|
|
By McClure, Tommy, on September 1st, 1998
I. INTRODUCTION:
1. Text (Matthew 22:34-40) shows great value Lord put on love.
- A. Why the greatest?
- 1) Can go no higher in attitude toward God—full consecration! Cf. Mk. 12:30.
- 2) Can do no more for fellow-man than to love as self- Cf. Matt. 7:12.
- B. Love certainly not less important under gospel dispensation:
By Jamerson, Frank, on September 1st, 1998
Covenant Theology (1)
Introduction:
A. The term “covenant theology” is a denominational concept that is being revised and promoted as a Scriptural concept.
B. The doctrine is in flux among brethren. Continue reading » Special Sermon Studies: Covenant Theology
By Roberts, Tom, on September 1st, 1998
Many attempt to excuse religious division on the basis that “we cannot all understand the Bible alike.” For centuries, denominations have been arguing that we must be permitted the right to individual interpretation of the word of God since no two people can possibly agree on essential points of doctrine. The result has been the “chaos of the cults.” Each man and denomination does that which is right in his own eyes and there is no sure standard in their religion.
Currently, some gospel preachers, who have (in the past) had their feet securely fixed in the “faith once for all delivered” (Jude 3), are casting themselves into the sea of human speculation through a disavowal of Bible principles which establish Biblical authority. To put it concisely, some are turning away from the use of approved apostolic examples and necessary inferences to prove what is that “good and acceptable will of God” (1 Tim. 2:3). Not only so, but they are shaking the faith of many and unsettling churches as to the limits of fellowship. Having negated the use of these two principles of Bible study, they conclude that churches of Christ are too narrow-minded and legalistic in refusing to fellowship some who disagree with us only in matters regulated by examples and inferences. The truth regarding the Lord’s supper, sponsoring churches, benevolent works, the eldership, and other things cannot be clearly ascertained, it is opined, therefore we cannot withhold fellowship from those who disagree. Continue reading » Associate Editorial: The Use of Reason to Understand the Scriptures
By Fain, Larry, on September 1st, 1998
Many people approach some philosophical difference with another by using the very non-productive means of name-calling. We see it in politics all the time. When a proponent of some public policy is shunned, it is surmised that the opponent is either “a radical,” “a communist,” “a fascist,” “a fundamentalist member of the religious right,” or, perish the thought, “someone who listens to Rush Limbaugh.” In religion, we do the same thing, but with far more meaningful consequences. An opponent is either “a liberal,” or “an anti,” or a new one to me, “a member of a cult.”
I heard recently of a student, while attending Bob Jones University, a conservative Baptist college in South Carolina, who, when seeking permission to leave campus, was denied the privilege. The reason for the denial was that his destination was the services of a local church of Christ. The rationale of the administration in their denial was that the “Church of Christ” is a “cult.” To the credit of the student, he went anyway. (Acts 5:29; “We ought to obey God rather than men.”) Disagree with us as you will, but is this charge justified? I think not. Continue reading » Associate Editorial: Let’s Talk About the Church
By Henderson, Timothy, on September 1st, 1998
This is a question that is asked by many. And it is one that is quite easily answered, Yes, He will. Psalm 86:5 states “For thou, Lord, art good, and ready to forgive; and plenteous in mercy unto all them that call upon thee.” The scriptures also teach us that God would have all men come to repentance, 2 Peter 3:9 “The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” We see by these two verses that the Lord is “ready to forgive” and “willing … that all should come to repentance.”
Many think their sins are so great that God will not forgive them. They believe their sins are much too grievous and that forgiveness for them is too much to ask from the Lord. If you would, follow along with me as we look at several cases of sinners in the Word of God and see if God was willing to forgive them. Continue reading » The Simple Gospel: Will God Forgive Me?
By Deaton, Steven, on September 1st, 1998
Searching the Scriptures, August, 1968
There are two standards before which all stand – God and man. Computed by the standard of man, Noah was a very narrow person. I am not sure but what he was also considered narrow by the standard of God almighty! The servants of the Lord throughout the annals of history have been branded as narrow by the philosophy and worldly wisdom of man. Perhaps some consolidation can be derived by analyzing the life of Noah, to determine why people would have called him narrow.
By human standards Noah was narrow because he taught and believed his ark was the only one to be saved. Noah preached for years that salvation could be found in his ark only! (Gen. 7:23; 1 Peter 3:20,21). Today, when one teaches that salvation is found only in one church, this brings down the roof of slurs and taunts of worldly men. They usually say, “I have never heard of a person being so narrow as to claim that salvation is in only one church.” However, on the other hand, the Lord has plainly said that salvation is found only in His church which is His body (Acts 20:28; Eph. 5:23). Notice He gave His blood for His church (only) and He is the Saviour of His body, the church. Continue reading » Voices from the Past: Narrow Noah (Ward Hogland)
By Roberts, Tom, on September 1st, 1998
A statement from Hurlbut’s Story of the Bible says, “As in their own land, the children of Israel had forsaken the Lord and had worshiped idols, so after they were taken to these distant lands, they sought the gods of the people of those lands and ceased to be Israelites; and after a time they lost all knowledge of their own God, who had given them his words and sent them his prophets. So there came an end to the Ten Tribes of Israel, for they never again came back to their own land, and were lost among the peoples of the far east.”
A basic tenet of the premillennial system is that the ten tribes which separated from Judah under the leadership of Jeroboam, identified as Israel, were taken captive by Assyria about 722-721 B.C. and were consequently lost to view as a nation. “Lost” is not used here in a symbolic or metaphoric sense but literally. It is held that these Jewish people have had no sure identity, have not returned from captivity and that some Old Testament prophecies are yet to be fulfilled in them, namely, those dealing with a “return from captivity.” Amos 9:14 is an example of only one such disputed passage supposed teaching a modern return of Jews to Israel. Amos says, “And I will bring back the captivity of my people Israel, and they shall build the waste cities, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and drink the wine thereof; they shall also make gardens, and eat the fruit of them.” It is maintained that this prophecy was not fulfilled prior to the time of Christ and must, therefore, be fulfilled at a later date. Consequently, the establishment of the modern state of Israel and later migrations of Jews to that land have become “signs of the times,” signaling the imminent return of Jesus to earth to begin His millennial reign as a fulfillment of prophecy. It is the purpose of this article to suggest that this position is not factual and to stimulate more study on this subject which is so popular among the sects. Continue reading » Solid Food: Were the Ten Tribes Really Lost?
By Robson, Jim, on September 1st, 1998
In the Liaoning Province in northeast China, archaeologists recently discovered fossils of turkey-sized animals that were apparently covered with feathers. They have strong legs and stubby arms, and so the scientists proclaimed them to be feathered dinosaurs. In fact, the team of scientists who examined them, and those who wrote about them in Nature and National Geographic, have indicated that these fossils are the strongest evidence yet found to indicate that birds evolved from reptiles.
In point of fact, this only goes to show how little evidence there is to link dinosaurs to birds on some kind of evolutionary continuum. The only thing these fossils prove is that there was a group of animals that in some ways resembled dinosaurs and in some ways resembled turkeys. The scientists do not know if they were birds or dinosaurs. In fact, the fossils have been dated as being more recent than the oldest known fossils of birds. According to Alan Feduccia, evolutionary biologist at the University of Carolina, Chapel Hill, the animals preserved in these fossils could simply be birds that just happened to look like dinosaurs in some respects. Therefore, they could only be evidence of evolution to someone who already believes in evolution. Continue reading » Evidences of Faith: Why the Dinosaur Bird Won’t Fly
By Houchen, Stephen, on September 1st, 1998
Un cristiano es un discípulo (o estudiante). Eso quiero decir que anda conociendo más y más de la doctrina del Maestro. Si uno no está activamente aprendiendo, ¿es correcto decir que él es discípulo? La palabra cristiano es mucho más que un título honorario; implica que el que lleva ese nombre es un seguidor de Él y de los principios que expuso. Si uno ni siquiera sabe lo más fundamental de su doctrina, ¿cómo es posible llamarse cristiano?
Lo siguiente es una prueba de 15 preguntas acerca de la doctrina bíblica. Fíjese en que cada pregunta comienza igualmente con la frase “según la Biblia”. Para contestarlas, pues, hay que hacer distinción entre la doctrina bíblica y la tradición. Trate de contestar todas las preguntas primero, y después lea las respuestas y los versículos. Continue reading » Prosiguiendo a la meta: ¿Conoce usted su biblia?
By Hafley, Larry Ray, on September 1st, 1998
QUESTION:
“Since there is neither command nor example of a confession of sin being made before the church, where is the authority for such a long time practice
REPLY:
First, it is good that scriptural authority is desired and demanded (Matt. 28:20; Col. 3:17; 2 Tim. 1:13)! Indeed, we must have such authority, else our work and worship is void and vain (Matt. 15:3-9; Acts 15:24; 2 Jn. 9). Second, just because an act (in this case, public confession) has been practiced for many years, does not make it right or approved in the sight of God. Infant baptism and sprinkling for baptism are both old traditions, but they exist without divine authority. Continue reading » Queries and Explications: Public Confession of Sin
By Lagan, William, on September 1st, 1998
The Agbisits are an instrument of God for the Church of Christ started in Palawan. It started in the 1960′s in Narra, a municipality of Palawan, that has around forty thousand registered voters. Among the Agbisits only one son, brother Fred, had a formal education in the Bible. He graduated from the P.B.C. (the Philippine Bible College) in Baguio. He has a bachelor’s degree in theology (BTH). The parents of the Agbisits were reared among the liberals, so the Church of Christ here in Palawan was formerly liberal. Through the efforts of American brethren like Wallace Little, for example, when he was a member of the U.S. military, things changed. He is one of the bravest soldiers of Christ sent by God in the Philippines. He is the instrument of God that helped convert brother Fred to the conservative view. Brother Little did many good things in the work of the Lord here. Let us pray for his soul that God might help him go back to the truth of the New Testament. I know that they were blinded by their belief that a man might have a concubine without sinning. I am much concerned about his soul. Continue reading » White Unto Harvest: A Brief History of Churches of Christ in Palawan, the Philippines, and its Chief City, Puerto Princesa
By Zamora, Luis, on September 1st, 1998
The Longsuffering of the Bible is longsuffering with a purpose! A specific purpose: repentance. The word “longsuffering” itself is essentially the same in English, Greek, and Hebrew; it means “slow to anger.” Some of our brethren want it to stop there. But context everywhere shows it means one is slow to anger when pursuing good. It means you don’t just get angry and quit when someone or something opposes your good works. You keep at it.
But some of our brethren want it to mean you keep tolerating sin. That view of longsuffering is not Biblical. As a matter of fact, that view leads to the taking down of the church’s walls and the ultimate destruction of the Lord’s church. But don’t take my word for it: let’s go to the Scriptures to establish the meaning of Biblical longsuffering. Continue reading » Longsuffering
By Jacobs, Jarrod, on September 1st, 1998
Job chapter nine records one of the speeches Job made while defending himself against Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar. This speech in chapter nine is somewhat different from the others. This is because Job does not spend much of his speech responding directly to Bildad and what he has said in chapter eight. In chapter 9, Job devotes his attention to God and His greatness. The questions Job asks in this chapter get to the heart of the matter of sin.
In Job 9:1-10, Job declares God’s greatness. Here, he asks a question in verse 2, “…how should man be just with God?” or (NKJV) “…how can a man be righteous before God?” Job is simply asking, “How can a man maintain that he is in the right and then be in opposition to God?” Job has maintained all along that he has done nothing that would warrant his present situation, yet, he has been suffering. He then says, “If he will contend with him, he cannot answer him one of a thousand” (v. 3). Near the end of this chapter, Job pleads for a “daysman.” He says, “For he (God) is not a man, as I am, that I should answer him, and we should come together in judgment. Neither is there any daysman betwixt us, that might lay his hand upon us both” (Job 9:32-33). Continue reading » The Plea for a Daysman
By Price, Joe, on September 1st, 1998
Editors Note: Watchman Magazine is running the following series of articles in the July, August, September and October issues of the Magazine. Combined, these four articles represent a very thorough study of the subject. Enjoy!
“Basic Qualifications” for Agreeing to Disagree
Brethren who advocate the tolerance of doctrinal diversity know there are many passages in the NT which prohibit fellowship with sin and false teachers. As they try to uphold unity in spite of doctrinal diversity, they are constructing a scaffolding of misapplied scriptures which “deceive the hearts of the simple” (Rom. 16:18). For instance, one brother wrote to me saying,
“Now, how do we apply this is in light of the many passages you appealed to that clearly show we are not to fellowship sin and false teachers? Again, we use the principles outlined in the scriptures, coupled with the necessary humility, forbearance and grace. I believe that fellowship generally boils down to a few basic qualifications.”
Please remember, we have no argument with true humility, forbearance and grace. However, one must remember that 2 John 9-11 still stands: “Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine do not receive him into your house nor greet him: for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds.” Continue reading » Biblical Principles of Unity and Fellowship (Part 3 of 4)
|
|
Comments are closed 
