The Church Christ Built--Marks of Identification

The church Christ built is worthless to man if it is impossible to find it, if it only existed in ancient history, and cannot be known today. Fortunately, like all things that exist, there are marks of identification that allow us to know his church from those made by man. What are the marks of identification of the Lord’s church versus man-made churches?

(1) The time of its founding. The Lord’s church began in the first century on the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2. Any church that was built or came into existence later cannot be the church Jesus built. Many of today’s churches were founded during the years of the Reformation and in the years since then, thus eliminating them from consideration as being the church Jesus built.

(2) The builder--Christ himself built his church. If a church can trace its beginnings back to a particular man or movement that can be named for its founding, it is clearly not the church Christ built.

(3) Its name. If a church is the church Jesus built, then one would expect it would not have a name given by men attached to it. Actually, no formal name was ever given to the church Jesus built. It was often referred to by appellations such as: the body of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23, 4:12), the Lamb’s bride (Rev. 21:9-10, Rom. 7:4), the church of God (Acts 20:28), the church of Christ (Rom. 16:16), the church of the living God (1 Tim. 3:15), the church of the firstborn (Heb. 12:23), the household of God (Eph. 2:19), the flock of God (1 Peter 5:2), God’s field (1 Cor. 2:9), God’s building (1 Cor. 2:9), the house of God (1 Tim. 3:15), the temple of God (1 Cor. 3:16-17), and, of course, the most common designation for the church in the Bible is the singular term, “the church.”

When a church has a name or designation not found in the Bible, that ought to immediately raise a red flag. That alone tells you it differs from what you find in scripture and makes it suspect. If a church is named after a man, a method of governance, or a peculiar doctrinal stance, it detracts from God’s honor and glory. God is to be given glory in the church (Eph. 3:20-21)—not a man or a movement.

(4) Its members--their names. In the church built by Jesus no member was called anything other than a disciple, a brother or a sister as the case might be, or just brethren when taken collectively, a child of God, a saint, or just by the name Christian (Acts 11:26). This listing is not necessarily exhaustive but is sufficient to make a needed point. In the New Testament church there were no such beings as Christians who also had an additional appellation or name to distinguish them from others. This was the very thing Paul condemned in 1 Cor. 2:4 when he said, “For when one says, ‘I am of Paul,’ and another, ‘I am of Apollos,’ are you not carnal?” (NKJV)

No church whose members are called by a denominational name in addition to the name Christian is the church Jesus built. Not only is it carnal, as Paul said, but it is also dishonoring to God, as if it is not good enough to just be called a Christian or child of God. The name “Christian” is a Christ-honoring name. Denominational names dishonor Christ as his name is replaced with that which the Bible knows nothing about.

(5) Membership--how do people become members of Christ’s church? This is an easily answered question. The church was established on the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2. When Peter confessed Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God, in Matt. 16:16, Jesus’ responded by saying, “on this rock I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18 NKJV) but then in the very next verse he tells Peter, “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven.” (Matt. 16:19 NKJV) Jesus thus uses the terms the church and the kingdom interchangeably making them one and the same.

The kingdom of God is not something that in our own time is down the road in the future. Jesus said to those with whom he was speaking, in Mark 9:1, “Assuredly, I say to you that there are some standing here who will not taste death till they see the kingdom of God present with power.” (NKJV) Paul says some years later in Col. 1:13, “He has delivered us from the power of darkness and translated us into the kingdom of the Son of his love.” (NKJV)

Peter used the keys of the kingdom (the keys being the gospel message with its requirements) on the day of Pentecost. When the 3,000 that day heard the message, believed it, repented of their sins (as instructed to do--Acts 2:38), and were baptized for the forgiveness of sins (as instructed to do--Acts 2:38), they were then translated into the kingdom of God by God himself. It is in that kingdom, not out of it, where salvation is found. If saved that day, no one doubts that they were, they were at that very time translated into the “kingdom of the Son of his love.” (Col. 1:13 NKJV)

Men do not join the church (the kingdom of God), but rather God adds them upon conditions. “The Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved.” (Acts 2:47 NKJV) The conditions are those set forth by Peter on the day of Pentecost. Jesus said, “Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” (John 3:5 NKJV) There are only two kingdoms, the kingdom of God and the kingdom of Satan. One must be in the kingdom of God for salvation, but Jesus is the Savior of the body (Eph. 5:23) which is the church (Col. 1:24). The kingdom and the body, the church, are one and the same, the difference being only in the way it is being portrayed. The kingdom has a king, the body has a head, but the same one who is king is also the head--the head of the body and of the church, which are one and the same (Col. 1:24).

Membership in this body, this church of Christ, this church Jesus built, is granted only on the basis of the new birth (John 3:5). It begins with the Spirit in that through the Spirit’s word, the gospel message, man is led to faith and repentance and a willingness and desire to confess Christ for who he is--the Son of God--and it culminates in baptism for the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38, 22:16) but more succinctly to put to death the old man of sin and to arise a new spiritual creation (Rom. 6:4-6). The old man dies in baptism (Rom. 6:4), “we were buried with him through baptism into death.” (NKJV) We come up from the water clothed with Christ (Gal. 3:27 NAS). Paul is thus able to say, “For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body…and have all been made to drink into one Spirit.” (1 Cor. 12:13 NKJV)

These then are the terms of membership if one desires to be in the church Jesus built. One can get into churches built by men on other terms, into man-made churches, but there is only one way into the Lord’s church. We must go back to the New Testament and enter the Lord’s church on the same terms of membership that they did back then. The same process that makes one a Christian also makes him a member of the church Jesus built, also adds him to the church, the Lord doing the adding when the requirements are met.

(6) Another mark of the Lord’s church is its organization. Each congregation was on its own, running its own affairs, with no guidance from any kind of national church organization. Each congregation was to have elders appointed who met certain requirements as set out in 1 Tim. 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9. This group of men was sometimes referred to under various terms in the same way Christians were as discussed earlier. The terms used were elders, overseers, shepherds, bishops, pastors, and rulers.

One of the requirements for a bishop or elder was that he be “the husband of one wife” (1 Tim. 3:2, Titus 1:6), and thus the church Jesus built was led by men. There were no women in leadership positions in the church. Perhaps the reason is given by Paul in 1 Tim. 2 when he says, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man…for Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.” (1 Tim. 2:12-14 NKJV) This is a historical reason that time will never be able to erase and thus it was not a matter of culture as some teach today.

If you find a congregation that is in violation of God’s plan for church leadership, you can be certain that it is not the church Jesus built or it has apostasized, one or the other. The eldership was always made up of a number of men and not just a single individual (Titus 1:5, Heb. 13:17). Thus, in the church Christ built, there were no women in leadership positions or teaching over men (preachers), nor was there any such thing as the modern pastor system. Those things are from men, not God.

There was also a group of men known as deacons who worked or served in the church under the direction of the eldership. Qualifications for these men are found in 1 Tim. 3:8-13. Some feel the 7 men chosen to supervise the daily distribution in the church at Jerusalem, as found in Acts 6:1-6, were the first deacons. They certainly filled the role deacons might well fill.

(7) Worship of the church. What are the acts of worship as found in the New Testament that, when done in the right manner, please God? Partaking of the Lord’s Supper on the first day of the week is one (Acts 20:7), prayer is another, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs (Eph. 5:19-20, Col. 3:16) is included, teaching of God’s word in which exhortation would be a part, and giving. Very few, if any, would object to any of these things for all are pretty much in agreement that these things can be found on the pages of the New Testament as things authorized in worship. We can do all of these things in the name of the Lord Jesus. “Whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.” (Col. 3:17 NKJV)

But when we talk about the worship of the church, there is more to it than just the correct object of worship--God in heaven. Jesus said we must worship God in spirit and truth (John 4:24). He then says in reference to God that, “Your word is truth.” (John 17:17 NKJV) This means, obviously, that man is not free to worship God just any way he chooses and call it worship, worship that is pleasing to God. God gets to decide what pleases, not man. If you recall, the church at Corinth in 1 Cor. 11 had a worship problem as it pertained to the Lord’s Supper. We are not free, in the Lord’s church, to do things our way.

The problem today, when one is searching for the church built by Christ as far as it pertains to the worship, is finding a church that has not added to the worship. All kinds of entertainment have been made a part of the worship--plays, instrumental music, musical entertainment (generally called in my part of the country “special music”), special events, and around election time even political rallies passed off as worship service. No, if we want the church the saints had in the first century, the one that belonged to Christ, we will have to content ourselves with doing what they did under divine approval and say that is good enough for it is good indeed as it came to us from “the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning.” (James 1:17 NKJV)

(8) The works of the church. The church Jesus built taught the gospel, they attempted to build each other up in the faith, and lend a hand to one another as needed; they were encouraged in every good work, and helped the poor and needy. The mission of the church was spiritual, but that did not mean it was divorced from the cares of this world completely. “Whoever has this world’s goods, and sees his brother in need, and shuts up his heart from him, how does the love of God abide in him?” (1 John 3:17 NKJV)

Much of what you see being done in churches today was never a part of the New Testament church. There were no ball teams, no seminars on how to do your taxes or lose weight, no business enterprises to raise money versus giving it out of your own pocket, and the list could go on and on. We need to learn what work the New Testament churches were involved in and get back to it, and forget about everything else.

In this article, I have tried to set forth the marks of identification for the church Christ built. That is the church we need to be in and get back to. If we did all denominations would cease to exist. Men will fight that tooth and nail for it is one thing to say we want Christ’s church and it is another thing to want it enough to give up “our church,” our denomination. In other words, the old saying “talk is cheap” is more than just a saying. A lot of things will have to be given up to get back to Jesus’ church, but it can be done once the will to do it is found. 

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

Instrumental Music in Christian Worship

In studying the subject of instrumental music in Christian worship, there is no person living today in the Western world who can remember a time when instruments were not in common use and generally accepted across what is called Christendom in denominational churches. However, that is not the case everywhere.

In Eastern Europe, the Russian Orthodox Church, the Greek Orthodox Church, as well as the Serbian, Bulgarian, Romanian, Georgian, Ukrainian, and Antiochian Orthodox churches do not use instrumental music in their worship services. Neither do the Eastern Catholic Churches of the Byzantine Rite, which include the Ukrainian, Melkite, Romanian, Italo-Albanian, Slovak, and Hungarian Greek Catholic Churches.

It was over 600 years after Christ’s death before instrumental music was introduced into worship. If there is any truth to the tradition, Pope Vitalian was the first to add the instrument to worship, with the date being a little uncertain, but somewhere approximately 670 AD. It was another 300 years or more before it became common in the Western church, some would say even later. It was opposed vigorously and only slowly came to be accepted. These are the historical facts of the matter and can be easily checked by anyone.

These historical facts are immensely important. It proves the introduction of instrumental music into Christian worship was done by man rather than by God. If of God, rather than man, why did they not use the instrument from the beginning of the church rather than wait hundreds of years?

Remember when Jesus was confronted by the chief priests and elders who wanted to know by what authority he was doing the things he was doing? He told them he would answer when they answered his question which was, “The baptism of John, where was it from? From heaven or from men?” (Matt. 21:25 NKJV) Thus, we need to ask the question of the instrument in Christian worship: where is it from, from heaven or from man? To ask is to answer if for no other reason than the date of its introduction. One must ask who gave man the authority to bring it into the worship? Did man just usurp the authority?

A person then has to ask himself some questions as he considers whether or not he wants to worship with those who use instruments. Do I want as my authority for worship what men gave or what God gave? They say it doesn’t matter; God doesn’t care. How can we know this? How can a person know that a thing that clearly came from man, not God, is a matter of little or no consequence to him?

Do you just know it because your heart tells you so? Jeremiah said, (Jer. 17:9 NKJV), “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” Again, the Lord says, “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.” (Isa. 55:8 NKJV)

The Bible has examples of men who thought it was a little thing to deviate from what God said with regard to the worship of him. They thought it would not matter. One thinks of Nadab and Abihu, Aaron’s sons, who “each took his censer and put fire in it and laid incense on it and offered unauthorized fire before the Lord, which he had not commanded them. And fire came out from before the Lord and consumed them, and they died before the Lord.” (Lev 10:1-2 ESV) We can be absolutely certain they did not think it mattered.

Uzziah was one of the kings of Judah whom you can read about in 2 Chron. 26. The Bible says, “he transgressed against the Lord his God by entering the temple of the Lord to burn incense on the altar of incense.” (2 Chron. 26:16 NKJV) Azariah the priest, along with 80 other priests, went in after him and withstood him to the face for only the priests, the sons of Aaron, had God authorized to perform this service. Uzziah became very angry with them at which time leprosy broke out on his forehead, a direct intervention from God. He remained a leper until the day of his death, living in isolation. Do you think Uzziah thought it would matter to God if he entered the temple and burned incense?

Why was Cain’s offering rejected if how we worship God is just left up to how man decides he wants to do it? Surely, Cain thought in his mind that God would accept his sacrifice before offering it. He had faith in that, but the trouble was the faith he had was the faith in his own thinking. That is what he had faith in. Abel, his brother, on the other hand, had faith in what God had said about the offering before offering it. Heb. 11:4 says Abel offered his sacrifice by faith, and we know from the scriptures that faith comes from hearing God’s word (Rom. 10:17), thus Abel did his offering God’s way, offering what God wanted according to God’s word. Cain offered his offering his own way.

What is Paul’s rebuke of the Corinthians in 1 Cor. 11 all about if it is not about the corruption of the worship in how the Lord’s Supper is to be partaken of? Does it matter to God? Some are still saying today it does not matter. We can do this or that with it. How can one say that in light of history? Why does Paul place restrictions on women in the public worship if things do not matter in worship, that is, if God does not care how he is worshiped?

Those who say the instrument does not matter know more than any man can possibly know about it. No man can know a thing with certainty about which God has said nothing. I once read a sermon whose message in the title has stuck in my memory now for decades. The sermon was by a preacher named Benjamin Franklin, some distant relation to the Benjamin Franklin of historical fame, in a book entitled The Gospel Preacher, Vol. 1. The name of the sermon was “The Course to Pursue to be Infallibly Safe.” That sermon had nothing to do with instrumental music, but it seems to me the title is exceedingly applicable to the subject.

Is there an infallibly safe way where a man can be right beyond any question and in which all men would agree there is safety with regards to the subject of music in the worship? Yes, there is. No person who calls himself a Christian has ever questioned the singing of psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs with the voice only and without the use of musical instruments. All agree this is pleasing to God without question or doubt of any kind.

Paul says we are to speak to one another “in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord” (Eph. 5:19 NKJV). See also Col. 3:16. All accept the teachings of these two passages without question as being what is good and right and acceptable and pleasing before the Lord. Yes, there is an infallibly safe way we ought to pursue.

However, if a person chooses to be reckless, if a person desires to be a gambler, if a person wants to take a chance, he must also be prepared to take the consequences if his heart misleads him on the matter and he finds out that God does not think as he thinks on the last day. It is quite a gamble. Of course, if you ask the man or woman who is involved in the worship where the instrument is used, they will tell you they are not gambling, they know it is okay. Ask them how they know and they are not able to give a satisfactory answer, only that their heart tells them so.

G. K. Wallace wrote a tract on the subject of instrumental music years ago that took an unusual slant but one that also left a lasting impression with me. His point was that we have to decide what we will be guided by. Will it be by what the Bible says or by what the Bible does not say? Many justify the use of the instrument in worship, saying “the Bible does not say not to,” thus they are guided in their decision-making by what the Bible does not say. That opens a very broad door for what can be brought into worship, going far beyond just instruments of music.

The New Testament is the new covenant of Christ under which we live today, not the Old Testament. There were instruments of music used in Old Testament worship. Why was it okay to use them? Because there was word from God approving such under the Law of Moses (2 Chron. 29:25 and various Psalms). Why is it wrong to use them today? Because there is no word from God approving such under the law of Christ under which we live today.

If a man desired to live under the Law of Moses today, he could not be saved. Much of the books of Romans, Galatians, and Hebrews discuss this very issue. We cannot hope to be saved today by animal sacrifice, by worshiping as they worshiped, by observing Jewish festivals, etc.

Faith comes by hearing the word of God (Rom. 10:17). Where there is no word from God, there can be no faith. Faith based on the word of God demands word from God. There is no word from God in the New Testament regarding men worshiping him with instruments of music.

When the word of God is silent on a subject, no matter how much you may believe, what you really have is opinion, not Bible faith. If there is no word of God on a subject, there can be no faith, only opinion. To have faith, you must first have the word of God (Rom. 10:17). Walking by faith demands word from God. We are to walk by faith (2 Cor. 5:7).

A foundational principle of the Christian faith is that “without faith it is impossible to please Him (God--DS)”. (Heb. 11:6 NKJV) Faith is always dependent on evidence. We don’t believe in little green men because there is no evidence of their existence. We do not actually have to see a thing to believe in it, obviously, but we do have to have evidence. When it comes to instrumental music the problem is that evidence is lacking. There is not a single word about its use found in the New Testament. It is hard to have faith in a thing that is not even mentioned or hinted at. Since when did silence become evidence?

Those who use instruments of music in Christian worship teach their acceptability. Is this teaching of God or man? If of God, where does the New Testament teach the thing? If of God, why did it take hundreds of years after Christ's death to get it started?

Had God desired that we use instruments, how hard would it have been for him to of told us? Not very! He told the Jews under the Law of Moses, but he did not tell Christians living under the law of Christ. What does the law of Christ teach in the New Testament about instrumental music? Not one thing. Where is there a single passage found that gives any support whatsoever, any command, any example, of instrumental music in the worship of Christians? The passage cannot be found.

One might go to the book of Revelation and find it there, one might say. But the book of Revelation is a symbolic book. Do we think spiritual beings in heaven play literal material instruments? Besides, if they are found in heaven, what does that have to do with the here and now? If they are there, I will be glad to play them with you if we both get there (and learn how to play). Right now, you and I are living in the here and now under the law of Christ.

Brother Wallace was correct. If I use the instrument in worship, I am not being guided by what the Bible says but by what the Bible does not say. The Bible does not say not to use them. I am being guided by what the Bible does not say if I do so. Do I want to live my life based on what the Bible does not say about things?

If this is how I derive Bible authority for what is right, the silence of the Bible, then we are free to bring into the worship anything not specifically prohibited by direct command. We can again burn incense as did the Jews of old, have drama, dance, you name it. The Bible is silent about a lot of things.

As I write this paragraph my car is in the shop. When I go to get it I do not want a bill for a muffler in addition to the seals that are being put in elsewhere on the car. I do not want to hear “you didn’t say not to” from the shop owner. Real everyday life does not get its authority for action from silence. We all know that. Why then do we accept that argument in religion?

The argument from silence, the scripture did not say not to argument, has opened the floodgates in Christendom already. We all know this has happened. You name it and some denomination is doing it. However, ask the question whether what they are doing is of God or man and you easily come up with the answer.

If a man does not need the Bible as a guide then of what value is it? Paul tells us, “We walk by faith, not by sight” (2 Cor. 5:7 NKJV). The whole teaching of the Bible is that a man is to hear the word of God, believe it, and obey it. This is the only way a man can walk by faith--hear, believe, and obey. You do not walk by faith by adding to God’s word, not by adding instrumental music.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

Holiness or Consequences

Christians are generally reluctant to think of themselves as holy, feeling they are not worthy of such a designation. However, the Bible teaches that Christians are holy and must be holy if they are to see God. “Pursue peace with all men, and holiness, without which no one will see the Lord.” (Heb. 12:14 NKJV) So, we see, it is holiness or consequences.

When we think of holy men and women of the Bible, we often think of Peter, Paul, John, and the prophets of the Old Testament, and women like Sarah and Deborah. We feel totally inadequate to be placed in their company. However, we do not make ourselves holy, God does; thus, it is not a matter of how we feel about it. This does not mean we are passive in becoming holy, that we have no role to play in it, but God alone can cleanse us of our sins.

When we obey the gospel, we become a new creation, a holy one. “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away, behold all things have become new.” (2 Cor. 5:17 NKJV) One enters into Christ the end result of faith, repentance, and baptism—put another way, the result of obeying the gospel. We are “baptized into Christ Jesus” (Rom. 6:3 NKJV) or, as found in Galatians, “baptized into Christ” (Gal. 3:27 NKJV), the last step of gospel obedience.

In baptism, the old man, the old woman, the old creature died. “We were buried with Him (Christ-DS) by baptism into death” (Rom. 6:4 NKJV). When we arise from baptism (immersion), “we also should walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:4 NKJV). That would be impossible to do if you did not actually have a new life, a new spiritual life. You are a new person in God’s eyes. This is essential “for in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but a new creation.” (Gal. 6:15 NKJV)

This new creation that we become is holy and is God’s doing. He cleanses us of all our sins and makes us holy. We “put on the new man which was created according to God, in righteousness and true holiness.” (Eph. 4:24 NKJV) We are thereafter to be active “perfecting holiness in the fear of God.” (2 Cor. 7:1 NKJV) The exhortation is to be holy in all our conduct (1 Peter 1:15). Why? Because God is (1 Peter 1:16) and we are his children.

To be holy is to be like God in all aspects of our lives. That would be in the way we think, our attitudes, our hearts, our daily conduct, in everything we do and say. That can only come about as we read and reread and imbibe the scriptures to see and learn God’s will. We learn of earthly things from our earthly fathers; we are to learn of spiritual things from our spiritual father.

Holiness, of course, implies we keep ourselves from sin and that we be consecrated to Christ. It does not mean sinless perfection, an impossibility. It does mean we want to please God and thus strive to do so by keeping his commandments, “For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments.” (1 John 5:3 NKJV)

We need to discuss “sanctification” alongside the word “holiness.” Both words come from the exact same Greek word, the word “hagiasmos.” Thus, in some translations, you will read the word sanctification in a passage, and in another version, the same passage, you may read the word holiness; the two terms are interchangeable. I note in comparing the earlier versions of the New American Standard translation in Heb. 12:14 that both the 1977 version and the 1995 update used the word sanctification, whereas the most recent update, the 2020 version, has changed it now to the word holiness. Here they are for your comparison: (1) “the sanctification without which no one will see the Lord” (Heb. 12:14 NAS 1977), (2) “the holiness without which no one will see the Lord” (NASB 2020).

Without me going through all such passages comparing translations that use the one word, while others use the other one, I give you one more example, Rom. 6:22, where the original KJV uses the word holiness as does the NKJV, NIV, and the NLT, but most all of the other major translations use the word sanctification (the ESV, CSB, NAS, NET, and the NRSV).

Both words refer to a state of being, in God’s eyes, as he views us, because of the remission of sins he has granted to us in Christ, and to a state of consecration to God in living the Christian life. If we are holy or sanctified, we are set apart to God and are saints. We are saints, the way scripture defines saints, not the way the Roman Catholic Church defines them. We are holy; we are dedicated, consecrated, set apart to God.

This state of holiness is attributed to different things in scripture. In John 17:17, we are sanctified, made holy in the New Living Translation, by God’s truth. We are sanctified by the Holy Spirit in Rom. 15:16 and 2 Thess. 2:13. Ephesians 5:26 says it is “with the washing of water by the word” (NKJV)--the CSB, the NIV, the NLT, and the NRSV use the word holy in Eph. 5:26 rather than the word sanctify. (I digress for a moment to say if Jesus makes holy or sanctifies the church by the washing of water, that makes baptism essential for cleansing of sin.) And then we are sanctified by Jesus’ blood in Heb. 13:12.

Ultimately, it all goes back to the same source—God. Only God can cleanse us of sin and make us holy. It can be compared to making a living. We might attribute our ability to make a living to our own labor, to our good health enabling us to work, to our training or education that opened the door of opportunity, to the help of others along the way, as there are many contributing factors that made it possible. Yet, in the final analysis, God made it doable. It was his goodness toward us that made whatever success we have had possible. It is he who gave us our health, our ability to do the work, and our job. No doubt many others could have had our place, but God, by his grace, gave it to us.

So, one can attribute holiness to different things, even our own efforts to be holy, and we are commanded to make that effort (1 Peter 1:15-16), but finally, its source is God.

We probably need to mention this to try to cover all the bases. You probably recall Moses at the burning bush episode in the Old Testament, how he was told to remove his sandals for the ground where he stood was holy (Exodus 3:5). I mention that to say some things are holy besides God and his people. Anything closely related to God or God’s presence is holy. Thus in Matt. 23:17 we read, “Which is greater, the gold or the temple that sanctifies the gold?” (NKJV), and in Matt. 23:19, “Which is greater, the gift or the altar that sanctifies the gift?” (NKJV)

The gold and the gift in the passages cited are made holy, for that is what sanctifies means. The Good News Bible translates both passages using the word holy for “it is the Temple which makes the gold holy” in Matt. 23:17 and “the altar which makes the gift holy” in Matt. 23:19. The English Standard Version uses the word “sacred” rather than holy in both passages, but you get the idea. Holiness is an attribute of God; thus, anything closely associated with him is holy, is sacred, and is to be treated as such.

I know we have a natural reluctance to view ourselves as holy men and women, for it sounds to our ears like arrogance. It is not. We must be holy, for without it we shall not see God, and that means our eternal destiny would be hell. What a change in the life of the church if all of us would start thinking of ourselves as “holy.” It could then be said of each of us that there is “a man of God” or “a woman of God.” It would not only change the church, but it would change each of us. It is a change we need to make.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

Forgiving Others

If you, or I, or any other were asked to compile a list of the ugliest traits of character that a person could have and that we run across in people I am sure that things like hatred, anger, bitterness, malice, and an unwillingness to forgive would all rank up near the top of our list.

While I listed five traits, it is easy to see how they are all related in the person who is unwilling to forgive. There is a sort of revenge motive in the person who will not forgive. The idea is that I will get even with you, even if my only weapon to do so is by not forgiving.

Admittedly, some wrongdoing is so horrendous it would be nearly impossible for most of us to forgive; for example, the rape and murder of a young daughter. There are other more common things that would be hard to forgive as well--adultery committed against us, desertion by a husband against his wife and children, physical abuse, lies told against us, sins committed against our children, etc.

But, even so, where does holding on to the anger and bitterness and hatred get you? Does it bring you a happier life? Does it bring you joy? We all know the answer—it only brings greater suffering and sorrow, more misery, as we dwell more and more on the hurt we have received rather than on the rebuilding of our life that can bring joy and peace.

But there are some guilty of sin who refuse to repent. Based on Luke 17:3, I do not believe we are required to forgive those unwilling to repent for the text says “if he repents.” Nevertheless, even then, there is nothing to be gained and much to be lost by harboring anger, bitterness, and hatred toward the one who has done you wrong; in doing so, you become guilty of sin yourself. Our attitude must be that we are ready and willing to forgive.

There is an adage that time heals, and so it does. We all have people who have done us wrong, whom we have been angry with, but with time, the things that seemed so great an issue when they occurred have paled into insignificance and no longer matter for the one who has a forgiving spirit. No amount of time will heal the one with the unforgiving spirit. They will go on living in misery.

We are going to get hurt in life. That is just life. But we also have to remember as we have been hurt, so we have hurt others, whether intentionally or not. If we seek mercy and grace we must extend the same to others. Why do we take the hurts we receive to heart but see as insignificant things we have said or done to others? We, too, are guilty.

The New Testament is a message from God to man about forgiveness. It is God’s message to us that he is anxious, and more than willing, to forgive us of our sins. As God is a spiritual being, so are we. It is not the physical man that gets hurt, who develops bitterness and hatred, and who is unwilling to forgive, but the spiritual man.

Man was created in the image of God (Gen. 1:26). As we have received hurt at the hands of others, we have to remember that all of us have hurt God with our own lives. This has been true of man from the beginning. “And the Lord was sorry that he had made man on the earth, and he was grieved in his heart.” (Gen. 6:6 NKJV) This was because “the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” (Gen. 6:5 NKJV)

It is easy to say that was generations ago and times have changed; we are not that way today. Yes, easy to say but also easy to know we are deceiving ourselves when we do so. Paul said to Christians, “Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.” (Eph. 3:30 NKJV) If a Christian can grieve God, how about all those who are not Christians, who know the truth of the gospel but will not obey it? Do you think they grieve God? The sins and sinners of the world grieve God.

God is more than willing to forgive. We are to be followers of God, to be like him. If you have read the prophets of the Old Testament you have seen God virtually begging his sinful people to repent and return with the promise that he will forgive them. “Let the wicked one abandon his way and the sinful one his thoughts, let him return to the Lord, so he may have compassion on him, and to our God, for he will freely forgive.” (Isa 55:7 CSB)

The parable of the Prodigal Son found in Luke 15 is a parable about God’s willingness and longing to forgive us, the father representing God, mankind’s father. When he saw his son coming home, the text says, “When he was still a great way off, his father saw him and had compassion, and ran and fell on his neck and kissed him.” (Luke 15:20 NKJV)

He was overjoyed. The son’s sins he had committed did not matter, not now. All that mattered was that the son was now home. Repentance had brought the son home and a father’s love brought forgiveness before the son spoke a word. This is the attitude we are to have toward those who have sinned against us. No doubt in the father’s heart he had long since forgiven the son but there was no way to express that until the son repented and returned home. There could be no reconciliation until that happened. The father’s heart had been full of love and forgiveness before the son ever came into sight. It only awaited his appearance to be manifested. This is to be our attitude toward those who sin against us.

Jesus taught us, “For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.” (Matt. 6:14-15 NKJV) “And whenever you stand praying, if you have anything against anyone, forgive him, that your Father in heaven may also forgive you your trespasses.” (Mark 11:25 NKJV) This forgiveness must be “from his heart” (Matt. 18:35 NKJV), which means, of course, sincerely.

It might be good to comment on Mark 11:25, just quoted. Previously, I said that based on Luke 17:3, I do not think we must forgive the one who will not repent of his sin against us. Is Mark 11:25 saying we must even if he does not repent? I don’t think so. Mark 11:25 is a description of what the heart of the one who was sinned against ought to be. His heart is ready, willing, and even anxious to forgive the one who has harmed him. In his heart he has already forgiven the sinner, but formal reconciliation cannot come until both parties are amenable to it. That thus awaits the repentance of the sinner. I think Luke 17:3 is saying reconciliation awaits repentance for how does one reconcile with one who refuses to repent?

Jesus on the cross is an example of this. In his prayer to the Father, he said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do.” (Luke 23:34 NKJV) In his heart, Jesus had forgiven them. But formal forgiveness or reconciliation, if you will, could not come until the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2 when they repented and obeyed the gospel. Of course, not all of Jesus’ crucifiers repented. Those who did not were not forgiven.

If Jesus could have a heart of forgiveness toward those who were crucifying him, then surely no one has done such evil to you as that done to him. How is our heart toward God and our fellowman when we relish hatred and enjoy the bitterness and anger that accompany it? And why is that so? Why are we that way? Why would we rather destroy ourselves than forgive? Hatred, anger, and bitterness are self-destructive.

There is comfort to be found in the Christian life in not only our own forgiveness by God but also the burden that is lifted from our shoulders when we, from the heart, forgive those we have so long held anger and bitterness against. “Let all bitterness, wrath, anger, clamor (‘harsh words’ in the NLT—DS), and evil speaking be put away from you, with all malice. And be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, just as God in Christ also forgave you.” (Eph. 4:31-32 NKJV)

It is so much easier to live life when surrounded by people who are kind and tenderhearted and forgiving, people who are not out just for themselves, or just to get you, or just to get even and reap vengeance, but rather people who care about you. No, life is better when you are able to say yes, I need forgiveness myself, and I will no longer hold anger or grudges against others but I will forgive as I seek God’s forgiveness in my own life.

We need not live in hatred and malice, and unforgiving of others, as that is a personal choice. We choose to be that way. We do not have to be. No one forces us to be unloving and unforgiving and full of pride that will not let us repent.

David said, “Depart from evil and do good; seek peace and pursue it.” (Psalms 34:14 NKJV) It is a choice. “Cease from anger, and forsake wrath.” (Psalms 37:8 NKJV) God is ready to forgive. “For you, Lord, are good, and ready to forgive, and abundant in mercy to all those who call upon you.” (Psalms 86:5 NKJV)

There is a passage in Ezekiel that we all ought to learn for even though it was written for another people at another time it is applicable today, “Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways,” says the Lord God. Repent, and turn from all your transgressions, so that iniquity will not be your ruin. Cast away from you all the transgressions which you have committed, and get yourselves a new heart and a new spirit. For why should you die, O house of Israel? For I have no pleasure in the death of one who dies, says the Lord God. Therefore turn and live!” (Ezek. 18:30-32 NKJV)

We will all be judged individually, “every one according to his ways,” so it is not what kind of attitude the other man has that we have it in for but it is our own attitude that we must account for. Repentance can save us: “Repent…so that iniquity will not be your ruin.” It is up to us as we can get ourselves “a new heart and a new spirit.” No, we do not have to be the way we are if we are unloving and unforgiving.

This discussion would be incomplete without a brief mention of the implications of forgiveness. Forgiveness in its fullest sense, when there has been repentance and the two parties are fully reconciled, means a full restoration of friendship and fellowship. It is as if the sin never occurred. Jeremiah, the prophet, spoke of the New Covenant to come under which you and I live today. Jeremiah quotes the Lord as saying, “I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.” (Jer. 31:34 NKJV) Sin is no longer remembered when God forgives. When you and I forgive, the sin is no longer to be remembered. It is to be as if it never happened.

In 2 Cor. 2:8, Paul urged the church at Corinth to “reaffirm your love to him,” referring to one among their number who had repented of his sin. Forgiveness does not mean you merely make a statement of forgiveness, but you must treat the one you have forgiven with Christian love and kindness, not as a piranha, not as one you avoid.

In closing, let me ask a few questions for your consideration. Why did Jesus come into the world? Who sent him? Why is Jesus called the Savior? Why did he die on the cross? Has God given us a choice (free will)? Is it possible to change our attitude, our life, and our hope? Why do we choose to hate, have bitterness and anger, to be unloving and unforgiving? What joy and happiness do we find in that? Is there a better way of life? Can peace and joy and hope of life everlasting be found, or is the way hidden from us?

I think we all know the answers to these questions, so there is only one other question to ask. It is the question in the old gospel hymn we have sung since the days of my childhood, which is now many decades past. It is the question, “Why do you wait o sinner?” “Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.” (2 Cor. 6:2 NKJV) There is peace in forgiving and in being forgiven.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

The Faith of Enoch

The Bible tells us that, "By faith Enoch was taken up so that he should not see death; and he was not found because God took him up; for he obtained the witness that before his being taken up he was pleasing to God." (Heb. 11:5 NAS) Enoch and Elijah (2 Kings 2:11) were the only two men to never die a physical death. Elijah went up by a whirlwind to heaven after a chariot of fire and horses of fire separated him from Elisha, his traveling companion and the one appointed to take his place as a prophet of God. Of Enoch, we only know that the Bible says he was taken up. How we are not told.

Very little is known about Enoch and his life. We know he was the father of Methuselah (Gen. 5:21), the oldest man to have lived, as far as we know, who died at the age of 969 (Gen. 5:27), and that he was the great-grandfather of Noah (see Gen. 5:21-29). We also know that Enoch was a prophet of God in the seventh generation from Adam (Jude 14) and that he is found in the genealogy of Christ on Joseph's side in Luke 3 (see Luke 3:23-38, especially verse 37). So little is known about Enoch that we can quote all the Bible has to say about him in the short passages that follow, along with the passage quoted above.

"And Enoch lived sixty-five years, and became the father of Methuselah. Then Enoch walked with God three hundred years after he became the father of Methuselah, and he had other sons and daughters. So all the days of Enoch were three hundred and sixty-five years. And Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him." (Gen. 5:21-24 NAS)

"And about these also Enoch, in the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied, saying, 'Behold, the Lord came with many thousands of His holy ones, to execute judgment upon all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their ungodly deeds which they have done in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.'" (Jude 14-15 NAS)

What can we learn from these passages? To be more specific, what can we learn about the faith of Enoch? The answer is more than is first apparent.

The Hebrew writer in Heb. 11:5 tells us, "by faith Enoch was taken up." (NAS) Paul tells us, “So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of God." (Rom. 10:17 NKJV) The NAS (New American Standard) translation has "word of Christ" here rather than "word of God" but it is hard to see that that makes any difference since Jesus is the Word (see John 1:1, 14) and the Word was God (John 1:1). Enoch's faith then had to be, as does that of all men, based on God's word. By that, I mean he had to have heard from God to have faith (Rom. 10:17).

We do not know how much God communicated his will to those of ancient times, pre-flood days in the case of Enoch, but we know enough to know from Rom. 1:18-21 that man was "without excuse" (Rom. 1:20 NAS) as it relates to sin, and we know man was sinning. Man had grown wicked in pre-flood days. "Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually." (Gen. 6:5 NAS)

Read in context it is clear that Enoch's prophecy, as recorded in Jude 14 and 15, was applicable not just to the people of his day but for all people from his time forward until Judgment Day. When the Lord comes again he is going to execute judgment "upon all," which is exactly what the text says, and he is going to convict "all the ungodly" regardless of when they lived.

Mankind had enough knowledge of God in Enoch's time, and before and afterwards, to live in a way that would please God. Enoch, being a prophet, was an inspired man. God used prophets in those early days to communicate his will to early man, at least in part. Luke 1:70 and Acts 3:21 both indicate that there have been prophets since the beginning of time (see KJV or NKJV, see also Luke 11:50 in any version). If you read Luke 11:49-51, you see Abel listed as a prophet, which is easily overlooked.

Enoch knew God's will. He heard the words of God and spoke them as a prophet. His faith was in God by means of what God spoke to him which is to say, as Paul said, "faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." (Rom. 10:17 NKJV) God spoke, and Enoch believed. Without word from God, Enoch could only have known that God existed, that he had great power, knowledge, and understanding.

But we can learn even more from the few scriptures we have on Enoch. It is said Enoch pleased God (Heb. 11:5) and Enoch "walked with God" (Gen. 5:24 NASU).  To please God, one must walk with God. How does one do that? The Bible tells us that Zacharias and Elizabeth, his wife, the parents of John the Baptist, "were both righteous in the sight of God, walking blamelessly in all the commandments and requirements of the Lord." (Luke 1:6 NASU) Zacharias and Elizabeth lived under the Law of Moses, Enoch did not. That aside, how could Enoch please God the way he did and walk with God, which the Bible says he did, unless he obeyed the commands God gave him just as Zacharias and Elizabeth did?

Someone might object and say he walked by faith. Certainly, he did but how does one walk by faith? Is it possible for a man to walk by faith while actively and willfully disobeying God’s word? I cannot walk with God unless I have determined to go down the road he leads me down. If on that road he says stop (gives a command) I must obey. If he says turn right I must turn right. If he says slow down I must slow down. In other words, I cannot walk with God if I do not allow him to lead me and I follow along in accord with his directions, or put another way, in accord with “his commands.”

Faith in God, the Old Testament often calls this trust, manifests itself in obedience. Years after Enoch the children of Israel were given the Promised Land but the generation who were originally set to receive it, those who came out of Egyptian bondage led by Moses, were not able to enter in, and why not? Because they were not willing to obey and enter and fight for the land, even with God assuring them of victory. And why were they not willing? Because of a lack of faith.

"And to whom did He swear that they should not enter His rest, but to those who were disobedient? And so we see that they were not able to enter because of unbelief." (Heb. 3:18-19 NAS) If you turn to this passage and read it in context you see clearly that this is a direct reference to the children of Israel and their failure to enter into the Promised Land. The passage teaches us that faith would have led to obedience, just as a lack of faith (unbelief) led to disobedience. So what is the point? It is this--faith and obedience to God's commands cannot be separated.

When one is unwilling to obey God, or just is negligent in doing so, it is a manifestation of a lack of what the Bible calls faith or belief. If we truly believed strongly enough that God said what he meant and meant what he said, we would not be hesitant to obey but would obey readily and promptly. In doing so we would be walking with God and pleasing God as Enoch did.

Much of Christendom is today guilty of disbelief while calling it faith. Faith is more than just what is in your mind. The faith that leads to one's salvation is coupled with obedience and cannot be uncoupled. You obey because you believe, you disobey because you disbelieve, or just do not believe strongly enough to obey.

Now, what is it that must be believed if one is to walk with God? Eve believed the serpent's lie, his deception. One cannot just believe anything and everything. The apostle John, in 2 John 4, tells us what we need to believe. "I was very glad to find some of your children walking in truth, just as we have received commandment to do from the Father." (2 John 1:4 NASU) One must believe the truth if one is to walk in the truth, as John says we are commanded to do; thus, what must be believed is the truth.

Why will men perish? The answer is "because they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved." (2 Thess. 2:10 NASU) Jesus, in his John 17 prayer to the Father, said, "Thy word is truth." (John 17:17 KJV) When the Bible says Enoch walked with God do you think he walked in truth? He walked by God’s word.

John says just a little later, "And this is love, that we walk according to his commandments." (2 John 1:6 NASU) Do you think Enoch walked with God without walking according to the commandments God gave him? Do you think it would even be possible to walk with God without walking according to his commandments? Does not this passage teach that without commandment keeping there is no love? Many complain that strictness in commandment keeping is legalism, an attempt to be saved by works. John teaches that it is love. “For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments.” (1 John 5:3 NAS)

The point is not that Enoch was a perfect commandment keeper or law keeper for "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Rom. 3:23 NASU) and "there is none righteous, not even one." (Rom. 3:10 NASU) The point is that one cannot walk with God, or walk or live by faith, without believing enough in God to believe he knows best, better than you or me, and thus trust him enough to make a genuine good faith effort to obey him thus manifesting our faith in him. It is simply letting God be God, letting him be the ruler and taking our rightful place as bond servants of his. We obey because our faith leads us to that. Only then has God become in our hearts the God that lives in the heart. Only then does he rule within us.

So the truth is we can know quite a bit more about Enoch and his faith than what first appears to be the case. We too ought to try and please God and walk with God just as Enoch did lest we fall into the camp of those he prophesied against--the ungodly who do ungodly deeds, or put another way, the disobedient.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

Faith That Does Not Avail

The Bible teaches there is a type of faith in Jesus that does not avail. Unfortunately, this is a faith that is prevalent among many. These are people who are decent in most respects, people who believe they are saved. They do believe that Jesus is the Son of God but they are irreligious. They do not attend worship services; they never read the scriptures; the good works they do are not done because of anything God said but rather because it seems good to them. They believe faith (alone) will save them. There is more to saving faith than just believing in Jesus, believing that he is the Son of God.

If faith alone, defined as believing that Jesus is the Son of God, could save by itself then even the demons would be saved for James says, "even the demons believe--and tremble!" (James 2:19 NKJV) What they believed was that there was one God but by studying the gospel accounts one also knows they believed in Jesus as the Son of God for they often confessed him. One such example is Mark 3:11, "And whenever the unclean spirits beheld Him, they would fall down before Him and cry out, saying, 'You are the Son of God!' " (NAS)

Another example is found in Luke 4:33-34 (NAS), "And there was a man in the synagogue possessed by the spirit of an unclean demon, and he cried out with a loud voice, 'Ha! What do we have to do with You, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are--the Holy One of God!'"

Yet another example is Luke 5:41 (NAS), "And demons also were coming out of many, crying out and saying, 'You are the Son of God!' And rebuking them, He would not allow them to speak, because they knew Him to be the Christ."

But, it is not just demons that have faith that has not availed. John 12:42 proves beyond doubt there is a faith that lacks value. "Nevertheless many even of the rulers believed in him, but because of the Pharisees they were not confessing him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue; for they loved the approval of men rather than the approval of God." (NAS) Would you say these believers were saved?

In the late chapters of the book of Acts, we find Paul being examined by one official after another on his way to Rome after being put in custody in Jerusalem. One of the first of these was Felix, the Governor. It is said of Felix that he had "a more exact knowledge about the Way," a reference to Christianity, (Acts 24:22 NAS). Then in verses 23-26, "And he gave orders to the centurion for him to be kept in custody and yet have some freedom, and not to prevent any of his friends from ministering to him. But some days later, Felix arrived with Drusilla, his wife who was a Jewess, and sent for Paul, and heard him speak about faith in Christ Jesus. And as he was discussing righteousness, self-control and the judgment to come, Felix became frightened and said, 'Go away for the present, and when I find time, I will summon you.' " (NAS)

Paul preached faith in Christ Jesus and things that are entailed in that. If Felix did not believe why was he frightened? Did the faith of Felix save him? He evidently believed.

In the Parable of the Sower you find two of the four types of men who hear the word and believe and yet end up being condemned. Luke 8:13-14 (NAS), "And those on the rocky soil are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no firm root; they believe for a while, and in time of temptation fall away. And the seed which fell among the thorns, these are the ones who have heard, and as they go on their way they are choked with worries and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to maturity.”

In verse thirteen Jesus says specifically that these people believe. Are they saved? How about that class of believers represented by the seed that fell among the thorns? Are they saved? The Bible clearly teaches men can be believers and yet remain unsaved. They have the faith that does not avail and not the faith that saves.

In the New Testament, the word "faith" and its synonyms can be and are used from time to time as a figure of speech called a synecdoche. What is a synecdoche? It is where one puts the part to represent the whole. In speaking of salvation, when it is said one is saved by faith and nothing else is mentioned, then it is understood that faith is used in an all-inclusive sense to include everything that naturally follows from the belief.

In his book entitled Hermeneutics, D. R. Dungan says, in discussing synecdoches, "This is many times the case with the salvation of sinners. The whole number of conditions is indicated by the use of one. Generally, the first one is mentioned-that of faith-because without it nothing else could follow." (Page 305)

Faith is the basis of Christianity. Surely, a man lacking faith in Jesus will not be concerned with obeying Jesus or keeping his commandments so why proceed with anything else? There is no reason to until faith is first established. But, when faith by itself is mentioned as the saving factor it is a use of the word as a synecdoche. It includes everything that flows from a living faith and is far more than mere mental assent or belief. When the word faith is used as a synecdoche in the New Testament it is a reference to saving faith.

There are two types of faith--the kind that leads a person to take action on his beliefs (a living faith) versus the kind that is merely mental assent (a dead faith). The latter kind can never save. James says, "But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless?" (James 2:20 NAS) Later, he says, "Faith without works is dead." (James 2:26 NAS) Thus James confirms what has been said all along in this article--there is a kind of faith that leads to destruction.

When the Bible talks about being saved by faith it is talking about the kind of faith that has works (works of obedience), the kind of faith where the word faith is used to stand for and represent everything that Christ requires of us (the word "faith" or "believe" used as a synecdoche). We are told what does avail in Gal. 5:6, “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but faith working by love.” (NKJV) Faith cannot just set in one’s mind but must act. Act on what? Act on what God’s word directs you to do.

The faith that saves goes beyond obedience to just commandments that are pleasing to us. The faith that saves is willing to do whatever Jesus says and sometimes that can be tough. We live in a type of Christian environment today, if you want to call it that, that has rationalized every sin away. They tell you why this passage no longer applies to us today, why that one does not, and on and on it goes. They believe what they want to believe and discount the rest of scripture. Their faith is of the mental assent kind.

Jesus is "the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him." (Heb. 5:9 NKJV) "If you love Me, keep My commandments." (John 14:15 NKJV) "He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me." (John 14:21 NKJV) "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word." (John 14:23 NKJV) "He who does not love Me does not keep My words." (John 14:24 NKJV) Can a man have faith and go to heaven and yet not love Jesus? "If anyone does not love the Lord, let him be accursed. Maranatha." (1 Cor. 16:22 NAS) That does not sound like such a man is saved to me.

The faith that saves is not a smorgasbord where one can go in and pick this or that, as you choose, to believe and obey. One must believe and obey all that Jesus taught directly or through the word of inspiration as found in the New Testament scriptures. Saving faith is faith working through love.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

The Silence of the Scriptures

 From a book entitled A Short History of Christianity by Stephen Tomkins I quote as follows:  "The basic difference between Zwingli and Luther was in their attitudes to the Bible.  Zwingli saw it as a precise blueprint for church life.  For Luther, what is not forbidden is permitted; for Zwingli, what is not permitted is forbidden." (page 141)  Both Zwingli and Luther lived in the Age of Reformation, often referred to as the Protestant Reformation, and both men were leading figures in its beginnings.

The subject of this article is the issue that separated Luther from Zwingli, namely, the silence of the scriptures.  While I will be concentrating primarily on issues related to worship practices in this article the principles enunciated extend beyond what happens inside the doors where we meet for worship weekly.  Does the silence of the scriptures permit a practice or forbid it in Christianity?

This can only be answered by an appeal to the scriptures to which we will go but before doing so it would be good to make the point that some have answered this question without an appeal to scripture at all.  Authority within the Roman Catholic Church, for example, resides in the church itself, the Magisterium, not in scripture.  However, I suppose, if one was forced to put them in either Luther’s camp or Zwingli’s camp they would have to be placed with Luther.

When one takes the position Luther took one cannot complain too much, and be consistent, about wild innovations in the church.  If what is not forbidden is permitted then pretty much anything goes.  On what basis could you forbid it? 

But what do the scriptures teach for those desiring to know?  If there was only one passage one could use to settle this debate as it relates to worship it would be for me John 4:24, "God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth." (NKJV)  It is easy to overlook a very important word in this passage, the word "must."  That means neither you nor I have any choice in the matter.  It is we "must."  It is the only worship God will accept, that which is in spirit and truth, or else the word "must" is a word without meaning.

We know what is meant when we are told we must worship in spirit.  I think we all agree about the meaning of that part of the passage.  That leaves only the word truth and the question about that only revolves around what is truth, where it’s found, and how you can know it.  The Bible tells us. 

"Truth came through Jesus Christ." (John 1:17 NKJV)  Whatever Jesus spoke was "truth."  In prayer to the Father, Jesus said, in John 17:17, "Your word is truth." (NKJV)  The words Jesus spoke, whatever, wherever, to whomever were truth.  He spoke the words the Father had given him.  Hear Jesus, “I have not spoken on my own, but the Father himself who sent me has given me a command to say everything I have said.”  (John 12:49 CSB)  And, again, “I speak just as the Father has told me.” (John 12:50 CSB)

All the words of the New Testament, red letter or not, are the words of Jesus, the words of God the Father, the words of truth.  After Jesus’ death and ascension, when the Holy Spirit was given to men, the Holy Spirit did not speak independently of Jesus and the Father.  Jesus referred to the Spirit calling him “the Spirit of truth.” (John 14:17, 15:26 NKJV)

Jesus further speaking of the Holy Spirit said, “He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come.  He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you.  All things that the Father has are Mine.  Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you.” (John16:13-15 NKJV)

To worship in truth, then, involves worshiping by the word of God.  That means, and it seems so obvious that I do not see how men overlook it, that if there is no word from God there is no truth in matters religious.  If God has not spoken on a practice how does man practice that thing, whatever it be, and say he is worshiping in truth?

Additionally, how can we have faith in a worship practice if there is no word from God when “faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.” (Rom.10:17 NKJV)  And, again, “Whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus.” (Col. 3:17 NKJV)  If there is no word from Jesus (God) how do you practice an activity in worship “in the name of the Lord Jesus”?  Perhaps it would be more accurate to say we are doing it in our own name.

There is such a thing as the teachings of men.  Listen to Jesus again, "Hypocrites!  Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying: …'And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.' " (Matt. 15:7-9 NKJV)  Paul says in Titus we are to not give heed "to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth." (Titus 1:14 NKJV)  A worship practice that does not have a book, chapter, and verse for it in God’s word is a commandment of men, an invention of men, and is certainly not worship in truth for if it was book, chapter, and verse could be provided.

Now I know many are with Luther on this—if a practice or act is not specifically forbidden then it’s permitted.  If he was right then truth, God’s word, does not matter and one can on his own authority, manmade and man-given, institute worship according to one's desire.

Paul's rebuke of the Corinthians regarding the Lord's Supper provides further evidence that what is not clearly revealed in scripture is prohibited.  The Corinthians had been taught about the Lord's Supper or else they would not have been observing it, correctly or incorrectly.  Furthermore, Paul comes right out and tells us they had been taught when he says, "For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you." (1 Cor. 11:23 NKJV)  That is past tense.  Since he had last met with them they had obviously made some changes in the way they were partaking of the supper.  I ask—on whose authority did they do so? 

Note the principle Paul is establishing.  He is telling the Corinthians to do what you are told to do by inspiration and do not make changes, or additions, or subtractions.  To do so is to change the word of God and is to go outside of truth for one's worship.

In the book of Deuteronomy, we find Moses addressing the children of Israel, acting as God's spokesperson.  Hear what he has to say, "You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you." (Deut. 4:2 NKJV)  Upon what evidence do you think that principle has changed today?  Do you think that today God does not mind us adding to his word or taking from it?

We recognize the principle of silence being prohibitive in human wills and legal documents.  Why do we not recognize the same principle in the last will and testament of our Lord and Savior, the New Testament?  What was left out of that will was left out for a reason.

If a doctor writes you a prescription for drug X then you cannot use it to get drug Y in addition to drug X.  The silence of the prescription prohibits that.  And there is no substitution unless it is specifically written on the prescription that is allowed, normally to a generic.  Silence has meaning.  Silence prohibits and does not authorize.  It is impossible to gain authority from silence.

The police need a search warrant to search your home.  That warrant does not give them the legal right to search your neighbor's home.  Why not?  Because the warrant is silent, it does not speak about your neighbor's house.  You cannot have faith in silence no matter how strongly you may feel about what ought to be.  Our faith must be in what is written, not in the unsaid.

We cannot change what is written in the New Testament (the guide for Christians and Christ's last will and testament).  If we add to it we do so without having the authority to do so and thus do so as men using man's authority, not God's.  If we take away from what is written, ignoring it, then we may as well take a pair of scissors and cut it out of the biblical text.  Who would dare do that?  There is a Day of Judgment when men must stand before God and tampering with his word is not something you want to do when you contemplate that fearful day. 

A practical application of all of this, because it is such a widespread practice, is that of the use of instrumental music in worship.  It was allowed under the Law of Moses.  Why?  Because there was word from God commanding it (see 2 Chron. 29:25).  It is prohibited, even though commonly practiced, under the law of Christ (Gal. 6:2, 1 Cor. 9:21) under which we live today.  Why?  There is no command for it.  The scriptures are silent.  You can only bring it into New Testament worship by adding to the words of Christ.

The secular history of the church is such that it can be proven instrumental music was not used in the New Testament church for a few hundred years after the first century.  Most historians date it to the late seventh century.  The Jews were a people well versed in the use of harps and other musical instruments.  One must ask why Jewish Christians did not use them in the earliest years of the church.  I think the answer is self-evident. 

I close this by reiterating what I have already said.  If the silence of the scriptures allows freedom to do as we please there is no end to the man-made innovations that men can dream up and bring into the church.  Who can believe we can do anything and everything with God’s approval?

[To download this article or print it out click here.]