“THANKSGIVING”

On October 20, 1864, President Abraham Lincoln issued this official proclamation (#118) regarding the observance of Thanksgiving:

“Now, therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, do hereby appoint and set apart the last Thursday in November next as a day which I desire to be observed by all my fellow-citizens, wherever they may then be, as a day of thanksgiving and praise to Almighty God, the beneficent Creator and Ruler of the Universe. And I do further recommend to my fellow-citizens aforesaid that on that occasion they do reverently humble themselves in the dust and from thence offer up penitent and fervent prayers and supplications to the Great Disposer of Events for a return of the inestimable blessings of peace, union, and harmony throughout the land which it has pleased Him to assign as a dwelling place for ourselves and for our posterity throughout all generations.”

In the Bible, the manner in which ‘thanksgiving’ was expressed by those who feared God was most unique. It was by means of a sacrifice, by praising God, by a prayer, or through songs. While it was to be done willingly, and not out of constraint, it was always as God ordained in the language of the covenant between Himself and His covenant people. Thus, we see that thanksgiving is expressed both by words and by certain authorized acts.

Sadly, what has happened with love has happened with thanksgiving. How often do we hear (and say) the phrase, ‘I love you’? Does saying ‘I love you’ equate to loving someone? So also, saying your thankful does not necessarily mean you are thankful. The uniqueness of the thanksgiving of a Christian is that their deeds prove their words true. That is being Christ-like. In John 3:16, 1 John 4:19, and Revelations 1:5 the apostle John speaks of the love that God and Christ had. Is there any doubt that God and Jesus loves us? How do we know? We know because of how it was shown (John 15:13; Romans 5:8).

The uniqueness of the thanksgiving of the Christian is seen from 2 Corinthians 6:4. It is done “in much endurance, in afflictions, in hardships, in difficulties…”. God has foreordained this. We are no more at liberty to determine HOW we will thank God any more than we are at liberty to worship God as we deem right. God has not left us “in the dark” as to how to ‘thank’ Him anymore than He has left it up to us as to how to worship Him. Worship is unacceptable when offered with heartless lip service and when the traditions we observe are contrary to what God has commanded (Matthew 15:8-9; John 4:24). Our worship is not to be unrestrained for we have divine guidance as to what to do. Likewise godly living is not an unrestrained life. Without divine guidance, people will become unrestrained (Proverbs 29:18). Likewise, the thanksgiving of a Christian is expressed by denying ungodliness and worldly lusts (Titus 2:11-12).

The apostle Peter affirmed that God has given all things that pertain to life and godliness (2 Peter 1:3). Christians are to add these ‘things’ to their faith, that they might not live unrestrained (2 Peter 1:5-9). Through this ‘adding’, the Christian expresses his thanksgiving. Worship and godly living are only acceptable when exercised in obedience. This is also true in regard to thanksgiving by the child of God. Thankfulness is a discipline that needs to be valued, for its spiritual benefits.  But like anything that is of value, it needs to be exercised (i.e., nurtured AND expressed). That it is to be expressed, is seen from such passages as, “Oh give thanks to the Lord, for he is good!” (Psalm 118:1; 1 Thessalonians 5:18). But God has declared that our zeal must be “according to knowledge” (Romans 10:1-3).  Thus, the ‘nurtured’ aspect of giving thanks must be by this knowledge. Being truly thankful begins with recognizing how entirely dependent we are upon God’s mercy and His ability to provide. Thankfulness is expressed out of confidence that He will (James 1:17ff). When our thanks is expressed in obedience, an ‘on-going’ benefit is that pride will be rooted out of our life.  If not, pride will dominate in our life (James 4:6).

Thanksgiving and obedience are inseparable, for TRUE thanksgiving is ONLY in obedience to God’s will.  This is seen from the 50^th Psalm.  In condemning His own people Israel, God said: “Offer…a sacrifice of thanksgiving and pay your vows to the Most High; call upon Me in the day of trouble; I shall rescue you, and you will honor Me.”  But to the wicked God said, “What right have you to tell of My statutes and to take My covenant in your mouth? “ For you hate discipline, and you cast My words behind you.”  The only acceptable expression of thanks is in giving God what God most desires, and that, by His own declaration is our hearts (Psalm 51:17; Joel 2:13).

Let us return to Him in obedience, and recognize His rightful authority to rule over us.  What He promised (and did for) Judah, He will do for all who will ‘trust and obey’.  God said He, “let them find Him” (2 Chronicles 15:15).   Jesus gave the same assurance (John 7:17). Thanksgiving will always be blessed of God when it does as Jesus spoke: “If anyone loves Me, he will follow My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our dwelling with him.” (John 14:23).

11/30/2020

rdb

“THE CHALLENGE OF DEFENDING THE FAITH” ~ Philippians 1:17

“But what I am doing I will also continue to do, so that I may eliminate the opportunity from THOSE WHO WANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE REGARDED JUST AS WE ARE…” (2 Corinthians 11:12).

The statement above was made by the apostle Paul. The context shows that he was speaking of evil men who sought to be “regarded” as Paul and other apostles of the Lord. Paul, however, has severe scorn and rebuke for these ambitious men. In vss 13-15, he states, “For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. No wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. Therefore it is not surprising if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness, whose end will be according to their deeds.”

Why was the apostle Paul so harsh with his words toward these men? It was not out of personal revenge. Yes they had attacked him personally, but Paul’s concern was not for his own reputation. He had a much greater concern. The message of truth was under attack. In fact, truth was more important to Paul than his own life. We need to give heed to Paul’s concern for purity in the message and come to the defense of the gospel when it is being perverted. Accuracy in the message has become a thing of insignificance. It is no surprise that defense of this accuracy has given in to fear of “judging”! Feelings and sincerity of motive have taken precedence over doctrinal purity. Indeed, a love for truth is misguided when there is no love for soundness in doctrine. Truth is not based upon or determined by the existence of faith. Remember Jacob sincerely believed Joseph was dead, but that did not make it so (Genesis 37:31-35).

As we lose our love for soundness in doctrine, we are losing our first love (Revelation 2:1-4). Ephesus and Pergamos were two of the churches in Asia who had some who “held” to the doctrine of Balaam and of the Nicolaitans. Both of these doctrines were false! They had to be exposed and opposed! Not all in these two churches “held” to these false teachings. Those that didn’t had the same responsibility as Paul had in dealing with these false apostles in Corinth. Doctrinal purity must be defended against any and all who would attempt to pervert it. This is what Paul was doing; defending the gospel with which he had been entrusted (1 Corinthians 9:17; 1 Timothy 1:11; Titus 1:3). Paul, in both his epistles to Timothy commanded Timothy to GUARD this message (1 Timothy 6:20; 2 Timothy 1:14).

An accurate, sound, message is crucial. No passage better states WHY accuracy in the message is essential than Romans 1:16, “it is the power of God for salvation…”.The power of salvation resides in God’s message! Doctrine matters! Defending the purity of the message is equally crucial. Paul’s words were not gentle toward these brethren. They were false and deceitful because their message was false and deceitful! As Paul would later tell Titus, their mouths needed to be stopped (Titus 1:11). Timothy was told by Paul to “reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.” Paul had a love for truth and for them (Proverbs 27:5). In wanting to be regarded as apostles, these false apostles wanted their message to be regarded as inspired from God. But they taught DIFFERENTLY from what the Lord’s apostles taught by inspiration of the Holy Spirit. As such, they were giving people a false hope in regard to their salvation. Earlier in this chapter (vss. 3-4), Paul said of these false teachers, “But I am afraid that, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ. For if one comes and preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted, you bear this beautifully.” (Paul wrote similar words in his other epistles: (cf. Romans 16:17-18; 1 Corinthians 3:11; Galatians 1:6-9; Ephesians 5:6; Philippians 3:2; Colossians 2:4, 8, 18; 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16; 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9; 2:2-4, 9-11; 1 Timothy 1:19-20; 4:1-2, 16; 6:3-5; 2 Timothy 4:3-4; Titus 1:9-11).

We cannot deny the reality of false gospels in the world. The division in religion is proof of false gospels. False doctrine results in the damnation of both the teacher and his hearer. Note especially the “hearer” in 1 Timothy 4:16 – “…both save thyself, AND THEM THAT HEAR THEE.” [Preaching ACCURATELY, saves, both the preacher and the hearers.] and in 2 Timothy 4:3-4 “…THEY (i.e., the hearers) WILL NOT ENDURE SOUND DOCTRINE, but after their own lusts…heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears…turn away…from the truth…unto fables.”

A most relevant question for everyone…DO YOU BELIEVE IN THE REALITY OF FALSE DOCTRINE? A related question will perhaps drive the point home. DO YOU BELIEVE IN THE REALITY OF HELL? If there was no such thing as false teaching, would there be a need for HELL?Beware of those who come in sheep’s clothing…false apostles disguised as apostles of Christ…those WHO DESIRE TO BE REGARDED AS AN APOSTLE IN WHAT THEY TEACH! TEST THEM! As the apostle John warned in 1 John 4:1. They are false if their preaching does not match the preaching of the Lord’s apostles! What did the Lord’s apostles tell people to do to be saved? What did the preacher who preached to you, tell you to do to be saved? Did their messages match? This is why doctrine is so important in religion.

Jesus taught:

“Take heed WHAT ye hear” — Mark 4:24

“Take heed HOW ye hear” — Luke 8:18

Why? Because DOCTRINE MATTERS!

11/26/2020

rdb

“Deity - ology”

All scripture is theology, but not all theology is scripture. Scripture is God-breathed; theology is man-breathed. In order for theology to be God-breathed it must be scripture. Saving faith will result from obeying what God said (Romans 10:17). What God said is found ONLY in the scriptures.

If you're going to teach/preach ('speak' - 1 Peter 4:11), use scripture, not theology. - theology is defined by scripture; scripture is not defined by theology. The Bible definition of theology: words to no profit that subverts the hearer, that will increase unto more ungodliness and will eat as a canker - 2 Timothy 2:14, 17. Strive not about such words, but rather, rightly apply God's theology (2 Timothy 2:15).

No amount of rightly dividing man's theology will transform it into God's theology. Theology 'twists' God's words (Acts 20:30). It makes a proselyte out of a disciple. All disciples are proselytes, but not all proselytes are disciples. The determining factor is the doctrine they have been subjected to.

When a sinner is taught theology, he becomes a proselyte. Scripture states that he is made twice as much a child of hell as his teacher (Matthew 23:15). He is not made free from his sin, but is yet a slave of sin because of the form of doctrine to which he was committed (Romans 6:17-18). 

If scripture was delivered rather than theology, a sinner will call upon the name of the Lord as those in the book of Acts called. Scripture was delivered and obeyed from the heart in those recorded cases of conversions. 

THE RESPONSE OF THE SINNER REVEALS THE DOCTRINE THAT WAS PREACHED TO HIM, FOR HE WILL RESPOND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TEACHING HE HEARD.

rdb

10/26/2020

The Blood of Christ

Christ shed HIS blood. The BLOOD that was shed belonged to Christ. We may properly refer to it as the blood of Christ. Let us consider some lessons from this phrase 'the blood of Christ' as it applies to Christ's church.

Jesus said the shedding of His blood was going to be for the remission of sins (Matthew 26:28). Paul stated that Jesus shed His blood to purchase the church (Acts 20:28). These purposes are one and the same, for those in His church are those who have had their sins remitted. To have sins remitted is to be "in" Christ's church. There is a connection between the two and lessons to be learned from that connection, one of which is, proper and improper concepts of Christ's church.

Jesus foretold of the shedding of His blood by saying that HE was going to "build" His church (Matthew 16:18). This "building", was also connected to the remission of man's sins, for His blood had to be shed before sins would be remitted (Hebrews 9:22); and before the church would be "purchased" (Acts 20:28). The church being "built" and being "purchased" mean one and the same, the blood being shed for that purpose.

If Christ was to speak beforehand of the shedding of His blood in the manner in which He spoke of building His church, He would have said it this way:"I will shed My blood", as He said "I will build My church". We know this to be accurate, for He spoke beforehand of the purchasing of the church with His blood in this way.

If we were to refer to Christ's blood, we could express it in a number of ways: i.e., "Christ's blood"; the "blood of Christ", or "the blood belonging to Christ". Since Christ was "God" in nature (John 1:1), it would be in order to even refer to His blood as "the blood of God", so long as we understand that it was the Son, not the Father, who shed blood.

There is a lesson to be learned about Christ's church, by an analogy of the church and the blood are referenced. Christ shed his blood for "the world", [for God so loved "the world" ~ John 3:16]. But does it seem in order to refer to Christ's blood after those for whom it was shed, i.e., the "blood of the world" or the "universal blood"?

The church began on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1, 41). But does it seem in order to refer to Christ's church as the "pentecost" church", naming the church after the "day"?

There was a response from those who desired remission of sins on this same day (Acts 2:38, 41). But does it seem in order to refer to the Christ's blood as the "blood of repentance", or the "repentance blood"; because those on the day of Pentecost responded in repentance (v. 41)? Likewise, does it seem in order to refer to the Christ's blood as the "baptism blood", or the "blood of baptism", because those on the day of Pentecost submitted to baptism?

Would these designations of Christ's blood seem in order? Again, WHOSE BLOOD IS IT?

Christ DID speak beforehand of purchasing, or building His church. He said, "I will build My church" (Matthew 16:18).

As with reference to Christ's BLOOD, if we were to refer to Christ's CHURCH, we would express it in similar ways: i.e., "Christ's church"; the "church of Christ", or "the church belonging to Christ" would we not?

Since Christ was "God" in nature (John 1:1), it would be in order to even refer to His church as the "church of God", as long as we understand that it was the Son, not the Father who purchased the church, for the Son, not the Father, shed blood.

Those who have had their sins remitted, are to follow a pattern or method in how they worship, and in how they are to work together in spreading the gospel and in the work of building/strengthening one another up. But is it in order for the church to be called after the method, i.e., the "method" church?

There is a pattern or method to follow in how those purchased by Christ's blood are to be fed and protected (Acts 20:17, 28); but is it in order for the blood/church to be called after it's leaders, such as the "elders church"?

Would these designations seem in order? Again, WHOSE CHURCH IS IT?

Let us remember the words of the apostle Paul:

"... in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ." ~ Ephesians 2:13

"In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins..." ~ Colossians 1:14

"...if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin." ~ 1 John 1:7

9/28/2020

rdb

EXCHANGING WHAT IF'S...

Found--ancient document detailing the following exchange:

Joshua: "God requires holiness from His people. He requires us to offer sacrifices in the place He chose to put His name in order to atone for our sins."

Nameless Israelite: "Sacrifices cannot be necessary. What if a man is on his way to offer a sacrifice and a tree falls on him and kills him?"

Joshua: "God requires holiness from His people. He requires us to offer sacrifices in the place He chose to put His name in order to atone for our sins."

Found—modern document detailing the following exchange:

Preacher of righteousness: The apostle Peter told his fellow Jews to repent and be baptized for the remission of their sins.

Nameless believer: “Repentance cannot be necessary. What if a man is contemplating repentance and a tree falls on him and kills him?”

Preacher of righteousness: The apostle Peter told his fellow Jews to repent and be baptized for the remission of their sins.

Nameless believer: “Baptism cannot be necessary. What if a man is on his way to be baptized and a tree falls on him and kills him?”

Preacher of righteousness: The apostle Peter told his fellow Jews to repent and be baptized for the remission of their sins.

9/24/2020

rdb

"UNDERSTANDING IMPUTED RIGHTEOUSNESS"

The Bible repeatedly warns man to exercise caution as to whom and what he hears. We see this exemplified in the first two people, Adam and Eve. They listened to Satan’s words then acted upon their belief in what Satan said. In doing so they disobeyed what God had commanded and incurred God’s wrath. Their punishment was two-fold: spiritual and physical death. We see this from the apostle Paul’s words to the church of Christ at Rome. In Romans 5:12, 15-17, 21 he wrote: “Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man (Adam), and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all (not Adam) sinned”. This is significant, as we will see.

Adam and Jesus are compared and contrasted here in Romans 5. God’s eternal purpose is explained from this text. Notice how that which came through Jesus is similar to that which came through Adam.

“But the gift (eternal life – Romans 6:23), is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man (Adam), how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many!”

Notice also the contrast between Jesus and Adam: “Nor can the gift of God be compared with the result of one man’s sin: The judgment (from God) followed (came after) one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed (came after) many trespasses and brought justification…For if, by the trespass of the one man (Adam), death reigned through that one man(Adam), how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ…so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” What we learn from this is that death passed on to us from Adam; not his sin (as some teach). Death has passed on to us because all have sinned, as Adam did (v. 12). [All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God – Romans 3:23]

WE ARE NOT BORN SINNERS BECAUSE ADAM SINNED; WE BECOME SINNERS WHEN WE COMMIT SIN, JUST AS ADAM BECAME A SINNER WHEN HE DISOBEYED!

[The wages of sin is death – Romans 6:23] Which is why death passed on to us from Adam; it was the ‘wage’ (consequence) of disobedience. The same ‘wage’ passed. In like manner, ‘life’ has passed on to us through Christ, for grace came to us through Christ (v. 21) and John 1:17[eternal life was thus a ‘gift’ of God through Jesus – Romans 6:23]

When we obey, as Christ did (Hebrews 5:8-9), the ‘gift’ is received. We do not receive the ‘gift’ without our own obedience any more than we incur the ‘wage’ from another’s disobedience. In other words we are not punished because of Adam’s disobedience; nor do we receive the ‘gift’ based upon Christ’s obedience. This was what God purposed from eternity. “For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life THROUGH JESUS CHRIST our Lord.” Christ’s obedience to the will of God made it possible for us to be made righteous (v. 19). But we also have to obey God’s will just as He did. We can understand how Adam’s sin brought death, through understanding how Jesus’ obedience brought life. They stand in contrast to each other, yet occurred in a similar fashion.

Notice: Adam disobeyed; this constituted sin, and the consequence of that disobedience was death. Death passed on to all who sinned after the manner of Adam’s transgression. Again, it is not that Adam’s transgression passed on to us, but because our sins were of the same nature as Adam’s; we incurred the same PENALTY as Adam—death, which is separation from God. This is why Isaiah would write, “…your iniquities have separated between you and your God...” (Isaiah 59:1-2).

Now, let’s notice the ‘nature’ of Adam’s sin. Our sin and Adam’s sin were similar in nature in that we, as Adam, disobeyed commands from the same being who gave to us life—GOD. Likewise, Jesus obeyed. This constituted righteousness and the gift to all who obey Him is eternal life; this LIFE passes on to all who obey after the manner of Jesus’ obedience. It is not that Jesus’ righteousness passes on to us, but because our obedience is to be of the same nature as Jesus’, we have righteousness imputed to us.

Notice from Hebrews 5:8-9 – “ Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him…” The obedience of Jesus provides a pattern. Our obedience is to be of the same nature as His. The apostle Paul described it this way in Philippians 2:8, “He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.” Jesus died FOR our sin. We are called upon to die TO our sin. God’s righteousness is revealed in the gospel (Romans 1:17). It is attained through faith and was witnessed by the Law and the prophets (Romans 3:21).

The apostle Peter explained it this way, “Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps…He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness” (1 Peter 2:21, 24).

9/10/2020

rdb

INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC: USED AND UN-USED.

Two opposite positions cannot both be right. Most people would say, if asked, that instrumental music in worship has always been used in churches. The fact of the matter is, that is just the opposite. There is such abundant evidence to the contrary that, for one to continue to believe that, in the face of such evidence, is to be willingly ignorant.

Christians who understand the concept of the need for AUTHORITY have always correctly argued that there is no authority for the use of instruments of music in the New Testament. Although the modern-day denominations proudly play their mechanical instruments in worship; that has not always been the case. In the past, they were opposed to their use, on the same basis for which we in the church of Christ still oppose them – NO AUTHORITY IN THE SCRIPTURES!

The Roman Catholic church once opposed them but now use them (although today, the Greek Orthodox Catholic church still does not use them). Their own documents bear witness to this. From the Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 10, pg. 648-652 we read: “Although Josephus tells of the wonderful effects produced in the Temple by the use of instruments, the first Christians were of too spiritual a fibre to substitute lifeless instruments for or to use them to accompany the human voice.”

From this same writing on pg. 657-688 we read: “For almost a thousand years Gregorian chant, without any instrumental or harmonic addition was the only music used in connection with the liturgy. The organ, in its primitive and rude form, was the first, and for a long time the sole, instrument used to accompany the chant. The church has never encouraged and at most only tolerated the use of instruments. She holds up as her ideal the unaccompanied chant, and polyphonic, acapella style.”

From Chambers Encyclopedia, Vol 7, p. 112 we read: “The organ is said to have been first introduced into church music by Pope Vitalian in 666. In 757, a great organ was sent as a present to Pepin by the Byzantine Emperor, Constantine, and placed in the church St. Corneille as Compiegne.”

From John Calvin, in his Commentary on Psalms 33 we read: “Musical instruments in celebrating the praises of God would be no more suitable than the burning of incense, the lighting of lamps, and the restoration of the other shadows of the law. The Papists therefore, have foolishly borrowed, this, as well as many other things, from the Jews. Men who are fond of outward pomp may delight in that noise; but the simplicity which God recommends to us by the apostles is far more pleasing to him.”

Martin Luther, founder of the Lutheran church said of them: “The organ in the worship is the insignia of Baal. The Roman Catholics borrowed it from the Jews.” (McClintock & Strong's Encyclopedia Volume VI, page 762)

Consider the following quotes from the book entitled “50 Years Among the Baptists” by David Benedict: “Staunch old Baptists in former times would as soon have tolerated the Pope of Rome in their pulpits as an organ in their galleries” (p. 283)

Charles Spurgeon, Baptist: “What a degradation to supplant the intelligent song of the whole congregation by the theatrical prettiness of a quartet, bellows, and pipes! We might as well pray by machinery as praise by it.” He then declared: “I would as soon pray to God with machinery as to sing to God with machinery.”

In his commentary on Psalms 42, he wrote of instruments: “We do not need them. That would hinder rather than help our praise. Sing unto him. This is the sweetest and best music. No instrument is like the human voice.”

Adam Clark, Methodist: “I am an old man, and I here declare that I never knew them to be productive of any good in the worship of God, and have reason to believe that they are productive of much evil. Music as a science I esteem and admire, but instrumental music in the house of God I abominate and abhor. This is the abuse of music, and I here register my protest against all such corruption of the worship of the author of Christianity."

John Wesley, when asked his opinion of instruments of music being introduced into the chapels of the Methodists, said in his terse and powerful manner, 'I have no objections to instruments of music in our chapels, provided they are neither heard nor seen.' I say the same.

Notice that they once opposed mechanical instruments in worship. WERE THEY WRONG IN DOING SO? Would any present-day member of a denominational church say that they were in error for such opposition? If not, does it not mean that their use today is wrong?

You can’t both be right.

9/5/2020

rdb