We are told that there is a “common salvation” (Jude 3). This means that if you are a Christian, then anyone familiar with the Bible should know exactly what you did to be saved. Does that describe you? If not, something is amiss.

Anyone who was born again did so after receiving the word of God, which is what is able to save our souls (I Pet. 1:23; James 1:21).  The gospel of Jesus Christ needs to be heard in order to produce faith (Rom. 10:17; Acts 11:14). There is no way anyone can be saved without first hearing the message about Christ (Acts 8:35).

Not everyone who hears the gospel message believes it.Only those who believe the message can be saved (John 8:24; John 20:31: I Cor. 1:21). Keep in mind that faith makes it possible to be saved, but faith alone does not save (James 2:26). Those who believe the gospel message are those that gladly receive the word (Acts 2:41).

Those who truly believe in Jesus must be willing to confess their faith in Him (Rom. 10:9-10; Acts 8:37). It is possible to believe in Jesus but not be saved if we are unwilling to confess Him before men (John 12:42-43). Again, confessing Christ only makes it possible to be saved, but just confessing faith in Christ does not save you (Matt. 8:28-29).

When someone is willing to confess their faith in Jesus, he or she must make up their mind to change their ways, turn to Christ and repent of their sins (Acts 3:19; II Cor. 7:10; Acts 2:38). There must be a desire to turn away from walking in sin (Col. 3:5). But again, just stopping sinful activity does not save you. It just makes it possible to be saved.

To be born again, one must be born of water and the spirit (John 3:5). This is where one puts off the old man AND puts on the new man by being baptized into Christ (Rom. 6:3-7; Acts 22:16; Col. 2:12). Like the previous point, baptism does not save unless the other steps were also done. If not, one just gets wet (Acts 19:1-5). Does this describe perfectly what you did to be saved? If not, then something is wrong. Please contact us if you want to discuss further.

Chuck 

As a teacher of the word of God, I love a good illustration. Still, I have to remind myself that there is an order to be respected.  For example, I could tell you that I shed blood when I cut myself while rushing through a shave. I could explain that this blood was shed without purpose. It was not planned, and if I was told ahead of time, I would have done all I could to avoid having my blood shed.

I could have then contrasted this illustration with the blood that Jesus shed, how it was done with purpose, etc. Everything in this hypothetical scenario is true, but the order is backwards. Rather than telling a story and bringing Biblical applications to it, I should use God’s word as my starting point.

Notice how this example keeps the emphasis on God’s word. “Let’s open our Bibles and read the following text: John 19:13-30.” From there I could speak about what happened prior to Christ going to Calvary and the people crying out “Crucify Him!.” Then I would speak about the blood that was poured out from His wounds (Head, hands, feet and side). I could focus on the power and purpose of His blood. I might then contrast that with the uselessness of my own blood via the shaving illustration mentioned above (lack of power, lack of purpose, lack of planning).

As a teacher, I need to remind myself that a Bible lesson must focus on what was revealed in the scriptures, not focused on me trying to be creative. Years ago, it was instilled in me that the best way to interpret scripture is with scripture. We know that in Acts 17:11 those who went home after hearing Paul speak did not go and ponder the illustrations he spoke that made an impact on them. No, they searched the scriptures for answers. We want people to remember the word of God – that needs to be our focus.

There is nothing wrong with a good illustration, but it is to come from a great Bible text! Remember, the word of God is what produces genuine faith (Rom. 10:17). May we all seek to build this lasting faith as we teach those around us.

                                                                                            Chuck 

If you read last week’s bulletin, we dealt with the text of I Corinthians 5. The church at Corinth was rebuked for not exercising church discipline. The church is to be pure and kept unspotted from the world (Eph. 5:25-27). Therefore, when a member of the church is walking in sin (unwilling to repent), that local body of saints must deal with it the Lord’s way.

Without repeating the whole article, Christians need to deal with these situations. It might seem cut and dry as to what should be done with a wayward member who acts like all is fine because Christians know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump (I Cor. 5:6). However, brethren are often tempted to neglect their duties. This is especially true when a member just walks away and leaves. If they are no longer around to leaven the whole lump, is the church still expected to exercise discipline?  Absolutely. Let’s take a closer look at this.

It may be technically true that you cannot really “withdraw” yourself from one who is no longer around, but discipline still needs to be taken. Consider Galatians 6:1. Paul wrote, “Brethren, if a man is overtaken in any trespass, you who are spiritual restore such a one in the spirit of gentleness, considering yourself lest you also be tempted.”  James pretty much said the same thing when he spoke of brethren that wander away and how faithful brethren should try to bring them back (James 5:19-20).

We need to see that fallen brethren need to be dealt with whether they act as if nothing is wrong or if they walk away and stop assembling. A member who walks away is sinning, and it would be wrong for a local church to ignore. But what is a church to do? They should do the very same thing as when someone sinfully walks among them.

If a person leaves a church, they have “withdrawn” themselves. However, the Bible speaks about “marking” or “noting those” who are walking disorderly. The Thessalonians were told, “And if anyone does not obey our word in this epistle, note that person and do not keep company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet do not count him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother,” (II Thess. 3:14-15). This is the same idea presented in Romans 16:17-18.

Our goal is to help the fallen return. This is true whether they recognize that they have fallen or not. If a brother walks away and calls me up and acts as if nothing has changed, he would be wrong. If I act as if nothing has changed other than not seeing him at church services, I am not fulfilling my duty of marking him to inspire the godly shame necessary for repentance.

Today’s Christians need to be particularly careful about making the wayward comfortable in their sin. Social media is called “social” for a reason. Still, we should never stop loving our fallen brethren. We should continue to pray for them and, as the II Thessalonian text above mentions, we should never treat them as an enemy. The wayward should be greeted cheerfully rather than being ignored. However, we need to be careful that we do not use social media to accidentally praise those walking in rebellion against God. 

A member of the church who no longer accepts what we teach might say, “You can’t withdraw from me, I withdraw from you.” Fine. But Christians still have the duty to try and bring them back. If they refuse to repent, we must note them and not keep company with them. This is true for all who go back into the pollutions of the world (II Pet. 2:20-22). As children of God, we must remember that sin is sin!

                                                                                                Chuck

In a recent Bible class, we studied the subject of church discipline. In I Corinthians 5, Paul rebuked the church at Corinth for not dealing with a brother who was caught up in sin. They were told to deliver such a one to Satan in order to hopefully save him if he repented (verse 5). The faithful brethren were told not to even eat (socialize) with him (verse 11).

To help illustrate this, let me present a scenario. A husband and wife have a young son who is eight years old. One day, the son and his mother get into an argument and the boy slaps his mom in the face. Later that day the husband (dad) comes home from work and hears what the son does. Aside from being punished, the father says to his son, “I want you to go to your mother and apologize to her.”

What if the boy does not apologize but wants to go fishing with his dad as planned – should the dad take him fishing? I know we would all say no! What if the son still refused to apologize to his mom the next day but wanted to go play ball with his dad as planned – should the dad take him and play ball? Again, I know we would all say no!

Why are we consistently saying no? Why should the father not take the son and do those fun things? The answer is obvious. If the father did that, he would be minimizing the severity of what the son did to his mother. It might even communicate approval. This is the lesson we need to learn concerning Christ and His church.

When someone sins, it can affect the rest of the members of the local church. As Paul said, “A little leaven leavens the whole lump,” (verse 8). Let us not forget that it is also a sin against the Lord and brings reproach upon His church (Eph. 5:27). When a Christian sins and does not repent, they are to be loved and admonished as a brother, not as an enemy (II Thess. 3:14-15). Although the father wants his son to apologize to his wife, it does not mean that the father hates his son until the apology is given. The father should not hate the son, but there must still be consequences for both the error and refusing to apologize. As Christians, we must all recognize this valuable lesson.

Chuck 

I do not mind studying the Bible with anyone. The problem comes when people throw out all common sense when handling the scriptures. Such happened to me this week, and I found it frustrating. I think there are many lessons we can draw from this experience.

I was asked if the event described in John 16:25 had happened to me. The person I was studying with said it had happened to him. “These things I have spoken to you in figurative language; but the time is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figurative language, but I will tell you plainly about the Father.”

I explained that in this text, Jesus is specifically dealing with His apostles. He is describing what is going to happen after the Holy Spirit comes upon them. This was mentioned earlier in the chapter (verse 13). The Lord brought this event up a number of times in the previous couple of chapters (14:26; 15:26).

Did this happen to me? Yes and no. The promise was given directly to the apostles, but everyone after them (including me) benefited from the inspired message that they recorded. In Acts 2:1-4, the Holy Spirit came upon the apostles and then they spoke the word of God (verse 6). Everybody who has heard the gospel of Christ had heard this plain message about the Father described in John 16:25. But did this happen to me in a literal sense? No, I was not alive when Jesus gave this premonition, nor was I in the audience.

However, the message that the apostles spoke was not a mystery. Paul wrote: “How that by revelation He made known to me the mystery (as I have briefly written already, by which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)” (Eph. 3:3-4).  The reveals that God’s message is plain and understandable by all, which is consistent with John 16:25.

Having said all of this, why did this man ask me the question in the first place? They are many who think mankind needs divine intervention today to help us understand the message given by the apostles (the Bible). This logic is weak – why would our Lord send the Holy Spirit to guide His disciples into all truth if everyone else would not be able to understand the message that the apostles would then be preaching?  

To help this gentleman rightly divide the word, we read I Corinthians 1:26-27. As Paul said, not many mighty, noble or wise according to the flesh would be called. Few of these people would respond to the gospel because they considered it beneath them.  Consider also these words of Jesus: “I thank you Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and prudent and have revealed them to babes,” (Matt. 11:25).

Knowing this, I then answered “yes” to the original question. I can plainly understand the heavenly message. I do not need the Holy Spirit to help me understand what the Holy Spirit revealed. Why? Because the message was revealed in a way that was already understandable to those who are looking for the truth. We already noted that the message is hidden to those unwilling to see it. It is not because they cannot see it – rather because they do not want to!

I finally asked the person if he could pick up serpents and not be harmed as Jesus stated in Mark 16:18. He said that verse was not meant for him. Even though I agreed, it caused me to wonder – why consider the context surrounding the Mark passage but not the John passage? For this man, the only rule is apparently “no rules”.

Chuck