Do you trust what was written?

      There is no question that the Bible is rejected by the majority of this word. Even religious people are questioning the inspiration of the scriptures. In many circles, what is written does not have the final say. Reason being, there are numerous people who have said that God has spoken to them personally, separate from the Bible. I have been told this, personally, many times. 

The scriptures are either inspired, or they are not (II Tim. 3:16). You simply can’t have the word of God that was written down, support the idea that God speaks to man directly today. Why not? Because the Lord told us He wouldn’t (Heb. 1:1-2). So did God lie when He gave us His inspired word? If He did, then how can you trust what He tells someone directly today? Think about it.

It is strange to me when people say that God spoke directly to them, that they experienced something that Christ’s own apostles didn’t experience. God did not speak directly to the apostles. It was Jesus who promised the Holy Spirit to come upon them to guide them into all truth (Jn. 16:13; Acts 2:1-4). After all, this was going to be a message that was for all people. So why would God talk directly to someone today?

Here are two questions that I ask people who say God spoke to them. First: Did God say something different than what you read in the Bible? If their message contradicts anything that He already said, then it will make God a liar – and it is impossible for God to lie (Titus 1:2). Second: Did God say something that He already revealed in His written message – the Bible? If they say yes, I think to myself, why did God have it recorded if He is just going ahead and talking to people personally? Not only that, if he doesn’t speak to everyone, is He playing favorites? He already revealed He is not a respecter of persons (Acts 10:34).

I don’t claim to know what people think they heard. I am not calling them a liar. I believe they believe it was God. But for me to believe it was God I would have to reject His written word, which we should never do!

                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Chuck                                  

It doesn’t make you a false teacher 

 The apostle Paul, like the other apostles, found himself being falsely accused. It can be very frustrating for anyone who has people attack their character with accusations that are not true. On top of that, what makes it worse is when people believe it. The reason these evil doers have success, is because they poison the minds of folks (Acts 14:2). Those who teach God’s word, are not guilty simply because they… 

…have confidence in what they say

Just because someone speaks with conviction, it doesn’t automatically mean they are arrogant and wrong in what they say. Having said that, we must, at the same time interject that being confident in what you believe doesn’t mean you are automatically right (Acts 18:24-26). But back to our first point. There are those who react negatively to someone who speaks with certainty. This does not make a person false teacher. As a matter of fact, one ought to be a little apprehensive to believe someone who is unsure (II Tim. 4:2-5).

…expose those in opposition

It seems politically correct for individuals to stand for something, without standing against. Such should not be the case religiously. How can you stand for truth without standing against error? I know it makes people mad when someone tells them they are wrong, but it doesn’t make someone a false teacher simply because they point the finger (Psa. 119:104; I Jn. 4:1).

…don’t create a grey area

Faithful teachers get themselves in all kinds of hot water when they speak in absolutes. It’s easy to accuse someone by labeling them to others by uttering, “It’s their way or the highway!”  In truth, it is to be the Lord’s way, regardless. The gospel doesn’t leave any wiggle room for those who want to tweak it a little (Gal. 1:6-9; II Jn. 9). When you say that there is but one way, you will find yourself in hot water pretty quick.  The fact is, it doesn’t make you a false teacher when you are uncompromising.

…changed their beliefs

This was the very tactic they used on Paul. They wondered how this person who once persecuted those who followed Christ, now preached Christ (Acts 9:21,23). Just because someone changed what he once believed, doesn’t mean they are a false teacher. It wouldn’t make sense to for someone who realized they were wrong, to change and not share the reasons why. It seems proper to tell others why you changed.

…accepted money for preaching

Knowing that there are plenty of false teachers that are making mega amounts of money for their work, understandably, people are turned off of religion because of that. However, for someone who preaches the gospel and accepts a living wage, it doesn’t mean they are automatically a false teacher. Godly men can accept a wage, just as they did in New Testament times (II Cor. 11:8; I Tim. 5:18). Those who are in it for the money, do so for all the wrong reasons.

…are accused by other teachers

One is not qualified to say someone else is wrong, just because they claim to be someone special. The religious leaders in Christ’s time swayed the people simply because they were “teachers” (Matt. 27:15-26).  Since when is it acceptable for false teachers to accuse, but not be accused? The truth is, there are good reasons to find fault, but these six facts don’t prove anything automatically.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                   Chuck

Signs your preacher does not believe in Biblical baptism

      How many of you would go to a racist to get a proper understanding of equality? Would you go to a vegetarian to learn the benefits of eating meat? In both cases, you would expect to get a slanted answer. I asked those questions as preparation for this one – why would you go to a denominational teacher for baptism? He may be willing to baptize you. He may even want to baptize you!. However, the baptism is probably not being done for Biblical reasons.

The Bible clearly teaches that baptism is for the remission of sins (Acts 22:16) and that is the final step in putting off the old man of sin and putting on Christ (Rom. 6:3-7). Knowing these things, here are several signs that a preacher does not believe baptism has anything to do with salvation:

1. Sets up a future date and thinks there is no urgency – unlike what the Bible teaches (Acts 8:36-38).

2. Is convinced you are already a Christian before you are baptized – unlike what the Bible teaches (Acts 2:38).

3. Wants it to be some kind of ceremony where others have to be present or participate – unlike what the Bible teaches (Acts 16:33).

4. Promotes the belief that works having nothing to do with salvation – unlike what the Bible teaches (James 2:24).

5. Stresses the importance of being baptized as “an outward sign of an inward grace” – unlike what the Bible teaches (I Pet. 3:21).

6. Teaches that people are baptized into the kingdom/the church – unlike what the Bible teaches (Gal. 3:27).

                                                                                      Chuck

Effective Discipline 

Everyone needs moments of correction and rebuke throughout their lives. We need this in all of our relationships - parent to a child, a boss to an employee and even the church to a wayward member (I Cor. 5). When people do things that are wrong, there must be some kind of disciplinary action. If not, the problem will only get worse. Does the Bible give us any insight as to what would be effective disciple? The answer is yes. Let’s take a look at this important issue from a Biblical perspective.

Be angry and sin not

The brethren at Ephesus were warned about allowing their anger to cause them to sin (Eph. 4:26). When someone does something wrong, individuals will obviously be upset. However, we must use self-control or we could easily do or say something wrong too! When a rebuke is carried out with a lost temper, the person is just venting rather than trying to provide correction. There is a good reason why God’s people are to be slow to wrath (James 1:19).

Be consistent

Nothing destroys the effectiveness of discipline more than being inconsistent. Consider a parent who tells a child not to do something. The child does it and nothing is said. Then the child does it again and this time he is rebuked. And then another time it is overlooked. This does nothing more than create confusion and waste of time. Discipline must be done right away every time (Prov. 13:24).

Be unwavering

There is no sense in saying, “Stop! Stop! Stop! Stop! I said, Stop! Okay fine, go ahead!” Such behavior teaches that obedience is optional. The guilty will try to justify their actions – that is what the guilty do. To exercise proper discipline, one has to be firm (Gal. 2:11).

Be certain

Discipline is necessary, but it must be justified. We can cause great harm if we rebuke an innocent person. Jesus warned about being angry with a brother without a cause (Matt. 5:22). Getting the facts is vital because wrongly punishing someone will only provoke them. Consider Paul’s warning to fathers not to provoke their children to wrath (Eph. 6:4). We need to be swift to hear and slow to speak for this very reason (James 1:19).

Be willing to enforce punishment

We can see how punishment works if we consider a parent who is applying all the principles discussed so far. For example, a father might tell his child, “Since you did what you were told not to, you will lose your cell phone privileges for two days.” The child says, “That’s not fair!”  The dad calmly responds, “Do you want to go for 3 days?” The child then raises their voice again and says, “You have got to be kidding me!” Then the father calmly says, “That’s 3 days, do you want to go for 4?”  By this time the child realizes they need to be quiet and accept the punishment before it gets worse. The father must now be firm – if he changes his mind and gives the phone back, nothing was accomplished.  The goal is to change the bad behavior (Prov. 22:15).

Effective discipline is not fun and games. Neither giving nor receiving chastening enjoyable, but the end results will hopefully bear fruit (Heb. 12:11). It is totally unacceptable to say that we love someone too much to discipline them. The truth is, we show love by offering discipline as needed (Heb. 12:6).

                                                                                       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