All have authority for what they do

 

Consider how fragmented the religious world is today. Do all have authority for what they do? Yes! However, most people do not have the same source of authority. It might be their own, an organization’s or even the Lord’s. As long as man rejects the need to have one source of authority, religious division will always exist.

 

Our God knew that unity would require one source of authority. Our Lord has all the authority (Matt. 28:18) and left us with His written word. Because of this, mankind must have Biblical authority for all that we do in order to be pleasing to God (Rom. 10:17; Heb. 11:6). This source of authority is being rejected by the majority of religious people today. One might wonder how this could happen when the Bible is regarded by most people as the inspired word of God. The answer is found in several forms of faulty thinking….

 

It is inspired but left to private interpretation

 

Is it possible for many people to understand the Bible in the same way? Yes! We are clearly told that the Bible is not left up to private interpretation (II Pet. 1:20-21), yet many make the claim that the Bible can be interpreted different ways (i.e. people can look at the same passage and come to different understandings). Their conclusion is that people can believe and practice different things and all still be acceptable to God. If this is true, then either God did not intend to communicate to man in a way that all could understand, or God did not expect mankind to understand the scriptures alike. In either case, why would God even speak at all then?

 

The fact is, the problem is not with the inspired word – the problem is with man. Many things can hinder people from reading and comprehending what the Lord has said. First and foremost, I again must point out that if man already thinks the Bible cannot be understood alike, then they have lost before they get started. The gospel message was written in a way that there can be only one proper conclusion (Gal. 1:6-9). Those who respect this can obtain unity in understanding (I Cor. 1:10).

 

It is inspired, but it has to make sense to me

 

Too many times in Bible discussions, I hear people read a verse and then say, “I know what is says, but…”  Notice that they recognize what the Bible says – they are instead questioning why God said that. For example, people read Ephesians 5:19 and often tell me, “Yes Chuck, we should sing spiritual songs to God. And yes, we can sing without the aid of mechanical instruments. However, I do not see why it would be wrong to use mechanical instruments in worship.” God has given them enough info to enable obedience. The problem is clearly not with God’s word – the problem is with people expecting answers to unnecessary questions.

 

Also consider Genesis 4 – Cain knew he needed to sacrifice to God. He did not think it mattered what he offered to God though (verse 1-6). No matter how extensive or well-thought out Cain’s ideas were, they do not change what God already stated. In fact, God reminded Him of exactly this (verse 7)!  Many religious people love the Bible and claim that it is inspired and understandable. Despite this, they believe they can reason through God’s word to add things not explicitly stated.

 

 

It is inspired but takes a backseat to feelings and experiences

 

This problem goes beyond our last point. It is one thing to say that the Bible is the inspired word of God. What good is belief in the Bible if our experiences and feelings are also given authority? From a Biblical standpoint, they cannot. We are clearly told that whatever we do in word or deed must be done by the authority of Jesus Christ (Col. 3:17). It does not matter if someone argues to give feelings/experience equal authority to the Bible, more authority or even less authority – Colossians 3:17 teaches that the only acceptable for of authority is that of Christ.

 

How would you react if an angel of God spoke to you? The apostle Paul said that if an angel preaches any other gospel unto you, let him be accursed (Gal. 1:8). God’s word should be the first and last word on anything. It does not matter what one feels based upon some experience. All that matters is that we go to the scriptures for doctrine, for correction, for reproof and for instruction in righteousness (II Tim. 3:16).

 

It is inspired but is not completely accurate

 

Usually when a person makes this argument, the parts of the Bible that they feel are unreliable are the things that a person does not want to accept. The obvious problem with this is that it also discredits the parts of the Bible that they deem as correct. Why? Because if parts of the Bible are untruth, then none of the Bible is trustworthy. It is either 100% right or 100% wrong.

 

Jesus used this logic in discrediting the false accusation that He healed people by the power of Beelzebub (Luke 11:15). If that be true, then Satan would be fighting against himself (verse 18). Either Jesus healed because He has the power of God, or else He cannot have power at all. It makes no sense for Him to heal people of demon possession via the power of the ruler of demons. Thus, we cannot accept parts of the Bible while at the same time rejecting other parts.

 

Every religious person claims to have authority for what they do. I agree that they all reference some sort of authority. However, most do not accept the supreme authority of Jesus Christ (Matt. 28:18). May we fully accept the Bible as the inspired word of God without any conditions, additions or reservations.

 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Chuck                                                                                                                                                                    

Respecting the Holy Spirit

 

The Bible contains some warnings regarding the Holy Spirit – there are certain things we should never do to Him. Consider these admonitions.

 

• “Do not quench the Spirit” (I Thess. 5:19)
• “Do not grieve the Holy Spirit,” (Eph. 4:30)
• “Whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him” (Matt. 12:32)

 

The Holy Spirit is part of the Godhead (Rom. 1:20) and is to be recognized as God just like the Father and Son (Acts 5:3-4; Heb. 1:8-9). Each part of the Godhead plays a part in the plan of redemption. Therefore, our actions toward Him can help us get to heaven or prevent us.  We must never minimize the Holy Spirit’s role. This is why the statements above were given concerning the Spirit.

 

What role did the Spirit play in helping man get to heaven? The answer is given in John 16:13: “However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come.”  Without the Holy Spirit coming upon the apostles as promise and in fulfilled in Acts 2:1-4, then we would not know the will of God.  We could not even go into all the world and preach the gospel so people can be saved (Mark 16:15-16).

 

Knowing all of this, we can understand why quenching, grieving or blaspheming the Spirit puts our soul in jeopardy. Those who refuse to accept the gospel message are essentially rejecting the Holy Spirit. The inspired writers of the scriptures were moved by the Holy Spirit (II Pet.1:20-21).  This is why Paul told the brethren at Rome to listen to the message – in doing so they were being led by the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:14). They were not led in some mystical, mysterious way. It simply means when we do what the spirit revealed, we are following Him. May we always respect the Holy Spirit.

 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                          Chuck                                  

The church is not a franchise 

 

In last week’s bulletin, we discussed the subject of church funds and examined what you can and cannot use these funds for. What we need to discuss further is the relationship between churches. After all, some religious groups are organized like a fast food franchise. In other words, you might own a local McDonalds, but as a franchise you send money to the corporate head to cover licensing costs, advertising, etc.

 

Churches of our Lord that you read about in the bible are not franchises. They did not send money to a centralized organization in charge of erecting church buildings, advertising, placing preachers, printing teaching material, etc. Instead, the local churches are self-governing and autonomous. With Christ being the head of the church (Col. 1:18), every local congregation takes care of its own business.

 

To be clear, God recognizes no universal church of Christ “organization”. There is no pattern or authority for this in the Bible.  The New Testament contains no faithful religious organization larger than the local church. Consider why seven letters were written to seven different churches of Christ in Asia (Rev. 2-3). There was no “head church” to filter a message through. Instead, a letter was written to each independent church.

 

Of course, this system of organization is very different from most denominations today. Most groups have an earthly headquarters, appoint people to various centralized leadership positions and devise their own bylaws for the organization. These rules are enforced, and those who do not abide by them might be ousted.

 

As for the Lord’s church as described in the New Testament, a local group that wanders away from following Christ will not have a direct impact on any other church that is His. Why? They take care of their own business and have Christ as their head. A local church may stray, but this will not drag down the “universal” church belonging to Christ. Contrast this with the denominational model described earlier. If the “head church” strays from Christ, then the entire organization will stray (and because they are using a non-Biblical organization model, they are already straying).

 

Because the churches of Christ are independent, each local group decides what they can afford to do – TV programs, radio shows, paying for a preacher full time, owning a building to meet within, etc.  These are all local decisions – no other church of Christ can interfere with the decision-making.

 

This does not mean that local churches have nothing to do with each other. In New Testament times, brethren had fellowship with one another. Paul visited many churches and even sent greetings from churches (Rom. 16:16). While Christians are encouraged to visit and worship with faithful congregations when travelling, they do not have a right to interfere with their affairs.

 

If two local, independent churches are both faithfully following the head – Christ – there should be no doctrinal differences. This makes sense because to abide in Christ’s doctrine of Christ means we are right with our God (II John 9). If you visit a place that teaches different things than where you have been going, that means they do not have the same doctrine. One group might be right while the other is wrong, or they might both wrong. If they differ on doctrinal matters, though, they both cannot be right (I Cor. 1:10)!

 

As you seek for the truth (Matt. 7:7), keep in mind that the denominational/franchise concept many religious groups use today is not found in the Bible. Instead, there is the church Jesus built (Matt. 16:16; Acts 20:28). Make sure you seek that one.

 

                                                                                             Chuck 

 

What if I like having
instrumental music in worship?

 

When discussing the subject of instrumental music in worship, most people are quick to defend the practice by simply saying that they like it. Interestingly, God likes it too! Yes, you heard me right. God not only likes instrumental music in worship, He demands and commands it. Let’s take a closer look at this subject.

 

You cannot find a clearer passage of scripture to reveal God’s expectations for worship than Colossians 3:16. “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.”

 

This verse is plain and clear – Christians are commanded to use a specific instrument for music in worship, namely their voices. This helps us understand why psalms and hymns and spiritual songs were listed. These forms of music contain words that we can use to praise the Lord and teach and admonish one another with. In contrast, the notes made by mechanical instruments cannot teach, admonish or offer praise.

 

Remember, the purpose of this article is to determine what is expected out of saints when they worship the Lord musically. Consider also Paul’s argument in I Corinthians 14:16. “What is the conclusion then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will also pray with the understanding. I will sing with the spirit, and I will also sing with the understanding.”  Here again we see that we must understand what we are singing – merely offering music as general praise is not enough. Clearly, 1 Cor. 14:16 is not an admonition to “play” some sort of mechanical instrument with understanding.

 

Just as we need Biblical authority to use our voices as instruments to please our God, we should also seek Biblical authority to use mechanical instruments in worship. The fact is, the only instrument authorized is the voice. Many religious groups today will play instruments during prayer or when a teacher is winding down his lesson. Just as there is no scripture to support mechanical instruments for praising God in song, there is no Biblical support musical accompaniment during prayers and preaching either.

 

The verses of the New Testament feature a consistent pattern of acapella singing. When Paul and Silas were cast into prison and started to sing, is it logical to assume that they also started to play instruments (Acts 16:25)? Of course not. If we were hypothetically commanded to both sing and play instruments, then it would be sinful to sing without instrumental music. On top of that, it would be sinful if everyone was just singing and not playing an instrument.

 

“Is it wrong to sing praises to God without mechanical instruments?” Every time I have asked this question to someone advocating for instrumental music, the answer has always been “No!”  I then ask how they can be so sure it is not wrong.  My purpose is to get them to realize that Biblical authority is necessary and that anything else is just an opinion. I recall attending a denominational church years ago where a man got up and played a “spiritual song” that consisted solely of musical notes. There were no words at all. How does this match the instructions of 1 Cor. 14:16 or Col. 3:16? We need to listen to our God and walk by faith to please Him (Heb. 11:6). Only those who listen to His words and abide are walking by faith (Rom. 10:17).

 

                                                                                               Chuck

 

The penalty is not a sin

 

      I recall in times past that a person taking our Bible course sent in a question. She was concerned over people who murdered and are now on death row. She wanted to know that since murder is a sin, why would anyone be in favor of the death penalty, since that is murder too?

 

What she needed to understand, as we all need to, is that there is a big difference in the eyes of God between murdering someone and justice being carried out. In Genesis 20:13, God said, “Thou shalt not murder.” In the next chapter God said, “He who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death” (21;12).

 

One might conclude that in both cases two people die and there is no difference. There is a difference. One is murder, the other is the penalty for murder. The latter is not sin because sin is transgression of law, and to administer the penalty for sin is not transgression, it’s obedience (I Jn. 3:4).

 

The question is, has this fact changed now that we are under the gospel and the old laws have been done away with (Col. 2:14)? Man is still told not to murder (Rom. 1:29). If someone does murder, are we allowed to kill them? The scriptures do not authorize someone to take the law into their own hands. The laws of the land are for us (Rom. 13:3-4), and we must be subject to them (vr. 5).

 

What should our disposition be if there was a death penalty? Would such be against God? The apostle Paul didn’t think so. He stated that if he did anything worthy of death he would not refuse it (Acts 25:11). If Paul wouldn’t object if he was the one facing the sentence, it is right to think he would object if it was anyone else? Of course not.

 

May we see the difference between murdering someone and one facing the penalty for murder. What our God wants from man is obedience. The penalty for a crime is not a crime!

 

                                                                                                                                                                                               Chuck