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.]

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.]

Non-Offensive Christianity

If someone was to ask you or me what constitutes Christian character what would we say?  Off the top of our head, we would most likely say love for God and our fellowman and faith in the Lord Jesus.  As we thought about it more intently we would add things like the fruit of the spirit, "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control." (Gal. 5:22-23 NKJV)  We might recall Peter's admonition to add to our faith virtue and godliness in 2 Peter 1.  No doubt we would add humility (1 Peter 5:5), mercy and meekness (Col. 3:12), thankfulness (Col. 3:15), and truthfulness (Eph. 4:25) to our list and our list would still not be all-inclusive of the good things to be found in Christian character at its best.

It is hard to look back over this list and see anything that should offend anyone.  It is certainly not the Christian's desire to offend.  The word of God teaches the Christian to "pursue peace with all men" (Heb. 12:14 NKJV), "to speak evil of no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing all humility to all men" (Titus 3:2 NKJV), and "as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men" (Rom. 12:18 NKJV).  How is it then when it is the Christian's desire to be non-offensive to others and he/she has good character that the Christian ends up offending so many? 

The answer lies in what the Christian believes.  The very fact the Christian believes what he or she believes is offensive to many.  To whom you might ask?  To those who believe otherwise— to the atheist, to the progressive, to the secularist, to the communist, to the Islamist, to those who will not believe and obey the gospel and live faithfully.  The very fact one is a Christian condemns them.  They know they are living lives that are contrary to the gospel, that the gospel condemns their life choices.  They feel Christianity is judging them. 

For example, if the Christian believes it is sinful to live a life of a fornicator who is likely to be offended by that belief?  To ask is to answer—the fornicator, to those who see sex as a sort of human right married or not.  If the Christian was to speak against living together outside of marriage how many friends do you think he or she would make in the world we live in today here in America?  Not many.  If he speaks up it is said he is making himself a judge and causing trouble.  He is considered harsh and intolerant (as though God would tolerate the sin).  He is unloving.

If the Christian considers drunkenness to be sinful who is likely to be offended by that belief if not the one who drinks to drunkenness?  You can go right down the list of what the Bible calls sins, name them one by one, ask the same kind of question, and get the same kind of answer.  Christian beliefs themselves are offensive to many--to a great, great many--no matter what subject you end up talking about.  It is not so much what the Christian does that is so offensive but what he believes.  Jesus said we would be judged by the word of God (John 12:48) and God's word does offend many by limiting their freedom to sin without rebuke.  The word rebukes them.  If you believe the word then that is a rebuke to them and that is offensive.  You offend them because of what you believe about the word, namely, that it is the truth. 

Jesus said on one occasion, "The world…hates Me because I testify of it that its works are evil." (John 7:7 NKJV)  Do you think the sinner wants to hear or be told that his works (his sins) are evil?  The minute the Christian speaks up against a sin he puts himself in company with Jesus and the world will hate him too just like it hated Jesus.  The men and women of the world want not only the silence of the Christian but even more than that, they want the Christian's approval.  They basically desire the Christian give up his faith, deny the word of God, and join them, at least in heart.

Jesus said on one occasion to those who sought to kill him, "You seek to kill Me, because My word has no place in you." (John 8:37 NKJV)  When God's word has no place in a man then given the right circumstances and provocations, as the man sees them, there is no limits to the depths of sin that it can lead a man to.  The word of God places boundaries upon men, boundaries that do not satisfy those of a worldly bent, but boundaries that keep men from the evil which men are capable of doing when at their worst.  The Christian respects God's fences (boundaries) but the man of the world whose desires are for the world rips the fences to pieces.

The world thus often puts the Christian in a spot that if he had his choice he would rather not be in.  No one who has had any upbringing about him wants to be offensive to others.  We all desire the friendship of others and their affection, we want friends, not enemies, and let us be honest even if a person is worldly it does not mean they are unlikeable.  Many have very winning personalities.  They are often not bad people measured by the standards of the everyday world but the problem is the Christian can have only one standard and that standard is not the standard of everyday worldly life.

Paul gave us all words of wisdom when he said, "For we dare not class ourselves or compare ourselves with those who commend themselves. But they, measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise." (2 Cor. 10:12 NKJV)  Christ is the only acceptable standard a Christian can have.  The goal and the desire is not to be the best of the average everyday person but to be Christ-like.  Our desire is to be saved and in order to be saved we must live like Christ and not like the average of men.  We must seek to please God, not man.  "If I still pleased men, I would not be a servant of Christ." (Gal. 1:10 NKJV)  The command of God is, "Come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord." (2 Cor. 6:17 NKJV) 

The condemnation of one group of believers in Christ lay at this very point.  "Nevertheless even among the rulers many believed in Him, but because of the Pharisees they did not confess Him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue; for they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God." (John 12:42-42 NKJV)  Thus we come to the fork in the road where we must make a decision.  What will it be?  Will we go with God and his word or will we go with the majority of men?  Will we offend God or will we offend man for that is what it comes down to?

No matter how much you and I desire the salvation of all men we do not desire it any more than God does.  God is "not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance." (2 Peter 3:9 NKJV)  He "desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." (1 Tim. 2:4 NKJV)  He loved the world (mankind) so much he gave his only begotten son that man might be saved (John 3:16).  Nevertheless, the Bible teaches "narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it." (Matt. 7:14 NKJV)

Now let me ask a question.  If God is so desirous of men being saved why is the gate to life so narrow and the way to life so difficult? (Matt. 7:14)  The gate is narrow and the way is difficult because man finds it hard to accept God's will, believe it, and obey it.  Put another way man finds it difficult to bring his will into subjection to God's will.  Anyone and everyone could be saved, God does not show partiality, but God is God and man is often and generally unwilling to accept salvation on God's terms.  It is offensive to man.

What does please man is the way that seems right to man.  But, what is the end of that way?  "There is a way that seems right to a man, But its end is the way of death." (Prov. 14:12 NKJV)

Even among those the world calls Christians (whether they are or not God will judge based on his word) very, very few are willing to accept that a child of faith must repent and be baptized for the remission of sins despite Peter's exact words to that effect.  "Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." (Acts 2:38 NKJV)  He had to be mistaken, he could not have meant it, it is offensive, the very thought is offensive.  We want non-offensive Christianity.  Non-offensive Christianity demands disregard for the word of God.

With non-offensive Christianity we can have, I recently read, 34,000 Christian denominations (A Short History of Christianity, Stephen Tomkins, page 245).  With denominationalism everyone gets what they want, the church of their choice; all will be saved no matter what group they are with as long as they in the broadest sense of the term "believe" in Jesus, and thus no one is offended—non-offensive Christianity.  No one is offended because in the end denominationalism means doctrine does not matter.  You read it the way you want, I read it the way I want, we are both saved, it doesn't matter which one of us had the truth.

Denominationalism is a wide gate and a broad way.  If I am wrong and that is the narrow gate and difficult way (34,000 denominations) then tell me how many denominations we would have to have to have a broad way?  Would a hundred thousand do it or would it take more like a million?  When one can find the church of his choice, rather than God's choice, you have non-offensive Christianity.

There is no doubt that the tender heart that does not want to offend people is good in its attitude toward the feelings of others but the truth of life, all of life, is that man must make choices and in making choices he will inevitably offend.  There are gentle-hearted people who sincerely want to please everyone, not be offensive to any, and who want to stay out of all fights and disagreements and they are thus unwilling to take sides or take a stand.  They just want to be left alone and left out of any disagreements or unpleasantness but isn't that the desire of most of us?  We want peace, not strife.  We want less stress in our lives, not more.  But there is a problem.

Life just does not work that way.  We cannot stay on the sidelines forever.  In failing to choose sides we choose the side by default that is most likely to be wrong, the side of the majority.  If the broad way has most of the people in it (according to the Lord it does—Matt. 7:13-14) and that is the way of destruction then my choice by default is not going to work out well for me.  It is true enough in this life a majority position is the most popular and the least likely to cause you strife in the here and now but it is also the damning position on the Day of Judgment.  On that day you want to be a part of the minority, not the majority.

Paul, speaking by inspiration, says, "All who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution." (2 Tim. 3:12 NKJV)  Who is this person who is suffering persecution?  Is it the non-offensive Christian?  No!  The truth is you cannot be a faithful Christian without offending many.  You will offend because you will take a side, the side offensive to the world and to much of Christendom.

God calls us to take sides and he gives us no middle ground.  It does not matter if we would prefer to not take a side for that is not given to us as an option.  We will either believe or we will disbelieve.  We will either repent of sin or we will not.  We will either be baptized for the remission of sins or we will not be baptized for the remission of sins.  We will either be obedient in life or we will be disobedient.  We will either battle Satan or we will not battle Satan.  God's choices are only twofold.  They are either/or.  Eve only had two choices, not a half dozen.  Yes, this may sound hard and harsh to some.  God is a demanding God but what are you going to do about it?  Are you strong enough to take on God and win?

"He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters abroad." (Matt. 12:30 NKJV)   It is either/or, there is no other option given.  We must "contend earnestly for the faith." (Jude 3 NKJV)  We must "fight the good fight of faith." (1 Tim. 6:12 NKJV)  Why?  Because it is either/or.  God commanded it and we either will obey or we will disobey.  There is no third option given.  That is the life we live.  We can please the majority of men now by not taking sides, sitting on the sidelines, giving the world no opposition, but in doing so we have taken the default position which is the devil's majority position--the broad way. 

We might say we did not ask to get put in this position.  No, we did not ask to be put in this position but God saw fit to place us here.  We are his creation.  Are we going to fight against God or put on the armor he has given us and go to battle (see Eph. 6:11-17)?

My parents did not ask for the poverty of the Great Depression and then WW II but that is where they found themselves.  The wise man takes a look around to see where he is at and the best course to pursue rather than moan, groan, and complain about where he finds himself.  God will give us rest and peace in due time in a place where there is no strife or battle but that is then and this is now.  Those who are overly meek and quiet need to put on the Lord's battle armor and go to war for the time being so they can have peace in a later time, the hereafter.  It is an either/or choice, you either do it or you don't.  Your future depends on your decision.  Do not delude yourself into thinking there is such a thing as not taking sides and setting on the sidelines for that is Satan's default position.  That is Satan's side.

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Living in Grace Day by Day

Many years ago I got into a discussion with the editor of one of the brotherhood periodicals over the topic of how a Christian is cleansed from sin that he may commit from time to time.  He had taken the position that a Christian had to confess every single sin he committed or else he was lost.  There was a general debate among brethren back then about this topic which they were calling "continual cleansing."  I am not here to opine on that doctrine except in the case of sins of ignorance.   

I think most Christians agree that when a Christian sins he must repent of his sins and confess them to the Father in prayer asking for forgiveness and depending on the particular sin and the circumstances surrounding it there may be a need to confess to others as well asking their forgiveness, even before the church in some instances.  Some think that it is never necessary to publicly confess sins but I am not one of them.  All sin is against God but some sin is against others as well (Matt. 18:21, 1 Cor. 8:12) and one can commit sin against the church (1 Cor. 10:32, 1 Cor. 11:22, Gal. 1:13).  We need to confess to whomever we have sinned against.    

The editor I am speaking of years ago was taking the confession of sin to an extreme so that any sin not confessed to the Father doomed one, including sins of ignorance.  Now if it was hardness of heart and impenitence that prevented one from confessing a sin that is one thing but ignorance is quite another.  Sins committed in ignorance cannot be repented of and confessed unless it is at a later date when one knows more and has learned better and remembers his past.

However, remembering is part of the problem, a big part of it.  We do not realize we have sinned so the event or occasion when we sinned does not stick in our memory.  There was no reason to remember what to us at the time was meaningless.  We generally remember the evil we have done but if we did not consider our action at the time evil we are not likely to remember it a few days down the road to say nothing of years down the road. 

Now do not get me wrong, ignorance is not an excuse for sin.  If ignorance excuses sin then all those living in lands where they have never had the opportunity to hear the gospel, North Korea for example, are saved and are better off if they never have an opportunity to hear it.  If ignorance were an excuse for sin we would all be better off remaining ignorant.  If ignorance excuses sin one can be saved without the gospel. 

Nevertheless, there was a problem with my editor brother's position.  It is impossible for the Christian to know every single sin he has committed even as he attempts to live the Christian life in all sincerity and faithfulness.  I am to obey the laws of the land, of the government under which I live, but as I drive down the highways and streets of this country I do not see every speed limit sign.  Am I eternally lost because I violated a traffic law I was unaware of?  I am certainly guilty under the law but am I guilty and condemned under grace?    

There is no Christian security, no sense of peace, no freedom from fear of condemnation, no assurance of salvation, and no sense of living under grace versus law when we go that far afield.  John said he wrote 1 John so "that your joy may be full" (1 John 1:4 NKJV) but where is the joy if I must live in fear of my ignorance?  I wonder how many sins we have all committed in our lives when at the time we committed them we had no idea we were sinning.

Is the teenager who has just been baptized supposed to have the knowledge and understanding of the faithful Christian who has read and studied for 50 years?  Is there no room under the grace system under which we live for growth in knowledge and understanding?  "But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ." (2 Peter 3:18 NKJV)

So what is my point?  It is we live under grace, not law.  We do not know every sin in our life or sin that has been there.  We repent of and confess what we know which is all we can do.  I think it likely that many, perhaps most, add in their prayers to God a request that they be forgiven for all those sins of which they are unaware or know not even as they confess the sins they do know.

Do you not only know every commandment found in your New Testament but know exactly how to apply each one of them in every possible scenario that arises in your life?  Can you define every sin listed in the New Testament?  Tell me the difference between a temptation which is not sin according to the New Testament and an evil thought which is (Mark 7:20-23), draw me a line in the sand and tell me exactly when one crosses over into the other.  Is the thought only classified as evil when it is acted upon and thus becomes sin retrospectively only because it was acted on?

At what exact point in time does self-esteem turn into pride which is sin?  Draw the line in the sand and tell us exactly when.  My point is there are a lot of things that are black and white when we see them in the extremes but who is so perfect in judgment as to be able to draw these lines when they are not so extreme?  We can certainly be ignorant of crossing the line on occasion.  These are only examples of many similar things that could be listed. 

I want to make it clear I believe in strict commandment keeping.  I could quote verse after verse on the need to obey from the pages of the New Testament.  Every reader of the New Testament knows that but the bottom line is we are saved by grace and not by perfection in law-keeping. 

"For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast." (Eph. 2:8-9 NKJV)  "I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain." (Gal. 2:21 NKJV)  The word "the" that comes before the word "law" in Gal. 2:21 just quoted is an added word, added by the translators, which is not in the Greek thus Young's Literal Translation of the Bible translates the passage, "I do not make void the grace of God, for if righteousness be through law--then Christ died in vain." 

John tells the Christian how he is saved day by day in 1 John 1:7, "But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin." (NKJV)  The word "cleanses" in this passage is in the present tense meaning it is a constant process, a continual thing.  Commentator Guy N. Woods says of the cleansing of this verse by the blood of Jesus that "it cleanses from sin, not merely or solely the conscience, but sin (amartias), all sin, whether of thought, word, or deed, rash sins, sins of ignorance, of malice, of omission or commission, sins of the flesh, sins of the disposition, sins of pleasure or of pain, sins of every type and kind committed at any time or place." (See his commentary on 1 John 1:7.)  I quoted this only because brother Woods mentions "sins of ignorance."  

E. M Zerr in his commentary on 1 John 1:7 says, "If a man is a worker in the Lord's vineyard and his life as a whole is one of obedience to the law of Christ, he does not need to worry about the mistakes he might make which he does not realize, for the blood of Christ will take care of it and wash them away."  I agree.  

But what does it mean to "walk in the light?" (1 John 1:7)  The Bible describes God's word as light.  "Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path." (Psalms 119:105 NKJV)  "The entrance of Your words gives light; It gives understanding to the simple." (Psalms 119:130 NKJV)  To walk in the light is to walk in or by God's word.  It is to be directed by God's word which is the same as to be directed by God.  

But it might be objected that would require perfection in the knowledge of the word and anything short of that would not be truly walking in the word, in the light.  I concede it does place a responsibility on a man to not be lazy or lukewarm in studying and learning God's word.  If we fail to walk in God's word because we were too indifferent and uncaring to find a desire to read and study the word how can we expect our sins committed in ignorance to be forgiven when it was willful ignorance we lived in?  There comes a point in time when we are old enough in the faith to know better as the saying goes but even then we each have different God-given abilities to learn and retain knowledge. 

Whatever subject a man sets out to learn it takes time and that goes for learning God's will as well.  Peter said to those new in the faith, "As newborn babes, desire the pure milk of the word, that you may grow thereby." (1 Peter 2:2 NKJV)  God thus allows for growth and no babe ever becomes an adult overnight.  Elsewhere the writer of the book of Hebrews says, "Everyone who partakes only of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe." (Heb. 5:13 NKJV)  If he is unskilled it surely means he has a ways to go to maturity and thus is prone to sins of ignorance. 

Heb. 5:14 sums up the end goal of spiritual growth in knowledge, "But solid food belongs to those who are of full age, that is, those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil." (Heb. 5:14 NKJV)  It thus takes time.  

Yes, I believe we must repent of and confess every sin to God of which we are aware to be forgiven.  John teaches, "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." (1 John 1:9 NKJV)  I also agree, as already stated, that those too indifferent to study and learn are not going to get a free pass because of ignorance.  I would also include in that group those who through hardness of heart are unable to learn the truth (God will judge).  But, to say a Christian man who has a good and honest heart yet sins in ignorance and thus fails to repent of that sin and confess it is condemned is a thing I do not see the Bible teaching. 

Walking in the light is the key (1 John 1:7) but the best any man can do is walk in the light he presently has.  I have more light today than I had 30 years ago because I know more today than I did then.  How about you?  You surely know more today than you did 5 or 10 years ago. 

I am satisfied I have taken the correct position on this subject for the opposing position puts us back under a strict law-keeping system for salvation where one slip up through ignorance condemns you.  Furthermore, that position requires that one be fully mature from the moment he arises out of the waters of baptism in both knowledge and understanding.  That just cannot be correct.

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

 

Work Out Your Own Salvation

As I was thinking about doing an article on this famous passage from the book of Philippians (Phil. 2:12-13) I first did a little Google research to see if anyone else had done so and if so to see what they were saying.  I did find a couple of authors whose work I took a look at.  It seemed to me like both had worked themselves almost into a frenzy trying to deny what the passage clearly states; a person must work out his/her own salvation.  One denied the Greek was correctly translated and made his argument on that basis.

Let me quote the Philippians passage to you so we will have it before us and know what it says. 

“Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for his good pleasure.” (Phil. 2:12-13 NKJV)

Is this a correct translation of the Greek text?  It is according to the American Standard Version of 1901, the English Standard Version, the Holman Christian Standard, the Christian Standard, the International Standard Version, the New International Version, the King James, the New King James, the New American Standard, the New American Standard Update, the NET, and the Revised Standard Version.  There were a vast number of Greek scholars behind these translations so I think the question as to whether or not the text has been correctly translated has been answered.  An argument based on the idea of a mistranslation holds no water.

The other man I was reading after based his argument on verse 13, “for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for his good pleasure.” (NKJV)  His idea seemed to be that it is not  us working out our salvation but rather God; it is God working, him moving us.  Well, as the kids would say, “Duh!”  How does that negate us working out our own salvation?

Of course, God is working in us to work, to will to do his will, and to do his pleasure.  That is the way it works and always has.  How does he do it?  He does it through his word.  We hear his word and it moves us to obey.  The Spirit of God gave the word, there is power in the word of God (Heb. 4:12), the word is the sword of the Spirit (Eph. 6:17), it (the word) is the tool the Spirit uses to move us. 

Take the word of God away and there is no work of faith for faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God (Rom. 10:17), there is no obedience for there is nothing to obey without the word, there is no works of righteousness (“all your commandments are righteousness”--Psalm 119:172 NKJV), there is no man who works righteousness (obeys God’s commands).  Man is to walk uprightly and work righteousness (Psalm 15:2) if he is to abide in the tabernacle of the Lord according to the Psalmist.

To say that a man is to work righteousness, which means only that he is to obey God’s commands, is a vast cry from saying that man is saved by works or that he is working his way to heaven or trying to get there by works apart from grace.  Man has his choice.  He can either work righteousness or he can work unrighteousness and he will do one or the other as there is no third option.  A man is either going to try and obey (try to be righteous) or else he is going to be disobedient (unrighteous).  It is an either-or matter.

Which of these two men do you think will get to heaven?  Which is going down the difficult way Jesus spoke of that leads to life?  “Narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.” (Matt. 7:14 NKJV)  Is it the man who is unconcerned about righteousness or the man who is very concerned about it?  It is easy to be a sinner; it is difficult to live a holy, righteous life, an obedient life.

Let us take a look at the larger context of our passage (Phil. 2:12-13) starting in Philippians 2:8 where the text is speaking of Jesus and says, “And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross.” (NKJV)  The next verse, verse 9, starts with the word “therefore” meaning it ties back to verse 8, “Therefore” (because of this act of obedience by Jesus--DS) God also has highly exalted him and given him the name which is above every name.” (Phil. 2:9 NKJV)

But, now note how verse 12, the first verse of our text (Phil. 2:12-13) begins.  It begins with our word “therefore” again meaning all of this has been tied in together thus the broader context within which Philippians 2:12-13 is found.  Jesus was obedient to death (verse 8).  Paul says the Philippians “have always obeyed” (Philippians 2:12).  His admonition then, taken in context, to “work out your own salvation” is an admonition to continue to obey God’s commands in his absence as they always had in his presence.  And, that is what Jesus had always done – obey God’s commands.

But, one must remember this was a choice they could make--to do or not to do.  God was working in them toward this end (via his word) but the admonition has no meaning if God was forcing them to do it.  That is the position they put themselves in who say we are not under any obligation to work out our own salvation--when they say salvation is totally in God’s hands and man has no role to play in it.  The admonition of Paul in our passage is meaningless if it is all left up to God.

God’s word can never be destroyed.  James' statement in James 2:24 will stand for eternity.  “You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.” (NKJV)  That has always been true and always will be.  Man has things he must do if he is to be saved.  The responsibility is not all on God and God alone. 

“He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey him.” (Heb. 5:9 NKJV)  Obedience is to righteousness. (Rom. 6:16)  Jesus says we will be judged by his word (John 12:48).  Are there any commandments in his word?  “He who does not love me does not keep my words.” (John 14:24 NKJV)  Can you go to heaven not loving Jesus?  “If anyone does not love the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be accursed.” (1 Cor. 16:22 NKJV)  “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments.” (1 John 5:3 NKJV)

Peter in quoting Moses’ prophecy regarding Christ in Acts 3 says in verse 23, “And it shall come to pass that every soul who will not hear that Prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the people.” (NKJV)  That makes it clear to me.  “Utterly destroyed” are the words.  Who will be utterly destroyed--those who will not hear (meaning heed or obey) his words.  Remember the entire New Testament is the words of Jesus for Jesus himself said of the Holy Spirit who inspired men to write, “He will not speak on his own authority … he will glorify me, for he will take of what is mine and declare it to you.” (John 16:13-14 NKJV) 

How men can say we are not to work out our own salvation I simply do not understand.  Obedience does matter and you cannot go to heaven without it.  However, you can be “utterly destroyed” from among the people without it. 

For those convinced that what I have said makes us work our way to heaven hear Jesus.  “So likewise you, when you have done all those things which you are commanded, say, ‘We are unprofitable servants.  We have done what was our duty to do.’” (Luke 17:10 NKJV)  If you are an unprofitable servant then certainly you are saved by grace for if you are unprofitable you are also unworthy.   

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

  

  

God's Hardening of the Human Heart

Does God ever harden people's hearts?  No doubt about it.  Every Bible student is aware of God's hardening of the heart of Pharaoh back in the book of Exodus.  This was God's plan before Moses arrived in Egypt.  "And the LORD said to Moses, "When you go back to Egypt, see that you do all those wonders before Pharaoh which I have put in your hand. But I will harden his heart, so that he will not let the people go." (Exod. 4:21 NKJV)

Why did God do this?  He tells us, as he told Pharaoh, "But indeed for this purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth." (Exod. 9:16 NKJV)  Paul quotes this passage in Rom. 9:17 and then in the very next verse says, "Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens." (Rom. 9:18 NKJV)  God willed to harden Pharaoh's heart.

Does God harden people's hearts arbitrarily; just pick out people at random to harden their hearts?  We know he does not for "God is love." (1 John 4:8 NKJV)  He "desires all men to be saved." (1 Tim. 2:4 NKJV)  He is "not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance." (2 Peter 3:9 NKJV)  "He does not afflict willingly, nor grieve the children of men." (Lam. 3:33 NKJV)  God does not harden a heart willingly since a heart hardened against God represents a lost soul.  There must be a reason that God hardens a heart. 

There are difficult issues involved in understanding this subject.  Whose hearts does God harden?  Why?  How does he do it?     

Many that I have read after are pretty much under the conviction that the way God hardened Pharaoh's heart and thus the heart of others whom he has hardened is through his word.  That is to say, God gives a command that a man does not want to receive and obey.  He (the man) refuses to do so.  The man thus hardens his own heart but there is a sense in which it could be said God hardened the man's heart by giving the commandment.  The idea is that God's word is the tool that God uses to harden the heart.

We can see there is truth that words can harden hearts from our everyday conversations and simple observation.  Say the wrong thing to someone, innocent as your intentions may have been, and the first thing you know they are angry at you and develop a hardened attitude toward you.  Hopefully, in your adult life, this has seldom happened to you personally but I think we have all seen or observed the thing.   

There is no doubt God's word when directed at one's heart can harden a heart already inclined to disbelieve and disobey (belief being against their perceived self-interest as they see it).  His word rebukes the sinner who then gets his back up and rebels even further.

There is much merit in the argument that God's word does harden some.  However, is that the only means God uses to harden people's hearts whom he hardens?  That is a very difficult question to answer.  After all of the plagues were over and Pharaoh had released the children of Israel to leave Egypt, God instructs Moses to camp at Pi Hahiroth by the sea (Exod. 14:2) the reason being, "Then I will harden Pharaoh's heart, so that he will pursue them; and I will gain honor over Pharaoh and over all his army, that the Egyptians may know that I am the LORD." (Exodus 14:4 NKJV)  Here it seems a further hardening was coming.  God intended for Pharaoh and his army to enter the Red Sea for their destruction.

That this is certain we can ascertain from the following passage: 

"And the LORD said to Moses, 'Why do you cry to Me? Tell the children of Israel to go forward.  But lift up your rod, and stretch out your hand over the sea and divide it. And the children of Israel shall go on dry ground through the midst of the sea.  And I indeed will harden the hearts of the Egyptians, and they shall follow them. So I will gain honor over Pharaoh and over all his army, his chariots, and his horsemen.  Then the Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD, when I have gained honor for Myself over Pharaoh, his chariots, and his horsemen.'" (Exod. 14:15-18 NKJV)

This hardening seems to have come when the Egyptians were on the very edge of the bed of the Red Sea.  It is hard to see how this hardening was just a function of the rejection of God's word for this hardening seems to be in addition to the hardening that had occurred earlier.  On its face, it seems to be a hardening separate and apart from the word.

In Joshua 11 we find a similar passage along much the same lines.  Joshua and the children of Israel are at war against the inhabitants of Canaan (the Promised Land).  The passage reads as follows:

"There was not a city that made peace with the children of Israel, except the Hivites, the inhabitants of Gibeon. All the others they took in battle.  For it was of the LORD to harden their hearts, that they should come against Israel in battle, that He might utterly destroy them, and that they might receive no mercy, but that He might destroy them, as the LORD had commanded Moses." (Josh. 11:19-20 NKJV)

There were 7 nations in the land of Canaan that God wanted totally destroyed.  They were the Hittites, the Girgashites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites (Deut. 7:1-2).  Why were they to be destroyed?  Was it just to make room for the children of Israel?  No, it was because of sin.  "It is because of the wickedness of these nations that the LORD is driving them out from before you." (Deut. 9:4 NKJV)  How sinful were these nations?  "Every abomination to the LORD which He hates they have done to their gods; for they burn even their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods." (Deut. 12:31 NKJV)  For other passages describing the sins of these nations in greater detail see Lev. 18 and Deut. 18:9-14.  God obviously did not harden hearts that were not already hard.  It takes a hard heart to burn your son or daughter to death. 

Both of these cases, that of Pharaoh and the Egyptians and that of the people who inhabited the land of Canaan, seem to be examples of what some would call a judicial hardening.  God had determined to pass judgment on them due to their sins and thus hardened their hearts to bring about their destruction.  It was judgment day for them.

Two points ought to be made here.  (1) People seem to be under the impression, and I have heard it said most of my life, that one can always repent and obey God as long as there is life in them--the idea being that we are judged after death.  There is just enough truth in this line of thought, the truth being that God is longsuffering, to make it exceedingly dangerous to a man.

In both the cases above just cited was God not executing judgment on men while they lived by ending their lives?  Many other such examples could be given from the Old Testament and then we have Ananias and Sapphira in the New Testament (Acts 5).  I do not see where the Bible teaches that a man can go on and on and on in sin without any need of fearing God here and now.  A person living in sin ought to be fearful everyday of God’s judgment.  I am not saying what God will do but I do not see how we can say what he won't do.

(2) The second point is that God inhabits eternity.  He knows what will be tomorrow as well as what was yesterday.  "I am God, and there is none like Me, Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things that are not yet done." (Isa. 46:9-10 NKJV)  He knows us from beginning to end.  While we have free will he knows what we will choose before we make the decision.  You say how can this be?  It is one of the great mysteries of God how God can have foreknowledge and yet man have free will.  Some things are beyond man's ability to understand.  Some things we must accept by faith.

The point to be made is that God does not harden a man for destruction who was going to repent if given more time to do so for God knew already what the man would choose.  There is no evidence in the Bible to support the idea that God ever has or will harden a heart that is not already hard.

Whatever means God used to harden Pharaoh's heart, or anyone else's for that matter, is then in a sense immaterial for the very reason that God does not harden hearts that are not already hard.  It was only after the sixth plague that the Bible says the Lord hardened Pharaoh's heart (Exod. 9:12).  Prior to that plague it was Pharaoh who hardened his own heart. 

John 12:37-40 is a New Testament passage on this subject that has caused some people some problems:

"But although He had done so many signs before them, they did not believe in Him,   that the word of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spoke: 'Lord, who has believed our report?  And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?'   Therefore they could not believe, because Isaiah said again:  'He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, lest they should see with their eyes and understand with their heart, lest they should turn, so that I should heal them.'" (John 12:37-40 NKJV)

In this passage it sounds like the Lord made it impossible for people to believe by blinding their eyes and hardening their hearts apart from their free will, that is he did it before and without giving them an opportunity for salvation.  If that would be the case then it would not be true that God "desires all men to be saved." (1 Tim. 2:4 NKJV)  It would not be true that God is "not willing that any should perish" (2 Peter 3:9 NKJV).  We thus know that if God did in fact blind their eyes and harden their hearts, and in some sense or way he did for the text says he did, it was not before they had an opportunity for salvation.

Isa. 6:10 is where Isaiah makes the statement about the hardening of the heart that John quotes in John 12:40 above.  This same passage from Isaiah is also quoted by Jesus himself in Matt. 13:14-15 and by Paul in Acts 28:26-27.  There is a slight twist, however, in Jesus' and Paul's quoting of the passage which helps clarify the text when considering how the hardening effect came about.  Jesus in quoting the Isaiah passage says, "their eyes they have closed" (Matt. 13:15 NKJV), and Paul says exactly the same thing in Acts 28:27.  Compare Matt. 13:15 with Acts 28:27 (Jesus and Paul) and you will see, at least in the New King James version, the exact same wording in both verses which I quote:

"For the heart of this people has grown dull.  Their ears are hard of hearing, and their eyes they have closed, lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, lest they should understand with their heart and turn, so that I should heal them." (Matt. 13:15, Acts 28:27 NKJV)

Jesus makes it clear that it was the Jews themselves who closed their eyes and if you will read the Acts passage in its context (Acts 28:23-28) you will see Paul was blaming the Jews for a refusal to accept the message of the gospel.  As stated earlier, God's word can harden people who are already in their own hard hearts immune to it.  When that is the case it can certainly be said with justification that God has hardened a person's heart.  That is what we seem to have in the Isaiah quotation found in the New Testament passages listed above, people who already have hard hearts that are hardened even further by the hearing of God's word.  God hardened their hearts by his word.

We today seem to think that the door of opportunity for salvation remains open endlessly for a man.  It makes, so we think, little difference whether I obey the gospel today or twenty years from now (assuming one should live that long).  If we as Christians are living in unfaithfulness we have much the same attitude about time.  We think I can always repent.  However, the Bible says, "Now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation." (2 Cor. 6:2 NKJV)

Not only do we not know the day or hour of our death neither do we know whether we shall be hardened making salvation impossible.  I do not say God will directly harden your heart (nor would I say he would not) but I know you can harden your own and I also know when people are rebellious long enough and beyond hope that God will give them up (Israel and Judah of Old Testament times being examples).  Judgment day is not necessarily some day off in the distant future.  For all practical purposes judgment day for you or me is the day we die or otherwise become incapable of responding to the Lord.  Here is a quote from the Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, Vol. 2:  New Testament, page 34; I think is applicable, "The cumulative effect of unbelief is a hardened attitude that becomes more impenetrable as time progresses."  

God is a God of love who offers to all the hope of salvation, at least up to a point in time largely determined by our own hearts.  God will use us to accomplish or fulfill his will.  If we are willing we can be a vessel of his for honor (2 Tim. 2:21).  But, if we are unwilling he can if he so desires still use us for his glory as he did the Egyptians who drowned in the Red Sea.  We get to choose which way it will be.  We are all given free will for a time but who can say how long or short a time that may be?

"Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation." (2 Cor. 6:2 NKJV)  "Today, if you will hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion." (Heb. 3:15 NKJV)  Amen!

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