Christendom, Islam and Christianity

New Testament Christianity Stands in Stark Contrast with Both Christendom & Islam

The year was 312 a.d. Civil war raged across the Roman Empire. In a history changing conflict, Constantine defeated his enemies at the battle of Milvian Bridge, winning the crown of the western empire. Though “exposed” to Christianity as a child by his mother, Helena, he was a pagan for most of his life. By biblical standards his “conversion” remains to this day as suspect.
According to legend the day before the battle Constantine looked towards the sun and saw written above these words; in hoc signo vinces – “in this sign, win!” The legend says that the symbol he saw was what is now called the labarum. The labarum is a combination of the first two letters in the name of Christ in Greek, chi (X) and rho (P). Constantine, for whatever reason, had his soldiers paint the labarum on their shields they then carried into battle. Historically, of course, we know that Constantine prevailed in the next days conflict. His imagined vision changed history.
The following year, Constantine and his co-emperor, Licinius, issued the Edict of Milan which made the empire officially neutral religiously. Neither Christianity nor paganism was recognized as the state religion. Each person was free to worship whomever he/she wished. For the very first time, the empire no longer legally embraced paganism. These changes led to the return of confiscated Christian property and laid the foundation of what we now know as Christendom, the total union of church and state in full totalitarian mode. “Christianity” (i.e. Nicene Catholicism) became the state religion on 27 February 380 with the issue of the Edict of Thessalonica. Though Jesus Christ Himself clearly stated that “my kingdom is not of this world otherwise my servants would fight,” Christendom ushered in nothing but armed conflict, bloodshed and mayhem for over a thousand years. Wars sponsored by “Christian” nation states began with Charlemagne and lasted until Napoleon! Everywhere the labarum went, death and destruction followed. Slaughter in the name of the pope would take place from Europe to Asia Minor to Asia to the South China Seas to the Americas and back again before the power of the pope was finally neutralized during the Napoleonic Wars by the rise of Great Britain as the first modern age super power.
By the time of Pope Urban II in 1095 “Christendom” was solidified to the point of being a singular and monolithic church-state dictatorship. Rome possessed absolute power over the lives, fortunes and minds of the various European nation-states and their inhabitants. There was no middle class, only a few very wealthy land lords with the rest of the population held in virtual slavery. The economy was what we would best characterize today as fascist - church owned, taxed and controlled. Any opposition was quickly suppressed with extreme violence to the poor and the threat of excommunication by the pope to the rich. So called “canon law” reined supreme over local, state and national laws. Even kings and queens served at the pope’s pleasure. Anyone who opposed Rome either theologically or politically was immediately branded as a heretic bringing death, destruction and confiscation of property upon both themselves and their families. Urban decided that the time was ripe for murder, rape and pillage under the banner of the Constantinian labarum against the Islamic armies pouring in from the east. The bottom line: Christendom is NOT a religion per se, it is a military, political and economic weapon for power and domination of other peoples cloaked with a thin skin of religion.
Two hundred and thirty years after Edict of Thessalonica, a man in Arabia by the name of Muhammad, like Constantine, began to imagine visions from God. The year was 610. By the time of his death in 632, Muhammad had amassed a massive following and controlled all of the Arabian peninsula. Islam means “submission to Allah” and a Muslim is “one who submits or surrenders” to the teachings of Muhammad. It is very likely that Muhammad could neither read nor write for his “visions” were written down in the Islamic holy book, the Qur’an, not by him but by his “companions” via memory after his relatively early death at age 62. A “companion” was someone who saw Muhammad while he still lived, believed his teachings and remained a Muslim until death. It is generally agreed that the number of “companions” that wrote the Qur’an number between 50 and 60 persons. Islamic theology is not based solely upon the Qur’an. Like the writings of the so-called “church fathers” in Christendom, the traditions of Islam are taught and supported by the Hadith. The Hadith was written long after the demise of Muhammad, some two hundred years plus in fact. The Hadith is the passed down generation to generation of the “companions” recollections of the thoughts, practices and interpretations of Muhammad. Should one study Islam by studying ONLY the Qur’an, one will miss much of what drives the Muslim to believe the way he or she does. Thirty or so years after the death of Muhammad a power struggle split Islam into two bitterly opposed denominations; the minority Shia and the majority Sunni’s. As Islam rose to battle Christendom, a pope like figure called the Caliph arose to exert total power and authority. The Caliph imposed strict observance of so-called Sharia Law, a medieval and barbarous set of ruthless laws that enslaved the masses just like the so-called Canon Law of Rome. The Caliph’s imposed a brutal dictatorship supported by war, piracy, extortion, plunder and the slave trade. Before retreating in the fifteenth century, Islam would threaten Rome from the French border in the west to eastern Austria in the east. In 1095, however, the two world powers were poised for a death struggle that would take four hundred years to come to an end. Not until the Islamic Moors were forced out of Spain in 1492 would the religious wars between Christendom and Islam begin to subside. The bottom line: Islam is NOT a religion per se, it is a military, political and economic weapon for power and domination of other peoples cloaked with a thin skin of religion.
It is the thesis of this paper that “Christendom” and “Islam” are two side of the same coin. They came to blows, not because of their differences but because of their similarities! It is also our thesis that New Testament Christianity stands in stark contrast to both “Christendom” and “Islam.” In fact biblical Christianity is 180 degrees opposite to both. The greatest challenge of our age is for New Testament Christians to reach out to both Roman Catholics and Muslims with the good news of the gospel, a message of peace, love, joy, faith, hope, forgiveness and salvation – a message NEVER shared by the Pope’s crusaders or the Caliph’s soldiers! They never shared it for they never had it to share.
The chart below validates our thesis – Christendom and Islam are IDENTICAL except for their theologies. Keep in mind however theology is but a thin skinned covering to mask the real thing in both cases. Underneath their two different theological skins, Christendom and Islam are twin brothers, as it were.
Islam Christendom
Caliph Pope
Mosque & State Are One Church & State Are One
Imams Priests
Jihad Crusade
Feast of Ramadan Feast of Christ-Mass
Hadith Tradition Patrisic Tradition
Sharia Law Canon Law
Execution for Internal Opposition Execution for Internal Opposition
Free Salvation for Dying in Battle Free Salvation for Dying in Battle
Holy City of Mecca Holy City of Rome
Ends Justify the Means Ends Justify the Means
No Salvation for Outsiders No Salvation for Outsiders
Submit or Die Convert or Die
At the end of the day, both Islam and Christendom gave up any and all pretense to being “people of the book” and paid any price for power, glory, wealth, domination and total destruction of their mortal enemies. What they once abhorred in their enemies they both embraced for themselves.
Political reality shows that Christendom is no more. Western nations no longer embrace faith in the God of Heaven and for the most part have become secular if not agnostic, even atheist. In fact, since the demise of the Ottoman Empire in World War I, western nations no longer act monolithically, they have fought each other in two world wars, neither of which had a single religious component. Most significantly, the pope no longer has any political and military sway. In that sense, Islam triumphed over Christendom. For some reason, though, the message of this defeat has yet to reach the Islamic world! To them, nothing has changed. Most importantly to this very hour in time, they see Christianity as “Christendom!” No notion could be more false.
New Testament Christianity is found in the heart not on the tip of the sword. New Testament Christianity has absolutely nothing in common with either Islam or Christendom! The Kingdom of God is one of spirit not of flesh. It is the Body of Christ not the bodies of slain enemies. The church of Christ is not a building, it is not a government, it is not an army, it is not a city or stronghold to be taken by force of arms and is not temporal. Her headquarters are not in Rome or Mecca but in Heaven above! The Christian loves his enemies, renders good for evil and prays for those who abuse him or her. Our warfare is not with Islam (or Christendom for that matter!) but with the “power of the prince of the air,” Satan and his wiles. Islam and Christendom persuaded men with violence and the sword, Christians persuade men by the proclamation of the gospel for “faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God.” Should men reject the message, so be it. No force, be it physical, be it psychological or be it otherwise will be employed by the Christian against any man or woman who turns away. Our example is Christ who, while being murdered, prayed for God’s forgiveness of those who were literally killing him. “Father forgive them for they know not what they do!” was His plea. The Father answered that prayer 50 days later on the Day of Pentecost when those same murderers cried out, “Men and brethren, what must we do!?” Peter, along with the eleven, rose up and said; “Repent and be baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and you shall receive the Gift of the Holy Spirit!” Christians, towards one another, “turn their swords into plowshares” and “learn the ways of war no more!”
For more information on the church of the New Testament, the singular and eternal church of Christ, go to: http://gospelcall.blogspot.com/2010/11/reasoning-together-introduction-to.html. May God bless all those, both the current adherents of both Christendom and Islam, as they turn to God through Jesus Christ, “THE way, THE truth and THE life” through whom all who would seek after God must come!

Imagination, Revelation and the Emerging Church Movement

“But Naaman was angry and went away, saying, "Behold, I thought that he would surely come out to me and stand and call upon the name of the LORD his God, and wave his hand over the place and cure the leper.” – II Kings 5:11 (ESV)

Naaman IMAGINED that God would perform as Naaman directed. He became angry when God did not act out on his IMAGINED and outcome based assumption. This attitude epitomizes the so-called “emerging church movement.” This movement is one that IMAGINES that God is at our every changing beck and call and IMAGINES the Almighty is nothing more than a spiritual Gumby ® that people can shape and mold any way they will on any given day. Satan has struck swiftly and effectively. Even as we mount the walls of the City of God to watch for the enemy approaching, we look over our shoulders and view with horror that the enemy is already in the city, sweeping many a soul into a potentially hellish eternity. [God alone is the judge] Who knows how many souls have gone down stream in the swift flowing current of sin and error since the summer of 2006 when the “new hermeneutic” rushed through the church of Christ like a deadly tsunami. Just what is the "new hermeneutic?" It is a "new" (turns out to be very old) biblical interpretive model. It is based upon a 2nd century reliance on the "thinking" of the so-called church fathers, or "patristics." The problem is that these men, in many cases, were already leading the church into full blown apostasy. We should consult the patristics for history but by no means consult them on revelation! They were not inspired! Instead, we need to return to the Scripture for "all things pertaining to life and godliness!" The new / old hermeneutic, replacing "thus saith the Lord" hermeneutic is called "allegorical" or "circular" interpretation. "Circular interpretation" is described by its name. One starts with a question and ends up with even more questions. To the circularist, one finds nobility in the "search" for truth, NOT in the finding of it. When I would babble on about something or another as a child, my Mother would stop me and say; "Russell, you're talking in circles!" The so-called "new hermeneutic" is nothing more than circular babble. In the wake of this disaster, perhaps a third to a half of the Lord’s congregations in the United States have either gone with the instrument, have become sympathetic to the instrument or just have become lukewarm regarding the biblical pattern of vocal only worship in “psalms, hymns and spiritual songs.” Many congregations continue to sing acapella but do so because of “tradition” and / or personal preference and no longer out of faith and conviction. What was not long ago a matter of doctrine is now a matter of opinion among many who call themselves Christians. The instrument per se is not the issue here, it is the interpretive model that made the instrument possible! We are “perishing without knowledge.” That interpretive model that is turning truth into error is collectively called the “emerging church.” Where did this term come from?

The answer is shocking… the term “emerging church” comes from Darwinian evolution.

And why not? “IF” slime can evolve into fish, fish into monkeys and monkeys into man…why can’t primitive New Testament Christianity evolve from a singular church with autonomous leadership to Medieval Catholicism, to Reformed Protestantism, to Evangelicalism and now into “every man and woman for him or her self defining truth and spiritual matters individually?"(1) Merriam-Webster On-Line defines the word emerge thusly:

To become manifest: become known, to rise from or as if from an enveloping fluid: (to) come out into view, to rise from an obscure or inferior position or condition, to come into being through evolution.(2)

Those who promote error in our time choose this terminology deliberately. Like Darwin, the “emerging church” teaches that “truth,” like life itself “emerges” [evolves] over time from the “simple” to the “complex.” As a result, the 1st century church was simple, ignorant and insignificant compared to those of us today who have “evolved” further down the road making today’s “truth” far more “true” than yesterdays “truth.” Not only that, tomorrows “truth” will be more “true” than today’s “truth” since those in the future will be more “evolved” that we are!

Soberly, we must reflect on the fact that 30 - 40 years ago young people in the church began embracing the idea that it was "possible" for God to have used "evolution" in the formation of the universe. In other words when God said "the evening and the morning were the first day," He really meant "millions of years." Now as adults, these same people apply this same imaginative thinking to the instrument, to leadership in the church and even to the plan of salvation! "IF" day means "millions of years," then "psalms, hymns and spiritual songs" can mean guitars, drums and dancing. "IF" day means "millions of years," then women can serve as elders. "IF" day means "millions of years," then baptism for the remission of sins can be the "sinner's prayer." "IF" day means "millions of years" the one and only singular church of Christ can be just another denomination. May God save us from such a foolish imagination!

The "emerging church” believes that “truth” is individually defined, comes in multiplicity, changes over time, evolves from the simple to the complex and therefore static and un-changing truth does not actually exist! The “emerging church” finds nobility in the “search” for truth but ridicules its existence as they engage in its pursuit. The “emerging church” openly defies the words of our Lord and Savior who clearly stated that “ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.” (John 8:32 King James Version (KJV) We have heard this nonsense of seeking non-truth before. The “emerging church” is pure existentialism applied to theology. (Existentialism is a philosophy that singularly focuses on the here and now for there is no here after.) The father of existentialism, Soren Kierkegaard, stated the following:

I see it all perfectly; there are two possible situations - one can either do this or that. My honest opinion and my friendly advice is this: do it or do not do it - you will regret both.(3)

Essentially, Kierkegaard says that, search as we may, we will never find the truth. The best we can hope for is to, through constant injection of chaos, allow our “choices” to battle out for themselves their relative strength and validity in the whirlwind of life. If this also sounds familiar, it is! Kierkegaard philosophizes the ancient far-east religion of Taoism. Taoism teaches that there is no ultimate truth, only a constant battle between forces. Though most cannot recognize Taoism by name, nearly everyone hears people talking about “karma” and have seen the circular black and white bumper stickers featuring the “yin and the yang” in struggle against one another while neither dominates the struggle. All these concepts are blended into the “emerging church movement.” For clarification, “emerging” applies to the movement as a whole, while the term “emergent” applies to any individual who is “emerging.”

For decades faithful brethren preached against this kind of apostasy. Many a sermon was delivered on the dangers of “falling away,” of “drifting” and “error.” Perhaps the numbers of these sermons made us numb to the warning. Perhaps we thought that the point was “over sold.” Whatever the reason, many a guard is let down and error is sweeping into the church of Christ like the recent floods of Nashville and Oklahoma City. Satan has “re-branded” an old error with a new label! Technically, the “emerging church movement” began in the late 1990’s. In reality, it is a retread of an old satanic trick first sold to Eve in the Garden. It worked so well that he has never had to roll out a new product! Let us recall the Word of the Lord:

“Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God actually say, 'You shall not eat of any tree in the garden'?" And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, but God said, 'You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.'" But the serpent said to the woman, "You will not surely die. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." – Genesis 3:1- 5 English Standard Version (ESV)

We want to notice two things that Eve (and Adam) found attractive about this temptation. First of all one can decide for herself / himself what course to take, and, second that making such choices makes one equal to God! Wow! “Not only do I get to choose what to do, I can be my own God!” Satan is telling Eve that there are no “right or wrong” choices. He is telling her that she can control her own destiny and future. He is telling her that there are “multiple truths,” God’s truth, Eve’s truth, Adam’s truth, Satan’s truth...all equally valid. Satan is telling Eve to “deconstruct” the past so as to “reconstruct” the future!

This pattern is used by Satan on each of us. We are tempted continually to “go our own way” and when we do, we too are told we will “be as gods knowing good and evil.” This pattern is the foundation of every single false religion that there ever was or ever will be. Man gets to “choose” because he is the most intelligent, strong and wisest “germ” in the universe! Man is god, or so he keeps telling himself. You may think that surely these views cannot possibly be held by anyone claiming to be a Christian in the New Testament sense of the word. You would sadly be wrong. Note a couple of quotes from several faculty members at ACU from 2002 and contrast them with Scripture:

“Therefore put away all filthiness and rampant wickedness and receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls.” – James 1:21 (ESV)
vs.
“The Bible does not save us. Jesus does. Scripture is not a rule book covering every imaginable situation, if we only know how to decode it correctly.” (4)
And
“Follow the pattern of the sound words that you have heard from me, in the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus.” – II Timothy 1:13 (ESV)
vs.
“While the Bible does shed light on issues of church organization and other issues that have attracted the attention of many of us, it does not provide a constitution or pattern for church organization, focusing instead on the much more important issues of spiritual and moral life, justice, peace, and reverence before God.”(5)

Sadly, these statements may have more in common with the existentialist cleric, Brian McLaren,(6) than they do with the faithful! In fact, Brian McLaren, though he is not even a Christian in the New Testament sense of the word, was one of the marquis speakers at the “2008 ACU Summit!”(7) Unfortunately, Brian McLaren, the very same fall also appeared as a marquis speaker at the Lipscomb University “Preacher’s Conference.”(8)

An ancestor of mine, Hugh Gaston (d. 1766) eloquently wrote of the biblical role of Scripture, in sharp contrast with the views of our contemporary “emerging” brethren:

Those have succeeded best in ascertaining the true sense of many Portions of Scripture, and in answering Objections against them, and setting several Scripture Doctrines in a clear Light, who have first searched the Scriptures for the whole and complete Account of the Subject, and hereby were enabled to show what was doubtful, by being briefly expressed in one Place, was sufficiently enlarged upon and explained in others. Besides such Explications of Scripture Truths as are to be found in the Scriptures themselves, none else are to be depended upon: for the sacred Writers, being sufficiently qualified for their Work, did not leave it to be mended by inferior Hands; they left the Scriptures a finished Performance, containing a System of Religion from God, which, like all His other Works, is good and perfect in its Kind, being full and complete in all its Parts, plain and proper in its Terms and Expressions, and effacious or sufficient to answer the ends for which it was written: if it fails, no other Writers will prove effectual for reforming the World, and making Mankind wise to Salvation.(9)

The strange thing is this: Hugh was an Irish Presbyterian! When I examine the statements of my own brethren, I find that I am in much more agreement with Hugh than I am them! This is alarming! If everything else in God’s vast universe is made to a precise pattern, why would God write His word in such a way as to become so just much chaos and incoherence? The phrase, “thus saith the Lord,” or a variation of it, is found some 430 times in Scripture! “IF” the “emerging church” is right about the Bible, then God would then be saying “Just kidding!” some 430 times as well and would owe us all an apology. “Let God be true and every man a liar!”

When we carefully examine the Genesis 3 account, one word describes it all…IMAGINATION. Satan convinced Eve to IMAGINE she had a right to choose and to IMAGINE herself as a god. It’s just like that old 1960’s song…”it was just my imagination running away with me!” The “emerging church” is a church that IMAGINES “truth” but neither seeks it or acknowledges its very existence! The “emerging church” is the church of John Lennon as he IMAGINED it:

Imagine there's no heaven - It's easy if you try - No hell below us - Above us only sky
Imagine all the people - Living for today...

Imagine there's no countries - It isn't hard to do - Nothing to kill or die for - And no religion too - Imagine all the people - Living life in peace...

You may say I'm a dreamer - But I'm not the only one - I hope someday you'll join us - And the world will be as one

Imagine no possessions - I wonder if you can - No need for greed or hunger - A brotherhood of man - Imagine all the people - Sharing all the world...

You may say I'm a dreamer - But I'm not the only one - I hope someday you'll join us - And the world will live as one(10)

You are right! There are light years between REVELATION and IMAGINATION! How did we get from the former to the latter? How did we go from assertion of a singular and absolute truth to imagining multiple fictitious truths? The short answer, as we stated, is in Genesis 3. To be more precise the Holy Spirit has much to say in Scripture regarding IMAGINATION.

The Scriptures use six original words (three Hebrew and three Greek) that are translated “imagination / imagination(s)” in the KJV a total of twenty times. Of these twenty usages, only one is used in a positive sense of the word. [That one exception is I Chronicles 29:18]. All other nineteen references to “imagination / imagination(s)” are used to describe rebellion, sin and rejection of God. Here are the six words along with example usages:

1. H3336 – yester – “intellectual framework, graven image, devise (or) imagination”(11) This word is used in Genesis 6:5 – “And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” This is perhaps the most extreme use of “imagination” in the Bible for it describes the heart of mankind just prior to the universal flood. The primary meaning of this word is in describing the continuous intention of the heart and is rendered that way in the ESV. The ISBE notes that yester is a “shaping,” as one would shape an image for idol worship, hence, “imagination” is a logical extension of “image.” When men choose “imagination” over “revelation,” they become idolaters, pure and simple, “worshipping the creature instead of the Creator.” (Romans 1) “Imagination” is the pavement of the road to perdition!
2. H8307 – sheriyruth – “stubbornness, hardness, firmness in the sense of (being) twisted”(12) This word is used by Moses in his address to the children of Israel in Moab warning them of the consequences of unfaithfulness in Deuteronomy 29:19-20 – “And it come to pass, when he heareth the words of this curse, that he bless himself in his heart, saying, I shall have peace, though I walk in the imagination of mine heart, to add drunkenness to thirst: The LORD will not spare him, but then the anger of the LORD and his jealousy shall smoke against that man, and all the curses that are written in this book shall lie upon him, and the LORD shall blot out his name from under heaven.” (KJV) The primary meaning of this word is stubbornness and is rendered that way in the ESV. This word is used more often than any other in the Old Testament for “imagination.”
3. H4284 – machashabah – “thought, devise, plan, purpose, invention”(13) This word is used in Proverbs 6:18 – “An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,” We should pay very close attention to this word! It is used as one of the seven things that God hates in Proverbs 6. It is rendered as “thoughts of vanity” in Young’s Literal Translation (YLT), as “evil plans” in the Literal Translation of the Holy Bible (LITV), as “wicked plans” in the (ESV), as “wicked purposes” in the 1901 American Standard Version (ASV) and “wicked plots” in the 1899 Douay – Rheims Bible (DRB)
4. G1271 – diaanoia – “(a way to use) the mind as a faculty of understanding, feeling, desiring (imagining) (or) way of thinking”(14) This word is used in Luke 1:51 – “He hath shewed strength with his arm; he hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.” (KJV) Notice that the imaginative are seen as proud by God. It is certainly not wrong to use one’s imagination for it is a gift of God. However, to use one’s imagination to circumvent God’s will is to embrace eternal disaster! This word is rendered conceit in the DRB.
5. G1261 – dialogismos – “the thinking of a man deliberating with himself, a thought, inward reasoning, purpose, design, a deliberating, questioning about what is true, hesitation, doubting, disputing, arguing”(15) This is an existential word, carrying the idea of contradictory “self talk” that empowers people to imagine falsehood as being truth. It is used by Paul in Romans 1:21 – “Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.” The ASV et al renders dialogimos as “reasoning.” The DRB uses “thoughts” while the ESV utilizes “thinking.”
6. G3053 – logismos – “a reckoning, computation, a reasoning: such as is hostile to the Christian faith, a judgment, decision: such as (a violation of one’s) conscience”(16) This is the final word used for “imagination(s)” in Scripture. It occurs in II Corinthians 10:5-6. It is, as it were, God’s final warning to us regarding the presumption of imagination. “Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; And having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled.” Paul clearly states that the collective imaginations of all men and all time will be torn down, brought into captivity and completely revenged.

The apostle Paul in I Corinthians 10 tells us that the things written before were written for our learning, for our example and for our warning. There are many such examples and warnings in Scripture, here are but a few:

• In Genesis 4, Cain IMAGINED that his offering would be acceptable, it was not
• In Genesis 11, man IMAGINED he could build a tower to heave, they were scattered
• In Exodus 32, the Israelites IMAGINED they could worship God via a golden calf, they were made to eat it
• In Leviticus 10, Nadab and Abihu IMAGINED they could bring strange fire to the Tabernacle, they died before the Lord
• In Numbers 16, Korah IMAGINED that he could challenge the leadership of Moses, he, his family and his followers perished
• In Numbers 20, Moses and Aaron IMAGINED they could strike the rock in addition to God’s command to speak to the rock – they both were denied entry into the Promised Land
• In Numbers 22 – 25, Balaam IMAGINED he could curse the people of God, he could only bless them
• In I Samuel 4, the Israelites IMAGINED they could use the Ark of the Covenant as a “good luck charm” in battle – the Ark was taken by the Philistines and Israel was defeated
• In 1 Samuel 15, King Saul IMAGINED that partial obedience in regard to the Amalekites was the same as complete obedience – God removed the kingdom from him that very day
• In I Kings 12, Jeroboram IMAGINED he could change the place and object of true worship, he was described by God thereafter as the king “that caused Israel to sin.” Jeroboram and his entire house was cut off forever
• In I Kings 18, the priests of Baal IMAGINED he would send fire to their sacrifice – that false god did not and the priests of Baal were slain by Elijah that very day.
• In I Corinthians 1, the Corinthians IMAGINED that they could form separate denominations inside of Christ, Paul said that Christ was NOT divided
• In Galatians 1, the Galatians IMAGINED that there were multiple gospels - Paul said that if anyone, even he or an angel from heaven, should preach any other gospel other than the one he first preached to them, that person would be accursed and accursed a second time to underscore the point.

It is worthy of note that NONE of these imaginer’s noted above prayed for wisdom or consulted the Word of God before their imaginations swept them into error, judgment and condemnation. We cannot IMAGINE our way to God! People could not imagine their way to God before Moses. People could not imagine their way to God during the years of the Mosaical Law. And now, during the “last days” dispensation in which we now live we cannot imagine our way to God.

There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death. – Proverbs 14:12 (KJV)

Though he does not use the word “imagination(s),” John speaks of the fact that we are “in the last hour” and that “many anti-christs have already come into the world.” [See I John 2, 4 and II John 1] Anyone who exalts his / her own imagination over revelation is an anti-christ for that person puts himself / herself in opposition to the Words of Christ. The Word is Christ and Christ is the Word as we know from John 1. The Word of God:

• Is revelation, not imagination
• Is the mind of God, not some fanciful story or narrative
• Is fact, not fiction
• Is precise, not generic
• Is inspired, not simply inspiring
• Is truth, not opinion, speculation or fiction
• Is the standard, not a standard
• Is the singular way to God, not one way among many
• Is THE pattern for life and godliness, not a mishmash of religious sayings
• Is not to be added to nor taken away from
• Is unchanging, not evolving
• Is static, not moving
• Will last forever, and
• Will judge us all on the last day!

May God extend us all grace and mercy until we once again set aside our “emerging church imaginations” and without question, murmur or complaint, re-embrace revelation among us!

END NOTES:

(1) Making the “argument” even more ludicrous, evolution itself has been proven wrong in recent years. Darwin built all his assumptions around the idea that the most simple evolved into the most complex. Now even science concedes that even the most simple of cells has complexities far too cumbersome for mere mortals to comprehend. Life is complex from top to bottom and bottom to top because they were created by an all knowing Supreme Being. Instead of “evolving,” mankind because of sin, is rushing to judgment.
(2) Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/emerge
(3) Quote source: www.brainyquote.com. SK is regarded as the father of existentialism and, as this quote indicates, believed that “truth” is found in contradiction. Existentialism asserts that active “deconstruction” and subsequent “reconstruction” accelerates the ever evolving future. Progress comes only by and through chaos, the more chaos, the more progress. Existentialism is the driving force today in religious thought. It is daily being put into real time practice. Brian McLaren, the leading emergent personality is an extreme existentialist parading about as a “cleric.”
(4) Kenneth L. Cukrowski, Mark W. Hamilton, James W. Thompson, (God’s Holy Fire – The Nature and Function of Scripture, Abilene, TX, A.C.U. Press, 2002) pg. 67
(5) Ibid. pg. 48. Also note, if interested, the spring 2010 issue of New Wineskins Magazine is entirely devoted to beating up the straw man know as “patternism.” Here is the link: http://www.wineskins.org/filter.asp?SID=2&fi_key=318&co_key=2173 This issue is a classic example of existentialist deconstruction of what was once believed so a new “truth” can be reconstructed on the ruins of the old.
(6) For detailed information on Brian McLaren and his interaction with churches of Christ link to:
http://samuelslinesaulscircle.blogspot.com/2008/09/who-is-brian-mclaren-why-do-you-need-to.html
(7) Known as the “ACU Lectureship” in more faithful times
(8) Examine the obsession that LU has with this subject of “Imagination” by linking to:
http://samuelslinesaulscircle.blogspot.com/2008/09/lipscombs-magical-imagination-tour-for.html
(9) Hugh Gaston, (A Scripture Account of the Faith and Practice of Christians, Dublin, Ireland, S. Powell, In Dame-Street opposite Fowners-Street, 1763) From the preface
(10) http://johnlennon.lyrics.info/imagine.html
(11) The word numbers are Strong’s. The definitions are from either Strong’s or Thayer’s via www.e-sword.com
(12) Ibid.
(13) Ibid.
(14) Ibib.
(15) Ibid.
(16) Ibid.

Will It Be Jude or John? (Calvin That Is!)

The question; “Can a Christian lose their salvation?” is at best semantically confusing and at worst begs the question. The question “implies” that Christians get into some kind of spiritual wrestling match with Satan and / or his minions and, despite the Christians best efforts, have their salvation wrested from them, become disconnected to God and head screaming straight into hell itself, all very much against their will. The question should be; “Can a Christian SURRENDER their salvation after being in an absolute saved state?” When theologians approach Scripture allegorically such tail-wagging-the-dog conclusions are not only possible, they are inevitable when begging the “lose their salvation” question.

The historically great, yet biblically confused reformer, John Calvin, poured the theory that Christians could never become apostate into theological concrete where it remains until today. Many have been deceived by this doctrine during the last 500 years while the truth regarding the matter, revealed by the Holy Spirit in the book of Jude, has been rejected, overlooked and ignored. In 180 degree opposite reaction to medieval Roman Catholicism, Calvin formed a theological system now named after him, known as Calvinism. Calvinism is summed up in an acronym, “T.U.L.I.P.”

T otal Depravity – all mankind is conceived and born as sinners doomed to hell unless God “elects” them to salvation arbitrarily
U nconditional Election – some of those “totally depraved” are arbitrarily “chosen” (elected) by God for salvation while the rest are arbitrarily “chosen” (elected) for damnation, humans have no free choice
L imited Atonement – The blood of Christ, shed on the cross, is not sufficient to save everyone, just the so-called elect.
I rresistable Grace – those who have been arbitrarily chosen for salvation cannot resist the grace of God, even though they attempt to do so
P erserverance of the Saints – once those who are arbitrarily elected to salvation have been saved, they cannot never become apostate and therefore “lose” their salvation

Time and space will not allow an examination of all these theories, our immediate concern is the last leaf in the flower, as it were, “perseverance of the saints.” Can a Christian become an apostate? Can one who once was saved reject that salvation at a future point in time and re-embrace damnation? Can one who once “walks in the light as He is in the light, re-enter into “everlasting darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth?” Calvin says, “no.” To “prove” this assertion, Calvinists turn to two Scripture references. [“A text without a context is a pretext for a proof text.” – D. A. Carson Sr.] These two “proof texts” are offered up:

And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. – John 10:28 -29

Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.
– I John 2:18 – 19

The Calvinist interpretation of these two verses goes like this:

1. Once a person becomes a Christian he / she is in the grasp of the Saviors hand and no one, not even Satan himself, can wrestle that person away from Christ.
2. Since said person enjoys this iron clad grasp in the Savior’s hand, he / she remains a Christian, in the hand of the Savior forever … no matter what sins that person commits, no matter what false doctrine that person embraces or teaches and no matter how much unbelief is spewed from the lips and heart of said person. Once a person is “saved,” that person can never be lost.
3. Thirdly, since it “appears” that one that was once a Christian is now spewing apostasy in word and deed it must mean that said person was never really a Christian anyway!

Now if the Scriptures had nothing else to say regarding this matter, the Calvinist would indeed have a leg to stand on. However, the Scripture has much more to say about it. First of all, salvation is conditional to on going faithfulness, repentance and confession of sins. John says the following:

This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. – I John 1:5 - 10

Continued salvation is conditional upon our dedication to walking in the light as He is in the light and confession of all our sins. “IF” we walk faithfully and confess our sins THEN we are firmly in the grasp of the Savior’s hand and no man “can pluck us out!” However, the inverse is true as well. “IF” we do not walk in the light as He is in the light and confess our sins, we surrender our salvation and can once again be lost. We can always return but should we die in the apostate state, we can still lose our souls! Having said all the above, some might still cling to Calvin in the false hope that one can “live like hell and still go to heaven.” That is where Jude comes in.

The inspired book of Jude gives us not one, not two, not three, not four but FIVE concrete examples of people once saved that consequently became lost when they embraced apostasy. These were not people who were “never really saved,” they were people who were saved by God totally, without question and without a doubt! Here are the five examples and we will rest our case!

1. Jude 1:5 – The Lord SAVED a people out of Egypt and later destroyed those who did not believe. How many of the Israelites were saved out of Egypt and were “baptized unto Moses” as they crossed the Red Sea? ALL of them! They were ALL once saved but some of them became apostate and were consequently lost. Saved people lost their salvation.
2. Jude 1:6 – There were angels in heaven who did not keep their first estate but LEFT their habitation. Saved angels, living in Heaven, willingly abandoned their positions and deserted to the enemy! Saved angels lost their salvation!
3. Jude 1:7 – The people of Sodom and Gomorrah were once saved by God via Abraham who raised an army from his own house and saved them from destruction as we read about in Genesis 14. Unfortunately, after their salvation, Sodom and Gomorrah “gave themselves over to fornication and strange flesh.” As a result, they lost their salvation and were destroyed.
4. Jude 1:12 – Jude asserts that the apostates of whom he is writing are “twice dead.” What must be true about someone who is “twice dead?” These apostates were once “dead in their sins” but they obeyed the gospel, were buried with Christ in baptism and rose again to walk in “newness of life.” These “live souls” died again when they rejected Christ and embraced apostasy. They were truly “twice dead!” An unrepentant apostate is “twice dead” and will lose his soul, just like those who rebelled in the desert, just like the fallen angels and just like Sodom and Gomorrah.
5. Jude 1:12 – Finally, Jude asserts that the apostates of whom he is writing have been “uprooted.” One must understand that a plant that is “uprooted,” must of necessity, first of all must have been “rooted” previously! The uprooted, and now unsaved, apostate was once rooted and saved – just like those who rebelled in the desert, just like the fallen angels and just like the people of Sodom and Gomorrah

.

One last observation. “IF” Calvin is right and “IF” “once saved always saved” [The Perseverance of the Saints] is a true and wholesome doctrine, then the following also must be true regarding the assertions of Jude:

1. God did not really destroy those who did not believe in the desert, its just a fable.
2. God did not really allow His angels to leave Heaven, it too, is just a fairy tale.
3. God did not really destroy Sodom and Gomorrah, it is just a “Bible story” and did not really take place.
4. Jude wasted his time writing about and warning the church regarding the apostates. After all, God will still save them in the end!

There we have it. We have a choice to make. Will we choose Calvin over Jude or will we choose Jude over Calvin? Upon that choice our souls depend!

© 2010 by Russ McCullough – All Rights Reserved - MCN: C4U9Q-J5SEG-27PHB

Civility and Apostasy

This past week America witnessed the worst kind of vile invective back and forth the political aisle. Fowl and vulgar language turned the air blue with words our mothers once washed out our mouths for saying. Debate crossed the line and became enmity. It is all very sad and sobering.

The book of Jude is instructive for Christians in this regard. He tells us by inspiration that Christians should not issue “railing accusations” towards other people, even apostates.

Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, dusrst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, “The Lord rebuke thee.” – Jude 1:9

This verse is compelling on many levels. In fact, this is the only reference we have in the Bible regarding this instance of conflict between Michael and Satan, two former brothers in heaven now adversaries. Michael remained faithful while Satan fell. We do, however, have reference to this instance in a non-biblical source, The Assumption of Moses. This book is not inspired and is not contained in Scripture, though the Holy Spirit confirms here in Jude that THIS instance did, in fact, take place. Michael and Satan DID contend and dispute over the body of Moses. Jude uses these facts to illustrate a truth for us.

The book of Jude is the only book in the New Testament devoted exclusively towards dealing with apostasy. Other books, especially the epistles of John and Peter, deal with apostasy but are not devoted exclusively to it. Jude, however, deals with it singularly, passionately and completely. Verse 9 of his letter is somewhat like a steam valve. When the steam pressure in a boiler gets too high, a steam valve is used to lessen the internal pressure, thus bringing the entire environment back into safety. The pressure in Jude brought on by “certain men (who) crept in unawares” has been brought to a fever pitch by verse 8 and threatens to explode. Instead of sending his readers in angry fury toward these false teachers, Jude illustrates that “railing accusations” are not in the appropriate communication realm of Christian men and women. God is the only judge. Only He can ascertain and judge the hearts and the motives of men. Jude says, in essence, “If Michael did not issue a “railing accusation” against Satan, the epitome of evil itself, we should not issue such railings, accusations and judgments of motive towards apostates, false teachers and anyone else with whom we disagree. We need to leave such judgments to God and God alone.

Does this leave us with nothing we can or should do when false teachers enter the flock? Absolutely not! While we are not to judge by appearance or motive, we must “judge with righteous judgment” and “speak the truth in love.”

“Judge not according to appearance, but judge righteous judgment.” – John 7:24
“But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the heard, even Christ:” – Ephesians 4:5

Assessing the facts of the matter, using the Word of God to teach the truth and to refute error is both allowed and expected by God. Michael did not judge the apparent motives of Satan and neither should we judge the apparent motives of false teachers, apostates and anyone else for that matter, that task will be accomplished by Christ on Judgment Day. (II Corinthians 5:10) Instead our speech should be “as apples of gold in a setting of silver.” (Proverbs 25:11) “WHY” people do what they do is between them and God alone and is not the business of man to discover. Let’s remember that our business is “WHAT’s” right or wrong, not “WHO’s right or wrong and certainly not “WHY” someone does or does not do a thing! Let’s keep our head, lower our tone, clean up our language and refuse to speculate regarding motive when dealing with our adversaries. Michael did and so should we.

Copyright 2010 by Russ McCullough - All Rights Reserved
MCN:C1ULC-GX1QV-T3QGU

Did the Apostles Advocate the use of the Instrument in Acts 15 Without Even Knowing It?

In December, 2006, bro. Rick Atchley of the Richland Hills church of Christ asserted in his first “Both / And” sermon that we can and should add the instrument to worship today since the Apostles did not make circumcision a requirement for salvation in Acts 15. Rick’s assertion, argument and premise is that the apostles and elders did not meet at in Jerusalem to preserve and defend the gospel, they met to “make it easier” for Gentiles to become Christians. In other words, it is his contention that the only meeting EVER recorded in Scripture with the apostles and the elders of the Jerusalem congregation was to, in effect, conduct an “outreach and methodology seminar.” One can almost see the rows of “church growth” vendors inside the convention hall, as it were. Acts 15 becomes his primary, central and foundational “proof text” for adding the instrument to worship. In true circular fashion, bro. Atchley takes a secondary and byproduct (1) point from 15:19 and elevates it to core, central and dominant status in his “interpretation” of the passage. In Rick Atchley’s world, the theological tail wags the theological dog.

This choice of “proof texts” relates to us more than “surprise,” it conveys outright astonishment, amazement and incredulity. Such is the case “IF” Acts 15 turns out NOT to be about answering the question; “What must I do to be saved?” NOT about “adding to nor taking away” or NOT about the preaching of “another gospel.” In fact, “IF” Acts 15 is about adding the instrument to worship our only response would of necessity have to be one of stunned amazement. The adoption of Acts 15 as a “proof text” for the instrument would create such centrifugal force from radical circular reasoning as to leave one suspended in mid air with no where to go.

Even as I type these words, the whole idea of discussing this passage in such a light seems so bizarre as to defy all logic and reason. Unfortunately, as my mind returns to rationality, I sadly begin to understand what Paul spoke of so passionately to Timothy just before he died the martyr’s death:

For the time will come, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts will they multiply to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they will turn away their ears from the truth, and will be turned to fables. (2)

To read into (3) Acts 15 a “proof text” for the use of the instrument in worship is indeed… a fable. Gill says that these “fables” are “…everything that is vain, empty, and senseless.” (4) Thayer says that a fable is, “…a story…a fiction… an invention, a falsehood.” (5) How, then, could bro. Atchley possibly see the instrument in this passage? In order for one to “see” the instrument in this passage one must first adopt:

• Origen’s theory that Scripture has “hidden and multiple meanings,” all equally valid. (6)
• Origen’s theory that individuals can understand Scripture via “allegorical” (fictional) stories.
• Thomas Aquinas’ theory that truth is primarily revealed through the “senses” and not revelation. (7)
• Thomas Aquinas’ theory that one of man’s “senses” is the “sense” of “imagination,” i.e. if one can imagine something as true, it becomes true for that person – think John Lennon, “imagine there’s no heaven, it’s easy if you can, no hell below us, above us only sky…” (8)
• Circular Theology that theorizes that one best understands Scripture when seen through the light of “one’s life experiences” and that nobility is found not in the finding of truth but the SEARCH for it. In other words, one ends where one begins… with questions and no answers. (9)
• “Emerging” or evolutionary theology that theorizes that truth evolves over time like Darwinian evolution. Each generation, like rings on a tree, grows stronger and more sophisticated than the generation before it. Therefore, today’s “truth” is superior to yesterday’s “truth” and tomorrow’s “truth” will be superior to today’s… and so on. Darwin incorrectly assumed that the “simple” evolved into the more “complex.” We now know that even the smallest of cellular organisms are far more complicated than we can even begin to understand, even with today’s advanced technology. Upon this same foolish notion, the “emerging” church assumes that 1st century Christianity was “simple” and today’s is far more complex and sophisticated. (10)
• Sensus Plenior (“fuller sense”) biblical interpretation theory that assumes that men today, with all the accumulated “wisdom” of the ages, can actually better understand the Scriptures than those who lived before, even the writers of the Bible!

When one blends all these murky and erroneous ingredients into a lens mold, a pair of “rose colored glasses” is the sad result. Through these glasses one can then stare through and “see” the use of the instrument in worship supported in Acts 15. In our next installment we will hear what Acts 15 has to say about Acts 15. By the way, we continue our study on Wednesday nights at 7 p.m. on this subject at the Archdale church of Christ in Charlotte, NC. You are more than welcome! www.archdale.org

NOTES:

(1) A byproduct is not the essence. Resulting effects are not possible without the essence of a thing being first delivered. When the Holy Spirit inspired truth of the gospel was defended and defined at Jerusalem, one effect was that no additional roadblocks were put in the way of Gentile believers, they came to Christ the same way as the Jew.
(2) II Timothy 4:3-4 – 1833 Webster Bible via e-sword.com
(3) To read “into” a passage something that is not there is called “eisegesis.”
(4) John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible via e-sword.com
(5) Thayer’s Greek Definitions via e-sword.com
(6) Origen lived and taught in the early 2nd century, primarily from Alexandria and Palestine
(7) Thomas Aquinas lived in the 13th century
(8) Lyrics via: http://johnlennon.lyrics.info/imagine.html
(9) Here’s a technical definition of Circular Theology: “Bible interpretation (hermeneutics) is therefore the circular process of understanding sacred Biblical literature, namely interpreting the component parts of the sacred text in the light of the whole and the whole of the light of its parts. It is the ongoing dialogue between one’s initial understanding of the sacred text and the impressions of the Holy Spirit gathered from subsequent readings and reflections on it. It’s the dialogue between one’s own frame of reference (one’s own sphere of existence) and the context of the text.” - Ferdinand Deist, A Concise Dictionary of Theological and Related Terms (Pretoria, South Africa: Van Schaik, 1990, 1992)
(10) For more detail, see: Brian McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy (El Cajon, CA, Youth Specialties Books / Zondervan, 2004) pg. 286-280.

Did the Holy Spirit Speak to a Man in 1994 (Or There-Abouts)? Perhaps 1996?

In December of 2006 bro. Rick Atchley of the Richland Hills church of Christ in Ft. Worth, Texas, preached a series of three sermons. These sermons were all entitled, "Both / And." The purpose of these lessons was to "justify" the addition of the instrument to their worship and to add the taking of the Lord’s Supper on days un-authorized in the New Testament. Since that time many congregations have followed the erroneous path blazed by Richland Hills. Many more, sadly, may be contemplating the embrace of such error as well.

The opening…and most aggressive argument…set forth in these lessons to justify such radical changes to the New Testament pattern (YES… there IS a pattern! See II Timothy 1:13’s statement regarding the “pattern of sound words”) is the assertion that the Holy Spirit instituted them by way of a "special knowledge" communication directly and exclusively to Rick Atchley. Here is the exact quote:

Right there in that spot about 1994 in the middle of my sermon, the Holy Spirit said to me (emphasis mine RM): “And that’s what you and all the preachers like you are doing who haven’t for years believed that the worship to God with instruments is wrong but you continue by your silence to let people think it’s wrong to allow the body to be disrupted and you do so under the plea, “Well, we’re maintaining peace,” but that’s not peace, that’s cowardice.” I knew then the day would come I’d have to teach this lesson.(1)

In the very first lesson, and at the very beginning of that lesson, bro. Atchley asserts that the Holy Spirit told him (“about” 1994) during the middle of a sermon that he would "have" to teach these lessons. Is this possible? Did the Holy Spirit actually "speak" to Rick Atchley? Why weren’t these “new truths” preached in 1994? Why did bro. Atchley have to wait until 2006? How did he know when to preach them? Did the Holy Spirit speak to him again and give him the time table? Why did elsewhere in the sermon did bro. Atchley say this “statement” from the “Holy Spirit” took place ten years prior? [That would have made the conversation in 1996, not 1994!] Which year was it? "IF" the Holy Spirit actually "speaks" to a man, would not that very date and time become tatooed on his brain? Did the Holy Spirit change His mind on the instrument? Let’s see what the Scripture says:

o Special knowledge was a spiritual gift given in the 1st century to "confirm the word" before it had been written down – Mark 16:17-20
o Special knowledge was to "cease" when the Word was completed – I Corinthians 13:8-10
o Today God speaks to us ONLY through His Son – Hebrews 1:1
o Jesus Christ is the Word and the Word is Jesus Christ – John 1
o ALL Scripture is profitable for doctrine – II Timothy 3:16
o ALL things "pertaining to life and Godliness" have been (past tense) given to us – II Peter 1:3
o The faith has been (past tense) "delivered to the saints" – Jude 3
o God is not a "respecter of persons" – Acts 10:34-35

Summarizing, "IF" the Holy Spirit did "speak" to Rick Atchley, the following would have to then be true:

• Special knowledge is still a gift and the Word of God is not complete and is still being written today – Mark was in error
• God speaks through men in addition to His Son Jesus Christ – the Hebrew writer was in error.
• Words other than Scripture are profitable for doctrine – Paul was in error.
• God has not, in fact, given us all things pertaining to life and Godliness – Peter was in error.
• The faith has not been delivered to the saints – Jude was in error.
• God is, after all, a respecter of person – Peter, again, was in error
• Since Mark, the Hebrew writer, Paul, Peter, and Jude were in error, Rick Atchley is the only one with the truth.
• By logical extension of bro. Atchley’s contentions, HE has more revelation from God than the very writers of the New Testament! “IF” such is the case, these men will have to seek bro. Atchley out in heaven one day to sit at his feet and hear his discourse on these matters!

These conclusions are, of course,absurd! The Word of God is complete, special knowledge has been done away with, God speaks exclusively through His Word Jesus Christ, all scripture is profitable for doctrine, all things pertaining to life and Godliness have been given to us, the faith has been delivered to the saints and God is not a respecter of persons.

One other “small” matter… “IF” the Holy Spirit” did speak to bro. Atchley, he MUST produce tangible evidence [Mark 16:17-20] that he is telling the truth, i. e. heal the sick, raise the dead, speak in languages he did not study, drink deadly poison, pick up deadly snakes, etc. You know what I mean… the whole “goose and gander” thing….

In conclusion, the Holy Spirit did not change His mind on the instrument (or any other point of doctrine) and He did not speak to Rick Atchley while he was delivering a sermon in 1994. Regardless of any other "proof" trotted out by bro. Atchley, his arguments crumble for they are built on a foundational falsehood and a bedrock of shifting sand…the assertion that the Holy Spirit speaks to some men and not others outside and apart from the Scripture today. The truth is plain...the Holy Spirit does not today speak to mortal men outside of the Revelation of Scripture, PERIOD.(2)

NOTES:

(1) Transcribed by the author off of the Richland Hills website (www.rhchurch.org). The sermon is no longer available on the website per se, though it is FOR SALE on CD format on said website.
(2) During the Fall Quarter, we are studying a series of Bible lessons entitled, "Wrong Division - A Study of Proof Texts Used in Support of the Instrument." JOIN US! Every Wednesday at 7 p.m. - Archdale church of Christ, 2525 Archdale Drive in Charlotte. For directions go to: www.archdale.org!

Miss Bertha's Revival

On February 20, 1894 in Thorp Spring, TX (1) the world changed forever. In violation of both Scripture and conscience Miss Bertha, as she was called, was asked to “play on.” Play on she did, on the organ, that is. The occasion was a gospel meeting held at Add-Ran College (now known as Texas Christian University in Ft. Worth, TX). It appears that the “tail wagged the dog” at this particular place of learning for the inclusion of the instrument was the students idea and not the faculty or the staff. Sadly, the “ghost” of Miss Bertha is stalking churches of Christ even now! She’s somehow been “revived…” Error is progressive and constantly pushes all who will listen to the very edge of the abyss and then drags all present over that very same edge to their destruction. Like so many so-called “progressive”(2) congregations of our day, these students had persuaded their teachers and administrators to allow the use an organ in both their social and devotional events for some time. That night they went for the jugular. When the smoke cleared, the church in Thorp Springs was torn asunder, the Clarke family was openly divided with two sons, (Addison and Randolph) against their faithful father and a once flourishing Christian college began its slow decent into the endless dust of history. The elder bro. Clarke died brokenhearted in 1901. In 1906, it all became “official” when the U. S. Government Census listed “churches of Christ” and “Christian churches” separately. History, sad to say, is repeating itself. In 1906, the instrumental faction focused on taking buildings away from the faithful church of Christ. At least these wayward brethren had the good grace to change their name once they became apostate! Today they are known primarily as “Christian Churches” and “Disciples of Christ.” Were that it would be so today! Were that those bent on bringing in the instrument would be content with simply taking over a building! Beginning in 2006, many self identified progressives have been “celebrating” the legacy of Miss Bertha, not by stealing a building but by attempting to steal the very name – church of Christ. Though the instrumental denomination party among us “has gone out from us,” [I John 2:19] they continue to demand the hijacking of the very name of the Savior’s Body for their own chaotic purposes! How does one “embrace the name of Christ” and yet oppose the very clear teaching of His Word? Some of you may be saying as you read this; “Hold on now Russ!”

• “The Bible doesn’t ever call the use of the instrument a sin!” • “That’s just your opinion!” • “Using the instrument is not a salvation issue!” • “Using the instrument helps attract young people!” • “Why argue over the instrument when we should be out spreading the gospel?” • “Aren’t there instruments in heaven?”(3)

There are these arguments and others as well. Our parent’s generation, and their parents, heard them in their day. “There’s nothing new under the sun” says the wise man. Now these same old, already answered arguments, are now being … as it were… brought down from the attic, dusted off, polished up and set down before us once more. In the coming weeks we will prove… with Scripture alone… that the use of the instrument in New Testament worship is not only UN-authorized by God, it’s presumptive presence among us today is the sad result of the mindset of King Saul in I Samuel 15. The flawed logic and pragmatic mindset of King Saul resulted in the Kingdom of Israel being stripped from him and given to another. Far from being “just an opinion,” the use of the instrument is indicative of having the mind of an apostate. How we interpret the Bible (or MIS-interpret it as the case may be) has either blessed or catastrophic results. May God bless us as we seek the truth that is given in His Word as we commence this study;

Wrong Division – A Study of Proof Texts Used in Support of the Instrument.

Let’s stop listening to a ghost from the past and put Miss Bertha back where she belongs… in the history books.

NOTES:

(1) For a very interesting, yet sad, history of this incident see: http://www.therestorationmovement.com/clark3.htm
(2) “Progressive” in the sense of the 1964 Glen Ford movie, “Advance to the Rear!”© Those in error often “spin” for themselves new and self congratulating descriptions. They may define themselves with terms quite opposite from reality, i.e. what was once called fornication is now known as “co-habitation” and ones illicit lover is now called a “significant other.”
(3) The arguments raised and the proof texts given are from the very words of one of the instrumental faction’s own spokespersons, bro. Rick Atchley of the sadly misnamed Richland Hills Church of Christ in Ft. Worth, TX. Rick troubled the entire brotherhood regarding these matters in December, 2006 with a series of three lessons on the subject, all entitled: “Both / And.” As no printed transcript of these lessons is available, the author transcribed large portions of the three addresses by hand off of audio from the Richland Hills website.

An Exegesis of John 3:1-21

The restoration plea has always called us back to the Scriptures as they were first written. From the day our brother Paul penned I Corinthians 1:10fl until this very moment constitutes what we refer to as the Restoration Movement. God continually, through His Word, hearkens us back to what He said in the first place; clear, singular and plain truth. God “says what He means and means what He says!” When we presume to add to or take away from the Word we are found to be liars (Proverbs 30:6). Unfortunately, many continue to distort the very words of God.

A certain passage, perhaps more than any other, continues to be assaulted by those who would have God’s Word conform to their preconceived notions. That passage is John 3:16. Most recently it has been misapplied by a famous denominational author in a book entitled; 3:16. Since the time of Martin Luther and John Calvin, most Protestants have claimed that baptism is a “work of man” and therefore not necessary for salvation. (The Bible clearly identifies baptism as a work…a work of God as noted in Colossians 2:12). Based upon this false premise (that baptism is a work of man), the author of 3:16 replaces the “…should be saved” conditional language of the original Greek with the subjectively arrived at “shall be saved” contractual language of circular interpretation. Under this kind of devilish eisigesis, the universal opportunity of salvation upon responsive obedience morphs into the “assumed” universal “guarantee” of salvation for the non-responsive and non-obedient “believer” regarding the absolute necessity of baptism. (Mark 16:15-16; Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16; Romans 6:1fl; et. al.) Few changes to God’s Word have rendered more damage over the years to the truth of the gospel.

A contextual look at John 3 will reveal that Jesus exegesis of Numbers 21:4-9 in John 3:14 is not only critical to the understanding of the entire John 3 passage, it is core, central and foundational to that understanding. Jesus teaches in John 3 that God’s Salvation requires a RESPONSE to an OPPORTUNITY through OBEDIENCE.

Though Satan twists the passage to teach a “faith only” pseudo-salvation, Jesus clearly teaches that “faith alone” will do as much to save one spiritually as “staying in the tent” saved the Israelites physically!

Non-response and non-obedience to God’s opportunity of salvation will leave one dead in their sins now, just as it did in the wilderness. Here is an exegetical outline highlighting Jesus’ teachings on this critical subject in John 3 in order as they are made:

1. John 3:3 – Jesus tells Nicodemus that “unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.”
2. John 3:5 – Jesus tells Nicodemus that “unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.”
A. When Christ had died on the cross a soldier pierced His side and “out flowed both blood and water.” – John 19:34
B. Christ came “by both blood and water.” – I John 5:6
C. Jesus shed his blood in his death.
D. We are baptized “into his death” (Romans 6:3)
E. There is “no remission (of sins) without the shedding of blood. “ – Hebrews 9:22
F. The Blood of Christ renders many gifts:
1) Propitiation – Romans 3:25
2) Justification – Romans 5:9
3) Salvation – Romans 5:9
4) Redemption – Ephesians 1:7 & Colossians 1:4
5) Forgiveness – Ephesians 1:7 & Colossians 1:4
6) Peace – Colossians 1:20
7) Reconciliation – Colossians 1:20
8) Remission – Hebrews 9:22
9) Sanctification – Hebrews 13:12
10) Cleansing – I John 1:7
G. The blood of Christ renders “remission (of sins).” – Hebrews 9:2
H. Baptism is for “the remission of sins.” – Acts 2:38
I. The Gift of the Holy Spirit is given ONLY in baptism – Acts 2:38
J. “Three” bear witness in the earth.” – I John 5:8
1) The Spirit
2) The Water
3) The Blood
a. These 3 are found together ONLY in Baptism and no where else!
K. NOTE on John 3:5 – The well know evangelical preacher John MacArthur et al assert that this passage could not possibly refer to water baptism for the church had not yet been established and Nicodemus could have had no knowledge of things to come. “IF” such were the case, then the entire gospel section of the New Testament applies ONLY to the Old Testament dispensation! In truth, the gospels contain the WILL of Chirst, His New Testament if you please. This WILL was read on the day of Pentecost and required both repentance and baptism for ALL persons of understanding there present. John 3:5 DOES refer to baptism for the remission of sins, regardless whether Nicodemus understood it or not and is the time, place and portal of salvation under the current Will of Christ.

3. John 3:9-13 – When Nicodemus asks the question (“How can these things be?”) Jesus replies with ALL the authority of the Godhead.
A. As “The” teacher of Israel, Jesus asserts that Nicodemus should have already been aware of Messianic prophesies in the Old Testament in the form of a rhetorical question.
B. “WE speak of what WE know, and bear witness to what WE have seen…” – If Nicodemus ever listened to anyone or anything…this is that time!
1) Jesus speaks with the authority of the triune Godhead.
C. Jesus speaks on His own singular authority as well as the “son of man.”
1) No one ever (except Jesus Christ) EVER did, or ever will, ascend and descend to and from heaven as He did.
D. These verses contain perhaps the most powerful introduction to any
statement in the entire Scripture! What follows next is the key verse
in the entire passage and essential to understanding the passage in
it’s proper context. In fact, ANY exposition of John 3 not hinging upon
John 3:14-15 will miss the message of salvation!
4. John 3:14 – “And as Moses…” are the three most important words in the entire passage. Jesus sets up a metaphoric parallel between the uplifted serpent and the soon to be uplifted Christ. In other words the physical salvation of physical Israel in the wilderness is a type, a shadow, of spiritual salvation of spiritual Israel. Salvation in the wilderness required a physical response to God’s free offer of salvation just as God’s free offer of spiritual salvation requires a physical response today. Jesus tells Nicodemus in the very strongest of terms (a direct message from the Triune God by way of the Son of Man) that Nicodemus (and us by extension) cannot understand what Christ says next in 3:16-17 until Nicodemus (and us by extension) grasps what Christ says in 3:14-15.
A. The word “as” is from the original kathos which, according to Strong’s means: “…according to which thing, that is, precisely as, in proportion as: - according to that, (inasmuch) as.”
1) By using kathos, Jesus makes clear the fact that we understand, comprehend and partake in our spiritual salvation “as” the Israelites in the wilderness understood, comprehended and partook in their physical salvation.
5. John 3:15 – Jesus here uses very specific language when discussing the opportunity for and response to the free gift of salvation just alluded to by the serpent / cross parallel.
A. “Whomsoever / Whoever” – The opportunity of salvation is universal and is offered to every person.
B. “Should / May” – The response, however, is conditional. Some will respond and be saved, others will not and be lost…JUST AS with the Israelites and the brazen serpent. All were offered salvation in the wilderness, not all took advantage of the free gift of life. The same parallel reigns true today, ALL are offered salvation…some respond to it, some reject it. The language is clearly conditional when these words are chosen. Mere belief without response is not sufficient as it was not sufficient in the wilderness…those who stayed in their tents perished. “Just as….”
6. John 3:16 – The world’s most beloved verse…for all the wrong reasons.
A. God DOES love the world enough to send His only begotten Son that…
1) “Whosoever / Whoever” – The opportunity for salvation is universal and open for all.
2) “Should / May” – The response Jesus referred to in vs. 14 and 15 requires responsive action “just as” the Israelites in the desert had to physically respond to God’s free gift of life…
a. They had to move out of their tents far enough to actually look upon the brazen serpent to complete their obedience and be saved from physical death.
b. In like manner, (“And as Moses..”) we must contact the saving blood of Christ in the waters of baptism (water and spirit of vs. 5) where “the Spirit and water and the blood bear witness in the earth” for “life is in the blood.” (Leviticus 17:11) Jesus Christ shed his blood in his death, into which we are baptized, for “without the shedding of blood there is no remission.” (Hebrews 9:22)
c. Jesus’ language here to Nicodemus is not contractual in a quid quo pro kind of way with God, it is conditional upon a proper physical response…just as in the desert.
7. John 3:17 – “…in order that the world through Him might be saved.”
A. Again, the language of salvation used by Jesus to Nicodemus is conditional.
8. John 3:18 – “Whoever believes in Him is not condemned…”
A. As the Israelites “belief” in the desert required a response, so does the belief Jesus is relaying (the new birth) to Nicodemus, and by extension, you and I.
1) Belief and obedience are synonymous
a. “He that believeth on the Son hath eternal life; but he that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him.” – John 3:36 (ASV)
A) Believeth – pisteuo – “…to entrust, commit…”
B) Obeyeth – apeitheo – “…to disbelieve, disobedient, obey not, unbelieving…”
1. Belief and obedience are synonymous as are faith and works (James 2:14-26)
a) Repentance cannot be achieved and validated without baptism (Acts 2:38)
b) Forgiveness of sins cannot be achieved without both repentance and baptism (Acts 2:38)
c) The Gift of the Holy Spirit cannot be received without both repentance and baptism (Acts 2:38)
9. John 3:19 – Judgment is that Light has come into the world and the people loved the darkness rather than the light because their deeds were evil.
A. Evil deeds = darkness
10. John 3:20 – Evil deeds mean two things:
A. Evil deeds = a hater of the light
B. Evil deeds = will not take one to the light
C. Why?
1) So evil deeds will not be exposed by the light
11. John 3:21 – True deeds mean one thing
A. True deeds take one to the light
B. Why?
1) So that it will be clearly seen that “his works have been carried out in God.”
12. Conclusion of John 3:19-21:
A. Belief…true belief that is both intellectual and responsive…is required of Nicodemus, and by extension, you and I.
B. Evil deeds condemn
C. True deeds save.

The conclusion of the entire passage is that God’s free gift of salvation, just as it was with Moses and the children of Israel in the wilderness, requires a RESPONSE to the message. The message of salvation is an OPPORTUNITY that can be accepted or rejected. The proper RESPONSE to the OPPORTUNITY is OBEDIENCE. OBEDIENCE requires that a person must be “born again of both the water and the spirit.” Jesus came by both “blood and water.” We access the saving blood of Christ in the waters of baptism. OBEDIENCE to both repentance and baptism is a “true deed” that takes us to the light. One cannot be saved without OBEDIENCE to the commands of Christ which includes baptism. Repentance and baptism is a “true deed” that RESPONDS to the OPPORTUNITY of salvation in complete OBEDIENCE. Thank God for the inquiry of Nicodemus!

Russ McCullough
8 April 2009 – Charlotte, NC

EXegesis and EISigesis - An Analysis

There is a world war being fought with renewed intensity these days. It is a war, not of guns and bullets, but one of truth and error. This war began in the second century and continues to this very moment. It is a war of biblical interpretation.

The Scripture is very clear about what it is and how it is to be interpreted. Two passages come quickly to mind:

II Peter 1:19-21 – We have also a more sure word of prophecy; to which ye do well that ye take heed, as to a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day-star arise in your hearts: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. (American Standard Version(ASV)

II Timothy 3:16-17 – All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished to all good works. (ASV)

These verses are saliently clear, ALL Scripture is inspired of God and Scripture is not to be interpreted according to one’s own emotions, feelings or opinions. This was the un-contested understanding of the early church. However, near the end of the 2nd century, this began to change. Origen of Alexandria began to teach that the Scripture had “multiple meanings” and that each person could “interpret” each Scripture “allegorically,” i.e. according to their own individual experiences. This philosophy, grounded in the pagan Homeric Greek philosophy of Plato, took hold in the apostate church and holds sway to this very day. It is a philosophy embraced by the Roman Catholic Church and “emergent” theologians such as Brian McLaren. It is a man centered philosophy that essentially places God in a secondary position in the search for and the establishment of truth. Mechanically, this “allegorical method” is one that looks inside the Sacred Writ and allows the seeker to “pour in” his or her own “meaning” into the passage. The “truth” that is therefore “discovered” is of the making of the seeker and in the “image” of man. This is what Paul warned of in Romans 1:25 when the “interpreters” of his day…”changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever.” (Webster' 1833 Bible) This madness is known to us today as eisigesis (ice-a-gee-sis). A relative new term coined ca. 1878, eisigesis is defined as;

“The interpretation of a text…by reading into it one’s own ideas.” (Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, (Merriam-Webster, Inc. Publishers, Springfield, MA, 1991), pg. 399)

To coin a phrase, for one to embrace eisigesis in the pursuit of truth would lead one’s search for salvation onto the “thin ice.” Eisigesis has brought us everything from 2nd century Gnosticism to 19th century liberalism to the so-called “Emergent church” of today. The process takes one in circles, always searching and yet never finding. Eisigesis allowed King Saul to rationalize keeping alive the king of Amalek as well as the best of the herds and flocks instead of utterly destroying them as God had clearly commanded in I Samuel 15. Today, eisigesis allows men and women to rationalize all kinds of things un-biblical though the Scripture clearly teaches that additions and subtractions to God’s Word are strictly forbidden as we see in Proverbs 30:6.

There we are enjoined to “…not add to His words or He will rebuke you and prove you to be a liar.” (Scripture taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan. All rights reserved.)

On the other hand, those who wish to honor God and move “neither to the right or to the left,” view Scripture from an exegesis [ex-a-gee-sis (“ex” – out of)] basis. Exegesis is what Jesus Christ referred to as “having ears to hear.” It is the mindset that instead of injecting our own opinions into the Scripture, we humbly extract God’s will for us from the Scripture without question or argument. The exegete is totally subservient to his or her Lord and Master’s Word, the final say in the on-going war of biblical interpretation. In I Samuel 15, Samuel was the exegete while Saul was the eisigete. Samuel is now honored among the faithful while Saul was removed from the throne of Israel. Just how we interpret God’s Word has the most serious of consequences.

Eisigesis views the Word of God as a collection of “stories, historical fiction and fables” to be “interpreted” via one’s own life’s experiences rendering God a god of “confusion” and “contradiction.” It produces a foundation of sand causing both spiritual collapse and spiritual death. The end of eisigesis is unbelief and the end of unbelief is death eternal.

Exegesis views the Word of God as 100% “God breathed,” “Holy Spirit inspired” and is “profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” (Websters 1833 Bible, op. cit., II Timothy 3:16) It has nothing to do with our own life’s experiences, opinions or conjectures. It is not influenced by circumstance or any kind of pragmatically conceived benefit. It produces a foundation of rock solid faith rendering both spiritual stability and spiritual life. The end of exegesis is belief and the end of belief is life eternal.

So dear reader, which are you, an “ice” or an “ex?” Heaven and hell anxiously await your response.

Does An Evangelist Rule Over An Eldership?

We often note that in our society that “the tail wags the dog.” Preconceived notions often change otherwise sound conclusions in matters of policy, values and faith. Without thinking we sometimes accept falsehoods without examination. One such area very seldom examined has to do with congregational government. In one form or another, most denominations and many churches of Christ are “ruled” by one man. He may be called a priest, a pastor or an evangelist. This perceived pattern is so prevalent and is so old, most people actually think it is biblical. But…is it? Now, don’t take my word for any of this, check the book! (Acts 17:11)

First of all, there no longer is a singular priesthood, we are all priests. (I Peter 2:9) Secondly, a “pastor” is part of a plurality of elders, presbyters or bishops, all four terms are interchangeable and are never identified in a singular manner, always in the plural. (Acts 14:23)

When we come to the term “evangelist” we find that the word occurs but three times in Scripture, Acts 21:8, Ephesians 4:11 and II Timothy 4:5, according to Vine’s. In all three instances the word is descriptive of a function, “…a preacher of the gospel,” with no indications of either office or office holder. “Evangelist” is, therefore, a description and not a title.

Finally, when we come to the word “office,” it is used some six times in the New Testament according to Strong’s Concordance:

Romans 11:3 – Paul’s “office” as the apostle to the gentiles
Romans 12:4 – “Office” as synonym for parts of the physical body
I Timothy 3:1 – “Office” of a bishop
I Timothy 3:10 – “Office” of a deacon
I Timothy 3:13 – “Office” of a deacon
Hebrews 7:5 – “Office” of the priesthood

We can safely conclude that the term “evangelist” and the term “office” are never used together as in the above examples. The 1st century evangelist was a preacher of the gospel and not an office holder in the church.

We must now ask the question, “If a plurality of elders governed the congregations of the first century, how did the “one man ruler ship” of congregations come to be to the point of becoming entrenched for 20 centuries or more?” Alexander Strauch puts it very well:

At the beginning of the second century, many churches developed three separate offices or leadership ministries. That was the start of episcopally structured churches:

The overseer (bishop)
A council of elders
A body of deacons

At the start of the second century, the overseer (bishop) presided over one local church, not a group of churches. Thus he is called the monarchical bishop. Through the centuries, inordinate authority became concentrated in the bishop. Unchecked by the New Testament Scriptures, his role continued to expand. The bishop became ruler over a group of churches. Some bishops emerged as supreme over other bishops. Eventually they formed councils of bishops. Finally, in the West, one bishop emerged over every Christian and every church.

But in the churches of the New Testament period, there was no clearly defined, three office system. Instead, there were only two offices as found in Philippians 1:1.

The council of overseer elders
The body of deacons

This Roman Catholic leadership pattern was followed by the Reformers as well, though it was somewhat amended. Instead of a celibate singular congregational priesthood, the Protestants liked to refer to their “priests” as “pastors” and allowed them to marry. However, both Catholics and Protestants continued to require their adherents to go through a mortal man to have access to God…clearly a blatant false teaching in light of Scripture.

The New Testament teaching of a plurality of elders in leadership was largely adhered to during what we now call the “Restoration Movement” during the nineteenth century. However, during the 1920’s, 30’s, 40’s and 50’s, many denominational churches were converted in mass…denominations one week and New Testament churches of Christ the next! Many of these new congregations did not have proper teaching regarding congregational leadership and the denominational “pastor” evolved into the “evangelist.” He continued a “one man rule” as he had before. Unfortunately, a “supporting theology” has sprung up to support the false notion that the “evangelist” is the singular “leader” of the congregation.
The “supporting theology” surrounding the preeminence of the “evangelist” centers primarily on one argument:

• Paul appointed Timothy and Titus as evangelists
• Timothy and Titus appointed “elders in every church”
• Therefore, evangelists are superior and rule over elderships, negating the need for said elderships.

Since Paul simply states the qualifications for elders to Timothy (I Timothy 1:3-7), his authority to appoint such is implied. However, Paul clearly instructs Titus: “For this reason I left you in Crete, that you would set in order what remains and appoint elders in every city as I directed you.” (Titus 1:6 (NASB) We can clearly see that Titus appoints elders, not on any authority of any “office” or because he is an “evangelist,” but on the authority of Paul the apostle.

To complicate matters further, it has become regretably popular among the so-called "mega-churches" among churches of Christ to adopt this error in stealth. These "Emergent" congregations have opted to have "senior ministers" who lead a "council of elders" that act as "deacons" because...these congregations often have no deacons. One man rule that the average person would not even notice. How convenient. These "dual track" congregations, "appearing" bibllical, fool no one, especially the Almighty.

In conclusion, we can safely say that instead of the “evangelist tail” wagging the “eldership dog,” elderships appoint and oversee evangelists…the gospel preachers of our day and time…just as it was in the first century. “One man rule” of a congregation is Romanesque, is extra-biblical and is a false teaching.

The Work of the Evangelist is the Fulfillment of Ministry - II Timothy 4:5 - A Biblical Approach to Gospel Preaching

For some length of time now I have observed “preacher wanted” and “preacher available” ads running on brotherhood web sites. These various sites paint almost endless “job description” pictures. Let me recall a few variable highlights. Regular office hours; yes, no or in-between? Time and energy focus on lesson preparation; priority or not? Proactive or reactive duties? Do the congregations in question have eldership or “business meeting” leadership models? Do these congregational leaderships have macro, micro or delegatory management styles? Are there internal or external ministry focuses? Is schooling or experience seen to be more beneficial? Should the preacher and his wife have children? If so, what age should the children be? Should the preacher be young, old or middle aged? Are there doctrinal expectations or not? Does the congregation focus on local or foreign mission opportunities? We could go on here…but you get the idea. There are endless differences in all of these ads. However, there appears to be one commonality.

Diverse as these ads are, there does seem to be one universal concern stated in most every ad. Nearly every “preacher wanted” and “preacher available” ad asks, or answers, this question: “What is the preachers philosophy towards his ministry and how should he spend his time during a typical day?”

As an elder, soon to be gospel preacher (Lord willing), I would like to answer this question - from the Bible.

As alluded to in the title of this article, the apostle Paul instructs Timothy, his much beloved “son in the gospel,” having much to say regarding his much needed ministry. He summarizes these urgent matters in II Timothy 4:15 (NKJV): “But you be watchful in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.” Just what is the fulfilling work of an evangelist? The fulfilling work of an evangelist is the full time pursuit of the Great Commission of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. The Great Commission is, at the same time, the most profound and yet simply put job description in the history of the world!

Then Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” - Matthew 28:18-20 (NKJV) [Emphasis added – RM]

In this passage we can answer the question asked above, “What is the preacher’s philosophy towards his ministry and how should he spend his time during a typical day?” By identifying the key words in the passage we know the answer:

Go – Disciple – Baptize – Teaching to Observe All Things Taught (Repeat)

As has been often noted, it’s not the difficult to understand passages with which we wrestle, it’s the easy ones! Matthew 28:18-20 is easy to understand, yet hard to follow. It is the contention of this writer that the Great Commission cannot be misunderstood - except - on purpose. Some see an “explanation” to excuse themselves. These would contend that since the Lord was addressing the apostles directly, that this passage applies only to the apostles. However, even the briefest of looks at the passage in context confirms that the phrase; “…teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you…” includes going, discipling, baptizing, teaching and observing for ALL subsequent believers. Jesus Christ Himself reaches out through the Great Commission to each and every convert until the last trumpet sounds. The only difference between the vast majority of Christians and the gospel preacher is that the gospel preacher is blessed with the opportunity of “full time pursuit” of the Great Commission. In a nutshell, this “full time pursuit of the Great Commission” is the “fulfilling work of an evangelist!” Let’s now examine the individual components of the Great Commission in order to flesh out the “…man of God…complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work,” as Paul describes him in II Timothy 3:17.

GO – As did our Lord, we are enjoined to first of all to go to the people, to the souls that are lost. That was the mission of Christ (I Timothy 1:15) and it is the mission of all of us as well as we emulate Him. To accomplish this mission, God “scatters” us into the world through various and sundry ways (Acts 8:4). The gospel preacher is “scattered” today by immersing himself in the life of his community. He supports his community. He participates with his community in its civic, social and school functions. He takes part in community activities. He meets and greets everyone he can. He patronizes local businesses. He makes himself available to speak at public and private events of various kinds. He makes himself available to the media to be interviewed whenever a matter of religion or morality is in the news. Most importantly, he always invites all those whom he meets to some kind of church function – always. The gospel preacher knows that he can never proclaim the “good news” to someone he has yet to meet, as Paul passionately told the Roman church (Romans 10:14). Going and meeting people is only the beginning of the preachers fulfillment of his task. Going makes discipleship possible.

DISCIPLE – As did our Lord, once He met and called people to Himself, He began the process of building eternal relationships with them. He did this, not by merely introducing Himself, He did it by sharing His very life with them – as should the gospel preacher. Over time the disciples of Christ became His friends (John 15:12-17). Jesus accomplished this by not only calling the disciples by name, he called them to a greater purpose in life (Matthew 4:19). The gospel preacher shares his life with his many friends in the community, calling them as well to a greater purpose in their lives. He shares his home. He shares his milestones. He shares his events. He shares his activities. He shares his table. He shares his time. He shares his interests. He shares his resources – and - as with all people, the gospel preacher will be judged according to his attention to the needs of others, especially the “least among us” (see Matthew 25:31-46). All of this sharing, however, is not done alone! This sharing is meshed with that of other Christians, a servant-hood concurrently rendered to the congregation’s community friends. As a result, many Christians begin to share their various lives with the community. Most importantly, many Christians begin to invite all these community friends to study the Scriptures. Invitations to study God’s Word are given often and by multiple Christians – always – as the congregation, along with the gospel preacher, share their lives with their ever closer community friends. Going, meeting and discipling takes the gospel preacher only part way in the fulfillment of his task. Discipleship make baptisms possible.

BAPTIZE – Through the “foolishness of preaching,” (I Corinthians 1:21) disciples become Christians as God adds “such as are being saved” to the church of Christ upon their baptism (Acts 2:47). Baptism is the “hinge” of life. It marks the most radical transformation one can experience this side of eternity. Before baptism we are “dead in our sins.” After baptism we become the “temple of the Holy Spirit.” Though by no means is baptism an end in itself – in fact, going, discipling, teaching and observing are all for naught without it. Noting all of these facts, the gospel preacher must make the baptism of new disciples a key priority, along with the rest of the congregation. Once people have been met, befriended and discipled the gospel of Christ must be presented in completeness and clarity in a number of diverse study settings. These study settings must be consistent with the direction of the eldership, appropriate to the needs of the students and complimentary of the gospel preachers training and abilities. Jesus said that He “came to seek and save that which was lost” (Luke 19:10). We too, by extension, must focus on “seeking and saving” the lost – salvation that is impossible without baptism into Christ! In order for this focus to manifest itself, the gospel preacher must be ready, willing and able to preach and teach salvation to the various and sundry groups of people he comes into contact with. Baptism closes the sale, as it were. Baptism is the hinge on which the open door of heaven swings. Baptism is the place, time and setting where the “work of God” is accomplished (Colossians 2:12). His work is accomplished nowhere else! Baptism ushers in salvation and provides teaching opportunities for the saved who then - in turn - begin to go, disciple, baptize and “teach all things commanded” themselves!

TEACHING TO OBSERVE ALL THINGS TAUGHT (REPEAT) – By inspiration, Paul puts heavy, solemn and substantial emphasis on the continual and on-going preaching of God’s Word to the congregation. He presses the point to the young evangelist, Timothy:

I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom: preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction. – II Timothy 4:2 (NASB)

In addition to keeping the congregation doctrinally pure (See vs. 3 and 4), Timothy is subsequently enjoined by Paul to be “sober in all things, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist and fulfill his ministry” (See vs.5). And why is this? In addition to preaching the gospel to the lost and fighting off error, the gospel preacher is to prepare the entire congregation to teach others. Earlier, Paul told Timothy; “And the things that you have heard from me among many witnesses, commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” – (II Timothy 2:2 (NKJV). This somber task was previously emphasized to Timothy by Paul in I Timothy 4:13; “Till I come, give attention to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine.” (NKJV)

As did our Lord with His disciples, the greatest amount of time and effort is centered on the preparation and presentation of the Word of God to the congregation. Because individual time and opportunity are fleeting, the gospel preacher must “commit” the knowledge and training of the continual presentation [the Great Commission] of the Gospel of Christ (I Corinthians 15:1-8) to the “faithful” in order for them to “teach others also.”

CONCLUSION:

The philosophy and structure of gospel preaching is revealed, evident and spelled out in the Great Commission. The gospel preacher is to spend whatever daily time given him by God to go, disciple, baptize and teach all things commanded by our Lord in order that the legacy of the gospel will be sustained beyond our time here on earth. “We are saved to save others.”