Things God Cannot Do

The Bible teaches that there are things God cannot do. Why not? It is certainly not because he lacks the power or knowledge, but it's a matter of who he is, his character. We can understand that. There are things you and I could do, but our character would never allow it. I thought it would be good to use an online Bible concordance for the New King James Version and type in the word "cannot" and see what came up. I was interested only in those things God cannot do. Here is the list I compiled.

(1) God says in Isa. 1:13, "I cannot endure iniquity and the sacred meeting." (NKJV) Prior to this verse God speaking through Isaiah says of his people that they "have rebelled against me." (Isa. 1:2 NKJV) A couple of verses later they are referred to as a "sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a brood of evildoers, children who are corrupters!" (Isa 1:4 NKJV) They were up to their necks in sin of all kinds and yet were still offering sacrifices to God (V. 11) and observing the assemblies (v. 13). They were a people full of hypocrisy.

God cannot endure worship directed to him when those offering it are full of sin that they are unrepentant of. Living a life of sinful indulgence and disregard for God's word did not please God then, nor will it now, no matter how much playing church we do. Acceptable worship to God must be from a life of faithful living in spirit and truth.

We see what God cannot endure nearly everywhere we look if we have eyes to see. As an example, it is common to see congregations in which there are unscripturally divorced and remarried couples, couples living in adultery by the Bible definition, that are members in good standing. I personally knew of a man who left his wife of, I am told, 37 years, for another woman, married this woman, and now attends another congregation which seemed to accept him and her with open arms, unrepentant. It is also common to hear on the news of churches welcoming homosexual pastors or priests, as they call them. If you know anything about the Bible, you know God condemns homosexuality (1 Cor. 6:9-10). These are just a couple of examples, but God is still saying, "I cannot endure iniquity and the sacred meeting." (Isa. 1:13 NKJV)

(2) Habakkuk says of God in Hab. 1:13, "You are of purer eyes than to behold evil, and cannot look on wickedness." Obviously, God sees or knows the wickedness of man; otherwise, how could he judge man? "There is no creature hidden from his sight, but all things are naked and open to the eyes of him to whom we must give account." (Heb. 4:13 NKJV) The Psalmist tells us in speaking of God that "he knows the secrets of the heart." (Psalms 44:21 NKJV) So, there is no hiding wickedness from God, even wickedness in the heart. Habakkuk is saying in this passage that God cannot tolerate or endure wickedness or sin.

What is the message for today? "Whatever a man sows, that he will also reap. For he who sows to his flesh will of the flesh reap corruption, but he who sows to the Spirit will of the Spirit reap everlasting life." (Gal. 6:7-8 NKJV) "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad." (2 Cor. 5:10 NKJV) "Tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek." (Rom. 2:9 NKJV)

The fact that God does not punish men on the spot and immediately for their sin does not mean he has not seen it or has overlooked it. If it seems we have gotten by with it, it is only because God is "longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance." (2 Peter 3:9 NKJV) There will be a day of accounting. God "cannot look on wickedness." It is impossible for him to accept it.

(3) "God cannot be tempted by evil." (James 1:13 NKJV) This is just a straightforward statement of fact. The lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life tempt men, not God. God is spirit. The same passage tells us that God tempts no one.

What does this mean that God cannot be tempted by evil? It means God will not lie to me, he will not cheat me, he will do me no wrong at all, for that would be evil, the thing God cannot be tempted to do. It means God cannot be bribed or bought off, for that would be evil. Evil, by its nature, is absent from God. It means, as we are told in many places in scripture, that God is good.

Yes, there will be problems that enter my life, but they will be for my growth and improvement. "Brethren, count it all joy when you fall into various trials, knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience. But let patience have its perfect work, that you may be perfect and complete lacking nothing." (James 1:2-4 NKJV) "He himself has said, 'I will never leave you nor forsake you.'" (Heb. 13:5 NKJV)

(4) God "cannot lie." (Titus 1:2 NKJV) Titus tells us this in connection with a promise God has made to his people--the promise of eternal life. This is a great comfort and hope as time goes by in our lives and we see ourselves growing older. We know some day we must leave this world for the great unknown, but God has given a promise, and he cannot lie; there is such a thing as eternal life. What a joyous thought and hope.

But we must also remember that when we are told that God cannot lie, it pertains to everything God has said. We cannot choose what parts of the Bible we want to believe and obey. God cannot lie about anything he has said. If he has given a commandment you or I do not like, we must remember God was not lying when he gave us the commandment. He meant for it to be kept and obeyed. Next time you read a commandment that is hard to accept, ask yourself this question: Is God lying about this? Does he mean it?

Today, men and women are living in disobedience to plain commandments of God because in their minds, he will not care, he did not mean it for us today, he knows times have changed. In other words, God did not mean what he said and will not count our disobedience against us as sin. We need to remember the words of Jesus, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God." (Matt. 4:4 NKJV) We ought to emphasize from that passage the phrase "every word." God "cannot lie."

(5) God "cannot deny himself." (2 Tim. 2:13 NKJV) Taken in the context in which this passage is found, the entire verse reads as follows: "If we are faithless, he remains faithful; he cannot deny himself." This is very similar to the previous passage from Titus telling us God cannot lie. To be faithful means we keep our word. For God not to do this would make him unfaithful, and he would be denying himself, denying what he had previously told us.

This really means that you and I can take God's word to the bank, as the old saying goes. It is good as gold, better than gold. There is no possibility of a failure or fault to be found with it. We need to have confidence in the word of God, for without it, when doubts start entering in, sin and falling away are not far behind. Jesus says, "The scripture cannot be broken." (John 10:35 NKJV) God cannot deny himself.

It is wonderful to know the things God can do, but it is also wonderful to learn there are things God cannot, will not, do.

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

Did it Really Happen—What Jesus Says

One cannot claim he has faith in a man and yet doubt that man's veracity. Our only choice is to believe what a man says or disbelieve it. Such is the case with Jesus. We either believe in Jesus as a man whose word can be trusted or disbelieve him, consider his word as unreliable; it is either one or the other. If his word is at times unreliable, you never know when to believe him and when not to. He cannot be fully trusted.

This article comes as a result of a sermon I heard in which the preacher made the comment that with many people today, everything in the Bible is seen as figurative or symbolic and thus not to be taken at face value. To be specific, everything that seems incredible, the miraculous, is simply the use of figurative speech to make a spiritual point; thus, when scripture is looked at in this way, one does not have to deal with the supernatural in the affairs of men for the simple reason that the supernatural never happened.

Viewing scripture this way presents some very real problems for many of the things people wish to deny Jesus declared to be factual. The problem then becomes, do you believe Jesus or do you think he lied or, at the very least, was mistaken. I thought it would be good to compile a list of some of the things Jesus spoke of in such a way as to confirm their reality.

The listing was compiled by starting in Matthew and just taking events in the order in which I found them in a red-letter edition of the New Testament. Thus, the reason we start with Sodom and Gomorrah is that it was the first confirmation I came to of an Old Testament miraculous event as I ran my finger up and down the pages of Matthew, then Mark, Luke, and John in order, seeking passages where Jesus confirmed Old Testament miracles—Matt. 10:15. I quote the Luke passage, for it is more in-depth than Matthew, but I will include what Matthew quotes Jesus saying as well.

(1) Jesus confirms Sodom and Gomorrah and what happened there, saying, "Likewise as it was also in the days of Lot: They ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built; but on the day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all." (Luke 17:28-29 NKJV) "Assuredly, I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city!" (Matt. 10:15 NKJV) The words Jesus spoke confirm what the Old Testament had to say about Sodom and Gomorrah. Did Jesus lie? Can one believe the Bible account of Sodom and Gomorrah?

The Bible says, "the men of Sodom were exceedingly wicked and sinful against the Lord." (Gen. 13:13 NKJV) In Gen. 18:20, Gomorrah is included with Sodom as a place whose "sin is very grievous." (Gen 18:20 NKJV) In Gen. 19:5, we see the nature of their sin. Two angels came to Lot (Gen. 19:1), but their appearance was that of men (Gen. 19:5). The men of Sodom came to Lot and insisted that he "bring them out to us that we may know them carnally." (Gen. 19:5 NKJV) They were engaged in homosexuality, men with men engaging in unseemly sexual acts.

One cannot be an advocate of gay marriage and be a faithful Christian, not if he or she believes the Bible. In 1 Cor. 6:9-10, in the New Testament, not the old, Paul, speaking by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, gives a list of those who "will not inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Cor. 6:9 NKJV) and says "do not be deceived" (1 Cor. 6:9 NKJV) about it. In that list, we find "homosexuals" and "sodomites." (1 Cor. 6:9 NKJV)

Did Jesus lie about Sodom and Gomorrah? Do you believe what he said?

(2) Jesus confirms the story of, as he calls him, "the prophet Jonah." (Matt. 12:39 NKJV) "But He answered and said to them, 'An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.'" (Matt. 12:39-40 NKJV)

Many people do not believe the story of Jonah, but Jesus says it happened. They think that a man could not survive in the belly of a giant fish for three days and nights, but the reason they reject it is that they discount the supernatural. They think scientifically that such a thing could not happen. My answer to that would be, of course not. Clearly, it is a supernatural event out of the norm, but the biblical text tells us as much.

This was no ordinary fish for the Bible says, "the Lord had prepared a great fish to swallow Jonah." (Jonah 1:17 NKJV) God made this giant fish for a specific purpose, put it in a specific location at just the right time, to do a specific task (swallow Jonah), and designed him in such a way that a man could survive inside him. Jesus said this happened. Did Jesus lie? Do you believe him?

Can we believe in Jesus, a supernatural being having no earthly father, and then say supernatural events have never happened, that miracles are just fairy tales? If the miraculous is always to be rejected, then who can believe in the virgin birth of Christ and/or his resurrection? How can we believe in our own resurrection if we do not believe in the miraculous?

Even if evolution were true, would that not also be just as much mind-boggling as the Bible's creation account? Both are beyond the realm of human reason and understanding, both incomprehensible by the human mind. Evolution is a mathematical impossibility and thus would be just as much a miracle as anything the Bible speaks of. Evolution has life evolving from non-living matter. If true, is that not a miracle? Both the evolutionist and the creationist believe in miracles, but one will admit as much while the other refuses to acknowledge it.

(3) Jesus confirms man's creation and Adam and Eve. “And He answered and said to them, 'Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning "made them male and female," and said, "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh"?'" (Matt. 19:4-5 NKJV) Thus man was a creation of God and did not evolve. There was a beginning, and at that time human beings, male and female, were created by God.

Please note Jesus says you can read about this, "have you not read." (Matt. 19:4 NKJV) Thus, Jesus confirms the account given in Genesis of the creation.

Jesus further confirms the account of Adam and Eve as being real people and not mythological when he confirms the life and death of Abel. Since Abel was the son of Adam and Eve, if there is no Adam and no Eve, then there is no Abel. "Therefore, indeed, I send you prophets, wise men, and scribes: some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city, that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar." (Matt. 23:34-35 NKJV) Jesus says Abel died a righteous man; thus, Abel did indeed live, the son of Adam and Eve.

If Adam and Eve were mythological instead of living human beings, the question arises how about Abel? Was Abel also mythological? At what point in time do we move in the biblical account from mythological beings to actual living human beings? Jesus teaches that there was no mythology to it.

(4) Jesus confirms the flood account. "But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be." (Matt. 24:37-39 NKJV) Jesus says there was a flood, a man named Noah, and an ark. Who was taken away in the flood? Jesus says "took them all away" thus it was a universal flood. God said to Noah, "the end of all flesh has come before me." (Gen. 6:13 NKJV) Those who want a local flood only have to deal with these passages. Was Jesus a liar? Were only a part of them, a part of all flesh, taken away? Do you believe Jesus told the truth?

(5) Jesus confirms the burning bush incident. "But concerning the dead, that they rise, have you not read in the book of Moses, in the burning bush passage, how God spoke to him, saying, 'I AM THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, THE GOD OF ISAAC, AND THE GOD OF JACOB'?" (Mark 12:26 NKJV) This was the bush that burned with fire but was not consumed (Exodus 3:2-3). A bush that burns with fire and yet is not consumed is a miracle. Jesus is saying the passage is legitimate and is putting his stamp of approval on the account being a matter of factual history.

(6) Jesus confirms the miraculous feeding of the widow in Zarephath and her son in 1 Kings 17 for approximately 3 years and 6 months. When Elijah met her she had but barely enough food for that single day for herself and son (see 1 Kings 17:12) but Elijah speaks to her word from the Lord, "The bin of flour shall not be used up, nor shall the jar of oil run dry, until the day the LORD sends rain on the earth." (1 Kings 17:14 NKJV) That ended up being nearly 3 years and 6 months (see Luke 4:25).

Here is what Jesus said about that, confirming it as a real event, "But I tell you truly, many widows were in Israel in the days of Elijah, when the heaven was shut up three years and six months, and there was a great famine throughout all the land; but to none of them was Elijah sent except to Zarephath, in the region of Sidon, to a woman who was a widow." (Luke 4:25-26 NKJV)

(7) Jesus confirms the miraculous healing from leprosy of Naaman. "And many lepers were in Israel in the time of Elisha the prophet, and none of them was cleansed except Naaman the Syrian." (Luke 4:27 NKJV) You remember Naaman was told by the prophet Elisha to dip 7 times in the river Jordan (1 Kings 5:10) and he would be cleansed. After hesitating, he finally did so and was cleansed. We have Jesus here confirming another Old Testament miracle.

(8) Jesus confirms Lot's wife being turned into a pillar of salt. He says, "Remember Lot's wife." (Luke 17:32 NKJV) What is to remember about her if she did not turn into a pillar of salt upon disobeying God (Gen. 19:17, 29)? That is the very thing we are to remember lest we too disobey.

I ask do you believe what Jesus taught? Do you believe the things he said about the events I have listed above? If you doubt them, you question Jesus' veracity. How can you believe Jesus is Lord and Savior and yet doubt his word, for to doubt his word is to doubt him? If Jesus is prone to fairy tales, then how do you know what to believe or think?

Why would we expect God to be held in rein by science, by naturalistic processes, when God, by definition, is outside and above the natural world, for he is the one who, if he does exist (I do not doubt that he does), created it all? He who created nature is not bound by what he created. The creation does not reign over the creator. The creator has not created a thing more powerful than himself, a thing he cannot intervene in and change to suit his purposes.

If you or I build a house, do we not have the power to take that house and remodel it? Why then cannot God intervene miraculously in the affairs of nature and of mankind, of which he created both, to suit his own purposes? Why does supernatural intervention surprise us to the point that we deny that it can happen? We deny miracles?

Those who doubt generally do not want to believe. They do not search for God. They are running from faith because they do not want to believe, for belief would mean being bound by God and his commandments, which limit our freedom to do as we please, and I add, as we all know, we are all inclined to do what we want to, to do what pleases us. It is our human nature.

Even among religious people in Christendom, many have doubts about various passages in the Bible, but why? I think the root of the matter is that doubt allows us the freedom to build our own unique version of Christianity to suit ourselves. If we cannot trust the Bible completely, then we get to build the Bible (the doctrines and commandments) that most pleases us. It allows one to have a smorgasbord religion where one can pick and choose rather than just take what God has served up. We like the meal we would prepare better than the one God has prepared. It is a liberal brand of Christianity, but by design to meet a purpose—to live life the way we desire. 

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

Isaiah (Chapter 1) For Today

                     (I post this in the year 2026 but it was written years ago like most of the articles here.)

Paul says, in Rom. 15:4, “For whatever things were written before were written for our learning” (NKJV) as he writes to the Christians in Rome (Rom. 1:7 NKJV). The prophetic book of Isaiah, written hundreds of years before Christ, can teach us much about God—who he is, his nature, what pleases him, what displeases him, how he feels, his thoughts, his sense of justice, etc. I think most of us would like to know God better, and Isaiah gives us that opportunity. There are lessons for the church, God’s people, found in the very first chapter of Isaiah.

As Isaiah chapter one opens (Isa. 1:1), we learn of a vision Isaiah saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem, God’s people in that Old Testament time period. We must remember that we Christians are God’s people today, so in terms of broad principles at least, versus specific laws, there is application for us as well as for those who lived back then. Here are some of the lessons found in the first chapter.

(1) God’s people can cease to know him or understand him. “The ox knows its owner and the donkey its master’s crib; but Israel does not know, my people do not consider.” (Isa. 1:3 NKJV) Under the Law of Moses, a child was born a Jew, a child of God, by physical birth. He/she would have to grow into a knowledge of God and his will as they grew and matured and were taught. Under the Christian dispensation, one cannot become a child of God, a Christian, without first having obtained a knowledge of Christ. “No one can come to me (Christ--DS) unless the Father who sent me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day. It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught by God.’ Therefore, everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me.” (John 6:44-45 NKJV)

However, I do not believe Isaiah is talking about an ignorance of God, like I might have an ignorance of chemistry or of physics, but rather a rejection of him based on the idea that things do not matter to God. They had gradually, and it seems almost totally, drifted away from God in their belief that what he had said mattered, or that he really cared, about the things he had told them, through the law and the prophets.

Here is the great lesson for the church and individual Christians today. Have you ever heard it said, “I know what it (reference to the word of God) says, but … .” I have heard it. I wonder if people in Isaiah’s day were saying that sort of thing. I once knew a lady who was gung-ho on women preachers. Paul said, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man.” (1 Tim. 2:12 NKJV) What an inspired preacher had to say about the subject did not matter to her. She rejected Paul but would have argued all day with you that she believed the Bible.

The Jews of Isaiah’s day had recreated God in their own image. He would become the God they wanted him to be. We must be very careful today lest we do the same thing. When we begin to say things like "that was then, this is now, we have to adapt the Bible to modern times," etc., we are starting to travel a dangerous road. Who is the man who is qualified to tell us what changes need to be made in the Christian faith and practice of today versus that of the first century, as found in the pages of the New Testament? Many feel they are qualified, for they are busy telling us all the time what is allowable today, even though unheard of in the New Testament. However, I have always been wary of blind guides leading the blind. That men have created their own brand of Christianity today to suit themselves is found in the fact that there are hundreds, if not thousands, of denominations. They all argue they know God. Do you believe it?

Reminds me of the church of the Laodiceans in Rev. 3:14-19 in that Jesus said of them, "Because you say, ‘I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing’ – and do not know that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked-." (Rev. 3:17 NKJV) The fact that an individual or a church calls itself Christian and feels good about itself amounts to about two cents if that much. The measuring stick is not man nor men nor how they feel or think, but the word of God. Even Sardis had a name, but Jesus said they were dead (Rev. 3:1); the majority of them, like the people in Isaiah’s day, had defiled their garments (Rev. 3:4).

There is only one way to know and understand God. One must become a faithful and diligent student of the word of God, not just an occasional and casual reader. One must believe what he reads, which involves not only faith in facts that are presented but a trust in God and his promises. One must act upon what he has learned, which is to say he must be obedient to it and that from the heart. To know and understand God is to accept God as God, which means God is over me. In Isaiah’s day, God had been forsaken and despised (Isa. 1:4 ESV), for what he had taught no longer mattered. A person or a group’s attitude toward the word of God can tell you a lot about them.

(2) People who reject God may still hold worship services, but do so in vain. If one will read Isa. 1:11-15, it becomes clear that the people were still offering sacrifices, burnt offerings, incense, holding to the appointed feasts, observing the Sabbaths, etc. These were divinely given acts of worship, but God was not pleased, for neither the heart nor the life was right in the worshipers.

God says, “I cannot endure iniquity and solemn assembly.” (Isa. 1:13 ESV) He says their incense “is an abomination to me.” (Isa. 1:13 ESV) Of the new moons and the appointed feasts, he says he hates them (Isa. 1:14).

Worship is not acceptable to God that does not first come from a life of purity based on belief in and obedience to God through his word. Please do not let my use of the word purity mislead you into thinking perfection. Perfection is the goal, but while man can obtain maturity in the Christian life, he cannot obtain perfection in the sense in which we use the word today. The idea Isaiah presents to us is of a people who were practicing iniquity. Sin was a way of life with them. Hypocrites cannot please God nor worship him in a manner acceptable to him. To worship God acceptably, one must make a sincere effort to obey God and live a Christian life. “One who turns away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer shall be an abomination.” (Prov. 28:9 NKJV)

We all would do well to memorize Prov. 28:9 just quoted for that is our status with God when we become involved in sin and have not or will not repent of it. I would like to have people pray for me, as I am sure you would, if you are a believer.  However, I know the prayers of a certain class that might pray for me would all be for naught. Is your life such that if you had a family member in need of prayer, you could pray with hope that the prayer would be accepted by God? Are you the righteous man or woman whose prayer avails much (James 5:16)?

We also need to remember that while the application of the lesson is to the individual, Isaiah was talking to people who, as a group, had almost all fallen into this category of iniquity. The point is that an entire body of people can fall into this classification, continue to worship God outwardly, and yet the worship be in vain. “In vain they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.” (Matt. 15:9 NKJV) Jesus spoke those words as recorded in Matthew, but he said it was a prophecy of Isaiah and applied it to the people of his own time. That said, it is a truth that will always apply to those who teach “as doctrines the commandments of men” and who still try to worship God while doing so.

(3) A third lesson we can take from Isaiah 1 is that God gives man the ability and the opportunity to cleanse himself of sin. “Wash yourselves, make yourselves clean; put away the evil of your doings from before my eyes. Cease to do evil, learn to do good.” (Isa. 1:16 NKJV) A little clarification is in order lest there be misunderstanding. God is not saying that man has the ability on his own to cleanse himself of sin apart from God. God is saying he will forgive them if they will meet the conditions, and it is in their hands as to whether or not they will do so.

The Jews of that day did not have to be living a life of sin. No one forced it on them. They lived that way by choice. Likewise, if they would, they could choose to live a life of godliness and righteousness. They could wash themselves clean by complying with God’s laws of pardon under the Law of Moses, but, of course, God would only accept those sacrifices made as an offering for sin if made in sincerity of heart from a penitent heart, a heart that had been genuinely changed, so the pardon was conditional. God has always given accountable man responsibility for his own salvation. There was never a time when salvation was unconditional. (Of course, all forgiveness under the Law of Moses looked forward to the atonement for sin made by Jesus on the cross--see Heb. 9:15, 10:1-4, Rom. 3:25.)

(4) A fourth lesson is that God is able and willing to save the greatest of sinners if they will repent and turn to him seeking salvation in his appointed way. “Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall be as wool.” (Isa. 1:18 NKJV) The colors are put in contrast. Scarlet is a reddish color, the color of blood, signifying great sin. White is the color of purity. The intent is to array opposites against one another. God is saying, even now, as great as your sin has been, I will cleanse you if you are willing, and I can cleanse you perfectly, completely.

We often forget that those who Peter said were guilty of taking Jesus by lawless hands and crucifying him were, by faith and obedience to the gospel of Christ, preached by Peter on the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2, forgiven of their sins and saved. How much greater sin can one commit than that of crucifying Christ? If one can be forgiven of that, cleansed, and made white as snow, then men need not fear that their sin is too great for God’s forgiveness.

Elsewhere, Paul gave himself as an example of one who had great sin yet was forgiven by God. He called himself the chief of sinners (1 Tim. 1:15) and says he was forgiven (“obtained mercy”) so that in him Jesus “might show all longsuffering, as a pattern to those who are going to believe on him for everlasting life.” (1 Tim. 1:15 NKJV) Isaiah teaches us today that sin is not so great that God cannot forgive or is unwilling to. The question lies not with God but with our willingness to give up sin and come to him.

I would also remind those who are backsliding Christians that Isaiah was writing to the people of God. Isaiah teaches restoration of the penitent child of God. “Zion shall be redeemed with justice, and her penitents with righteousness.” (Isa. 1:27 NKJV) Sometimes children of God will wander away and then have a desire to come home to God, but have doubts they can do so, doubts he will have them. The Bible teaches just the opposite. It teaches his great desire to have them come home.

(5) A fifth lesson I take from Isaiah chapter one (although there might well be others in addition, should we pursue it in more depth) is that there is a penalty to be paid for rebellion and disobedience, for a life of sin from which one refuses to repent. After Isaiah speaks of the penitents in Isa. 1:27, of their being saved, he goes on in the next verse and says, and I am going to quote from the NLT for its clarity in meaning, “But rebels and sinners will be completely destroyed, and those who desert the Lord will be consumed.” (Isa. 1:28 NLT) Then in the last verse of the chapter, “They and their evil works will burn up together, and no one will be able to put out the fire.” (Isa. 1:31 NLT)

One cannot rebel against one’s creator, the God of the universe. One will pay for his sin, “For the wages of sin is death.” (Rom. 6:23 NKJV) The New Testament teaches that there is a hell reserved for the unrighteous. It is sometimes called “the second death” or “the lake of fire” (see Rev. 20:14). Jesus says there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth (Matt. 25:30) and says on the Day of Judgment that those on his left hand will be told, “Depart from me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels.” (Matt. 25:41 NKJV)

Let me tell you a little story. I stopped writing a while ago and made a trip to the store. I had the radio on, and it just so happened there was a preacher on telling about another preacher who said that in their congregation, they did not believe God would punish anyone. They did not believe in a God like that. What good does a Bible do for a group like that? How do you make a claim of being a believer, a believer in Christ, and not believe what he says?

We must remember it does not have to end this way for the sinner. God “is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.” (2 Peter 3:9 NKJV) God would have “all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.” (1 Tim. 2:4 NKJV) That is why Christ was sent into the world, and that is what the cross is all about. Nevertheless, if one remains rebellious, there is a penalty to be paid.

In conclusion, while the book of Isaiah was not written directly to us today, we can, nevertheless, learn a great deal from it, and we ought to do that. The first chapter reveals a great deal about God. If you are concerned about having a correct relationship with God, then read and study Isaiah chapter 1. It will help you. 

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

Looking Down Your Nose

The expression "looking down your nose" was and is an American idiom used with reference to looking upon someone with condescension, dishonorably, with a degree of contempt. It is felt that the other person is beneath you, undeserving of your status and dignity. That is the subject of this article.

James says:

"My brethren, do not hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with partiality. For if there should come into your assembly a man with gold rings, in fine apparel, and there should also come in a poor man in filthy clothes, and you pay attention to the one wearing the fine clothes and say to him, 'You sit here in a good place,' and say to the poor man, 'You stand there,' or, 'Sit here at my footstool,' have you not shown partiality among yourselves, and become judges with evil thoughts? Listen, my beloved brethren: Has God not chosen the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him? But you have dishonored the poor man. Do not the rich oppress you and drag you into the courts? Do they not blaspheme that noble name by which you are called? If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself,' you do well; but if you show partiality, you commit sin, and are convicted by the law as transgressors. For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. For He who said, 'Do not commit adultery,' also said, 'Do not murder.' Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the law of liberty. For judgment is without mercy to the one who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment." (James 2:1-13 NKJV)

This is a sin I see being committed day after day out in the world. I have been around secondary public schools for a long time and this is a sin that runs rampant there. Kids have their cliques and often mistreat those who do not fit in. They embarrass them, ostracize them, and often call them names. One must learn where he/she fits in lest they become a victim. Know your place and stay in it.

However, this is not confined to just teenagers. The janitors and cooks, the aides, the secretaries, the support staff, as they call it, are not considered as honorable as the teachers, often by the teachers. Not by all, of course, but it is common. Then the administrators often seem to feel a lot the same way toward the teachers.

I suspect that just about every organization has much the same pecking order, usually determined by position, the amount of money being earned, and that sort of thing. The attitude conveyed is that if only these guys and gals below me had half my drive and natural ability, they would have done as well as I have. They are not as smart, lack my drive, and really are not worthy of what I receive. Anyone can do their work, but it takes a special type of person to do mine, one who is worthy.

It is said by those who study such things that during our Civil War many southerners were dirt poor and had no slaves. Why then did they side with the slave owners and support the Confederacy in the war?

The answer was that every man needs a sense of self-worth, no matter how big a failure he may have been in this world, as the world measures such. The slaves were the one group that poverty-stricken white southerners could look to and feel a sense of betterment. Without the slaves, their sense of self-worth was nonexistent. Being at the bottom of the pile is pretty destructive to a human being, to what he thinks of himself and about himself. The slaves gave them worth as they saw it. They were at least better than them, so the thinking went.

In the country of India, they used to have the caste system, and to an extent, it is still in existence there in a few places. The caste system was the way society was organized so that your birth determined what social/economic group you would be in for life. If you were born into a low-caste family it meant you would remain there all your life doing menial labor for low wages. You did not marry or socialize outside your caste. This is the way it was for the slaves in the pre-Civil War South.

The thought comes to me that we are a lot like that here in America, in some respects, even today. It is not likely you will see a janitor or clerk, for example, visiting and socializing with an executive in their home. Teachers and school cooks do not get together and visit in each other's homes, but it is that way pretty much all across our society.

James, by inspiration, tells us this is not the way the Christian is supposed to be. We are to treat each other honorably and show no respect of persons.

I would like to go back now and take a look at parts of the text quoted from James. Verse 1 teaches us clearly that there is to be no partiality among us. It is a command. The ESV says, "show no partiality," and that sums up the command. However, I ask the question whether this is a one-way street?

Some years back, my wife and I were invited to go home for dinner after Sunday A.M. church services with a very wealthy couple (wealthy by our standards). I found an excuse not to go, but the truth is, I really did not want to go. This family did not know me well enough to realize the great economic gulf that separated our two families, but I knew, and I knew where they lived, and thus the kind of money they had to have.

Did I, the poorer party, show partiality? Looking back on it, yes, I did. Showing partiality is a two-way street. In rare circumstances, it may be the poorer one who proves to be guilty.

But, while the text from James is using economic well-being as an example, do you believe the command is limited to monetary matters? Have people never shown partiality by race, sex, age, looks, social skills, or the lack thereof?

Kids are often embarrassed by their parents and sometimes would like to hide them. Why? Maybe they are older and out of touch, maybe they lack the social skills the new age demands, or they are poor, maybe they are ashamed of their parents for the kind of work they do, whatever. Is this sin? Is this showing partiality? So, there is more to partiality than first meets the eye.

Then there is verse 4, where James says of us, if we show partiality, have we not "become judges with evil thoughts?" Two thoughts come to mind as we read this. (1) Who made me or you a judge? How is it that I think so highly of myself as to consider myself worthy of being a judge of others? Is there not some arrogance tied up in that?

Paul tells us, "For who makes you differ from another? And what do you have that you did not receive? Now if you did indeed receive it, why do you glory as if you had not received it?" (1 Cor. 4:7 NKJV) Most questions that are asked seek an answer, and we try to answer if directed at us. These questions bring us to silence. What can we say in response?

What do you have that you did not receive from God? Was it your looks, your intelligence, your ability, your good health? What was it you have that you did not receive, that you got on your own, that sets you apart from other men? If you have made great achievements, could you have done it without these natural gifts from God?

Some have great natural intelligence and can go through the finest colleges and make lots of money. Who gave this ability to them? How does a gift from God merit superiority in one's thinking?

Who gives great natural athletic ability or singing ability that leads one to fame and fortune? Who gives beauty? Who gives the health that allows one to work and achieve? Without God on your side and giving you gifts, you, nor I, nor any other is able to achieve anything.

Did you ever think that even if you were right in thinking you had some superior gifts from God, that is all the more reason for grace in your life toward others? It is all the more reason for you to be their servant in the sense that you are able to help them, the stronger helping the weaker. When we have the attitude that every man is my brother and every woman my sister, and I am going to help all I can, then we cease to judge and begin to love.

God says to the rich, "Let them do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to give, willing to share." (1 Tim. 6:18 NKJV) In the verse just before this, he, through Paul, speaks much like James in the passage we are studying, for he says "command those who are rich … not to be haughty." (1 Tim. 6:17 NKJV)

I also want to look at the second part of verse 4 from our text, where Paul says that if we show partiality, we become judges with evil thoughts. What kind of "evil thoughts?" First of all, the Bible teaches that evil thoughts themselves are sin.

Hear Jesus, "But those things which proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and they defile a man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies. These are the things which defile a man." (Matt. 15:18-20 NKJV)

We are not told exactly what the evil thoughts of James 4:7 are, but we all pretty much know. It is I am better than this guy, what a loser. It is the attitude of the Pharisee who went up to pray and was thanking God that he was not like the other man there, the tax collector. But, Jesus says, "I tell you, this man (the tax collector--DS) went down to his house justified rather than the other (the Pharisee--DS); for everyone who exalts himself will be abased, and he who humbles himself will be exalted." (Luke 18:14 NKJV)

When I begin to judge the other guy, I am automatically exalting myself above him. In Jesus' eyes, we are all sinners. How is it we think one sinner worthy of death is better than another sinner worthy of death?

I recently read a sermon that was well worth my time. The thesis of the sermon was that God looks at world history and/or national history differently than man does. Our history books are full of famous men's names. They are famous because of their exploits in politics, business, war, etc. We say they have been great successes in life.

We suspect God's view of history is vastly different based on his word. Most of the names of people in our history books were not Christians. Their names are not going to be found in God's book of life, his history book, so to speak. God's great men and women of history will be, at least for the most part, people who were not well known in this life, simple God-fearing people who went about serving God and others in ordinary daily life. I had never thought about it this way. I am convinced the man who wrote the sermon had it right.

God's word is too plain to deny that with him, the greatest person is not the one lording it over the other but the one who is serving. Remember when James and John came to Jesus desiring to sit one on his right hand and the other on his left hand in his glory?

Jesus said in part, "You know that those who are considered rulers over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you shall be your servant. And whoever of you desires to be first shall be slave of all." (Mark 10:42-43 NKJV)

We are not really being a servant when we desire the lordship, and that is what we do in heart when we show partiality over others as though we are better. James says it is sin, "if you show partiality, you commit sin." (James 2:9 NKJV)

Do we realize that when we show respect of persons in a way that the person becomes aware of it, we have also become a thief? James says in chapter 2, verse 6, "You have dishonored the poor man." (NKJV) When we dishonor a man or woman, we are robbing them of their self-respect and dignity, and this makes us one of the worst thieves of all. You can take a man's money, but when you take his self-respect, what does he have left?

In verses 8 and 9, James contrasts loving a person with showing partiality. When we show partiality, it shows that we do not love the one whom we are mistreating. James quotes scripture saying, "'You shall love your neighbor as yourself,'" (James 2:8 NKJV) and says this is the "royal law according to the Scripture." (James 2:8 NKJV) How can you love a man whom you judge to be of lesser worth or value? Sin is a transgression of the law (1 John 3:4 KJV). When we show partiality, we transgress the royal law. We fail to love. We sin.

Verse 13 then logically follows, "For judgment is without mercy to the one who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment." (NKJV) A merciful man is the man who loves his neighbor as himself. His desire is to help. If indeed there is one less fortunate than oneself, the attitude needs to be I want to help, how can I help?

It would be good if we could all burn into our memories and, more importantly, into our hearts the scripture, "judgment is without mercy to the one who has shown no mercy." (James 2:13 NKJV) A merciful man is not a man who has an attitude of partiality. As he is merciful and not judgmental, he will be shown mercy.

I want to make one final point before closing. There is no partiality with God. Peter spoke of this in Acts 10:34 when he said, "In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality." (NKJV) This he spoke concerning God's willingness to save all men of whatever race or background.

But as God is not partial in who he will save neither is he partial in whom he will condemn for Paul says in Rom. 2:11-12, "For there is no partiality with God. For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law." (NKJV)

Again in Col. 3:25, "But he who does wrong will be repaid for the wrong which he has done, and there is no partiality." (NKJV)

Peter says to us, "And if you call on the Father, who without partiality judges according to each one's work, conduct yourselves throughout the time of your sojourning here in fear." (1 Peter 1:17 NKJV)

I suspect way too many of us think that God is going to treat us a little differently than others; my character and circumstances are such as to merit special consideration. I wonder if we think in the back of our mind that I am a little more deserving than some others, and so will be treated differently. If so, we are delusional.

With me, one of the most frightening passages in the Bible is this one from Paul in 2 Thess. 1:7-9, "And to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power." (NKJV)

God is no respecter of persons. One has either believed and obeyed the gospel, or he has not. God is either a liar or he is not. The only hope so many have is that God is a liar, that it is all a lie. But there is no partiality with God, nor can God lie. Is there no fear of God within us? I can find plenty of Old Testament examples of people who did not fear or obey God. Do we want to be like them?

So, in this study, we have looked at showing partiality from man's side and shown it to be sin. But we have also looked at the subject from God's side and seen that there is no partiality with him. He will gladly save us no matter who we are if we will believe and obey, but without showing partiality, he will condemn us if we do not believe and obey. The way we live in our treatment of others is our choice. God also allows us to choose how we will treat him. The choice is ours, and that goes as much for the writer as the reader of this article.

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

 

Praying to God to Bless the Bread

[To view a larger print version of this article in PDF format click here.]

“God is Spirit, and those who worship him must worship him in spirit and truth.” (John 4:24 NKJV)

Whose job is it to bless the bread and bless the fruit of the vine when the Lord’s Supper is being observed in the communion service? One hears prayers or petitions to God continually to “bless the bread” and to “bless the fruit of the vine” leading up to their serving at the observance of the Lord's Supper. Why? I have no idea other than it has been done so long that it has become a habit. It is not scriptural.

A little thinking on the subject ought to convince most. How do you bless an inanimate (non-living) object? Rain after a long drought is certainly a blessing, but it is not the rain God blessed in sending it to man, but the man who received the rain. God blessed man, not the rain, unless you want to say the rain was blessed in the sense that God made more of it.

It is true in Deut. 7:13 you will find inanimate objects being blessed, but if you turn there and take a look at the passage you will see that those objects (fruit of the land, corn, wine, oil) are being increased by God’s blessing, being made abundant for the sake of his people. Do we want God to “bless the bread” and “bless the fruit of the vine” at the communion table this way–by making more bread and more fruit of the vine? I think not.

When we ask God to bless the bread and/or the fruit of the vine at the communion table, those who ask do not know or understand what it is they are asking for or what they are expecting from God. We want God to bless it, but we do not have the slightest idea of what we expect as a result of his doing so. What is supposed to happen when he does bless the bread (assuming he is doing it, which I deny)?

Sometimes the one who leads the prayer will qualify his request for a blessing on the bread and/or fruit of the vine by adding a qualifier saying “bless it to its intended use.” How does that help? What is the intended use of the bread and fruit of the vine–is it spiritual or physical? All agree the intended use lies in the spiritual realm but that means for the bread and the fruit of the vine to be of benefit to me personally it is not what God does to the emblems (as they are frequently called by man–the bread and the fruit of the vine) but my attitude, my spiritual state of mind, my approach to the supper that makes the difference as to whether or not it proves a blessing to me. It is not what God does that makes it a blessing.

The Lord’s Supper is meant to be a blessing to us, but it is already that without further action on God’s part. God long ago did all that was needed to make the Lord’s Supper a blessing to man.

It is what man does, not what God does, that counts now as to whether or not the Lord’s Supper will be a blessing to man or not. Paul teaches that the Lord’s Supper, instead of being a blessing, can become a condemnation, not because of God but because of our reckless partaking of it if we play the fool while partaking. “Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.” (1 Cor. 11:27 KJV) “For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.” (1 Cor. 11:29 KJV) I have, over the course of a few decades, seen once in a great while someone talking or visiting while the Lord’s Supper was being observed. Do they understand what they are doing? I think not. Partaking of the Lord’s Supper is serious business. It needs to be done showing all respect, reverence, honor, and thanksgiving.

I do not believe there is the least bit of evidence in scripture for the idea that Jesus ever blessed the bread or the fruit of the vine in instituting the Lord’s Supper, based on what is recorded in the word. If he did, where is it found? Furthermore, where is the example of any man in New Testament times asking God to bless the bread and/or the fruit of the vine?

What does the word “bless” mean as it relates to prayer? There is one passage that is so clear on the matter as to settle the issue. That passage is 1 Cor. 14:16-17:

“Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest? For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.” (1 Cor. 14:16-17 KJV)

This is so simple as to be nearly impossible to misunderstand. To bless in prayer means to give thanks.

Since the word “bless” is only used 10 times in a total of 9 verses in the King James Version of the New Testament it will not take long to run through those listings, check them out, and see what we can find, namely, see if we ought to continue this practice of asking God to bless the emblems at the Lord’s table. Since we have already looked at 1 Cor. 14:16-17, we only have 8 other verses to look at. Those verses are: Matt. 5:44, Luke 6:28, Rom. 12:14, 1 Cor. 4:12, Acts 3:26, 1 Cor. 10:16, Heb. 6:14, and James 3:9.

Four of these eight verses teach the same message, so we can deal with them as a group. I will use the passage of Luke 6:28 for this purpose, which reads as follows:

“Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you.” (KJV)

If the reader will check out Matt. 5:44, Rom. 12:14, and 1 Cor. 4:12 he will find the same doctrine being taught. I did not start with Matt. 5:44 for the reason that most modern versions do not have the word bless in them at that verse in view of the fact that there is a textual variant there.

Anyone can see from a quick reading that man, not God, is to do the blessing in all four of these passages. It is also obvious that one man can only bless another in one of two ways, either by word or by deed. Most commentators agree with Barnes’ remarks who says, “The word ‘bless’ here means to ‘speak well of’ or ‘speak well to.’” I am not sure I would want to limit it to that alone, but I am just passing on this famous commentator’s remarks. (Barnes’ comments are on the parallel passage–Matt. 5:44.)

This only leaves four other times the King James New Testament uses our word “bless,” and the reader will realize that so far we have not found an instance where the word bless is used as man commonly uses the term today.

The next verse is Acts 3:26:

“Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.” (KJV)

In this passage, the meaning of the word bless is self-explanatory as it is plainly stated. Jesus does bless us by “turning away every one of you from his iniquities.” The ESV is even plainer for it reads, “God, having raised up his servant, sent him to you first, to bless you by turning every one of you from your wickedness.” This blessing came to man by means of the cross and the gospel which, if believed and obeyed, results in the greatest blessing possible that could be bestowed upon a man—eternal life.

We next come to the word “bless” as found in 1 Cor. 10:16, which deals with the Lord’s Supper. It reads:

“The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?” (KJV)

All agree that Paul is talking about the communion service. The “cup of blessing which we bless” (please notice we do this, not God) is the fruit of the vine used in that service. Paul says he was told by the Lord what was to be done at the Lord’s Supper, “For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, ‘Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.’ After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, ‘This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.’” (1 Cor. 11:23-25 KJV) Please note this 1 Cor. 11 passage comes in the very next chapter after 1 Cor. 10:16, the verse just quoted in the prior paragraph.

Paul says that Jesus gave thanks for the bread and then says of the fruit of the vine Jesus did the same (gave thanks), for he says “after the same manner,” that is, he followed the same procedure for the fruit of the vine as he had done for the bread. Bless thus means to give thanks in prayer to God or else Paul in 1 Cor. 10:16 is asking us to do something different from what he said Jesus did in 1 Cor. 11:23-25. I also remind the reader again of 1 Cor. 14:16-17 which defines the word “bless” when used in prayer to mean give thanks.

In the last half of chapter 11 of First Corinthians, Paul deals with the subject of the Lord’s Supper so that the Corinthians (and all later generations) might observe it properly. He begins with the words (verse 23), “For I have received of the Lord.” (KJV) If you want to do what Jesus did and follow his example, do as Jesus did. It is safe; it is what ought to be done.

Here is the summary of the points that need to be learned from these Corinthian passages. (1) We are indeed to bless, give thanks, while at the Lord’s table, but that means we do it, not ask God to do something mysterious to the emblems, nor ask him to give thanks himself. (2) Jesus’ example shows that he did not bestow a blessing (as modern-day man perceives of the thing) on the bread and/or fruit of the vine in instituting the Lord’s Supper, but merely gave thanks for the emblems. (3) Jesus did not ask God to bless the bread and/or the fruit of the vine.

I think it is very possible that modern-day error on this subject has come from a bad rendering in the King James Bible of Matt. 26:26-27 where a word was added to the text by the translators but generally read by readers as though it was a part of the original Greek manuscripts. The text there reads as follows:

"And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it." (Matt. 26:26-27 KJV)

In the original Greek, there is only one “it” in this entire passage, and that is the very last one. The reader is likely aware that in the King James Bible the italicized words were not in the original text but were added by the translators for clarification. All the other "it" words in this passage were added by the translators.

Thus, the King James Version makes the text sound as though Jesus blessed the bread, and people have been led astray by that little word added by the translators.

Here is the way the two verses read when words added by the translators that are not in the original are omitted (as they should have been):

“And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake, and gave to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave to them, saying, Drink ye all of it.” (Matt. 26:26-27, KJV, without the words added by the translators)

Jesus thus just blessed, which means, as we have already shown, that he gave thanks for the bread. In fact, one ought to be able to see this easily enough, for with regard to the cup, the text clearly says Jesus gave thanks. Did he do one thing for the fruit of the vine while doing something entirely different for the bread? Did he give a supernatural blessing to the bread while not doing so for the fruit of the vine? We know better.

Let the reader beware, the King James Version is not the only translation that has done this sort of thing with this verse, namely, added words not in the original Greek text. I am not going to go through all the various versions, but I can tell you the English Standard Version (ESV) is guilty of the same thing, and the problem with the ESV is that it does not italicize words added by the translators that are not in the original Greek. Overall, the ESV is an excellent translation, but I hate this failure to italicize added words.

Before leaving Matt. 26:26-27 here are some comments from Barnes’ commentary on the passage. He says, and I quote, “or ‘gave thanks’ to God for it. The word rendered ‘blessed’ not unfrequently means ‘to give thanks.’”

The word bless is used in the sense of giving thanks in prayer in all passages relating to the Lord’s Supper. One can find the record of the Lord’s instituting the Lord’s Supper in Matt. 26:26-27, Mark 14:22-23 (again, the word it was added by the translators), and Luke 22:19-20. Matthew and Mark say Jesus “blessed” with regard to the bread, while Luke says he “gave thanks,” as does Paul in 1 Cor. 11:23-24. (As already stated, blessed means to give thanks when we are talking about prayer.) Matthew and Mark are not contradicting Luke and Paul. In every instance, as it related to the fruit of the vine in these passages, it was not blessed but “gave thanks” as far as what terms were used in describing what was done. Luke says “likewise,” but says about the bread that Jesus gave thanks, thus “likewise” means Jesus gave thanks.

The New International Version never uses the word bless in any of the passages related to the Lord's Supper.  It is always gave thanks.

If the reader will just remember 1 Cor. 14:16-17, he/she will never be confused again with regard to this subject. Many years ago, when I was growing up in the 1950's and 1960's, it was common when people were gathered together for a meal to hear the one in charge ask another “to give the blessing.” People back in those days knew what the blessing was. As times have changed, so has the vocabulary people use. However, to bless or give the blessing is to have a prayer of thanksgiving to God. This is not to say that this is what the word bless means in every instance in the Bible, but it is to say that it is what it means in reference to the Lord’s Supper and in prayers surrounding that observance.

That pretty much covers the discussion, which is the subject of this paper, for the last two verses where the word “bless” is used in the New Testament do not relate to the Lord’s Supper. The first passage is Heb. 6:13-14, “For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself, saying, surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee.” (KJV) The reader will readily see we are not dealing with the subject of prayer here. The words blessing and bless here refer to what we commonly think of when we hear the phrase “blessings from God.”

The last time the word “bless” is used in the King James New Testament is in James 3:8-9. “But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison. Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God.” Here again is another passage showing that bless in prayer means to give thanks. The TEV, or as it is sometimes called “The Good News Bible,” translates these two verses as follows:

“But no one has ever been able to tame the tongue. It is evil and uncontrollable, full of deadly poison. We use it to give thanks to our Lord and Father and also to curse other people, who are created in the likeness of God.” (James 3:8-9 TEV) To bless is to give thanks, as is easily seen by comparing the King James translation with that of the TEV.

We should follow the example Jesus gave in giving thanks to God the Father for the bread and the fruit of the vine when instituting the Lord’s Supper, and should stop this business of asking God to bless the bread and fruit of the vine. What do we expect him to do after all?

Many who give thanks at every meal and would not think of doing otherwise observe the Lord’s Supper regularly, where thanksgiving is never or rarely given, and that at the most important meal a person will ever take part in–the Lord’s Supper. Jesus gave thanks but we often don’t. We need to be educated on the subject. Jesus gave his life for us, and yet in observing that event, we do not give thanks. Friends, if you are a Christian, you ought to think long and hard about that.

Instead of doing what we ought to do, we do that which was unheard of in scripture, and that which no one can explain about what it is they want God to do. We say we want him to bless the bread, to bless the fruit of the vine, but when asked to explain who can? What is he supposed to do in blessing it? The reality is, he gave us the Lord’s Supper as a blessing. It is up to us now, not him, to make it what he intended it to be for us.

Finally, there is the matter of conscience involved in this. If one believes as I do that we are to give God thanks for the bread and the fruit of the vine at the Lord’s table how are we to worship in good conscience if the one leading prayer does not give thanks but wants to go ahead and ask God to bless? What are we to do? We know we are to thank God, but the one in charge wants God to bless the bread, an inanimate object, and does not thank God. If we are to worship God “in spirit and in truth,” are we doing so when we do not give thanks? Where is the truth part if we do not give thanks? I do not have any answers since I am like all others in that I am subject to whatever the speaker says; he is in charge, not me. I do all I can and offer a silent prayer of my own, but this is certainly not the preferred route to take, but what are you going to do?

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