By: Louis Rushmore You state: “The Old Testament canon was accepted as it is at least by the second century B.C. The New Testament canon was accepted within one generation after the death of the apostle John. The Bible canon has stood the tests applied to it by critics throughout the centuries. Counterfeit books of the Bible have been discovered to be false when compared with the genuine. The inspiration of the Bible books is inherent and does not rely upon verification by outside sources.” How do you know that “The Old Testament canon was accepted as it is at least by the second century B.C.”?  How do you know that “The New Testament canon was accepted within one generation after the death of the apostle John”? These are SERIOUS questions that I would like you to answer. ~ Agabus The querist with the cryptic signature of “Agabus” questions a couple of statements of mine that appear in an article about canonicity.  His critique pertains to my concluding paragraph to the article entitled “Biblical Canonicity.”  Immediately following that paragraph the following list of resources appears.  The substantiation for each affirmation I made in the article, including those under review presently, reside in those citations. Suggested reading includes: Revelation and the Bible by Berkouwer and others, published by Baker Book House (1958); Inspiration and Canonicity of the Bible by Harris, published by Zondervan Publishing House (1974); General Biblical Introduction by Miller, published by Word-Bearer Press (1960); and, Introduction to the New Testament by Thiessen, published by Eerdmans Publishing Co. (1973). The

By: Louis Rushmore “What does the Bible teach about co-habitation? ~ Dan Gannon” The question is short and unadorned.  It is difficult to know the perspective from which the querist poses the inquiry and for what reason it is submitted.  However, a sufficient response, we suppose, is possible by first identifying the definition of “co-habitation,” and second, by taking that definition to the Bible. “Cohabit” means “1 : to live together as or as if a married couple.”  [Merriam Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, (Springfield, Massachusetts: Merriam-Webster, Incorporated) 1993.]  Further, to cohabit is refined to mean:  “1. to live together as husband and wife, usu. without legal or religious sanction.”  [Webster’s Talking Dictionary, (Parsons Technology, Inc.) 1996.]   Another dictionary adds:  “1. To live together as spouses, especially when not legally married.”  [Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia 99, (Redmond, Washington: Microsoft) 1998.] Hence, usually “cohabitation” is distinguished from marriage.  Further, those cohabiting may be a heterosexual couple, but they may instead be (1) homosexuals, (2) lesbians, (3) a plurality of communal, heterosexual participants, (4) polygamists or (5) incestuous parties. Since the 1960s, several variations on the family unit have emerged. More unmarried couples are living together, before or instead of marrying. Some elderly couples, most often widowed, are finding it more economically practical to cohabit without marrying. Homosexual couples also live together as a family more openly today, sometimes sharing their households with the children of one partner or with adopted or foster children. Communal families, made up of groups of related or unrelated people,

By: Louis Rushmore Could you give me a little information on the doctrine of Kingism (70 A D)? ~ Norma Preston Apparently the A.D. 70 Theory predates its introduction into the churches of Christ, but has been popularized by Max R. King of Warren, Ohio.  The proponents of this doctrine are militant.  They have schooled several men over the years in this notion and sent them out to an often unsuspecting brotherhood.  Their literature abounding with this one doctrine is plenteous.  Consequently, several congregations where they have exerted any influence have been troubled and often divided over the A.D. 70 Theory. On the surface, the A.D. 70 Theory hardly appears believable.  It appears absurd that anyone would seriously consider such a doctrine.  Especially religious people who usually exhibit a high regard for the authority of God’s Word and have intense familiarity with it would hardly be expected to be duped by such a thing.  However, the A.D. 70 Theory has been embraced by many anyway.  Part of the reason several have been susceptible to the persuasion of its proponents may be attributable to laxity in personal Bible study before hand. The A.D. 70 Theory portrays all end-of-time events about which the Bible speaks as having already occurred at the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.  For the proponents of this doctrine, all biblical prophecy is fulfilled.  To accomplish this hermeneutically, its proponents have authored an entirely new vocabulary with which to replace biblical vocabulary.  Any doctrine can seem plausible if

By: Louis Rushmore Acts 21 seems to say Paul kept parts of the law.  The apostles wrote a letter to the gentiles “Not to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things”  Acts 15: 28-29 and also Acts 21.  Why did Paul keep the law?  I know alot of people who say Jews must keep parts of the law and gentiles don’t. ~ D. Peery The ministry of the apostle Paul was especially to the Gentiles (Acts 26:16-18; Romans 15:15-16).  He, though, was a Jew who identified with the sect of the Pharisees (Philippians 3:4-8).  Other Pharisees who became Christians were particularly vocal and insistent that Gentiles who became Christians ought to practice Judaism before they could practice Christianity (Acts  15:1-5).  That was the message they brought to the predominantly Gentile church in Antioch of Syria, purportedly from the apostles and elders in the Jerusalem church. The only matter under consideration in Acts 15:6-31 was whether Gentiles were obligated to proselyte to Judaism before they could become Christians.  The apostles and elders in Jerusalem concluded that no such instruction had been received from the Holy Spirit regarding the Gentiles.  They, therefore, sent a letter and preachers to convey that conclusion to the church in Antioch to counter the misinformation that Pharisee Christians had presented there.  The apostles and elders added exhortations about Christian living that addressed the temptations to sin to which Gentiles were especially susceptible. Further, the apostle Paul adamantly taught on several occasions that both Jews

By: Louis Rushmore “Please explain 1 Tim 2:8 re: lifting up holy hands.” Pete Tucker, Edgewood Church of Christ, Columbus, GA “Lifting up holy hands” in the context of 1 Timothy 2:8 refers to a posture of prayer by the male member articulating a public prayer.  The verse reads, “I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.”  The Greek word for “men” here refers to the masculine gender rather than being inclusive of women as in “mankind.”  The brother audibly making the prayer here raises his hands.  The phrase “lifting up holy hands” does not refer to any of the non-verbal participants in that prayer, men or women.  Further, the “lifting up holy hands” is not comparable to the audience raising their hands and swaying, etc. Various postures were employed in biblical times, as now, for prayer.  No particular posture is especially superior to any other posture in prayer.  Prayerful postures include, kneeling (1 Kings 8:54; 2 Chronicles 6:13; Psalms 95:6; Luke 22:41; Acts 9:40), bowing one’s head (Genesis 24:26; Exodus 4:31; 12:27), lying face down (Matthew 26:39), standing or kneeling and raising one’s hands (1 Kings 8:22, 54; Psalms 28:2; 63:4; 88:9), standing (1 Samuel 1:26; Mark 11:25; Luke 18:11, 13). As to the lifting up of the hands, the following can be stated: Vincent says that among the orientals, the lifting up of the hands accompanied the taking of an oath, blessing, and prayer. The custom passed over into the

 Have you ever pondered: “Which books belong in the Bible?” Probably not. The question of biblical canonicity, though perhaps never considered by most people, is of paramount importance if men are to appropriately serve God. God’s Word must be sure in order for men to confidently prepare themselves for eternity. God’s Word must also be free of corruption, subtraction or addition that might otherwise adversely affect that preparation.   Fortunately, mortal man has no need to become alarmed pondering which books belong in the Bible. Our God is powerful enough to preserve his Word. Ample evidence overwhelmingly confirms that the Bible with which we are familiar is the complete and uncorrupted Word of God.   Insofar as translations have been accurately translated from the original languages, those translations are the inspired Word of God. No doctrine has been corrupted in reliable translations. Some translations, however, have not been accurately translated, but there is no doubt concerning the validity of the Bible text in the languages in which it was originally written.   The word “canon” appears in the Greek New Testament about five times (2 Corinthians 10:13, 15-16; Galatians 6:16; Philippians 3:16) and its meaning has been applied to the inspired body of Scripture–the Bible. Frequently, the word “canon” is translated as “rule” and refers to God’s rules by which men are supposed to live righteously before God, and certainly the rules by which men will ultimately be judged for their non-compliance.  “Nevertheless, whereto we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule,

“For Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved” Romans 10:13  “Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.”  Romans 3:28 . . . Galatians 1:6-7 . . .  Sir, I pray that you do not pervert the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.  Salvation Does truly come By Faith Alone by personally praying and receiving Jesus in your life.   I ask that If you are going to quote Gods word, that you study it more and use all the verses concerning Salvation.  Belief brings us Salvation; Active obedience demonstrates that our belief is genuine. I too believe everyone should be Baptized, but only as a profession of Faith to the public and out of obedience to our Lord, but Salvation does not require it.  Works are not a substitute for, but a verification of our faith in Christ.  Sir I do thank you for your time and I pray that you allow God to speak to you more through His Word and to give you understanding.  Faith Alone, Plus Nothing, Minus Nothing.  Please do not deceive people.  May God Help you, Steve Fincher (emphasis added, ler) First, biblical truth is not ascertained by quoting Scripture in isolation from the passage in which it appears and isolated from the general context of the Bible.  From the paragraph above, it appears that the querist imagines that a verbal acknowledgement of Jesus possesses saving quality.  It is clear that the writer above also affirms

Wouldn’t it be good to take the Lord’s Supper to the elderly and infirm?  I have assisted with this in my younger days. Or , can we say the Lord understands? Not many congregations do take Communion to infirm today. ~ Thomas Hall, North Little Rock, AR Five worshipful activities are derived from New Testament passages for the Lord’s church to engage each Lord’s Day. They are communion, giving, singing, preaching and prayer. The assembly is described in Scripture as the whole church come together in one place (1 Corinthians 11:18, 20; 14:23). Whereas giving, singing, preaching and prayer are described in Scripture as occurring ALSO outside the worship assembly, communion is in Scripture confined to the assembly. For instance, regarding communion, “And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread . . .” (Acts 20:7). Further, communion is relatively equal to the other four acts of worship. The elevation of communion by Catholicism to a Sacrament, I believe, has carried over beyond Catholicism. Many people have the notion of a heightened importance of communion over the other four acts of worship. Therefore, well-meaning brethren either request the communion be brought to them when they, due to illness or some other hindrance, are unable to attend the worship assembly, or brethren volunteer to bring communion to those who are unable to participate in the assembly. It would seem to me that consistency would demand that one bring along the collection plate as well

I read your story and was quite puzzled about your references to Christians going to. It seems as though you beleive that our Eternal Salvation has something to do with what we do instead of what we believe. Christ was clear in saying that if you believe on me (Christ) you shall be saved. . . . Please read the parable of the 10 virgins in Mathew and ask yourself why is the the Kingdom of heaven likened to 10 virgins even the foolish ones. and why is outer darkness in Heaven and why would an unbeleiver be on their way to the wedding feast. Could outer darkness be a place where Christians go (5 foolish ones) for a time to receive there punishment for not gaining the oil (yes maybe). Do you REALLY see loss of salvation in this verse or were these people not saved to begin with, if not why are they in heaven already. Non-beleivers are never judged with believers. . . . I just think it is time for Christians to follow the one new commandment that Jesus said, To Love One Another. It is not up to us to stand and judge this Christain or that Christian to. . . . ~ Steve Hazen (emphasis added, ler) John Calvin (1509-1564) popularized some religious tenets so well that together they are commonly referred to as “Calvinism.”  The five cardinal doctrines of Calvinism are easily remembered by the acrostic, TULIP:  Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace and Perseverance of the Saints. 

TITLE:   Hope SpokenTEXT:    Romans 10:13-17THESIS: To Emphasize the urgency with which the Gospel of Hope must be proclaimed to a sin-laden and sorrow-ridden world.SONG:   The Gospel Is For All INTRODUCTION: First, we must define biblical hope and distinguish it from mere earthly hope. Second, each Christian, each congregation of the Lord’s church, each eldership, each preacher and each teacher must prayerfully review his obligation to proclaim God’s Message of Hope. Third, we must identify the target audience to whom we ought to proclaim the Message of Hope. Fourth, we must re-evaluate the available mediums of communicating the divine Message of Hope (of course, with due consideration of biblical authority). BODY: I. Hope Defined. The concept of “hope” may be applied to non-spiritual matters pertaining to the physical universe and one’s existence therein. Further, “hope” may be applied to spiritual matters that transcend one’s physical surroundings. Most people who entertain hope do so with regard to their earthly existence only. Christians frequently entertain hope both regarding their earthly habitation and especially their spiritual citizenship in heaven. Unfortunately, vast numbers of the world’s population entertain neither earthly hope nor spiritual hope. Even more sad, many souls have an empty, false spiritual hope that is not substantiated by God’s Word. The apostle Paul wrote: “If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable” (1 Corinthians 15:19). That sentiment is amplified for those whose hope pertains solely to this physical existence and doesn’t even entertain a heavenly pursuit (Luke 12:16-21). Most of the world’s population exists under some sort of great oppression that does not provide much prospect of hope in this life

Why is it that those who DO emphasize and run around warning people of usually look mentally disturbed and unloving? They appear to be condemning and judgmental displaying characteristics more similar to the Pharisees than Christ. . . . Why is it that many who take the subject of and everlasting torture in a literal burning lake seriously often go insane and many even commit suicide? One would think that the Truth would set them free, not torment their minds to the point they can no longer bear to live. Why is it that when studying church history, those times when the church taught the strongest were the times when the church looked the darkest?  Why is the teaching of usually most prominent among uneducated people easily swayed by superstitions, myths, and traditions of men? And why is it that leadership which uses everlasting punishment as a tool with which to control their congregation usually appear to be power-driven instead of humble like Jesus? Why is it that the more one focuses on and everlasting punishment the more angry and judgmental one becomes while the more one focuses on God’s love and mercy, the more one is actually able to manifest that love and mercy? . . . the concept of (and that is all it is, a false concept) seems to violate everything that is reasonable. It violates the nature of God which is conditional Love. It violates the wisdom of God, the pleasure of God, the promises of

Could you give me some reasonable, civil and scriptural answers to some of these questions? thanks.  Why is it that those who believe in it spend so little of their time and money warning their family, friends, neighbors, business associates and even their enemies of the dire consequences of dying before accepting Jesus Christ as their personal Savior? . . . If was real, the number one occupation of all members of churches should be to determine how to get their community saved. But when we look at the time and money the average Christian or Christian leader spends on evangelism and missionaries, it is usually among the lowest of priorities. How can Christians fill their spiritual time with buffets after Church service, teas, Bible studies, Easter egg hunts, Christmas parties, weekend retreats, and thousands of other activities which take time and money away from getting their community saved for Jesus while millions of souls drop into the fiery lake because no Christian took the time and spend the money to prove they love them as Christ loves them? ~ Gary Amirault, Hermann, MO 65041 The paragraph above is the introduction of a rough dissertation of about 13,500 words in the guise of a question.  In comparison, the ideal article length that normally appears in Gospel Gazette Online is from 1,200 to 1,500 words.  The querist’s introductory paragraph above and the balance of his lengthy manuscript propose to (1) debunk the notion of an eternal, and (2) argue for Universalism.  While we

Not unlike hermeneutics which is being supplanted by the infamous “new hermeneutics,” biblical archaeology is being revamped with a “new” biblical archaeology. In both cases, the old, tried, proven and biblically defensible standards are being wholly undercut and discarded — by “scholars” who demonstrate their agnosticism or worse at every juncture.  Strangely, many “biblical archaeologists” today are openly enemies of the Bible. That being so, the term “biblical” should be dropped. Further, the propositions of both “new hermeneutics” and “new biblical archaeology” contradict the respective topics of hermeneutics and biblical archaeology.  James K. Hoffmier, a professor at Wheaton College, summarizes the perspective of new biblical archaeologists. The result of their scholarly investigations has been that virtually all that the Bible has to say about the early history of Israel has been rejected . . . Gone are Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Joshua and now even David. The Egyptian sojourn and exodus stories, along with Sinai wanderings and Joshua’s military entry into Canaan, have been reduced to retrojections or inventions by later Biblical writers. (James K. Hoffmier, “Of Minimalists and Maximalists,” Biblical Archaeology Review, Vol. 21, No. 2, March/April 1995, p. 22.)These and other biblical events, places and people are touted as “fictional.” (Ibid.) New biblical archaeologists picture “. . . the emergence of Israel from varied groups of pastoral nomads, sedentary farmers and possibly even urban families, mainly of local Canaanite origin.” (Shlomo Bunimovitz, “How Mute Stones Speak: Interpreting What We Dig Up,” Biblical Archaeology Review, Vol. 21, No. 2, March/April 1995,

Archaeology is subject to a degree of conjecture because it is necessarily interwoven with human interpretation. It simply is not enough to dig up the past. Artifacts recovered from the earth must be evaluated and linked to a real or theorized juncture in history. Such an analysis is often hindered by the examiner’s unintentional or even intentional bias. Therefore, it is little surprise that archaeological discovery is frequently enveloped with some discord.   To illustrate this problem, I present the following scenario to my classes at West Virginia School of Preaching.   The year is 3157 and I bring to class a time capsule recently discovered in a local excavation (Moundsville, WV). At one time the site where this was found was on the eastern bank of the Ohio River (whereas it has been under 63 feet of water for nearly 800 years). The capsule is four feet tall, 18 inches in diameter and cylindrical. It is made of a primitive metal called “galvanized” and has a lid with a handle. The most exciting find inside the capsule is an ancient weapon. It is in the shape of what once was called a “gun.” The device has a pistol grip and is constructed of something called “plastic.” At this late date, it is difficult to ascertain whether pushing a combination of buttons produced a hot or cold, fast or slow, stun or lethal force. The gun was apparently used for defense of one’s personal habitat, since it utilized an antiquated form of

 “Sorry, but who are you to said that miraculous of the Church has ceased ????? You know that God is healing today ???” ~ Juan Farrugia The first dictionary definition of the word “miracle” is: “an extraordinary event manifesting divine intervention in human affairs.”  A corresponding Greek definition for miracle is: “a deed manifesting great power, with the implication of some supernatural force – ‘mighty deed, miracle.’” The second dictionary definition of the word miracle is: “an extremely outstanding or unusual event, thing, or accomplishment.”  The failure to distinguish between these two circumstances, itself, is a great source of confusion regarding the subject of miracles.  The first involves an obvious, supernatural interference with what mankind knows to be possible according to natural law.  The second incident does not require supernatural suspension of natural law, only that a given circumstance be uncommon or awe-inspiring. Respecting the second definition, then, people commonly refer to the birth of a baby as a “miracle” because it is awe-inspiring—though it is neither a supernatural event nor uncommon.  Also, the word “miracle” is sometimes applied to survivors of some catastrophic event (though others present, too, may not have survived); yet, their survival no more required divine intervention via miracle than would God’s miraculous intervention be required for anyone to fall victim to any (and every) accident. A biblical miracle involved: (1) ACTIVITY which cannot be attributed to human agency and the outcome of the cause and effect of natural law; (2) often INSTANTANEOUS RESULTS; (3) usually

The first church was built by Jesus Christ in Jerusalem about 2,000 years ago. It was during his ministry that our Lord said: “. . . I will build my church . . .” (Matthew 16:18). He only promised to build ONE CHURCH — HIS CHURCH.  That church was not made of ordinary building material. It was not built from wood, stone or metal. Our Lord’s church was made with SPIRITUAL STONES. Jesus himself is the foundation (1 Corinthians 3:11) and chief cornerstone (1 Peter 2:6; Acts 4:11). Christians are the other stones with which the Lord’s church is constructed (1 Peter 2:5). Therefore, the saved (Christians) are added to the church by our Lord (Acts 2:47).  Acts Two records the birthday of the church. The remaining chapters of the Book of Acts show how additional congregations of Jesus’ church began. Where the Gospel of Christ was preached, congregations of the church started. The New Testament epistles were written to instruct the Lord’s church.  For hundreds of years there was only one church on earth. Our Lord’s church was described in Scripture as “the church of God” (1 Corinthians 1:2), “house of God” (1 Corinthians 2:15) and the “churches of Christ” (Romans 16:16). Catholic (A.D. 606), Lutheran (A.D. 1530), Episcopal (A.D. 1534), Presbyterian (A.D. 1536), Baptist (A.D. 1611), Methodist (A.D. 1739) and all other man-made churches did not yet exist.  Each congregation of the Lord’s church was independent from every other congregation. However, congregations enjoyed a religious fellowship through their common

Like God himself (Genesis 1:1), providence is not precisely defined in the Bible. Neither does the word providence appear in the Bible with reference to God. However, God’s providence is amply taught throughout the Bible.  There are two types of providence. There is general providence, under which all of humanity shares physical blessings irrespective of individual relationships with God. “. . . your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust” (Matthew 5:45).  There is also special providence, under which faithful children of God are the direct recipients of physical or spiritual blessings. “And Joseph said unto his brethren, Come near to me, I pray you. And they came near. And he said, I am Joseph your brother, whom ye sold into Egypt. Now therefore be not grieved, nor angry with yourselves, that ye sold me hither: for God did send me before you to preserve life. For these two years hath the famine been in the land: and yet there are five years, in the which there shall neither be earing nor harvest. And God sent me before you to preserve you a posterity in the earth, and to save your lives by a great deliverance. So now it was not you that sent me hither, but God: and he hath made me a father to Pharaoh, and lord of all his house, and a ruler throughout all the land of

There are several elements to which Scripture ascribes saving power. Each of these contribute to the redemption of a soul: faith (Romans 5:1), repentance (Luke 13:3), confessing Christ (Romans 10:9-10), baptism (1 Peter 3:21), faithfulness (Revelation 2:10), obedience (Hebrews 5:8-9), the Gospel (Romans 1:16), hope (Romans 8:24), grace (Ephesians 2:8), mercy (Titus 3:5), calling on the name of the Lord (Romans 10:13), works (James 2:24), knowledge (2 Timothy 3:15), laying aside evil and receiving the Word in its place (James 1:21), preaching (1 Corinthians 1:18, 21), love (1 John 2:10) and the blood of Christ (Ephesians 1:7). These ARE NOT options from which one or more may be selected to the exclusion of the balance in this list; all the elements to which saving power is attributed work together to save a soul. Unlike some of these contributors to salvation, blood has been a part of God’s redemptive plan in each of the three periods of religious history or dispensations: Patriarchy (Genesis 4:3-5; 8:20-21), Judaism (Exodus 20:10; Numbers 18:17; Leviticus 3:1-17; 16:1-34; 17:11; Hebrews 9:7), and Christianity (Colossians 1:14; 1 Peter 1:18-20). Animal sacrifices under the two former periods typified (Hebrews 9:22-24) and were wholly dependent for their efficacious quality on the blood of Jesus Christ (Hebrews 9:15), which he shed in his death on Calvary’s center cross (John 19:34). Only the blood of Christ can cleanse the conscience from sin (Hebrews 10:1-4; 9:12-14). Application of the blood of Christ to lost souls is crucial to salvation. The blood of our Lord’s

India: Excerpts From the Waldron Newsletter On Saturday the 8th of May forty-nine men received their diplomas in Bible from the Dindigul Bible Institute. It was May 1989 when the school first opened its doors, thus we have now ended our tenth year of operation. Those who finish the three-year course in January receive their diplomas in May. These forty-nine bring the total of graduates to 297. Of these we know of 35 or 40 who have fallen away from the faith, but some 85 percent are still faithful and the vast majority are preaching and supporting themselves. Philippines/Malaysia: Via Truth For The World Trip Report On March 29, 1999, Rod and Brenda Rutherford, Paul Meacham and John M. Grubb began their most recent trip to the Philippines. The first efforts scheduled at the Capitol City church in Quezon City, Metro Manila were the Evangelism Seminar and Song-leading Seminar. We already had a number of contacts in the Philippines due to our radio program and literature program. We sent letters to these contacts ahead of time inviting them to attend this effort in Manila. We were pleasantly surprised at the large numbers of brethren who attended from all over the Philippines. Many traveled several hours to attend this effort. One brother, Carlito Abella, traveled from Mindanao to attend this effort. In order to get to Manila, brother Abella rode in a boat for four days. While in the Philippines, Rod, Paul and John preached for various congregations as well. Brenda spoke at the

Was Satan created by God? And was Satan ever once a good angel turned bad and evicted by God from Heaven? Sincerely. ~ Joe Simmons Few questions are posed to us as frequently as inquiries regarding the origin, nature or some other facet of man’s great enemy–Satan. The reasons for which such questions are asked vary depending on whether the querist merely desires to understand more perfectly or is skeptical of the God of the Bible. Information about Satan is a strictly biblical subject, therefore, necessitating our consultation of the Bible. Our present effort to provide some fundamental information about Satan–including his origin–assumes a proper regard for the Divinely given Bible. (Other studies devote themselves to apologetics and internal and external evidences that verify the genuineness of the Bible as a Divine revelation.) Exactly who is this devil, Satan, who has established himself as God’s archfiend and mankind’s ardent foe? Is he real? If he is, what is his origin? Why has he arrayed himself against both God and man? What is his mission? What are his powers? And what is his ultimate destiny? These are questions that cry out from the human heart for answers. Fortunately, God’s Word provides those answers. (Bert Thompson, “Satan-His Origin and His Mission,” Part 1, Reason & Revelation, October 1998, p. 73.) The foregoing quote appears in a two-part series that provides one of the most extensive treatments of questions relating to Satan that I have ever seen. I highly recommend everyone obtaining a subscription

The apostle Peter once said to a lame man, “. . . Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk” (Acts 3:6). Likewise, today there are many things for which the world seeks that the Lord’s church cannot offer. However, we do have a gift for the world from Jesus that is more precious than any earthly pursuit. The churches of Christ can offer to the world the priceless blood of Christ. It is the blood of Jesus by which sinners are reconciled (Colossians 1:20), brought nigh to God (Ephesians 2:13), purchased (Acts 10:28), washed from sins (Revelation 1:5), redeemed (Ephesians 1:7; Colossians 1:14; 1 Peter 1:18-20; Hebrews 9:12; Revelation 5:9), made white (Revelation 7:14) and justified (Romans 5:9). The application of the blood of the Lord to our souls will permit us to boldly enter the eternal heaven (Hebrews 10:19). The blood of Christ also continues to cleanse souls who faithfully practice Christianity (1 John 1:7). The blood of Jesus Christ is superior to the blood of Old Testament sacrifices (Hebrews 10:1-4; 9:12-14). Our Lord’s blood also seals the New Testament (Hebrews 13:20; 10:29; 9:14-22). The kindest gift any Christian or congregation can possibly give is to tell someone how to receive the blood of Christ. The blood of Jesus, which he shed in his death (John 19:34), is applied to the souls of penitent believers when they are immersed into the death of Christ (Romans 6:3-5; Colossians 2:12). “Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ

The January 18, 1999 issue of Time magazine sports on its cover the wording: The end of the world!?! Y2K insanity! Apocalypse Now! Will computers melt down? Will society? A guide to MILLENNIUM MADNESS. These words appear on a sandwich board worn by a barefoot figure clad in a white flowing gown. People cower on a city street as the prophetic or angelic caricature stands in traffic with up-stretched hands, one clasping a cross. Only time will tell how much “madness” prevails preceding and at the turn of the official millennium. As the magazine intimates, and aware of the nature of the human creature and some of his history, doubtless there will be ample “millennium madness” demonstrated. We look for it to affect society, religion, economics and probably politics. Only cultures devoid of 20th century consciousness and oblivious to the contemporary calendar are likely to escape the effect of the birth of the new millennium. Strangely, besides some unaccountable souls, there are still some peoples in the world who qualify for this innocence. For the rest of us, we will have to hold on the best we can, even should the ride turn turbulent. The word millennium is rapidly becoming a hot new flag in, at least, the English language for both selling old products with new flare and engendering great alarm. As such it is being used in the utmost positive way while at the same time representing some of the most violent fears of modern man. It will be curious to follow that saga

“What is the sin that cannot be pardoned?  What is blaspheme?”  ~ Glen Gannon Your inquiry doubtless refers to the following passages. “Then was brought unto him one possessed with a devil, blind, and dumb: and he healed him, insomuch that the blind and dumb both spake and saw. And all the people were amazed, and said, Is not this the son of David? But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils. And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand: And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand? And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges. But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom is come upon you. Or else how can one enter into a strong man’s house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house. He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad. Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever

There is no confusion among brethren of which I am aware regarding who the Holy Spirit is.  Scripture clearly identifies the Holy Spirit as one of three Divine persons who comprise the Godhead.  Matthew 28:19 represents the three persons of the Godhead as Divine equals of the same unit or Godhead, by whose authority the “Great Commission” baptism is authorized and commanded.  “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.”  In short, the Holy Spirit is no more rightly an “it” than the “Father” or the “Son,” and Scripture otherwise attributes personal qualities to the Holy Spirit. The Spirit Attributed with Characteristics of A Person The Spirit descends: Mat 3:16, “And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:”  Joh 1:32-33, “And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him. And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.” The Spirit leads: Mat 4:1, “Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.”  Rom 8:14, “For as many as are led by the Spirit of

Let’s say that a non-Christian couple gets divorced.  Then one of them gets remarried to another non-Christian.  Then the new married couple study and get baptized.  Must they separate or can they remain married?  This is a question that is causing a lot of problems in our congregation.  Thank you for your assistance. At least two questions relate to the inquiry above:  (1) “Are non-Christians obligated to obey God’s marriage law?” and (2) “What is involved in biblical repentance and baptism?” (Acts 2:38).  Answering these two questions will provide an obvious and irrefutable solution to the dilemma. First, this sort of inquiry is affected by extreme emotional investment that tends to overshadow the unobstructed use of reason and will-power.  Every religious question deserves a strictly biblical answer.  We should not want anything else, and we ought to surrender our emotions, reason or intellect and will-power to the mind of God on every matter that is addressed by divine revelation.  After all, when each of us crosses the threshold of eternity, we will be judged by God’s law under which we lived–not by what we wished God’s law permitted.  Therefore, it behooves each of us now, irrespective of how painful the decisions may be, to ensure that we bring ourselves into compliance with the mind of God–revealed upon the pages of inspiration. Second, “Are non-Christians obligated to obey God’s marriage law?”  In other words, “Are non-Christians amenable to the Gospel of Christ?”  God’s marriage law is part of the Gospel of

My husband and I are both members of the church.  This is my second marriage and after many years of studying, I feel we are in an unscriptural marriage.  We have been married 22 years and have three children.  We have a wonderful marriage and family and love each other very much.  I also love God and want to do what is right so that I can someday have eternal life with Him.  Could you please advise me on how to handle this situation?  Would a divorce be necessary or could we continue to live together but no longer share the same bedroom and have sexual relations? A divorce would present several problems.  Financially, it would be very hard for us to have two households.  We have a large room we could turn into an apartment for one of us.  This would save us from upkeeping another home.  I have never worked outside the home so I would not have health insurance.  I have an illness called systemic lupus which makes it hard to get insurance.  My husband now has me under his insurance at work.  Of course, emotionally, it would be so hard on the entire family. I have read many articles on marriage, divorce, and remarriage.  Not one has dealt with the problem of how to get out of an unscriptural marriage and how it affects the family.  I would greatly appreciate your help and look forward to hearing from you soon. P.S. Please recommend any books that

Hello.  I would appreciate it if you would read the following and get back to me on your thoughts about it. I am a member of the Church of Christ and I am very concerned over the status of the church in which I attend.  You see a few months ago, we had Elders (2 in number).  One of those Elders felt that he, due to his age and recent sickness was no longer able to serve as an Elder.  The other Elder was also the preacher.  The Eldership of the Church was dissolved because Brother Bell resigned as Elder.  There are still no Elders today.  Yet there are men qualified, who desire the office.  Is it right for the Church to go on without Elders.  The preacher (who was one of the Elders) preached many sermons on the Eldership and Deaconship (which was dissolved due to this also).  He preached that there should be a committee of 2 men to be over the appointment of Elders.  At first he taught that the faithful Christian men of the Congregation would okay 2 men and then it would be brought before the Congregation for 2 weeks, then Elders would be appointed.  Is committees right and is the Church right for having gone on this long without Elders?  Should Elders have been selected before the Eldership was dissolved?  I would appreciate your thoughts on this subject, because I am very concerned about the Church in which I attend.  Thank you and I

I am researching the Bible translation controversy involving the King James Version of the Bible Vs the new translations.  The New King James, NIV, NASB, etc.  Do you have any articles or debates that you could send me regarding this issue?  Do you have an opinion on which Bible is the best to use and whether the new translations should be used?  I would sure appreciate any help you could give me in this regard. All Bible translations have some weaknesses and most translations have some strengths.  The weaknesses of many Bible translations are significant either because (1) they adversely affect Bible doctrine or (2) the weaknesses are so numerous.  In my opinion, three Bible translations whose weaknesses are far overshadowed by their strengths, and which do not contain doctrinal error, are the: King James Version, American Standard Version and the New King James Version.  Most of the rest of the Bible translations have varying degrees of weaknesses that: (1) make them unreliable as translations, (2) compromise Bible doctrine in favor of denominational dogma, (3) are not really translations at all, (4) are actually vulgar, and/or (5) are the products of translators who do not esteem verbal inspiration and consequently have little compulsion to preserve the actual message through the translating process. The sheer number of new Bible translations in modern time is itself suspicious.  Our language does not undergo dramatic changes as often as new English translations are marched off the assembly lines of the publishers.  Hence, a motive

John’s baptism was for the remission of sin. Did those who obeyed John’s baptism have to be rebaptized on the day of Pentecost? Thank you so much. I enjoy the good web-site you have. ~ Mack Bennett As the questioner correctly notes, “John’s baptism was for the remission of sin.” Mack Bennett poses a valid and interesting question (“Did those who obeyed John’s baptism have to be rebaptized on the day of Pentecost?”), though, a question of merely academic significance, since everyone now living has always and only been subject to the baptism of the Great Commission. Below is an excerpt from my book, The Church Divine, which addresses the question before us. In the closing days of the Jewish dispensation, a prophet of God initiated what became known as “the baptism of John” (Acts 18:25) or “John’s baptism” (Acts 19:3). This water baptism was practiced by John the Baptist, his disciples and the disciples of Jesus. Everything John the Baptist did, including the baptism he administered, prepared the way for the Messiah and his kingdom (Matt. 3:1-6). John the Baptist urged his auditors to: (1) repent and be baptized for the remission of sins (Mark 1:4) and (2) believe on the Christ who would come after him (Acts 19:4). However, this baptism was preparatory and temporary; it was valid only if practiced before the establishment of the church (Acts 19:1-6). John’s baptism was for the remission of sins in prospect of the death-burial-resurrection of Christ, much the way people formerly living under

This could develop into a very serious issue here if not resolved successfully. . . . We have a brother in a congregation planning to write a book advancing the proposition that women are to remain absolutely silent in the worship service.  He believes the Scriptures forbid a woman from making comments or answering questions in a Bible class even when under the authority of a man teaching that class. . . . There are some others with a similar stance.  These brethren want to see some hard core evidence that they are wrong before they will change. ~ Richmond, VA Presumably the brethren whose proposition is represented above do not prohibit women from singing in the worship assembly.  If I understand correctly, the doctrine being advanced is that since women are biblically required to be silent in the worship assembly (except for singing), the same restriction regarding silence applies equally to women in the Bible classes typically conducted in our church buildings. First, as I indicated in the preceding paragraph, the question at hand involves a doctrine (teaching) which brethren desire to enjoin on other Christians.  The task at hand is to ascertain whether this is a biblical doctrine.  I submit, and propose to demonstrate below, that it is not! Second, the doctrine being advanced in the question above results from a fundamental misunderstanding of the distinction between a worship assembly and studying the Bible outside the worship assembly.  Once it is clearly established that the Bible class and the worship assembly are not the

Bev Weddle writes in response to an article of mine appearing on the internet: I read your comments about the role of women.  I’ve been reading the same thing for years and you have a right to your interpretation of the scripture.  I would like for you to understand though that your words are wrong in my case when you say those that have a problem with women’s submission have “diminished respect for the authority of God and his holy word.”  I have the highest regard for God and his Word and believe it and will live by it.  But, I believe in the mutual submission of all people men and women alike.  Christ is the head of my home and has the last word in all that is done.  I lived under the heavy hand of male oppression for years and have found freedom in Christ.  I’m not using it as license to do as I please but I’m am no longer willing to be under the bondage the church and it’s leaders have tried to put on me for years.  There are some like me out here who do have the highest regard for God and his word yet do disagree with you.  Chaplain Bev Weddle First, I respectfully submit that the reason that you have heard for years about the submission of women in the home and in religion is because Scripture teaches that doctrine.  In recent years, largely due to societal changes, contemporary modifications have affected

God created Lucifer “the devil”. He obviously knew that Lucifer would try to overthrow Him, and that He would eventually banish him to. When humans do something “wrong” they attribute their behavior to the devil, “the devil is to blame, the devil is the father of evil and the devil made me do it,” they say. The devil is responsible for everything bad, everything that is not good. Ask yourself this: what, where or who was the evil influence on Lucifer when he was a “good” angel and why? Why are people to this day saying that the devil is the worst when he was created like all of us, from the same heavenly body? People say that everything that God creates is good. Ha,ha. respond with a intellectual explanation. One thing that your statement and inquiry appears to overlook is the topic of free will.  God neither created robotic angels nor robotic humans.  Though God through omniscience has the capacity to know the future, inclusive of the fact that Satan and other angels would rebel, and that humanity, likewise, would rebel, he still chose to create angels and humans–with free will. Both Satan and humans bear respective responsibility for their sinful actions.  Despite the fact that Satan introduced temptation to sin into the world, Adam and Eve were punished for their transgressions–because they were guilty. Every passage that calls upon mankind to respond in a designated way implies the capacity of mankind to satisfactorily respond of his own free

Strictly speaking, there is no “Sunday-Sabbath” or “Christian Sabbath” (pertaining to a day of the week). When God inaugurated Judaism upon Mt. Sinai, he established the seventh day of the week as the day of worship. “Keep the sabbath day to sanctify it, as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee. Six days thou shalt labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, nor thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thine ox, nor thine, nor any of thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates; that thy manservant and thy maidservant may rest as well as thou. And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the LORD thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the LORD thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath day” (Deuteronomy 5:12-15). God patterned the Jewish Sabbath according to God’s creation of the world in six days, ceasing from his creating on the seventh day. “For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it” (Exodus 20:11). However, both Patriarchy and Judaism (the Old Testament, inclusive of the Ten Commandments or so-called moral law) have been replaced with the

“How do you explain Romans 5!? in relation to Original Sin. How do you explain from the psalms, ‘In sin did my mother conceive me and in sin was I born.  Psalm 51.’ How do you explain the verse that says this promise is for you and your children?  How do you explain 1 Peter 3:21 This baptism now saves you. and Go and make disciples of all nations-  i.e.  the means of making a disciple is baptism and teaching.  Infants are included in all nations. The fact is that you are still under the guidance of Rome.  You want to explain away the true gospel by adding in your own work of reasoned assent to the Gospel.  Any decision we make for Christ was urged and guided upon us by the Holy Spirit creating faith within us.  We have nothing to do with it.” I am personally acquainted with the doctrine of original sin, as I was reared in Catholicism.  However, based on the following biblical principles, it is no longer my belief that original sin is a divine doctrine.  Further, the doctrine of original sin was unknown until introduced in the 14th century according to Merriam Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, among other resources.  Obviously, that doctrine, then, was introduced too late to be divine and eternal in origin.  The doctrine of Immaculate Conception was not devised to shield the mother of Jesus from the supposed original sin until the year 1687.  The doctrine of total depravity, which is Calvinism’s

Jesus addressed two subjects in Matthew Chapter 24.  In verse 1, Jesus and his disciples observed the magnificent temple and its associated buildings.  It was a mammoth structure that had been under construction for decades.  In verse 2, Jesus remarked that the facility would be utterly destroyed.  The astonished apostles imagined that such could not occur short of the end of the world.  This prompted them to ask Jesus questions in verse 3.  Grammatically, they asked three questions.  They thought they were essentially asking one question with related parts.  Really, the asked two distinctly different questions: (1) about the destruction of the world, (2) about the end of time when the Messiah would return. The balance of Matthew 24 is devoted to the answers to these two questions.  In verses 4-34, Jesus primarily answered the query regarding the destruction of the city of Jerusalem.  In verses 35-51, Jesus primarily answered the question about the end of time and when the Messiah would return.  All of Matthew Chapter 25 also concerns the end of time when the Messiah would return. Verse 34 signals the close of the discourse about the destruction of Jerusalem by announcing that the events mentioned in the preceding verses would be fulfilled within the generation of the disciples to whom he was speaking.  “Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.”  Appropriately, so-called signs of the times  were to be discernible prior to the destruction of Jerusalem (i.e., “For nation

“Morality” concerns the quality of actions and thoughts regarding right or wrong. Behavior is perceived to be right (moral) when it conforms to the ethical code to which one subscribes. One’s conduct is perceived to be wrong (immoral) when it violates the moral standard that he has adopted (Romans 14:23; 1 Corinthians 8:7, 10). Conscience is the human mechanism that praises or chastises one (produces guilt) corresponding to how well he implements morality in his life. However, the conscience can be improperly educated with a defective standard. Hence, cannibals can kill and eat fellow humans without a sense of guilt. Remarkably, they instead might be praised by their consciences for practicing cannibalism. Likewise, Saul of Tarsus (Paul), because his conscience was improperly educated, imprisoned Christians and consented to their deaths (Acts 8:1, 3; 9:1-2; 22:4-5; 26:9-11; 1 Corinthians 15:9; Galatians 1:13; Philippians 3:6). Consequently, Paul stated, “. . . I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day” (Acts 23:1). He “. . . was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious . . .” without offending his conscience because he “. . . did it ignorantly in unbelief” (1 Timothy 1:13). Christians realize that there is a moral standard that is superior to personal and community ethics. Conflicting individual standards of authority depicted in Judges 21:25 resulted in anarchy against God and chaos in Israel. The community standards of Nazi Germany that allowed the holocaust to occur are viewed almost universally as violations of a

1. What is the Bible teaching about “Special Collections” as special mission efforts, building programs, etc., etc.?? At best, are these not abused because Christians don’t give as they have been prospered? 2. Where/how, exclusively, does the church get money to do all the Lord’s work? Brother Rushmore, I am not asking these for purposes of debate or argumentation. I simply think the church is drifting into a denominational mode in this area as she has in many others. I am the preacher for the small congregation here in North Louisiana. Your Brother in Christ, A.C. Quinn, Oil City, LA I certainly can appreciate your concern over the Lord’s church succumbing often to the influences of denominationalism instead of being wholly guided by the Bible. Further, I too may have some strong feelings how various aspects of worship and service should be conducted. We both, though, must distinguish between matters of opinion or expediency and biblical mandates. The New Testament does teach some definitive, doctrinal matters regarding giving. Also, the New Testament teaches some things by implication (which are no less binding) about giving. However, the New Testament does permit latitude in some areas regarding giving. First, the “tithe” or ten percent giving of the Old Testament was part of that law from which we have been relieved. Tithing has not been reinstituted in the New Testament. Yet, if a tenth (tithe) corresponds with other New Testament teaching and principles, one may give a tenth portion of his income. Second, giving

Dear Stanley F. Sroka, Thank you for your comments of Saturday, December 19, 1998 regarding my internet article entitled “American Idolatry.” Following are some additional thoughts for your consideration. You cited Rev. 7:9 regarding a multitude in heaven which no man could number. You concluded that in order for such a large number to be in heaven that God must choose souls from among all those who claim to be Christians, irrespective of what they believe or practice. First, your solution is not the lone remedy for what you suppose is a mathematical dilemma. Souls in that number will include those who have lived since creation through the end of time. Billions of souls will comprise the vast host of living souls from which the “multitude” in heaven will be drawn. As such, then, members of that heavenly multitude are not even limited to the Christian Age, but include souls who lived under Patriarchy and Judaism. Further, it is possible to worship God in vain (Matt. 15:9) or be disobedient to the Gospel for which God will dispense punishment instead of reward (2 Thess. 1:7-9). Rather, those souls who obey God’s law under which they live (for us the Gospel) will be saved eternally (Heb. 5:8-9). Finally, Scripture clearly indicates that the majority of mankind will be lost (Matt. 7:13-14). The only confidence anyone can entertain regarding an eternity in heaven is compliance with God’s stated will for mankind. God’s grace and mercy are not operative on our behalf in

“Now the Lord had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights. Then Jonah prayed unto the Lord his God out of the fish’s belly” (Jonah 1:17-2:1). Down in the deep, dark chambers and hollows in the belly of a big fish, Jonah, wrapped in seaweed, desperately prayed to God. Like many of God’s children past and present, Jonah in this instance did not pray to God until he had no other recourse. “When my soul fainted within me I remembered the Lord: and my prayer came in unto thee, into thine holy temple” (Jonah 2:7). Jonah was a prophet of God and a native of the northern kingdom of Israel. Apparently he had made a vow to God respecting his function as a prophet (Jonah 2:9). Jonah, as a prophet, was committed to preaching God’s Word to his fellow Jews. However, he was unwilling to proclaim God’s Word to Gentiles–especially to the Ninevites. Only when Jonah could not escape from God and the mission on which he was sent, he reluctantly preached to the Ninevites. Further, Jonah became angry when: (1) the Ninevites repented, and (2) God consequently refrained from destroying them. Doubtless a poorer example of evangelism could hardly be imagined. Yet, the despicable attitude of Jonah toward the Ninevites may be shared often by the Lord’s church today. Are we sometimes as though we are in the belly of a big fish? Do we flee from the

1. What is the Bible teaching about “Special Collections” as special mission efforts, building programs, etc., etc.?? At best, are these not abused because Christians don’t give as they have been prospered? 2. Where/how, exclusively, does the church get money to do all the Lord’s work? Brother Rushmore, I am not asking these for purposes of debate or argumentation. I simply think the church is drifting into a denominational mode in this area as she has in many others. I am the preacher for the small congregation here in North Louisiana. Your Brother in Christ, A.C. Quinn, Oil City, LA I certainly can appreciate your concern over the Lord’s church succumbing often to the influences of denominationalism instead of being wholly guided by the Bible. Further, I too may have some strong feelings how various aspects of worship and service should be conducted. We both, though, must distinguish between matters of opinion or expediency and biblical mandates. The New Testament does teach some definitive, doctrinal matters regarding giving. Also, the New Testament teaches some things by implication (which are no less binding) about giving. However, the New Testament does permit latitude in some areas regarding giving. First, the “tithe” or ten percent giving of the Old Testament was part of that law from which we have been relieved. Tithing has not been reinstituted in the New Testament. Yet, if a tenth (tithe) corresponds with other New Testament teaching and principles, one may give a tenth portion of his income. Second, giving

Dear Marty Hollis, Part of the context in which Scripture needs to be considered is the perspective from which the original recipients of divine revelation would ordinarily have understood it. In this case, the primitive church, during which times true miracles were operative, probably would have understood the citation you note in the context of miraculous healing. Two circumstances, physical illness and spiritual illness, are observed in James 5:14-15. The latter is secondary references in verse 14 to miraculous healing. Therefore, since the miraculous age of the church has ceased, it is inappropriate and unwise to continue to employ the accompanying symbols (anointing with olive oil) of miraculous healing. Besides, anointing with olive oil is not part of contemporary American culture and sustains no significance beyond its place as an accompanying symbol of miraculous healing. Consideration of sinfulness in verse 15 is essentially an addendum to the context established in verse 14. Whereas the former (miraculous healing) has concluded, the latter (prayer–for physical and spiritual sickness) is still very much in order. I concur with the observations of commentators Guy N. Woods and Burton Coffman, some of whose comments appear following. The context would suggest that it is literal sickness inasmuch as it is mentioned in connection with literal suffering, praying, cheerfulness, and singing. In verse 15, below, it is clearly shown that the illness contemplated here is physical in character, in view of the fact that it is mentioned in connection with, and in addition to, spiritual illness. .

Dear Friend, You wrote: “How much is the human life determined by God’s predestination or planning (e.g., Pharaoh in Exodus or Judas). Or conversely, how much is determined by our freewill.” First, your question appears to assume a popular definition of “predestination” which, however, is not supported by biblical evidence. Many religious people imagine that “predestination” and “freewill” are incompatible, perhaps even polar opposites. The wording of your question implies that you concur with that understanding, or at least you suppose that there is sufficient conflict between “predestination” and “freewill” that some explanation is warranted to reconcile the two. The biblical doctrine of predestination stands in contrast to the prevalent but false denominational theory of predestination. Essentially, the Bible teaches that God’s predestination amounts to the Divine decision to save from their sins all people who comply with God’s conditions for grace and mercy. The competing doctrine of predestination authored by men assumes that God arbitrarily and unconditionally determined that certain individuals will be saved and conversely that certain individuals will be lost eternally. Whereas the denomination doctrine of predestination (a cardinal part of what is commonly called Calvinism) stipulates that a group of changeless, numbered and named individuals will be saved (or lost) without any human involvement in their salvation (or), God’s Word teaches that a group of changeable, an undetermined number and unnamed individuals will be saved (or lost) dependent on the way in which they exercise freewill. The difference is “unconditional salvation” Vs. “conditional salvation.” The difference

Jesus of Nazareth was crucified outside the city of Jerusalem on Golgotha or the hill of Calvary (Matthew 27:33; Luke 23:33). Two other men were led to that place of execution along with Jesus (Luke 23:32).All three were crucified, one thief on each side of our Lord (Luke 23:33). One of the thieves and his cross represents rebellion and arrogance, and depicts impenitent, lost humanity. He scoffed at Jesus: “If thou be Christ, save thyself and us.” Remarkably, that thief’s scorn for Christ was greater than his physical pain or the fear of his impending, dreadful death. Jesus, though, had done nothing to arouse this malicious attitude. This thief crossed the threshold of eternity unprepared and unconcerned about meeting God. Likewise, millions of souls have entered eternity with little or no concern for their souls. Lamentably, they made no preparation to spend eternity in heaven! Many are the souls who even live outside the lowly standards of righteousness established by men; they rebel against civil authority and are often openly without either penitence or remorse when caught and punished. Some sinners claim they have no desire to go to heaven and equally disdain companionship with godly people in this life. This thief was an unbeliever. If he were to have salvation, he demanded it on his own terms. Further, he wanted to test Jesus–requiring of him miraculous signs. This thief has many cousins possessing a similar inclination living today. The second thief and his cross represent penitence and depict the

(Job 19:23-26) Once prosperous from every consideration, then destitute of this world’s goods and even of his health, yet Job maintained the hope of a heavenly hereafter that sufficiently overshadowed every present distress. Job demonstrated confidence in the Lord to whom he gladly trusted his eternity. Job earnestly desired that the consolation with which he was comforted based on this hope would be realized by many others as well. Job’s hope and confidence was three-fold: (1) Job was confident that the Redeemer lives; (2) he also fully expected that the Messiah would someday appear to rescue his and other souls; and, (3) Job was hopeful and confident regarding the general resurrection in which he would participate. These reflections encouraged Job in the face of his severe adversity and served as the basis of his hope. Likewise, contemporary children of God who find themselves greatly afflicted or facing death can appropriate to themselves consolations through the same hope. Certainly, for the rest of us who are relatively free from great trials, we can also through this hope known to Job find sufficient strength to satisfactorily cope with daily affairs. The Redeemer of whom Job spoke is the Christ (i.e., Savior, Messiah) whose function and certain ministry on earth was first intimated in Genesis 3:15. That our Redeemer lives is the foundation of all our hope; if our God were dead as some declare, we could have no hope. Job had sure hope based on the resurrection long before the earthly walk

Greeting Louis, I’d like to ask you a question on marriage/divorce/re-marriage. If a woman commits adultry and leaves the husband, the husband is prepared to take her back but she refuses, the husband then files fore divorce, is the husband bound by civil law to wait the 12 months for the divorce certificate or can you use Genesis 2:24 as Gods pattern of marriage and deuteronamy 24: 1-4 as an example to divorce to overide civil law putting Gods law first and re-marry before the 12 months. Can we use these scriptures today? Have these scriptures been used out of context? In Christian love, EnzoAustralia Dear Enzo, First, you are asking, in part, a question about civil law. The position that Christians sustain to civil law, as it applies to your inquiry, pertains to Romans 13:1-7 and Acts 4:19; 5:29. In Romans 13, one learns that God authorizes the existence of government (not a specific type of politics, though), to which Christians must submit ordinarily (in all instances in which what government requires of Christians is not contrary to God’s Word). In the Acts citations, specifically and only in the instances in which rulers require of Christians that they do something contrary to God’s Word, can and must Christians appeal to the higher law of God. Yet, Christians who might find themselves in conflict with the government under which they live may only opt for noncompliance regarding what God through the Bible considers sinful. In all other matters, Christians must

One of the worst snow storms to hit Washington, D.C. in decades buffeted the city on January 13, 1982. A considerable accumulation of snow brought automobile traffic to a halt. For instance, there was a giant traffic jam on the 12-lane 14th Street Bridge complex. This bridge spans the Potomac River and connects the District of Columbia to Arlington County, Virginia. The moderate to heavy snowfall temporarily closed the Washington National Airport, three-quarters of a mile away. Among the affected aircraft was a Boeing 737-222 bound for Fort Lauderdale, Florida. This was Air Florida Flight 90, comprised of 74 passengers including three infants and a crew of 5. About an hour and forty-five minutes after the scheduled departure time, the plane took off from runway 36 at 3:59 p.m. The two-engine blue and green jetliner headed north and made a shallow left turn. The path of Air Florida Flight 90 presumed a 700 foot clearance over the 14th Street Bridge. However, at 4:01 p.m., a mere two minutes after leaving the runway, and unable to stay aloft, nose raised and tail down, the ill-fated 737 crashed into the 14th Street Bridge. The aircraft struck seven occupied vehicles, shearing the roof from one automobile and crushing four other cars. It also ripped out 180 feet of railing before plunging between the bridge spans, through the ice to the bottom of the river, 30 feet deep. The plane vanished except for the tail section which had separated from the body of the

Frank Higginbotham is a renown Gospel preacher in the Upper Ohio River Valley. For about three and half decades he has served the Chester, West Virginia congregation in an outstanding way. Brother Frank’s claim to fame, so to speak, is his unfailing use of transparencies and an overhead projector. With tongue in cheek, he has been accused of using the overhead projector on his radio program and even using transparencies when he performed the wedding for his sister Nita a few years ago. I have seen the (re-enactment) photos of the wedding ceremony! Seriously, his transparency sermons in conjunction with basic and simple biblical truths have contributed greatly to edifying the Virginia Avenue church of Christ. Additionally, those well-illustrated sermons have built up audiences wherever brother Higginbotham has preached in Gospel meetings, camps and lectureships. About 2,000 years ago, before the advent of electricity, overhead projectors and transparencies, Jesus Christ proved himself to be the master illustrator. Jesus did this through the effective use of picturesque speech. Frequently, our Lord employed parables in much the same way brother Frank uses the overhead projector. Christ’s discourses were often accentuated with parables as a vehicle through which to endear heavenly truths among his auditors. In his parables, Jesus referred to physical circumstances with which his audiences were abundantly familiar to teach them spiritual truths about which they knew little or nothing. One popular definition of the biblical parable is “an earthly story with a heavenly meaning.” Jesus Christ was a master in the use of pictorial

     The Gospel Gazette Online debuts with this issue.  Twice before the Gospel Gazette has appeared in paper formats for short durations in local works–a newsprint tabloid in eastern Pennsylvania and a booklet in eastern Ohio.  The Gospel Gazette Online appears now as a monthly internet publication.  The subscription is free and attainable by accessing the Gazette’s address on the internet each month.  The Gospel Gazette Online, though, will carry paid advertising, inquiries into which are welcome.      The editorial staff of the Gospel Gazette Online consists of brother Paul Hoover, Allen Webster and myself, assisted by others who volunteer their time and talents.  Brother Hoover is a graduate of West Virginia School of Preaching, Editor of the religious journal Upon the Rock and he preaches for the Lord’s church in Springfield, Ohio.  Brother Webster is a graduate of Memphis School of Preaching, a prolific writer and preaches for the church in Jacksonville, Alabama.  It was my good fortune to graduate of Memphis School of Preaching and now to serve as an instructor at West Virginia School of Preaching.  Each of us have a keen interest in the written word, whereas Paul’s articles appear in various Gospel magazines and in the paper he edits.  Allen’s articles are found in the three publications produced by the congregation with which he labors and in numerous brotherhood journals.  Over the years, I have written hundreds of articles (many of which appear on the internet already) and write and publish reproducible Bible class books for adults.      Together we will endeavor to ensure a strictly biblical view in each of the religious articles that appear