Your right hand shall hold me." (Psalm 139:7-10). The Psalmist speaking of the omnipresence of God — He is everywhere.
The questioner deems it a contradiction that the Bible says God is both in heaven and upon the earth. The trouble is not the holy text, but the questioner’s unbelief in the nature of God.
There is no contradiction.
When in Kingston, Ontario, worship with the Limestone Church of Christ assembling at 332 Montreal Street MEETING TIMES: Sunday Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Sunday Worship Assembly...................11:30 a.m. Wednesday Bible Classes......................7:00 p.m.
Listen to our radio program, Sunday mornings at 10:00 a.m. on Oldies960
______________________________________________ William J. Stewart Limestone Church of Christ Kingston, Ontario, CANADA www.lookinguntojesus.net 613-542-3354
Unless the LORD builds the house, they labor in vain who build it; unless the LORD guards the city, the watchman keeps awake in vain.
"Vanity of vanities, says the Preacher, Vanity of vanities, all is vanity." So Solomon begins the book of Ecclesiastes, and in these words, establishes a great theme to be addressed in this wisdom book. In fact, the word "vanity" (or vain) appears no less than 31 times in the book. The same writer has penned the Psalm we consider today, and as in the larger writing, so in this small text, the vanity of life and action without the LORD at the center is considered.
As a backdrop to the opening words of this Psalm, consider that Solomon was charged with the great privilege and duty of constructing the temple of God in Jerusalem (1 Chr 22:10-11; 28:10, 20). What a sobering task – to be commissioned by the Creator to build a dwelling place for God among His people. It was Solomon’s earnest understanding that this was the LORD’s building project, not his own. Though the temple would be raised by the hands of men, it was humbly acknowledged that God was the designer and chief builder. It was His construction project, entrusted with His people.
The security of antiquarian cities was primarily laid in the hands of their watchmen. These would alertly scan the horizon, watching for potential threats. If a threat was perceived, the men of the city would be made ready to defend her. Jerusalem was no different, but Solomon very candidly declares the vanity of the watchman’s vigilant gaze if God is not also guarding the city. The Assyrians, supposing to overthrow Jerusalem failed, for Isaiah had spoken, "Like birds flying about, so will the LORD of hosts defend Jerusalem, Defending, He will also deliver it; passing over, He will preserve it." (Isa 31:5). However, when the LORD ceased to defend, Jerusalem would fall, "Be instructed, O Jerusalem, lest My soul depart from you; lest I make you desolate, a land not inhabited." (Jer 6:8).
Friends, we are also entrusted with a building project initiated by and intended to give glory to God – His church. No longer does God dwell with His people through a temple constructed from inanimate stone and wood, but now resides in a living temple (Eph 2:19-22; 1 Pe 2:4-5). As we build upon the apostolic foundation supplied, acknowledging Jesus Christ as the chief cornerstone, we will become a "...spiritual house...", "a dwelling place for God in the Spirit"!
However, we must never become independent contractors in this building project. Even as Noah was given the standard for the ark (Gen 6:14-16), Moses was given the pattern for the tabernacle (Ex 25:9), and Solomon was given the plans for the temple (1 Chr 28:11-19), God has supplied a discernable order for the church (Heb 8:1-6). We must therefore be diligent students of God’s word (Heb 1:1-2; 2:1-4). Unless it is the LORD who builds the church, those who labour do so in vain.
As the wall of Jerusalem was kept with watchmen, so the Lord has appointed some to this vital task in the body of Christ also. The Hebrew writer implores us to "Obey those who rule over you, and be submissive, for they watch out for your souls..." (Heb 13:17). This is doubtless a reference to those who serve as elders in the local church. To the Ephesian elders, Paul instructed, "...take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood." (Ac 20:28).
The Bible plainly reveals the awesome responsibility these men have. Peter charged, "Shepherd the flock of God which is among you, serving as overseers, not by compulsion but willingly, not for dishonest gain but eagerly, nor as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock..." (1 Pe 5:1-3). However as the watchman’s sleepless nights were vain if God did not guard the city, so are the diligent efforts of the eldership. But God be thanked, for the very construction of the church is such that it shall never fall (Heb 3:3-6; 12:28).
It is vain for you to rise up early, to sit up late, to eat the bread of sorrows; for so He gives His beloved sleep.
From the time of creation, part of God’s design for man is that he find ought to do with his hands, to supply the needs of his family and of others (2 Thes 3:10; 1 Ti 5:8). Adam, being formed of dust and having received the breath of life, was placed by God in the garden of Eden, that he might tend and keep it (Gen 2:15). Shortly thereafter, we read of other occupations with which the human race involved themselves (shepherds, musicians, craftsmen, Gen 4). Labor is an inherent part of humanity.
As much as labor is an elementary function of man, if we do not hold the Lord at the center of our work, it will bring forth nothing but weariness. If our focus in work is the attainment of goods, then we have misunderstood the Lord’s intent and will find life to be tedious (Ps 39:5-6; Ecc 2:3-11). Solomon adequately summarized the place of the one who has this misguided concept, "For what has man for all his labor, and for the striving of his heart with which he has toiled under the sun? For all his days are sorrowful, and his work burdensome; even in the night his heart takes no rest. This also is vanity." (Ecc 2:22-23). All such will rise up early and stay up late, and find nothing but sorrow in their doing. There is no satisfaction, there is no lasting reward.
On the other hand, Paul commands bondservants, "...whatever you do, do it heartily, as to the Lord and not to men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the reward of the inheritance; for you serve the Lord Christ." (Col 3:23-24). If we find in the Lord our motivation to work, then we will also find from the Lord reward for our labors. Certainly, we will receive the sustenance of ourselves and our family, but the rewards the Lord has for us go so much further.
Why is it that one will rise early and stay up late, and experience sorrows, while another will rise early and stay up late, but know rest? It is dependent upon our disposition with regard to work. One religious writer penned of our work and attitude towards it, "It is not what a man does that determines whether his work is sacred or secular, but why he does it" (A.W. Tozer).
Friend, let us know for surety that if God is at the center of all our doing, we will be blessed in what we do. If we give the Lord preeminence in the church, in our homes, in our workplaces — in every aspect of our lives, then we can have the security and rest that so many faithful who have gone before us have known.
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST Vol. 4, Iss. 34 -- 08/22/2004
The Atheist's Complaint:
How many were in Jacob’s family when they came into Egypt, 70 (Genesis 46:27; Exodus 1:5), or 75 (Acts 7:14)? Is there a contradiction?
Response:
In Genesis 46:27, we read about 70 children of Jacob. They can be summarized as follows:
33 — Jacob’s children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren through Leah (v 8-15); 16 — Jacob’s children, and grandchildren through Zilpah (v 16-18); 7 — Jacob’s children, and grandchildren through Rachel (v 19-22); 14 — Jacob’s children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren through Bilhah (v 23-25)
70 — total number of Jacob’s descendants listed.
Why does Luke list 75? The Septuagint, which Luke would have used as a source, includes the following in Genesis 46:27, "...the sons of Joseph who were with him in Egypt, were nine souls...", and therefore concludes, "...all the souls of the house of Jacob which came with Jacob into Egypt, were seventy-five souls."
The number of travellers with Jacob is given as 66 persons (v 26). Follow the math with me:
66 — travellers with Jacob to Egypt; 2 — sons of Jacob already in Egypt (Joseph & Benjamin) 2 — grandsons of Jacob already in Egypt (Ephraim & Manasseh) 5 — great-grandsons of Jacob already in Egypt (1 Chr 7:14-21)
75 — the number of people listed by Luke, and by the Septuagint version of Gen 46:27.
There is no contradiction.
When in Kingston, Ontario, worship with the Limestone Church of Christ assembling at 332 Montreal Street MEETING TIMES: Sunday Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Sunday Worship Assembly...................11:30 a.m. Wednesday Bible Classes......................7:00 p.m.
Listen to our radio program, Sunday mornings at 10:00 a.m. on Oldies960
______________________________________________ William J. Stewart Limestone Church of Christ Kingston, Ontario, CANADA www.lookinguntojesus.net 613-542-3354
Shout joyfully to the LORD, all the earth. Serve the LORD with gladness; come before Him with joyful singing. Know that the LORD Himself is God; it is He who has made us, and not we ourselves; we are His people and the sheep of His pasture. Enter His gates with thanksgiving and His courts with praise. Give thanks to Him, bless His name. For the LORD is good; His lovingkindness is everlasting and His faithfulness to all generations. (NASB)
In the conquest of Jericho, Joshua commanded the people, "It shall come to pass, when they make a long blast with the ram’s horn, and when you hear the sound of the trumpet, that all the people shall shout with a great shout; then the wall of the city will fall down flat." (Josh 6:5). So it happened, on the seventh day, after seven circuits around the city, Joshua said to the people, "Shout, for the LORD has given you the city!" And so Jericho fell.
The word "shout" in Psalm 100 is the same word used by Joshua. In the Hebrew tongue, this word was primarily used of military action — the sound a war-cry or the shout of triumph over one’s enemies. Our joyful shout is to the LORD, for He is the source of our victory. The picture conveyed is that of faithful subjects celebrating their victorious King. What type of things characterize the citizens of God’s kingdom? They make a "joyful shout", not a monotone whisper. They serve Him with gladness, not in weariness. They come before Him with singing, even when times are difficult (remember Paul and Silas in Philippi, Ac 16:25).
It is noteworthy that though these words were penned in days when physical Israel were considered the people of Jehovah, the writer does not limit the joyful noise to the Jews. He calls upon "...all the earth", or "...all you lands" to give jubilant praise to the LORD God. This may be simply a generic phrase rousing God’s people to proclaim the greatness of God, but it likewise may be a faint prophetic word of God’s call to the all nations through Jesus Christ.
Why should we shout joyfully and serve with gladness? "Know that the LORD Himself is God..." Were there no other reason to give praise and faithful service to the LORD, this would be sufficient. He is Jehovah God; the divine ruler, the one true God, the Creator and Sustainer of all things. The consideration of His great power as displayed in creation should provoke the whole creation to magnify His name. Through the Psalmist’s pen, God spoke, "Be still, and know that I am God; I will be exalted among the nations, I will be exalted in the earth!" (Ps 46:10).
Not only does God’s role as Creator necessitate a worshipful response on our part, but also the fact that "...we are His people and the sheep of His pasture." We share an even more intimate relationship than Creator/creature with the God of heaven. We are not just His creation, but we are His people. He is our God, King, Master, heavenly Father, and Shepherd.
It was revealed to Moses at Mount Sinai how God viewed Israel. The LORD referred to that nation as "...a special treasure...", and called them to be "...a kingdom of priests and a holy nation..." (Ex 19:5-6). What a wonderful place in the plan of God — how worthy of praise from the children of Israel was He. But consider now the place of the Christian. Peter calls those who are saved in Christ Jesus "...a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people..." (1 Pe 2:9). And what reaction does such a wonderful calling merit? The apostle continues, "...that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; who once were not a people but are now the people of God..."
Not only does the Psalmist refer to us as God’s people, but as His sheep. Recall the words of our Lord Jesus, "I am the good shepherd; and I know My sheep, and am known by My own. As the Father knows Me, even so I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd." (Jn 10:14-16). The first flock were God’s people in Israel, the Jews; but to these, He would add another – the Gentiles (ie. all the earth). The two would become one flock (the church) and have one shepherd (the Lord). Paul speaks of the process to the Ephesians, "...now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity." (Eph 2:13-16).
As I read verse 4 of our text, I cannot help but begin singing the little verse which appears at the bottom of this article. This song of praise is based upon this psalm of praise. The essence of these sweet words is that of public worship. What a joyful occasion to assemble with people of like precious faith, united in our desire to exalt the name of God. Elsewhere, the Psalmist recorded, "My soul longs, yes, even faints for the courts of the LORD; my heart and my flesh cry out for the living God." (Ps 84:2). And again, "Those who are planted in the house of the LORD shall flourish in the courts of our God." (Ps 92:13). How do we approach public worship? Do we come with a thankful heart, ready to give praise to our great God?
Were the creation and our grand relation to the Creator not enough reason to afford Him praises both public and private, the Psalmist continues, "...the LORD is good..." The word "good" here signifies that which is pleasant to the senses or the most excellent of it’s kind. It is a high estimation of value. Solomon declared, "LORD God of Israel, there is no God in heaven above or on earth below like You, who keep Your covenant and mercy with Your servants who walk before You with all their hearts." (1 Ki 8:23). There is no god like our God.
As the psalm draws to a close, the lovingkindness and faithfulness of the LORD are considered. His lovingkindness (mercy, KJV) is everlasting; that is, His mercy is of long duration. Peter calls to our minds the longsuffering of God, whereby the judgment has not already come, but rather opportunity is present for the unfaithful and unbelieving to repent (2 Pe 3:9). In the same text, Peter reports the faithfulness of God, that indeed, judgement shall come to pass even as He has said, "...The Lord is not slack concerning His promise..." Therefore, "...what manner of persons ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness..." (v 11).
Friends, we serve an amazing God! Let us praise Him aloud, with joy and gladness in our hearts. May we often enter into His gates and courts, to bless His name.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I will enter His gates with thanksgiving in my heart, I will enter His courts with praise; I will say this is the day that the Lord hath made, I will rejoice for He hath made me glad.
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST Vol. 4, Iss. 35 -- 08/29/2004
The Atheist's Complaint:
Did Zedekiah’s eyes behold the king of Babylon? Jeremiah 34:3 says he would, but 2 Kings 25:7 says that he didn’t. Is there a contradiction?
Response:
It is evident that the questioner was not honestly reading the Bible and compiling supposed contradictions when he put this one together.
Speaking prophetically, Jeremiah said to Zedekiah, "Thus says the LORD, Behold, I will give this city into the hand of the king of Babylon, and he shall burn it with fire. And you shall not escape from his hand, but shall surely be taken and delivered into his hand; your eyes shall see the eyes of the king of Babylon, he shall speak with you face to face, and you shall go to Babylon." (Jeremiah 34:2-3).
Speaking historically, the writer of 2 Kings records, "So they took the king and brought him up to the king of Babylon at Riblah, and they pronounced judgment on him. Then they killed the sons of Zedekiah before his eyes, put out the eyes of Zedekiah, bound him with bronze fetters, and took him to Babylon." (2 Kings 25:6-7). The questioner conveniently failed to look at verse 6, or, chose to dishonestly avoid it, in hopes that his readers would only look at the verses listed. Shame!!
There is no contradiction.
When in Kingston, Ontario, worship with the Limestone Church of Christ assembling at 332 Montreal Street MEETING TIMES: Sunday Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Sunday Worship Assembly...................11:30 a.m. Wednesday Bible Classes......................7:00 p.m.
Listen to our radio program, Sunday mornings at 10:00 a.m. on Oldies960
______________________________________________ William J. Stewart Limestone Church of Christ Kingston, Ontario, CANADA www.lookinguntojesus.net 613-542-3354
But the liberal deviseth liberal things; and by liberal things shall he stand.
Depending upon your translation, the Hebrew word nadiyb from our text may be rendered generous (NKJV), noble (ASV), liberal (KJV), godly (LLXE) or perhaps with some other word. Regardless, the construction and meaning remains the same. Those who are acceptable to the Lord will seek to do good to others. They desire to aid those who are needy, and through such action, find favour with God.
In the context, the prophet contrasts this generous person with the wicked schemer (v 7), who concocts action whereby he may take advantage of and mistreat the poor. The schemer furthers his cause through lies and injustice, but these will be to his own harm. Solomon cautioned, "Though a sinner does evil a hundred times, and his days are prolonged, yet I surely know that it will be well with those who fear God, who fear before Him. But it will not be well with the wicked; nor will he prolong his days, which are a shadow, because he does not fear before God." (Ecc 8:12-13)
Note, of the righteous person, that liberality is an essential part of his design. He learns from his Father, who "...gives to all life, breath, and all things..." (Ac 17:25), and again, who "...gives to all liberally and without reproach..." (Jms 1:5). But understand, it is not in the devising of noble plans that we shall stand, but in the commission of them. God not only thought to bless mankind, He did so. We must both think to be generous, and then bring such thoughts to fruition. The ASV depicts the perpetual nature of this behaviour, stating, "...in noble things shall he continue."
May we be given to liberality; seeking to be imitators of our heavenly Father.
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST Vol. 4, Iss. 36 -- 09/05/2004
The Atheist's Complaint:
What is the correct recipe for the new moon sacrifice? Should there be two bullocks, one ram and seven lambs (Numbers 28:11), or should there be one bullock, one ram, and six lambs (Ezekiel 46:6)? Is there a contradiction?
Response:
Is there a difference between the new moon sacrifice which is listed in the Torah and what appears in the writing given through Ezekiel the prophet? Absolutely. Does this mean there is a contradiction? Absolutely not.
It is easy to pull two verses from separate contexts, and declare them to be contradictory. It is quite another thing to extensively study the context of said verses, and reasonably conclude that a contradiction is present. The questioner has done the former, not the latter in this case.
The sacrificial system given from 45:18-46:24 contains many differences from that which is revealed in the Torah. These differences do not represent points of contradiction with the Law, but appear rather to be amendments — changes to the form of the sacrifices, which accompanied the new temple (43:10-11). Is God not able to change the sacrificial requirements if He so chooses?
There is no contradiction.
When in Kingston, Ontario, worship with the Limestone Church of Christ assembling at 332 Montreal Street MEETING TIMES: Sunday Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Sunday Worship Assembly...................11:30 a.m. Wednesday Bible Classes......................7:00 p.m.
Listen to our radio program, Sunday mornings at 10:00 a.m. on Oldies960
______________________________________________ William J. Stewart Limestone Church of Christ Kingston, Ontario, CANADA www.lookinguntojesus.net 613-542-3354
The word which came to Jeremiah from the LORD, saying: Arise and go down to the potter’s house, and there I will cause you to hear My words. Then I went down to the potter’s house, and there he was, making something at the wheel. And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter; so he made it again into another vessel, as it seemed good to the potter to make. Then the word of the LORD came to me, saying: O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter? says the LORD. Look, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are you in My hand, O house of Israel.
The prophet Isaiah, like Jeremiah, mentions this analogy whereby God is the potter and we are the clay. Isaiah 29:16 records, "...shall the thing made say of him who made it, ‘He did not make me’? Or shall the thing formed say of him who formed it, ‘He has no understanding’?" (cf. 45:9). Such foolishness, and yet those who refuse to know the LORD do exactly that (Ro 1:22-25, 28). Rather, the claim of all humanity ought to be, "...O LORD, You are our Father; we are the clay, and You our potter; and all we are the work of Your hand." (Isaiah 64:8)
The Jeremiah text discloses some important truths for us. First, none of us have been fashioned except by the Creator. We are all the creation of God; each of us fashioned by the Maker’s hand (Ps 139:14). But the vessel which the potter laboured with was "marred". Understand, the imperfection is not in the hand of the Maker, but in the vessel – us. Though we were created flawless, that perfection has been tarnished through sin (Ro 3:23). But, as the clay in the potter’s hand was taken and reworked, so God desires to us to be "...renewed in knowledge according to the image of Him who created..." us (Col 3:10). This renewing is not a one time event, but a day after day process, leading to the salvation of our souls.
The apostle Paul confessed, "Not that I have already attained, or am already perfected, but I press on..." (Php 3:12) The apostle, like the little chorus below, declares that God is still working on us. May we allow God (the Potter) mould us into what He wants us to be.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - He’s still working on me, To make me what I ought to be; It took Him just a week To make the moon and stars, The Sun and the Earth And Jupiter and Mars. How loving and patient He must be, He’s still working on me.
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST Vol. 4, Iss. 37 -- 09/12/2004
The Atheist's Complaint:
Who was Zerubbabel’s faither? 1 Chronicles 3:19 says it was Pedaiah, but Ezra 3:2 and Nehemiah 12:1 say it was Shealtiel. Is there a contradiction?
Response:
If the meaning of the Hebrew word ben were so specific as to mean one’s immediate and biological son, then certainly there would be a contradiction here. Of course, the most common rendering is son, but of the 4906 occurrences of the word, we find son (2978), children (1568), old (51), young (35), man (20), child (10), stranger (10), people (5), miscellaneous (92).
Shealtiel and Pedaiah were brothers (1 Chronicles 3:18-19). Since in the genealogical listing, Zerubbabel is said to be Pedaiah’s son, he would thus be Shealtiel’s nephew. The question then, why do Ezra and Nehemiah speak of Zerubbabel as Shealtiel’s son?
It has been suggested by some that though Zerubbabel was begotten of Pedaiah, that he was raised in the house of Shealtiel. There is no way to prove or disprove such a claim, but it is noteworthy that only in 1 Chronicles 3 is Pedaiah, the father of Zerubbabel referenced. Everywhere else, Shealtiel is identified as his father. Though circumstantial, it certainly gives credibility to the thought.
Also, given the generic scope of the Hebrew word ben, it would not be out of the question for a man’s son, grandson, nephew, or other kin to be referred to as such.
There is no contradiction.
When in Kingston, Ontario, worship with the Limestone Church of Christ assembling at 332 Montreal Street MEETING TIMES: Sunday Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Sunday Worship Assembly...................11:30 a.m. Wednesday Bible Classes......................7:00 p.m.
Listen to our radio program, Sunday mornings at 10:00 a.m. on Oldies960
______________________________________________ William J. Stewart Limestone Church of Christ Kingston, Ontario, CANADA www.lookinguntojesus.net 613-542-3354
I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot. So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth.
There are but a few things in life which are best lukewarm; the water temperature of a swimming pool and milk prepared for a baby. Whether there are any others, I do not know. However, what is apparent by Jesus’ words in our text today, lukewarmness is not desirable in the Christian. As drinking lukewarm water tends to cause an inclination to vomit, so the service of a lukewarm person is loathsome to the Lord.
The complexion of the Laodicean church is briefly, and yet pointedly described to us. They were a church which could neither be identified as cold or hot – they were neither hostile towards the Lord’s cause, nor were they on fire to serve Him. They were simply lukewarm.
Jesus confirmed, "I know your works." Indeed friend, the Lord knows all our works. The quality of our work is dependent upon the determination of our heart. If we care not for the things of the Lord, then our works will bear witness. Likewise, if we have fervent love and devotion for God, then our works will testify. The Christ will know the degree of effort we put into serving Him, and He knows the character of heart which backs our work. "There is nothing hidden from His sight, but all things are naked and open to the eyes of Him to whom we must give account." (Heb 4:13, cf. Ecc 12:14).
If our service before God is "on again, off again", we are akin to the Laodiceans. If we are indifferent when it comes to doing the things of God, we have followed their destructive course. Elijah asked the people of his day, "How long will you falter between two opinions?" (1 Ki 18:21) We need to choose to serve the Lord, and to do so with all our heart. He will not tolerate fence-sitters, for He has said plainly, "He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters abroad." (Mt 12:30)
If we’ve been guilty of lukewarmness, let us repent. Hear the Lord, "As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten. Therefore be zealous and repent." (v 19)
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST Vol. 4, Iss. 38 -- 09/19/2004
The Atheist's Complaint:
How was Zedekiah related to Nebuchadnezzar? Was he Nebuchadnezzar’s uncle (2 Kings 24:17), or was he Nebuchadnezzar’s brother (2 Chronicles 36:10)? Is there a contradiction?
Response:
It is apparent that the questioner failed to read these two verses in context. Neither verses indicates that Zedekiah is a relation of Nebuchadnezzar. Zedekiah was a Jew, Nebuchadnezzar was Babylonian. They are no relation.
Notice in 2 Kings 24:15, Jehoiachin was carried captive to Babylon. Following this, Nebuchadnezzar made Zedekiah, Jehoiachin’s uncle, king in his place. Nebuchadnezzar was never king of Judah, and he certainly did not give the throne of Babylon to Zedekiah. Zedekiah replaced his uncle, Jehoiachin, as king in Judah.
Now, to 2 Chronicles 36. Again, the context reveals that Jehoiachin was king in Judah (v 9), that he was taken to Babylon (v 10), and replaced by Zedekiah (v 10). The question remains, why is Zedekiah called Jehoiachin’s uncle in the 2 Kings text, but his brother here? The Hebrew word ach can refer to a brother (ie. siblings), but is often rendered as "brethren" or "kindred", simply indicating a family relation, not necessarily a sibling. Such would be the case here.
There is no contradiction.
When in Kingston, Ontario, worship with the Limestone Church of Christ assembling at 332 Montreal Street MEETING TIMES: Sunday Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Sunday Worship Assembly...................11:30 a.m. Wednesday Bible Classes......................7:00 p.m.
Listen to our radio program, Sunday mornings at 10:00 a.m. on Oldies960
______________________________________________ William J. Stewart Limestone Church of Christ Kingston, Ontario, CANADA www.lookinguntojesus.net 613-542-3354
Now in the morning, having risen a long while before daylight, He went out and departed to a solitary place; and there He prayed.
Drop the kids off at school. Negotiate rush hour traffic. Intense work through the morning, followed by a business lunch with a client. Back to the office, rush, rush, rush... to meet that mid-afternoon deadline. Pick up the kids from school; help with homework, have a quick supper, and then out again for soccer practice. Does life seem a bit hectic? Perhaps your schedule is not like this one, but we’ve all got a variety of duties that demand our time and busy our lives.
Jesus led an extremely busy life. On a certain Sabbath day in Capernaum, he entered the synagogue and taught (Mk 1:21-22). Before leaving the synagogue, He healed a man with an unclean spirit (v 23-27), and then went to the house of Simon and Andrew (v 29). There, he healed Peter’s mother-in-law (v30-31). Whether still in this house, or perhaps in another, that evening, the whole city gathered with their sick and demon-possessed, seeking Jesus to make them well (v 32-34). This day closed, and the next having begin, Peter calls to Him, "Everyone is looking for You." (v 36-37). The fast pace and intense demand on the Lord’s time and attention continued as He moved on to the next towns.
Amidst all this busyness, we find our text for today. As hectic as life was, Jesus was certain to spend a good quality and quantity of time with God in prayer. How early He went out to this quiet place, we do not know. How long He spent in prayer, we do not know. But we do know that Jesus considered it absolutely necessary to set aside this time to commune with His Father.
Friend, it is important for us to follow the example of Jesus. Don’t allow the busyness of life to squeeze out time for prayer, meditation, and personal study. These are the building blocks which will make our day successful.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - In the stillness of the morning, Before a busy day of care, How sweet to be alone with God Through His holy Word and prayer. (Anderson)
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST Vol. 4, Iss. 39 -- 09/26/2004
The Atheist's Complaint:
Who was Zechariah’s father? 2 Chronicles 24:20-21 states that Jehoiada was, but Matthew 23:35 says it was Berechias. Is there a contradiction?
Response:
It is possible that Jehoiada and Berechias are names referencing the same individual. Recall, Matthew is also called Levi (Mt 9:9; Lk 5:27); Lebbaeus is also called Thaddaeus (Mt 10:3); and Simon is also called Cephas (Jn 1:42). It is entirely possible that this is one person, referred to with two different names.
Also, there is an assumption by the questioner that the Zechariah of 2 Chronicles 24:20-21 is the same Zechariah as mentioned in Matthew 23:35. Both were put to death in the temple, which perhaps gives credence to the thought that they are the same man, but it certainly is not conclusive proof. It is certainly possible that more than one person by the name of Zechariah was put to death in the temple by the Jews. Some have supposed that the Zechariah listed in Matthew 23 is the prophet, though no account is given in Scripture of his death.
Whether it is one of these explanations or perhaps another, the contradiction is answerable. There is no contradiction.
When in Kingston, Ontario, worship with the Limestone Church of Christ assembling at 332 Montreal Street MEETING TIMES: Sunday Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Sunday Worship Assembly...................11:30 a.m. Wednesday Bible Classes......................7:00 p.m.
Listen to our radio program, Sunday mornings at 10:00 a.m. on Oldies960
______________________________________________ William J. Stewart Limestone Church of Christ Kingston, Ontario, CANADA www.lookinguntojesus.net 613-542-3354
Lying lips are an abomination to the LORD, but those who deal truthfully are His delight.
In this week’s article, we are simply going to view what God’s word says about lying. No comments, just reading the words of God.
These six things the LORD hates, yes, seven are an abomination to Him: a proud look, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that are swift in running to evil, a false witness who speaks lies, and one who sows discord among brethren. (Pr 6:16-19)
You shall destroy those who speak falsehood; the LORD abhors the bloodthirsty and deceitful man. (Ps 5:6)
But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolators, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimestone, which is the second death. (Rev 21:8)
Dishonest scales are an abomination to the LORD, but a just weight is His delight. (Pr 11:1)
Excellent speech is not becoming to a fool, much less lying lips to a prince. (Pr 17:7)
Getting treasures by a lying tongue is the fleeting fantasy of those who seek death. (Pr 21:6)
Therefore, put away lying, ‘Let each one of you speak truth with his neighbor,’ for we are members of one another. (Eph 4:25)
He who works deceit shall not dwell within my house; he who tells lies shall not continue in my presence. (Ps 101:7)
A false witness will not go unpunished, and he who speaks lies shall perish. (Pr 19:9)
You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it. (Jn 8:44)
But there shall by no means enter in anything that defiles, or causes an abomination or a lie, but only those who are written in the Lamb’s Book of Life. (Rev 21:27)
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST Vol. 4, Iss. 40 -- 10/03/2004
The Atheist's Complaint:
How many of Zattu’s offspring returned from Babylon? Ezra 2:8 says 945, but Nehemiah 7:13 says 845. Is there a contradiction?
Response:
The degree to which Ezra’s and Nehemiah’s numbers disagree extends well beyond the sons of Zattu. Through the texts, a discrepancy can be found between the prophets on 18 occasions.
It has been admitted before, and certainly could be the case here, that transcriber’s errors are responsible for the lack of consistency. That being said, it seems that the number of differences between these texts would either reveal an extremely unskilled transcriber, or that some other reason accounts for the discrepancies.
It is more likely that the differences exist due to the fact that Nehemiah and Ezra wrote at different times. It is estimated that Ezra wrote in the late 6th century BC, while the book of Nehemiah has been dated close to 100 years later. With the passing of time, deaths and births can increase, decrease, or even out the growth of a family. Such would certainly account for the different totals given by the two prophets.
There is no contradiction.
When in Kingston, Ontario, worship with the Limestone Church of Christ assembling at 332 Montreal Street MEETING TIMES: Sunday Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Sunday Worship Assembly...................11:30 a.m. Wednesday Bible Classes......................7:00 p.m.
Listen to our radio program, Sunday mornings at 10:00 a.m. on Oldies960
______________________________________________ William J. Stewart Limestone Church of Christ Kingston, Ontario, CANADA www.lookinguntojesus.net 613-542-3354
And He said to me, ‘My grace is sufficient for you, for My strength is made perfect in weakness.’ Therefore most gladly I will rather boast in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me.
Paul’s thorn in the flesh has been for many a source of fruitless speculation. The scripture simply does not tell us what this "thorn" was, nor need we know. Had the nature of the affliction been vital to understanding the words of the apostle, surely he would have told us. Perhaps it was by intentional design, as this inspired writer dictated, that the specifics were left unsaid. As such, we can learn the principle God seeks to teach through the apostle Paul, and hopefully make the appropriate application to ourselves.
It is imperative that we learn to rely upon the Lord. We live in a world where independence and self-reliance are coveted. We need to come to the realization that we cannot gain the victory alone. Time and again in Paul’s writings, we witness his trust in God:
"I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me." (Php 4:13)
"And we have such trust through Christ toward God. Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think of anything as being from ourselves, but our sufficiency is from God..." (2 Co 3:4-5)
"At my first defense no one stood with me, but all forsook me. May it not be charged against them. But the Lord stood with me and strengthened me..." (2 Ti 4:16-17)
A common remark by non-theists is that Christians are weak people, for they need a crutch (the Bible, the church, faith in God). Indeed, the Bible, the church and our faith in God have been given to us as an aid. However, that does not give merit to non-theist’s argument. The Christian is no weaker than the non-Christian; in fact, because the Christian has learned to rely upon the Maker, he is made strong. Having come to terms with his own weaknesses, the Christian allows the power of Christ to rest upon and work through him. As Paul triumphantly declares, "...when I am weak, then I am strong."
"Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord and in the power of His might." (Eph 6:10)ANSWERING THE ATHEIST Vol. 4, Iss. 41 -- 10/10/2004
The Atheist's Complaint:
Can only God work great wonders (Psalm 136:4), or is Satan able to as well (2 Thessalonians 2:9)? Is there a contradiction?
Response:
If the wording in the two texts were parallel, then I suppose the questioner might have a case for a contradiction. However, the Psalmist attributes God as the only one who does "great wonders", while the lawless one of 2 Thessalonians 2 comes with "all power, signs and lying wonders". Are "great wonders" and "all...lying wonders" the same thing?
Will the questioner equate the works of Satan (temptation, evil spirits, etc.) to the works of God (creation, redemption, healings, etc.)?
There is no contradiction.
When in Kingston, Ontario, worship with the Limestone Church of Christ assembling at 332 Montreal Street MEETING TIMES: Sunday Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Sunday Worship Assembly...................11:30 a.m. Wednesday Bible Classes......................7:00 p.m.
Listen to our radio program, Sunday mornings at 10:00 a.m. on Oldies960
______________________________________________ William J. Stewart Limestone Church of Christ Kingston, Ontario, CANADA www.lookinguntojesus.net 613-542-3354
Do all things without complaining and disputing, that you may become blameless and harmless, children of God without fault in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom you shine as lights in the world.
Few things can be more destructive to a child’s future (both earthly and heavenly) as a propensity to whine and complain. Such is the manner of those who are ungrateful, greedy and self-seeking. Continued grumbling and griping is evidence that a child has successfully trained his parents to cater to his wantonness, placing in jeopardy not only the child, but also the parents (Pr 22:6; Deut 6:7; Eph 6:4). If the routine is not broken (Pr 2:15; 23:13-14), the murmuring child will become a murmuring adult, and an irritation to his peers.
Recall, when God brought the children of Israel from Egypt, they were a nation of complainers (Ex 15:24; 16:2; 17:3). The apostle Paul candidly states, "...with most of them God was not well pleased, for their bodies were scattered in the wilderness." (1 Cor 10:5) He cites the things which happened to them as "...our example, to the intent that we should not lust after evil things as they also lusted." (v 6) Friend, you and are not to "...complain, as some of them also complained, and were destroyed by the destroyer." (v 10)
A Christian complaining is no more acceptable than any child or the nation Israel doing so. If the Lord commands that we "drive it far" from the child, and if He scattered the Israelite bodies in the wilderness on account of their murmuring, then surely we can understand that such has no place in the child of God. The context of Philippians 2 supplies Jesus as our great example, through His obedience in going to the cross. Recall, the prophet wrote of Him, "...as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so He opened not His mouth." (Isa 53:7) If he endured such hostility and pain for us, without complaint, ought we not endeavour to serve Him daily without complaint?
Understand, my friend, our standing as children of God depends upon us laying aside all murmuring. If we are to shine as lights in this world, it will be through faithful obedience, and the knowledge that we are to be "blameless and harmless", not whiners and complainers.
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST Vol. 4, Iss. 42 -- 10/17/2004
The Atheist's Complaint:
Where did the women watching the crucifixion stand? Some texts say they were afar off (Matthew 27:55; Mark 15:40; Luke 23:49), but others say they stood near the cross (John 19:25). Is there a contradiction?
Response:
It is not uncommon for people to view a spectacle from a distance at first, and then afterward, to draw closer. It is this very inclination in man that requires our emergency squads to block off the scene of accidents or other events which draw a crowd. Were the blockade not present, many would press toward the site.
Likewise, and more akin to the supposed contradiction cited, I can recall the day upon which my grandmother passed away. Arriving at her hospital room, I did not immediately come to her side, but stood at a distance for a few moments first. Such a pause is not unusual, but rather an opportunity to reflect upon the situation. How much more appropriate for these women to stand afar off, given the means by which their loved one was to die. Whether it be shock or fear (or very likely a combination of both) which kept them at a distance, before the deed was done, they gathered close to the Son of God.
To prove a contradiction, the questioner must establish that the time spoken of was precisely the same. That is, the Synoptic gospels proclaim these women to be afar off at the precise time when John says they were nigh to the Saviour.
There is no contradiction.
When in Kingston, Ontario, worship with the Limestone Church of Christ assembling at 332 Montreal Street MEETING TIMES: Sunday Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Sunday Worship Assembly...................11:30 a.m. Wednesday Bible Classes......................7:00 p.m.
Listen to our radio program, Sunday mornings at 10:00 a.m. on Oldies960
______________________________________________ William J. Stewart Limestone Church of Christ Kingston, Ontario, CANADA www.lookinguntojesus.net 613-542-3354
You are receiving this message because years ago, you signed up for what was at the time known as TheOnlineBulletin. 207 weekly bulletin articles had been sent out weekly between late 2000 and October 2004. In October 2004, this list became inactive, but was never shut down.
Recently, I've received a couple inquiries about whether or not our weekly bulletin is made available via e-mail. It is no great trouble for me to copy and paste the articles into an e-mail message and click send, so I am happy to again pick up TheOnlineBulletin.
You are encouraged to check out our web site, www.lookinguntojesus.net, which has an archive of articles available at it. By far, the most popular feature on our site to web users is the Answering the Atheist segment, which weekly addresses a supposed contradiction. Other materials are also available at the site, including workbooks on some books of the Bible and audio files of our weekly radio program.
I hope you will enjoy receiving the weekly articles via e-mail and that you can benefit from the material at our site. If for any reason you do not wish to receive mail from TheOnlineBulletin, you may unsubscribe by sending a message to TheOnlineBulletin-unsubscribe@....
SUNDAY: (meeting at the Royal Canadian Legion, 734 Montreal St, in the Limestone Room) Radio program (104.3 FM)........10:00 a.m. Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Worship..................................11:30 a.m. WEDNESDAY: (meeting at 1449 Montreal St) Bible Classes............................7:00 p.m.
Since WWI, November 11 has been used to commemorate those who gave their lives in times of war. The day is titled differently, dependent upon your country of origin. In the USA, it is called Veteran’s Day. For the Polish, it is Independence Day. Folks in France and New Zealand call it Armistice Day; on Malta and in South Africa, Poppy Day. In the United Kingdom and it’s commonwealth countries (Canada included), it is generally referred to as Remembrance Day.
It is certainly a good thing to remember those who gave themselves to preserve the temporal freedoms which we enjoy. However, we ought to remember also that the Lord Jesus gave Himself, not for our temporal pleasures, but for our eternal benefit. Let us consider a few things the Bible says regarding remembrance.
GOD WILL REMEMBER HIS COVENANT God is faithful to His word. When He has made a covenant, we can now for surety that He will remember and keep it. There are numerous covenants established by God in Scripture, some strictly between Him and a particular man (ie. Abraham), some between Him and national Israel (ie. blessings in the land), and some between Him and all creation (ie. the rainbow covenant). Regardless the scope of the covenant, God will keep His word.
WE MUST REMEMBER GOD’S WORD Israel was commanded, "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy." (Exodus 20:8). They were given tassels on their garments, as a remembrance of the commandments of God (Numbers 15:38-40). It is important that God’s people remember God’s word. During the das of the Judges, Israel would turn away from God at times, forgetting His word (Judges 8:34), and would suffer as a result of their sin.
Solomon stressed the importance of remembering our Creator from the days of youth (Ecclesiastes 12:1, 6), before the days come when perhaps we will not have a mind to turn to the Lord from a life of wickedness which draws nigh to the setting sun. The churches at both Ephesus and Sardis were warned by Jesus to remember from where they had fallen and to repent (Revelation 2:5; 3:3). When we have forgotten the Lord’s way and turned to our own way, we must quickly remember His path and turn back.
DO NOT REMEMBER THE CAPTIVITY FONDLY Not long after departing Egypt, the Israelites began to complain. On more than one occasion, they longed to go back to Egypt, the place of their captivity. The moaned, "We remember the fish which we ate freely in Egypt, the cucumbers, the melons, the leeks, the onions, and the garlic; but now our whole being is dried up; there is nothing at all except this manna before our eyes!" (Numbers 11:5-6). Ohhh, how great we had it in captivity!! Just wish we could go back. They conveniently forgot the hardships which they endured as slaves in Egypt, and failed to focus on the blessings which God was giving and would give.
Friend, we need to not remember the days of our captivity fondly. I hear from time to time Christians talking about "the good old days", and in the process, speaking of some of their conduct prior to coming to Christ. Should we glory in such things? No!! Rather, we should remember that God has delivered us. That is the very thing which Moses called the Israelite attention to throughout the book of Deuteronomy (Deut 5:15; 7:18; 8:2, 18; 15:5; 16:3; etc).
"Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh – who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands – that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world." (Ephesians 2:11-12). Thanks be to God, He delivered us "...by the blood of Christ." (2:13) Thus, let us not turn back to our former ways, clinging to that which brings destruction rather than life. Jesus very pointedly admonished, "Remember Lot’s wife." (Luke 17:32)
GOD WILL REMEMBER OUR WALK Hear the words of Nehemiah, as he determined to accomplish God’s will in his life. He petitioned, "Remember me, my God, for good, according to all that I have done for this people." (Nehemiah 5:19). Again, "Remember me, O my God, concerning this, and do not wipe out my good deeds that I have done for the house of my God and for its services!" (13:14), and yet once more, "Remember me, O my God, or good!" (13:31).
On the flip side, realize that God also remembers the wickedness of the wicked. Just a few verses back, Nehemiah said, "Remember them, O my God, because they have defiled the priesthood and the covenant of the priesthood and the Levites." (13:29)
Solomon tells us that "...God will bring every work into judgment, including every secret thing, whether good or evil." (Ecclesiastes 12:14). Let us be sure that we have done good, and not evil, for God to remember on our account.
There are many, many more things which we ought to remember, but we shall leave it at that. Know that God is faithful, He will remember and keep His covenants. Know that God will remember our walk, He sees all that we do, whether the eyes of men have beheld it or not. God will judge us for these in the end, and thus, let us determine ro remember His will, and to walk accordingly.
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST
THE ATHEIST’S COMPLAINT: Did Jehoiakim die in Babylon (2 Chronicles 36:5-6) or near Jerusalem (Jeremiah 22:18-19)? Is there a contradiction?
RESPONSE:
2 Chronicles 36:5-6 does not say that Jehoiakim died in Babylon; it does say that "Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up against him, and bound him in bronze fetters to carry him off to Babylon." Whether he made it to Babylon or was put to death before reaching the city, we are not told.
Does Jeremiah’s prophecy necessitate that Jehoiakim’s death took place near Jerusalem? The text reveals that there would not be lamenting for him, as one might expect a nation to mourn for their fallen king. It is stated that "...He shall be buried with the burial of a donkey, dragged and cast beyond the gates of Jerusalem." The Hebrew word halaah (rendered beyond) means "to the distance, i.e. far away; also (of time) thus far : – back, beyond, (hence,-)forward, hitherto, thence, forth, yonder." (Strong’s) Nothing in the word demands that Jehoiakim’s death occurred just outside the gates of Jerusalem. When Nebuchadnezzar "bound him in bronze fetters to carry him off to Babylon", he was "...dragged and cast beyond the gates of Jerusalem."
We do not know how he died, or exactly where he died, but we know that there was no honour given to him at his death. No public mourning of the citizens of Judah, no royal grave site. His burial was like that of a donkey, likely being cast into a common hole where his body may have been left as prey for birds and beasts.
There is no contradiction.
SUNDAY:
(meeting at the Royal Canadian Legion, 734 Montreal St, in the Limestone Room) Radio program (104.3 FM)........10:00 a.m. Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Worship..................................11:30 a.m. WEDNESDAY:
(meeting in the Stewart's home, 1449 Montreal St) Bible Classes............................7:00 p.m.
The sovereignty of God is a vital Bible doctrine. In fact, one’s understanding (or lack thereof) of God’s sovereignty will shape the rest of his religious convictions. What you believe of God’s sovereignty will determine how you understand the inherent nature of man, whether man has free will or not, how and who can become a child of God, etc.. A false concept of sovereignty will inevitably corrupt one’s understanding of these and other Bible doctrines. Thus, it is important to consider and comprehend what the Bible says about God’s sovereignty.
Of God’s sovereignty, one writer explains:
There is not a single thing in the universe that is not controlled by God... If God promises to do something, yet there are some people around who are not controlled by God, then those people could thwart God’s promise. God must be in control of every single thing.1
The Westminster Confession of Faith states: God from all eternity did by the most and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass...
And again: God the great Creator of all things does uphold, direct, dispose, and govern all creatures, actions, and things, from the greatest even to the least...2
It sounds impressive to say that God is "in control of every single thing", and that "whatsoever comes to pass... ...from the greatest even to the least..." is ordained by God. However, there is a serious consequence to such a position regarding the sovereignty of God. If God absolutely controls every person and every single thing, God then becomes responsible for sin, and sin in fact becomes part of the will of God!! Those who have at times said of sin, "The devil made me do it," if they adhere to this false concept of sovereignty should rather say, "God made me do it!" What a blasphemous concept of the sovereignty!!
If God is "...in control of every single thing..." "...from the greatest even to the least...", then we must of necessity attribute wickedness to God. To the woman who was beaten black and blue by her husband last night, be happy, for God was in control of every blow! To the family who lost their daughter to a drunk driver last weekend, why be sad, it was God who turned the wheel in her direction. To the woman and child who are left to fend for themselves because he stepped out to go live with another woman, hey, that’s OK, God sent him to her! What a blasphemous doctrine this false concept of sovereignty is!
Mr. Carpenter makes no apologies or exceptions in his version of sovereignty; but the Westminster does. The quote above continues:
...yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.3
What double talk is this? God has "...freely and unchangeably ordained..." everything, but He is not responsible for sin? I can certainly understand not wanting to attribute sin to God, but it cannot be both ways. If everything "...from the greatest even to the least..." is ordained of God, then nothing is excluded, even sin. You cannot have your cake and eat it too.
Understand, the Bible does not characterize God’s sovereignty as Him controlling and causing everything that happens. It is a completely false idea that for God to be sovereign, all things must at all times conform to His will. Sovereignty is defined as: 1 obsolete : supreme excellence or an example of it 2 a: supreme power especially over a body politic b: freedom from external control : autonomy c: controlling influence 3 : one that is sovereign; especially : an autonomous state4
God is sovereign; that is an inherent fact, for He is Creator, Sustainer, Saviour, Judge — He is the Almighty. Our adherence or lack thereof to His will neither adds nor subtracts from His sovereignty.
2 Peter 3:9 tells us that God "...is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." Do ALL come to repentance? Hardly. The Lord plainly told us that there are few who are saved (Matthew 7:13-14). When God’s people of old offered their children to the Baals, was God controlling and causing them to do so? What did He say? "And they have built the high places of Tophet, which is in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, which I did not command, NOR DID IT COME INTO MY HEART." (Jeremiah 7:31; cf. 19:5; 32:35).
Carpenter fears that if "...there are some people around who are not controlled by God, then those people could thwart God’s promise."
5 What a weak and futile understanding of God Carpenter holds. The God of the Bible is not threatened or thwarted by man’s free will. Joseph’s brothers, from envy and strife sold him into slavery. They intended to do evil to him. God does not tempt men to do evil (James 1:13). It was not God who motivated them to sell him to slave traders, it was their own selfish desires. Their evil plan did not thwart the plan of God. He took what they did, and accomplished His will through it (Genesis 50:20). What about Israel’s desire for a king? Was that God’s will? No, for the Lord said to Samuel, "...they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me, that I should not reign over them." (1 Samuel 8:7). Surely it wasn’t God’s will that His own people reject Him. But, His sovereignty was not compromised. He still accomplished His promised will (Genesis 49:8-10).
Friend, it is so important that we understand appropriately the sovereignty of God. Those who misunderstand His sovereignty will also misunderstand His dealings with mankind, denying that man is a free moral agent, and rejecting plain Bible teachings, even the most basic of commands for man to turn from sin unto righteousness. The Bible speaks of such as our responsibility and indicates that we are able; the Calvinistic concept of sovereignty will still affirm that we are responsible, but denies that we are able. What a monster God they have created. The God of the Bible is not so. _____________________ 1 "Essential Gospel Doctrine", Marc D. Carpenter, outsidethecamp.org/egd.htm 2 Westminster Confession of Faith, Ch. III, Sect I and Ch. V, Sect. I 3 Westminster Confession of Faith, Ch. III, Sect I 4 Merriam-Webster Dictionary (www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sovereignty) 5 "Essential Gospel Doctrine", Marc D. Carpenter, outsidethecamp.org/egd.htm
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST
THE ATHEIST’S COMPLAINT: Did Jehoshaphat remove the high places? 2 Chronicles 17:5-6 indicates yes, but 1 Kings 22:42-43 and 2 Chronicles 20:31-33 indicate no. Is there a contradiction?
RESPONSE:
Indeed, 2 Chronicles 17:6 tells us that the high places were removed, and yet 2 Chronicles 20:31-33 (1 Kings 22:42-43) say that the high places were not taken away. On the face, without any consideration this may appear to be a contradiction; let us give some consideration.
That the same writer, in basically the same context (only 3 chapters separating the two statements) said both that the high places were removed, and that they were not taken away should cause us to think that he was not speaking about the same high places in both instances. What distinguished those removed from those which remained? Likely what they were used for. Those used for pagan worship would have been destroyed, but those which were not so employed, seem to have been left intact. These did not remain because Jehoshaphat was not willing to remove them, but "...as yet the people had not directed their hearts to the God of their fathers." (20:33) Rather than worshiping God at the temple, as they ought, some in Judah worshiped Him at the high places. Jehoshaphat was not as direct with the people about their worship of God at the high places (2 Chronicles 32:12).
There is a valid explanation, that some high places were removed, others were not. There is no contradiction.
SUNDAY: (meeting at the Royal Canadian Legion, 734 Montreal St, in the Limestone Room) Radio program (104.3 FM)........10:00 a.m. Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Worship..................................11:30 a.m. WEDNESDAY: (meeting in the Stewart's home, 1449 Montreal St) Bible Classes............................7:00 p.m.
Studying God’s word is a wonderful endeavour, which if undertaken with honesty results in wondrous eternal benefit. Students of the word must approach it with a sober attitude, a diligent focus, and a determined volition. With these, there will be much profit, both in the present life and that which is to come.
The Lord conveyed the plan to redeem man through several means. He at times spoke in parables, revealing great spiritual truths through simple earthly stories. Other times, He was as blunt as could be, for example, the list of woes against the Pharisees and scribes (Matthew 23). Among other oratory skills, Jesus would occasionally use humour to teach His audience. Isaac Asimov once said,
Jokes of the proper kind, properly told, can do more to enlighten questions of politics, philosophy, and literature than any number of dull arguments.1
Asimov’s persuasion as an atheist / humanist accounts for the absence of religion and morality from his list of subjects which may benefit from the proper use of humour. However, in Jesus’ teaching, we see that humour, correctly employed, can serve to enlighten hearers of religious discourse also. Let us consider a few examples of Jesus’ humour.
Not all humour is knee-slapping, roll on the floor funny. Sometimes an appeal to the absurd will bring a smile to the face of the hearer, and convey the orator’s point. Such is the case when Jesus said one does not "...light a lamp and put it under a basket..." (Matthew 5:15) How silly it would be, to prepare the lamp and light it, only to hide it’s light. Is it not equally absurd for the child of God to not shine as a light in the world? We have been prepared for that very purpose – "You are the light of the world." Get on the lampstand!! And when people are drawn to the light, point them to the One true light, the Lord.
Later in the same sermon, discussing worry, Jesus asked, "Which of you by worrying can add one cubit to his stature?" (Matthew 6:27) Friend, you’ve put a lot of time and effort into that worrying that you do, so what has it done for you? Did it make you any taller? Are you any better looking for it? Has it bolstered your health? Through a goofy question, Jesus has demonstrated how nonsensical it is for us to worry, for worry does nothing but harm to our bodies, and betrays a lack of faith in our God and Father.
Matthew 7:3-4 could well be found on the cartoon page of the Saturday paper. Jesus asked, "And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove the speck from you eye’; and look, a plank is in your own eye?" Sadly, most of us fail to appreciate the humour of this witty word picture, choosing rather to immediately begin analyzing the meaning. Certainly, we should seek to know the meaning, but shall we not stop and delight in the Lord’s sense of humor? (click here for a cartoon)
Do you not suppose that a grin appeared on the faces of the people (well, except for the rich) when Jesus said, "...it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 19:24) It is right to focus on the helplessness of the rich to save themselves, and to be thankful that though "...with men this is impossible, with God all things are possible" (19:26), but don’t lose sight of the comical image Jesus used to teach this lesson. (click here for a cartoon)
You’ve heard of the waiter, who when asked by a patron, "What is that fly doing in my soup?" responded, "Looks like the back stroke to me, sir." What about the Pharisee who strains his soup time and again looking for a gnat, but he fails to see the camel who fills the whole bowl? Jesus said, "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone. Blind guides, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel!" (Matthew 23:23-24)
There are certainly other instances where the Lord taught through humour, but these will suffice. Jesus knew when a witty statement would best serve His audience, and when a direct word would be better. The pulpit is the place for Bible teaching, not stand up comedy, but Jesus demonstrated that the mild use of humour can be effective in leaving a lasting impression of a truth in the mind of the hearer. What a blessing to see Jesus’ use of humour in the Scriptures.
ANSWERING THE ATHEISTTHE ATHEIST’S COMPLAINT: Was Jehu the son (1 Kings 19:16) or grandson (2 Kings 9:2) of Nimshi? Is there a contradiction?
RESPONSE:
Jehu, the king of Israel, was the son of Jehoshaphat, the grandson of Nimshi, as 2 Kings 9:2 (cf. 9:14) indicates. However, along with 1 Kings 19:16, other texts say that he was the son of Nimshi (2 Kings 9:20; 2 Chronicles 22:7).
In the same book, even in the same chapter (2 Kings 9), Jehu is both called the son of Jehoshaphat and the son of Nimshi. On the surface, such may appear to be a contradiction, but surely if it were, the writer of 2 Kings would have been aware of such, and not said both in the same chapter.
Though on the surface these appear to be contradictory statements, one must consider the meaning of the Hebrew word ben, which is in all these texts translated "son". If the word means specifically one’s immediate and biological son, then certainly, there is a contradiction here. Son is the most common rendering of the word (2,978 times), but it is also rendered children (1,568), old (51), young (35), man (20), child (10), stranger (10), people (5), and a variety of other words (92).
Strong’s defines the word as:
a son (as a builder of the family name), in the widest sense (of literal and figurative relationship, including grandson, subject, nation, quality or condition, etc...1
The word is used correctly, whether Jehu is called the son of Jehoshaphat or the son of Nimshi, he is a builder of the family name for both his father and his grandfather.
There is no contradiction. _____________________ 1 Strong's Concordance (PowerBible CD 5.4 software)
SUNDAY: (meeting at the Artillery Park Aquatic Centre, 76 Ordnance St) Radio program (104.3 FM)........10:00 a.m. Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Worship..................................11:30 a.m. WEDNESDAY: (meeting in the Stewart's home, 1449 Montreal St) Bible Classes............................7:00 p.m.
Have you ever received someone else’s mail? Occasionally we receive envelopes addressed to the former occupant of our house. Of course, the accepted practice is to write "Return to sender" or "Not at this address" on the envelope, and send it back through the postal system. Hopefully, through time, the stray items will no longer show up in our mailbox.
I want us to consider for a few moments today the idea of reading other people’s mail. "What!!??", you might exclaim. Allow me to explain. Years ago, I was fortunate to hear an excellent lesson on being "Led By The Spirit", taught by brother Marty Pickup, at the Florida College lectures. Throughout the lecture, brother Pickup reminded us time and again that when we open up the Scriptures, we are "reading other people’s mail." The thought has stuck with me, and I believe expresses an essential approach to correctly studying and understanding the Bible.
To illustrate, consider the address which appears in some of the New Testament books:
"To all who are in Rome..." (Romans 1:7)
"To the church of God which is at Corinth..." (1 Corinthians 1:2)
"...to the saints who are at Ephesus..." (Ephesians 1:1)
"...to all the saints in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, with the bishops and deacons..." (Philippians 1:1)
"...to Timothy, a true son in the faith..." (1 Timothy 1:2)
"...to Titus, a true son in our common faith..." (Titus 1:4)
"...to the pilgrims of the dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia..." (1 Peter 1:1)
"...to the elect lady and her children..." (2 John 1:1)
"...to the beloved Gaius..." (3 John 1:1)
We’re reading someone else’s mail!! And God intended it to be so. He chose to reveal His will through these letters written by inspired men to both assemblies of Christians and individuals. There is no apostle or inspired writer to pen a letter to the church which is meeting at Kingston, nor does there need to be. In the record which has been preserved from the first century, we find "...all things that pertain to life and godliness..." (2 Peter 1:3) In the letters which are compiled in our Bibles, we find things "...profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness..." (2 Timothy 3:16) These letters can profit God’s people today, just as those whom they are addressed to benefitted.
What then is the importance of acknowledging that these documents were originally someone else’s mail? In reading and developing an understanding of what is written, it is vital that we consider the historical context. Who was the instruction given to? What did this or that phrase mean to the original recipients? What were the circumstances that surrounded them, and how did that affect what was written to them? Are we in the same circumstance as the primary reader / hearer?
Consider a few simple illustrations of this from Paul’s first letter to the church at Corinth. In 4:17, 19, Paul wrote, "...I have sent Timothy to you..." and "...I will come to you shortly..." Friend, do not expect Timothy to be stopping by, nor to see the apostle darken the door. They are not coming to us. This was to and for the original recipients, the Corinthian church.
That is a simple, perhaps even silly demonstration, but let’s look at a few other examples of the need to examine the condition of the primary audience when reading the Bible.
In 1 Corinthians 7, Paul gives varied instructions about marriage. Of the one who has a virgin daughter, he says, "...he who gives her in marriage does well, but he who does not give her in marriage does better." (v 38) Of the widow, he states, "...she is happier if she remains as she is, according to my judgment – and I think I also have the Spirit of God." (v 40) So, it is best for Christians to remain virgins or widows, and not to marry? Earlier in the same context, Paul indicated why he said such things. It is not that he was opposed to marriage, nor that he thought it unwise for Christians to marry, but he stated, "...I suppose therefore that this is good because of the present distress – that it is good for a man to remain as he is..." (v 26) If married, remain married; if single, remain single. This was not instruction for all time and all circumstances, but given due to the calamity and tribulation which was upon God’s people at the time.
In chapter 14, Paul wrote, "Pursue love, and desire spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy." (v 1) He proceeded to give instruction for the use of spiritual gifts in the assembly, "If anyone speaks in a tongue, let there be two or at the most three, each in turn, and let one interpret. ...Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others judge." (v 27, 29) So, we should have prophets and tongue speakers in our assemblies? Not according to 13:10, for "...when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away." The perfect will of God is here; we have the complete revelation, and no more the use of partial revelation through tongues and prophecy.
It is "...living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword..." (Hebrews 4:12), and is the message "...given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness..." (2 Timothy 3:16). But we are reading other people’s mail, and must take this into account as we learn to "...rightly divide the word of truth..." (2 Timothy 2:12) and "...understand what the will of the Lord is." (Ephesians 5:17). Place statements in their historical context; understand phrases and words as they would be understood in the time the text was written, and determine whether our circumstances are on par with those whom the text was written to. Doing this, we will better comprehend the holy book, and faithfully obey God’s will for us.
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST THE ATHEIST’S COMPLAINT: Who appeared to Moses in the burning bush, God (Exodus 3:4) or an angel (Exodus 3:2; Acts 7:35)? Is there a contradiction?
RESPONSE:
Was it God, or an angel? It was God. Let me draw your attention to Exodus 3:2, for the questioner misrepresents what the text says. It does not read "an angel", it reads, "the Angel of the LORD". This is a key, recurring phrase in the Scriptures. From a look at the texts where the phrase appears, it appears that this was a phrase commonly used to describe the pre-incarnate Christ as He appeared through the Old Testament. The phrase is used synonymously with the LORD or God.
The One who appeared to Moses in the burning bush is identified in Exodus 3 as: the Angel of the LORD (v 2), the LORD (v 4, 7), and God (v 4, 6). Moses did not contradict himself, all three descriptions are valid. There are other such examples where the LORD and the Angel of the LORD are used as descriptions of the same person. Consider who:
led Israel from Egypt (Exodus 13:21; 14:19)
spoke to Moses from Sinai (Exodus 19:20, 21; 20:1-2; 23:20-23)
appeared to Samson’s parents (Judges 13;18, 20-22)
In next week’s main bulletin article, we’ll consider in more detail the Angel of the LORD. But for the present, as we consider Moses’ use of the Angel of the LORD, and God in the text, it can be understood that these are used to refer to same person – the pre-incarnate Christ.
There is no contradiction.
SUNDAY: (meeting at the Artillery Park Aquatic Centre, 76 Ordnance St) Radio program (104.3 FM)........10:00 a.m. Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Worship..................................11:30 a.m. WEDNESDAY: (meeting in the Stewart's home, 1449 Montreal St) Bible Classes............................7:00 p.m.
"...No one has seen God at any time..." (John 1:18; cf. 1 John 4:12) declared the apostle John. Given that Jesus is identified in Scripture as God (John 1:1), and that He has been sent among men (John 1:14; Matthew 1:23) to declare the Father to us (John 1:18; 14:9-10), it would seem appropriate to conclude that John's statement was with regard to the Father, not the Son. In fact, Jesus tells us that no one "...has seen the Father, except He who is from God; He has seen the Father." (John 6:46)
And yet, there are occurrences, especially in the Old Testament where individuals saw the LORD. If no one has seen the Father at any time, who is it that was seen by these folks? Who is it that appeared to Abraham saying, "I am Almighty God..." (Genesis 17:1)? Who was the LORD that he entertained with a meal a chapter later (Genesis 18:1)? Who did Moses speak to face to face (Exodus 33:11)? The Scriptures reveal plainly that it was not the Father (whom no man has seen at any time), but rather the pre-incarnate Christ — Jesus, before He came in the flesh.
The Christ Led Israel From Egypt
Christ was "...the spiritual Rock that followed them..." (1 Corinthians 10:1-4)
Moses tells us "...the LORD went before them by day in a pillar of cloud..." (Exodus 13:21)
Exodus 14:19 calls this same One, identified by Paul as Christ and by Moses as the LORD "...the Angel of God..."
NOTE -- a recurring phrase in Scripture is "the Angel of the LORD", or as appears in Exodus 14:19, "the Angel of God." This appears to be a common description used to speak about the pre-incarnate Christ through the Old Testament.
The Christ Led Israel In The Wilderness
Paul cautions us to not "...tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed by serpents..." (1 Corinthians 10:9; cf. Numbers 21:5-6). The inference is that they tempted Christ, for he was the One who journeyed with them in the wilderness.
The Christ Spoke To Moses From The Burning Bush
Stephen, in his review of Israel’s history indicated that it was the Angel of the LORD who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Acts 7:30, 35). In the Exodus account, the same individual is referred to as "...the Angel of the LORD... the LORD... God... the God of your father..." (Exodus 3:2-6)
The Christ Spoke To Moses And Israel From Sinai
Again, Stephen calls the One who spoke with Moses and the nation from Mount Sinai "...the Angel..." (Acts 7:38) The Exodus account refers to Him as "...the LORD..." (Exodus 19:20-21), "...God..." (Exodus 20:1-2), and "...My Angel..." (Exodus 23:20-23)
The Christ Foretold Manoah of Samson’s Birth
Manoah and his wife were told in Judges that they would have a child. The message came from "...the Angel of the LORD..." (Judges 13:16). Manoah was not aware who this was speaking to him, and asked His name. The response came from the Angel of the LORD, "Why do you ask My name, seeing it is Wonderful." (v 18) This is among the titles which are applied to the Christ (Isaiah 9:6).
Manoah and his wife made an offering to the LORD, and "...it happened as the flame went up toward heaven from the altar – the Angel of the LORD ascended in the flame of the altar!" (v 20) What did they conclude from this? "...Manoah knew that He was the Angel of the LORD." (v 21). As such, he feared, "We shall surely die, because we have seen God!" (v 22)
The Christ Appeared To Joshua
"...a Man stood opposite him with His sword drawn in His hand... as Commander of the army of the LORD I have now come... Joshua fell on his face to the earth and worshiped." (Joshua 5:13-15)
The worship of angels is forbidden (Revelation 22:8-9), but Joshua bowed and worshiped, even as Moses had (Exodus 3:5).
The Christ Appeared To Hagar
"...The Angel of the LORD..." spoke to Hagar and "...she called the name of the LORD who spoke to her, You-Are-the-God-Who-Sees..." wondering, "Have I also here seen Him who sees me?" (Genesis 16:7-13)
Years later, this same one heard the voice of Ishmael, and again spoke with Hagar. He is identified as both "...God..." and "...the Angel of God..." (Genesis 21:14-20)
The Christ Appeared To Abraham
On more than one occasion, the Angel of the LORD appeared to and spoke with Abraham. In Genesis 17:1, He identifies Himself as "Almighty God". In Genesis 18, again, the Angel of the LORD comes, with two other angels also. In Genesis 22, the Angel of the LORD stopped Abraham from doing harm to his son Isaac, stating, "...now I know that you fear God..." How did He know? "...you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me..." The sacrifice was being made to God, to the Angel of the LORD.
The Christ Appeared To Balaam
Throughout Numbers 22:22-35, "God", "the Angel of the LORD", and "the LORD" are used interchangeably to refer to the One who was angered at Balaam and stood against him in the way.
Several other texts speak about the Angel of the LORD, and indicate that this is the pre-incarnate Christ, one who is equal to the Father in His nature, the LORD, Jehovah God. The above should suffice to see the work of the Lord, even in Old Testament times, as the pre-incarnate Christ worked among the people of Israel.
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST
THE ATHEIST’S COMPLAINT: Can God stop iron chariots? He can do anything (Judges 4:13-16), but iron chariots are too hard for Him (Judges 1:19)? Is there a contradiction?
RESPONSE:
Certainly God is able to stop iron chariots and be victorious over them. Deborah and Barak went to battle in faith, and God gave them the victory (Judges 4:13-16)
But what about the iron chariots of Judges 1:19? Is it that God could not overcome them? See what the text says: "So the LORD was with Judah. And they drove out the mountaineers, but they could not drive out the inhabitants of the lowland, because they had chariots of iron." Who had trouble with the chariots, the LORD or the people of Judah? It does not say "He could not drive them out", but rather, "they could not drive them out".
As one follows through the rest of the chapter, it becomes apparent that none of the men of Israel approached the duty of driving the inhabitants of the land out with the certainty of faith. Time and again, we’re told that they did not drive the inhabitants out (v 21, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33). God had given the land into Judah’s hand (v 2), it was up to Judah to work to purge the land. It was not the LORD who failed, it was the men of Judah.
There is no contradiction.
meeting at the Artillery Park Aquatic Centre, 76 Ordnance Street
SUNDAY: Radio program (104.3 FM)........10:00 a.m. Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Worship..................................11:30 a.m. WEDNESDAY: Bible Classes............................7:00 p.m.
This past week, myself and another brother had the opportunity to study with a couple of Jehovah’s Witnesses at a local Kingdom Hall. The atmosphere was pleasant; the nature of the discussion respectful. Some might think it best to discuss the nature of Christ, the failings of the Watchtower Society, or some other similar topic. However, after several weeks of study with one of these men, I suggested that our discussion center upon the 144,000 and the great crowd spoken of in the Revelation. Why? Quite simply, the Witnesses’ position on the identity of these figures affects their understanding and application of most other New Testament texts. For example, texts addressing the "saints", "brethren" or "elect" are not considered to be unto all who are disciples of Christ, but just a small segment.
Our purpose herein is twofold: 1) to expose the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ false teaching about the 144,000 and the great multitude, and 2) to make known the truth on the same matter. The benefit for the child of God is also twofold: 1) to gain knowledge about this great figure in John’s Revelation, and 2) to prepare ourselves, should we perhaps have an opportunity someday to share this truth with one who has been caught in the Witnesses’ error.
WITNESS DOCTRINE OF THE 144,000 & OTHER SHEEP "So the 144,000 are persons who die on the earth as humans and are resurrected to heavenly life as spirit creatures, as Jesus was (Romans 6:5). When compared with the thousands of millions of persons who live on earth, they are, indeed, a ‘little flock’. However, the ‘little flock’ who go to heaven are not the only ones who receive salvation. As we have seen, they will have happy earthly subjects. Jesus referred to these as his ‘other sheep,’ of whom ‘a great crowd’ are even now serving God faithfully." (The Truth That Leads To Eternal Life, 1968 ed. p. 77)
THE "OTHER SHEEP" Jesus said to His apostles, "And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd." (John 10:16). Note that these "other sheep" were distinct from the original fold; they, like the originals would hear his voice, and they would be added to the original fold, such that there would be one "flock and one shepherd". There would not be two parts of one flock, but simply one flock.
Who are the original sheep? Jesus sent His disciples "...to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Matthew 10:6). He Himself was "...not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Matthew 15:24). The Scriptures identify the house of Israel or the house of Judah as God’s original fold (Ezekiel 34:30-31; Micah 7:14-15; Zechariah 10:3).
Who are the "other sheep"? At Pentecost, Peter said to the Jews who were coming to Christ, "...the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off..." (Acts 2:39) Who was "afar off"? Paul later wrote, "...remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh... who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ." (Ephesians 2:11, 13) Of the Jew and Gentile, we’re told that Christ "...has made both one... to create in Himself one new man from the two... that He might reconcile them both to God in one body..." (v 14-16). Time and again, the New Testament reveals that salvation is no longer of the Jews only (John 4:22), but for the Gentile also (Matthew 10:18, 21; Luke 2:32; Acts 10:45; 11:18; 13:46-48; 14:27; 15:3, 8, 14; Romans 10:16; 1 Corinthians 12:13; Galatians 3:8, 14, 28; Ephesians 3:6, etc.). The Gentiles who would respond to the gospel would be added to the faithful of the flock of God; Jew and Gentile would be brought together in one.
Jesus taught that there would be "one flock", that the original sheep and the other sheep would be made one. The Witnesses give lipservice to Jesus’ teaching, but reject it in their doctrine, making a distinction where Jesus has made none.
144,000 & THE GREAT MULTITUDE The primary source for the two class teaching of the Witnesses is found in Revelation, where we are told of the 144,000 and the great multitude. Before looking at the texts in detail, I believe it appropriate to consider a statement made by Charles T. Russell, the founder of the Jehovah’s Witnesses with regard to the use of Revelation. In debate with L.S. White, on the issues of eternal punishment, Russell stated:
"The Book of Revelation is not something that is properly brought in in such a controversy as this. Nor would it generally be considered usage to bring in the symbols of Revelation as proof on any point. It is a rule among those who are doctors on this line to exclude anything like the Book of Revelation from being direct proof. We ought to have it in the words of Paul, in the Corinthians, or Romans, or Ephesians, or Philippians, or some of these plain statements in which he declares that he did not shun to declare the whole counsel of God."
Russell hit the nail on the head. It is not prudent to appeal to the book of Revelation as the source of proof with regard to a Bible doctrine. And yet that is the very thing which has been done. The Witnesses have established a doctrine based upon Revelation 7 and 14, and then have gone on a rabbit hunt throughout the rest of Scripture to find texts which can be manipulated to support their misuse of the Revelation texts.
John tells us in Revelation 1:1 that the things contained in his writing were "signified". Consider the figure or symbol of those who are sealed.
144,000
is not a literal number, but represents those who are sealed. Two other numbers are used to arrive at this figure, the number twelve (12) and one thousand (1,000). Twelve (12) is often associated with the people of God (sons of Jacob, tribes of Israel, stones in High Priest’s breastplate, cakes of showbread, apostles of Christ, age of Jesus’ first teaching, baskets of fragments, etc, etc.). One thousand (1,000) signifies that which is complete or whole. The LORD says, "...every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills." (Psalm 50:10; cf. Psalm 105:8) Do not the cattle on the 1,001st hill also belong to God? The number is used to denote completeness. Those who are sealed are 12 x 12 x 1,000 — the complete number of God’s people.
Of The Twelve Tribes Of Israel
, like the number, is not a literal but figurative description. It is simply a reference to the people of God. Paul told us that "...they are not all Israel who are of Israel, nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, ‘In Isaac your seed shall be called." (Romans 9:6-7; cf. 2:28-29). James wrote to "...the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad..." (James 1:1). Was his instruction not as much for Greek Christians as it was for those of Jewish origin? The phrase is simply used to refer to the people of God.
Not Defiled With Women, For They Are Virgins
is a further description of this group of people. Just as the number and their identify as being of the twelve tribes were figures, this also is a symbol. There is "...neither Jew nor Greek...", nor is there "..male nor female..." in Christ. There are no secondary citizens among the Lord’s people, but "...all are one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:28). The image here is that of purity. With regard to the Corinthian church, Paul sought to "...present a chaste virgin to Christ." (2 Corinthians 11:2). The desire is "...to present you holy, and blameless, and above reproach in His sight" (Colossians 1:22).
The latter portion of Revelation 7 speaks of "the great multitude." Who are these? Consider: 144,000 THE GREAT MULTITUDE - numbered at 144,000 (7:4; 14:1) ** - no one could number (7:9) ** - of the tribes of Israel (7:4-8) - of all nations, tribes, peoples (7:9) [a figure of ALL God's people] [Jew and Gentile together] - male virgins (14:4) - clothed in white (7:9, 14) [a figure of purity] [washed by the blood of Christ] - before the throne of God (14:5) - before the throne of God (7:9, 15)
The description of the 144,000 and the great multitude sure look the same. They are both "before the throne of God" (7:9, 15; 14:5). They are both characterized as pure (7:9, 14; 14:4). Both comprise God’s people taken from all nations upon the earth (7:4-9, remember the symbolic use of the tribes). They are both a great number which man cannot tally (7:4, 9; 14:1, remember the symbolic use of 12x12x1,000). These are not two groups, as some (including the Witnesses) have concluded, but describe the very same group of people – God’s people.
144,000 or could not be numbered? In 7:4, John heard the number (which is symbolic), but did not see the crowd. In 7:9, he sees them. But how is it possible that the number of this crowd is both numerated and beyond numeration?
One at a football game might exclaim, ‘There’s no telling how many are here!’ In the 2nd quarter, it is announced over the P.A. system, ‘Today’s attendance is 144,000.’ Are there two crowds spoken of, since the patron indicated that he did not know the number, but the P.A. announcer gave it?
Though no man is able to number the people of God, the LORD is able to number His people, and signified it with the 144,000 (12x12x1,000).
Jehovah’s Witnesses are taught that the 144,000 "...go to heaven..." and that the "...other sheep..." (the great multitude) are their "...happy earthly subjects." However, a thorough investigation of John’s vision reveals that there is one group, not two, and that they are ALL before the throne of God (7:9, 15; 14:5). Where is the throne of God located? According to Scripture, it is in heaven (Psalm 11:4; 103:19; Isaiah 66:1; Matthew 5:34; Hebrews 8:1; 12:2; Revelation 4:2). In fact, according to the Watchtower, it is in heaven,
"To fit his unequaled position, his throne is in the heavens and our earthly globe is beneath his feet." (New Heavens and a New Earth, pg. 16)
The 144,000 and the great multitude are one. The other sheep are Gentiles who would come to Christ, added to the original fold, those from Israel who would be faithful to the Lord. The letters written by Paul, Peter, John and the other inspired writers, though not written directly to us, are applicable to us, for we are God’s people. Those who have responded to the message of the gospel in faith are called to be saints (1 Corinthians 14:33; Ephesians 5:3; Revelation 14:12), chosen and elect (Ephesians 1:4; Colossians 3:12; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 Peter 1:2; 2:9), blessed to be the brethren of our Lord Jesus (Matthew 12:50; Romans 8:17, 29; Galatians 4:7; Hebrews 2:11) .
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST
THE ATHEIST’S COMPLAINT: When was the man (or men) healed? Was it before entering Jericho (Luke 18:35) or after leaving Jericho (Matthew 20:30; Mark 10:46)? Is there a contradiction?
RESPONSE:
That the three accounts are one is evident, as the details are very much the same in each. That there are some variations in the accounts is also apparent, but should be expected. The accounts were given by three separate writers who wrote independent of one another. Each man, directed by the Spirit of God recorded whatever details seemed pertinent.
Mark is the only writer to speak of there being two blind men. Matthew, who was with Jesus, specifically knew the name of one of these men, and thus mentioned Bartimaeus by name. The absence of information in one account (ie. neither Mark nor Luke mention a specific name) or the inclusion of additional information in another account (ie. Mark revealing that there were two blind men) does not constitute a contradiction. Ask for details on any event from more than one person, and you will receive different, but not necessarily conflicting information.
But then we come to the time of the healing. Was it as Jesus entered into the city of Jericho, or was it while he was on his way out of town? Matthew and Mark’s accounts are both very clear, that this occurred as they "...went out of Jericho..." The Greek word ekporeuomai is used, which literally means to depart or proceed. Luke does not use the same word, but rather used the Greek word eggizo, which is often translated in the KJV as "draw nigh" or "at hand". The word can refer to the approach to a location, but likewise can simply denote proximity to a place. In Mark 11:1, the same word is used, not to speak of Jesus entering into Jerusalem, but to indicate that He was near Jerusalem, for He was at Bethphage and Bethany.
Can one be near to a place, after having left that place? Certainly. Since the healing of the blind men took place "...as he went out of Jericho...", it is most certainly appropriate to say that he was "nigh" (near) Jericho at the time. Young’s Literal Translation does a good job in translating Luke 18:35. There we read, "And it came to pass, in his coming nigh to Jericho, a certain blind man was sitting beside the way begging..." Luke’s account neither says that Jesus was entering or leaving the city, but rather than at some point in the time "...in his coming nigh..." to the city, this occasion took place.
There is no contradiction.
meeting at the Artillery Park Aquatic Centre, 76 Ordnance Street
SUNDAY: Radio program (104.3 FM)........10:00 a.m. Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Worship..................................11:30 a.m. WEDNESDAY: Bible Classes............................7:00 p.m.
Amidst a listing of the names of the family of Judah, we find what has come to be called in our modern day, "The Prayer of Jabez". The text reads,
"Now Jabez was more honorable than his brothers, and his mother called his name Jabez, saying, ‘Because I bore him in pain.' And Jabez called on the God of Israel saying, ‘Oh, that You would bless me indeed, and enlarge my territory, that Your hand would be with me, and that You would keep me from evil, that I may not cause evil!' So God granted him what he requested." (1 Chronicles 4:9-10)
This short prayer has garnered an amazing degree of attention in the past several years. All manner of merchandise can be purchased with the "Prayer of Jabez" on it; from posters to bracelets, key chains to card decks, engraved stones to calendars, and beyond. Also, there are countless audio tapes, video tapes and books for the old and the young, men and women.
Don't misunderstand me, I am in no way attacking the prayer of Jabez – that is, the prayer found in Scriptre at 1 Chronicles 4:10. However, the false premise, misinformation and conjecture which Bruce H. Wilkinson (writer of "The Prayer of Jabez", ISBN: 1-57673-733-0) has promoted and distributed in his series of books, I strongly oppose. This, along with the commercialization which has followed is a perverse manner with which to treat things spiritual (2 Cor 2:17; Tit 1:11).
In the preface to his book, Mr. Wilkinson says, "I want to teach you how to pray a daring prayer that God always answers. It is brief – once one sentence with four parts – and tucked away in the Bible, but I believe it contains the key to a life of extraordinary favor with God. This petition has radically changed what I expect from God what I experience every day by His power. In fact, thousands of believers who are applying its truths are seeing miracles happen on a regular basis."
A review at parable.com of Wilkinson's book stated, "Readers who commit to offering the same prayer on a regular basis will find themselves extravagantly blessed by God, and agents of His miraculous power, in everyday life."
Friend, repeating Jabez' prayer is not the solution to all our problems. Reciting the same prayer time and again would amount to a "vain repetition" (Mt 6:7). The Lord did not point believers to Jabez' prayer, nor did any of the inspired writers. It is not a lost be now found blessing for God's people, but one of many good examples (I repeat, examples) of faithful servants of God praying. Repeating his prayer will not solve all our problems, but certainly there are good things we can learn from it, which will help to improve our lives and service to God.
JABEZ, THE MAN The first several chapters of 1 Chronicles are likely among the least read texts in the Bible. There we find a seemingly endless list of genealogical data. Of most, it is said that they lived, begot children, and died (Ecc 2:16; 9:5). However, the Spirit saw fit to reveal more about Jabez.
What made this man outstanding? He was not a great prophet or preacher; nor was he a wise man or ruler or a nation; neither was he famous from victory on a battlefield. The Spirit tells us that he was "more honorable than his brethren." He lived righteously.
His was an uphill battle. Bible names are important. Names often describes something about the individual. Consider the names below. What does Jabez mean? "Sorrow". His mother called him "sorrow". However, he overcame what others might have expected of him, and became what God expected of him. [Isaac...laughter / Jacob...supplanter / Achan...troubler / Ruth...friendly / Naomi...pleasant / Mara...bitter / Jezebel...Baal exalts]
JABEZ' PRAYER "Oh, that You would bless me indeed..." This opening line might equally be translated, "...blessing me Thou doest bless me..." (YLT) How often do we begin our prayers by asking God to bless us? And yet that is the very thing which Jabez did. It is not wrong for God's people to ask for blessing (Gen 32:24-29). God desires to bless us, and indeed, those who are in Christ are richly blessed (Gal 3:7-9; Eph 1:3; 3:8-9, 14-21). The question is, do we realize the blessings which God has provided?
"...and enlarge my territory..." Jabez sought expanded borders, longer coasts, broadened limits. Those who preach a "health and wealth" gospel will point to texts like this and proclaim that it is God's good pleasure to fatten our pocket books and fill our lives with wealth. But is that really what Jabez was asking for? In order for his physical borders to expand as an heir in Israel, it would be necessary for another's borders to diminish. Is that what he prayed for?
Rather than understanding the expanding of his territory to be literal, it makes sense to say that Jabez sought to reach beyond his own limitations. He sought to grow; to go beyond the comfort zones which hedged him in, and to increase in his service and usefulness to God.
But friend, we cannot simply pray that we exceed our limitations, and then wait for God to do it for us. We must pray for such, and then put our hands to the work of expanding our borders. The people of Israel had liberal borders which required their labour (Joshua 17:14-18), we have spiritual borders which demand our attention.
"...that Your hand would be with me..." The hand is used figuratively many times in Scripture with regard to God's strength, direction and comfort. To requests God's hand be with us is to acknowledge that we cannot go it alone. We need the Lord. If we have sought God's blessing, and are intent on expanding our service to Him, then know for surety that His hand will be upon us (Ps 119:173). God is ready to be a source of comfort and to uphold His people (Isa 41:10).
"...and that You would keep me from evil, that I may not cause pain!" When God's people seek to do what is good, there will be no shortage of opposition from the wicked one. Jesus taught us to pray for deliverance from the evil one (Mt 6:13; 26:41). Satan is very aware of what God's people are doing, and just as he sought to overthrow the faith of Job, and Peter, and so many others, he will seek to destroy us.
How shall we keep from evil? The first three points of the prayer lead us to this point: 1) seek God's blessing in life, 2) establish a goal to grow in faith, and 3) allow the Lord to provide direction for our life.
Notice the last words of Jabez' prayer, "that I may not cause pain!" He was fully aware what his name meant, and perhaps what others expected of him. He did not want to be a self-fulfilling prophecy. He sought to be greater than he was, and more than what others anticipated. He sought to be what God could make him to be.
"So God granted him what he requested." God heard his prayer, and granted it. Friend, may we be challenged to Jabez, not to recite his prayer, but to pray for the very same things that this righteous servant prayed for. May we seek to increase more and more in our service to God, being aware of the many blessings which the Lord has given; seeking to leave behind our comfort zones and setting out for increased borders. Might it be our constant desire to not walk in our own way, but to seek God's hand in our lives, and when confronted with the easy path of the wicked one, to turn form it and keep our feet firm on the solid rock.
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST
THE ATHEIST’S COMPLAINT: Did Paul go to Jerusalem from Damascus immediately after his conversion (Acts 9:26), or did he go some time later (Gal 1:16-17)? Is there a contradiction?
RESPONSE:
Following Paul's conversion to Christ, we are told that "Immediately he preached the Christ in the synagogues..." (those in Damascus). However, when some plotted to kill him, the Christians helped him to escape from the city. Where did he go then?
The questioner assumes that Paul then went immediately to Jerusalem. Luke does not say so. He simply states, "And when Saul had come to Jerusalem, he tried to join the disciples..." (v 26) When was that? Was it a day after leaving Damascus? Maybe a month? A year? Three years? Luke does not say.
If all we had was the record of Acts, we would not know how much time passed between Paul's conversion in Damascus and his arrival in Jerusalem. One might assume that since Luke mentions Paul's arrival in Jerusalem right after his conversion that the two events were back to back, but there would be no way to know for certain. However, Paul provides information in his letter to the Galatians which Luke did not provide in Acts. Upon leaving Damascus, Paul went into Arabia, and then returned again to Damascus (Gal 1:17). "Then after three years..." he went to Jerusalem.
Why did Luke not mention this? I do not know. Maybe he was not aware. Is he obliged to mention every detail of Paul's life? Was it important to Luke's writing that the reader know how long it was before Paul arrived in Jerusalem? did the Spirit perhaps leave it for Paul to reveal his whereabouts for the three years following his conversion, rather than have Luke reveal this?
Whatever the reason for the span of time not being identified in Acts, but being revealed in Galatians, there is no contradiction.
meeting at the Artillery Park Aquatic Centre, 76 Ordnance Street
SUNDAY: Radio program (104.3 FM)........10:00 a.m. Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Worship..................................11:30 a.m. WEDNESDAY: Bible Classes............................7:00 p.m.
It is that time of year again, when folks are making "New Year's Resolutions". Some will resolve to lose weight, some to save money, some to kick a habit, some to spend more time with family, some to enjoy more leisurely activities, some to manage time better, etc, etc, etc.. There are as many resolution possibilities as there are people to make them.
There may be many important resolutions to make regarding this temporal life, but of greater importance are things which deal with eternity. Consider some of the words of Jesus our Saviour which demand or attention and resolve:
"You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt loses its flavor, how shall it be seasoned? It is then good for nothing but to be thrown out and trampled underfoot by men. You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden. Nor do they light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven." (Matthew 5:13-16)
"Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal; but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also." (Matthew 6:19-21)
"But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these thins shall be added to you. Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, or tomorrow will worry about its own things. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble." (Matthew 6:33-34)
"Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light." (Matthew 11:28-30)
"A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another." (John 13:34-35)
"If you love Me, keep My commandments." (John 14:15)
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST
THE ATHEIST’S COMPLAINT: How many sons did Jesse have, eight (1 Samuel 16:10-11) or seven (1 Chronicles 2:13-15)? Is there a contradiction?
RESPONSE:
The questioner is right, the number reported in 1 Samuel 16:10-11 and 1 Chronicles 2:13-15 do not match. But rather than immediately conclude that it is a contradiction, let us consider the texts.
1 Samuel 16:10-11 reads, "Thus Jesse made seven of his sons pass before Samuel. And Samuel said to Jesse, 'The LORD has not chosen these. And Samuel said to Jesse, 'Are all the young men here?' Then he said, 'There remains yet the youngest and there he is keeping the sheep.' And Samuel said to Jesse, 'Send and bring him. For we will not sit down till he comes here.'"
1 Chronicles 2:13-15 reads, "Jesse begot Eliab his firstborn, Abinadab the second, Shimea the third, Nethanel the fourth, Raddai the fifth, Ozem the sixth, and David the seventh."
Indeed, in 1 Samuel 16, seven sons had already been seen by Samuel, and David, the youngest, would be the eighth. And yet, in 1 Chronicles 2, David is listed as the seventh. How can this be?
It is likely that one of Jesse's sons had died prematurely. He would have been alive at the time Samuel came to anoint a son of Jesse as king, but deceased thereafter. The absence of this one from the list may indicate that he had no offspring to perpetuate his name.
My wife, when asked about her family will often say that she has one sister. She in fact had 2 sisters, but one is deceased. Depending on the nature of the conversation, she may or may not mention the deceased sibling. The same would be true, even of this record in the Bible. There is no contradiction.
meeting at the Artillery Park Aquatic Centre, 76 Ordnance Street
SUNDAY: Radio program (104.3 FM)........10:00 a.m. Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Worship..................................11:30 a.m. WEDNESDAY: Bible Classes............................7:00 p.m.
Sometimes, we will have promised to do something, but for whatever reason (sometimes reasons of our own making, sometimes reasons beyond our control) we are delayed in accomplishing what we endeavoured to do. It is not uncommon to hear folks say at such delays, "I’m getting around to it." Friend there are a number of things we must get around to quickly.
While in custody in Caesarea, Paul took advantage of the opportunity to speak with dignitaries about the hope which is in Christ. Among those whom he spoke to are Felix and Agrippa.
As Paul "...reasoned about righteousness, self-control, and the judgment to come, Felix was afraid and answered, ‘Go away for now; when I have a convenient time I will call for you." (Acts 24:25) So far as we know, Felix’s convenient time never came. He didn’t get around to it.
Two years later, Paul was able to speak with king Agrippa. He spoke with him about the Lord appearing to him, and his work of preaching. He called for Agrippa to account for himself, "King Agrippa, do you believe the prophets? I know that you believe." (26:27) Belief alone is not sufficient, and Agrippa knew that. His response? Paul, "You almost persuade me to become a Christian." (26:28) Agrippa’s almost was not enough. He didn’t get around to it.
Friend, have you heard the message of the gospel? Do you know that Jesus said, "Unless you believe that I am He, ye shall die in your sins" (John 8:24)? Are you aware that the Lord also commanded that we repent, strongly stating, "Unless you repent, you shall all likewise perish" (Luke 13:3, 5)? But don’t stop there friend, there is more. Jesus plainly taught, "...whoever confesses Me before men, him I will also confess before My Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven." (Matthew 10:32-33) Are you willing to confess Jesus as Christ?
One more step, and you will be added by the Lord to His church. Don’t stop short as Felix or Agrippa did. Jesus commissioned His disciples to preach the gospel throughout the world. He stated, "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned." (Mark 16:16) Baptized? But why? In Luke’s parallel, Jesus states that "...repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name..." (Luke 24:47) In Luke’s sequel, he recorded the message of the apostle Peter at Pentecost, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." (Acts 2:38) Why be baptized? When we obey this command, just as when Noah obeyed the command to build and enter the ark, God grants salvation (1 Peter 3:18-21).
What is the end result? Luke continues, "Those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them. And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers... And the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved." (Acts 2:42, 47)
Friend, why procrastinate? Why not obey the Lord, even today? Don’t plan to get around to it, do it, and do it even now. And just in case you are planning to wait until you can get around to it, here you go, here’s your very own "Round TOIT". (Download here)
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST
THE ATHEIST’S COMPLAINT: When was Jesus born? Was it before 4 BCE * (Matthew 2:1; Luke 1:5), or after 6 CE ** (Luke 2:1)? Is there a contradiction?
* wikipedia.org lists Herod the Great as living from 73-4 BC
** wikipedia.org indicates that Quirinius (Cyrenius) did not become governor over Iudaea until 6 AD
RESPONSE:
If the dates supplied (which are generally accepted) are valid, then certainly there is a problem if the Scriptures tell us that Jesus was born during the latter years of the reign of Herod, and in the reign of Cyrenius as governor in Iudaea. The question is, do the Scriptures say such?
Certainly, a reading of the English text appears to produce a contradiction. We read:
"Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the East came to Jerusalem." (Matthew 2:1)
"There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the division of Abijah. His wie was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth." (Luke 1:5)
"And it came to pass in those days that a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered. This census first took place while Quirinius was governing Syria." (Luke 2:1-2)
The text which is called into question is Luke 2:2. If Jesus was born in the days of Herod (who presumably died in 4 BC), then how could Quirinius be governing Syria (who presumably began his reign in 6 AD)?
The trouble is in the English translation of the text, not in the text itself. Keep in mind that the New Testament was written in Greek, not English. Since the translators were not inspired, there is the potential for errors in translating. Should the Greek word protos have been translated "first" in this text?
The word can be translated "before" or "former" (ie. John 1:15, 30; Acts 1:1; Revelation 21:4). If it were so translated in Luke 2:2, we would read:
"This is the census which took place before Quirinius was governing Syria."
Such a translation is true to the meaning of the Greek word, and in no way contradicts other details provided by Luke or any other New Testament writer, or the record of history.
There is no contradiction.
meeting at the Artillery Park Aquatic Centre, 76 Ordnance Street
SUNDAY: Radio program (104.3 FM)........10:00 a.m. Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Worship..................................11:30 a.m. WEDNESDAY: Bible Classes............................7:00 p.m.
Been a while since I've sent out articles via this list. I'll try to get back in the routine of doing so. To read previous articles, click the link above and check out the archives.
William
June 1, 2008
Volume 12, Issue 22
DECISION MAKING FOR THE WORK OF THE CHURCH
Each local congregation of God’s people is charged with the responsibility of engaging in the work of the Lord. There is a need for edifying teaching, effective outreach, dedicated benevolence, appropriate discipline, etc.. To properly address these and other items, there is of necessity an avenue whereby decisions can be made.
MEN’S BUSINESS MEETINGS? The "men’s business meeting" has become the standard practice in many churches to address these necessary decisions. Is the "men’s business meeting" a Scripturally correct method to discuss and decide on the work of the local church?
Some questions to ponder regarding the "men’s business meeting":
Where is an example of a "men’s business meeting" in Scripture?
What is the difference between a "men’s business meeting" and a church council or committee?
What Scripture excludes women entirely from being present and participants in any part of the work of the local church? (NOTE, some may limit the nature of her participation, ie. 1 Timothy 2:12; 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, but they do not exclude her)
A BIBLE PATTERN FOR DISCUSSION & DECISIONS
Matthew 18:15-17 - discipline v 15, "...between you and him alone... v 16, "...take with you one or two more..." v 17, "...tell it to the church."
Jesus' 3 step process for discipline: - 1 - approach the offender individually - 2 - take others (elders, if there are any) - 3 - tell it to the church (not elders or men)
Acts 6:1-6 - local benevolent care v 2, "...summoned the multitude of the disciples..." v 3, "...brethren, seek out from among you..." v 5, "...the saying pleased the whole multitude."
Nothing contextually, nor anything grammatically would lead one to conclude that this "multitude of disciples" was exclusively male.
Acts 15:1-30 - doctrinal controversy v 3, "...sent on their way by the church..." v 4, "...received by the church..." v 5, "...some of the sect of the Pharisees rose up" v 6, "...apostles and elders came together..." v 7, "...Men and brethren..." (cf. v 13) v 12, "...all the multitude kept silent and listened.." v 22, "...the apostles and elders, with the whole church..." v 23, "The apostles, the elders, and the brethren, to the brethren..." v 30, "...when they had gathered the multitude together..."
We're told that the whole church was involved in the process (v 3, 4, 22)
"Brethren" (adelphos) is generic, used of both genders.
- did false teachers only teach men? (v 1) - were only men happy about converts? (v 3) - were greetings extended to men only? (v 23) - did Judas and Silas only exhort the men? (v 32)
If "brethren" were exclusive to men, the phrase "men and brethren" (v 7, 13) is redundant.
1 Corinthians 5:1-5 - discipline v 4, "...when you are gathered together..."
The disciples were to remove this one from fellowship. Remember Jesus said, "tell it to the church."
1 Corinthians 16;1-4 - messengers v 3, "...whomever you approve by your letters..." cf. 2 Corinthians 8:19, "...who was also chosen by the churches to travel with us with this gift..."
The church was preparing a gift to send to aid the needy disciples elsewhere. They would choose messengers to bear their gift.
WHAT ABOUT THE SILENCE OF WOMEN? Paul wrote, "Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence." (1 Timothy 2:11-12). The word "silence" comes from the Greek hesuchia, meaning stillness, desistance from bustle or language, quietness (Strong’s). It is the same word which is used in Acts 22:2 and 2 Thessalonians 3:12. The word does not call for absolute silence, but for a quiet, submissive disposition.
Paul wrote, "Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says. And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church." (1 Corinthians 14:34-35). This word silence is from the Greek sigao, which means to keep close, secret, to hold peace (Strong’s). It is the same word which is used in Acts 15:12, 13 and 1 Corinthians 14:28, 30. This word demands absolute silence. The context in which it appears addresses the use of spiritual gifts in the assembly.
Neither of these text remotely suggests that a woman should not be present and participating in a meeting to discuss and decide upon issues dealing with the work of the local church. Nor is there any other text in Scripture which would exclude women from presence and participation in discussion about the work of the local church.
No Bible text reveals or even slightly hints of a "men’s business meeting". This is a modern construction, another name for an exclusive committee which has taken power unto itself which God has not given. Biblical leadership belongs to the elders of the local church. In the absence of elders, we do not create a substitute structure.
The consistent pattern of the Bible is that all members of the local church ought to be present and participants as the work of the church is under consideration. Even in the case where there are elders in the local church, the entire church was still included in the process, both men and women. Shall we not follow the direction of God with regard to His church?
ANSWERING THE ATHEIST
THE ATHEIST’S COMPLAINT: Is casting out devils a sign of a true Christian? Mark 16:17 reveals that yes, it is the sign of a true believer, but Mark 9:38 and Luke 9:49 reveal that some who don't follow Jesus can cast out devils too. Is there a contradiction?
RESPONSE:
Mark 16;17 clearly teaches that one of the signs which would follow those who believed would be the casting out of demons. The question is, were those whom the questioner depicts as ones "who don't follow Jesus" followers of the Lord or not?
In Mark 9:38, John spoke to Jesus, "Teacher, we saw someone who does not follow us casting out demons in Your name, and we forbade him because he does not follow us." (cf. Luke 9:49). I'm curious why the questioner stopped there, and did not read on. Notice Jesus' response: Do not forbid him, for no one who works a miracle in My name can soon afterward speak evil of Me. For he who is not against us is on our side. For whoever gives you a cup of water to drink in My name, because you belong to Christ, assuredly, I say to you, he will by no means lose his reward. (Mark 9:39-41) And again, Do not forbid him, for he who is not against us is on our side. (Luke 9:50)
John had the idea that unless one followed with them, they were not indeed a follower of Christ. Jesus corrected him on this. Of these who were casting out demons, Jesus said, "...he who is not against us is on our side." He did not share John's perspective of them.
In the book of Acts, we find some who were not the Lord's followers, and they were not able to cast out a demon: Then some of the intinerant Jewish exorcists took it upon themselves to call the name of the Lord Jesus over those who had evil spirits, saying, 'We exorcise you by the Jesus whom Paul preaches.' Also there were seven sons of Sceva, a Jewish chief priest, who did so. And the evil spirit answered and said, 'Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are you?' Then the man in whom the evil spirit was leaped on them, overpowered them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded. (Acts 19:13-16)
Those spoken if in Mark 16:17, Mark 9:38ff, and Luke 9:49ff were all true believers. The questioner has wrongly assumed that those of Mark 9 and Luke 9 were not. The context shows otherwise. There is no contradiction.
ASSEMBLING AT:
Artillery Park Aquatic Centre, Room C 76 Ordnance Street
SUNDAY:
Radio program (104.3 FM)........10:00 a.m. Bible Classes..........................10:45 a.m. Worship..................................11:30 a.m. WEDNESDAY:
Offline 
Send Email
