“And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungered” (Matthew 4:2). Of all the statements of the Bible that appear to be understatements, this one was a favorite of one of my teachers while at West Virginia School of Preaching. He was always quick to point out how simply the Holy Spirit worded certain passages, which, if mere men would have written them, they would have exhausted their vocabulary. Another “understatement” that comes to mind is this one made by Peter shortly after Jesus’ fame began to spread like wildfire in the region of Galilee, “And when they had found him, they said unto him, All men seek for thee” (Mark 1:37). Remember what Jesus later said about the nature and power of his death: “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me” (John 12:32). Truly, it is the case that all men seek after Jesus. Men, before the incarnation of Jesus, pleaded for a “mediator” (Job 9:33 NKJV) that he might “lay his hand upon us both.” Jesus is the answer to that desperate call (Hebrews 7:25). Men hoped for centuries for One who could reign as King and intercede forever as Priest (Zechariah 6:13). Jesus is that Hope (Hebrews 8:1; cf. Hebrews 6:19-20). Many more have become confused (James 3:15-16), have had their spiritual eyes darkened through sin (Romans 1:21), have been bewitched by false teachings (Galatians 3:1) and cheated by empty philosophies, traditions …

It is refreshing, after one has become despirited with the pessimism of blind evolution, to examine the positive, optimistic, thoughtful design seen in the human eye. First, the chemical elements making up the eye had to have a cause for their being in existence. Second, that those elements are arranged to form an optic nerve, a retina, lens, pupil, iris and cornea means there was an arranger. Third, that all the caused and arranged parts cooperate to give sight appears to be the purpose of the designer. For nine months, the parts being made and arranged in a dungeon are useless. Then, all of a sudden, the design is obvious, which design had to precede the making and the arranging of the multiple parts, and design reflects intelligence. An intelligence capable of producing sight cannot himself be blind: “He who forms the eye, can he not see?” (Psalm 94:9). In order to keep the eye moist and clean (which qualities are necessary to its brightness and its use), a wash is constantly supplied by a secretion for the purpose; and the superfluous brine is conveyed to the nose through a perforation in the bone as large as a goose-quill; or, more properly speaking, along two capillary tubes, one from either eyelid, which enter a duct, lodged in a canal passing through the bone. When once the fluid has entered the nose, it spreads itself upon the inside of the nostril, and is evaporated by the current of warm air which, …

Some people look on baptism as a sprinkling, whereas in the New Testament baptism is a “washing.” The New Testament does use “sprinkling” in relation to salvation, but it always refers to the blood of Jesus, not baptism. I. Washing “Arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins” (Acts 22:16). “[H]aving…our body washed with pure water” (Hebrews 10:22). “[B]aptism…now saves you, not the removal of dirt from your body” (1 Peter 3:21). “[H]aving cleansed her [the church] by the washing of water” (Ephesians 5:25-26). “[Y]ou were washed” (1 Corinthians 6:11). “He saved us…by the washing of the new birth” (Titus 3:5). II. Sprinkling “[O]bey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with his blood” (1 Peter 1:2). “[H]aving…our hearts sprinkled” (Hebrews 10:22). “[Y]ou have come…to Jesus…and to the blood of sprinkling” (Hebrews 12:22,24).

This life witnesses many inventions or phenomena that are neither good nor evil in themselves, but can be used in the extreme for either purpose. Music is one. The organized blending of vibrations–whether of the vocal cords, instruments or combinations thereof–is neither good nor evil within itself. History has shown many ways this medium can be used for either purpose. Composers of several centuries (not just the twentieth) have employed music to purvey some pretty immoral messages. Songs of varying popularity and genres have glorified sexual promiscuity, alcohol and drug abuse, marital infidelity, and even suicide. The destructive influence of such messages may be immeasurable, but an open mind sees a connection between the proliferation of such music and the degrading morals of a society. Sometimes art imitates life. Sometimes life imitates art. Sometimes, it seems just to be a vicious, self-perpetuating circle. On the other hand, music has had a positive effect on many souls and societies. In the secular world, there have been many songs that convey positive, even inspiring messages that are just the opposite of those ungodly communications mentioned above. Good, secular songs have become special emotional bonding points for couples and families. Almost all societies have a national anthem that inspires the hearts of its citizens to loyalty. In the case of a good society, where democracy aims to keep people free and prosperous, surely this is a good thing. Yes, even secular music can have a good message that is helpful (or, at the …

Most of us who consider ourselves “conservatives” or “moderates” or both, have probably taught that the persons who bind where God has not bound or looses where God has not loosed are both wrong, and equally dangerous to the cause of Christ and the salvation of souls. In this article, I wish to examine that thesis in a little more detail. It can be proven with a reasonable degree of certainty that the Pharisees of Jesus’ day made void the Word of God by their traditions by binding where God did not bind, and loosing where God did not loose. When they condemned Jesus for healing on the Sabbath, or walking through the grain fields and plucking the heads of grain and other such things, they were binding where God did not bind. When they took that which should have been used to support a needy parent and dedicated it to the Lord (as they claimed), they were loosing where God did not loose. Jimmy Carter in his book, Living Faith, mentions on page 211 visiting with a famous television evangelist in his ornate mansion. He says, “When I politely mentioned the seclusion and luxury of the place, he replied that he needed some privacy from his many admirers, and that the entire estate had been dedicated to the Lord. He and his family were just using it during their lifetime. Strangely, I did not feel that I was in the presence of Jesus.” This is the kind of thing the …

Throughout the history of the denominations that are still very much in the mainstream of America, there has been a strange relationship to the Bible. Protestants, as we call them today, were in the forefront of translating the Bible into the language of the people, a tradition that dates back to the 1300s in Britain. One of the first things that Luther did after he challenged the authority of the medieval church was to translate the Bible into his native tongue. Other men did the same, and in all the modern European languages the Bible was, and is found. Many of these early reformers had “classic” educations and were capable of reading the Bible in several languages, including the ones in which it was written. Though their prejudices beamed forth against certain portions of Scripture, such as Luther’s extreme dislike for the Book of James, which he called a “right strawy epistle,” and relegated to an appendix in his translation, the reformers led the way in both translating and interpreting the Sacred Scriptures. Not only so, but many, many preachers of the Reformation became deep Bible students and they wrote their comments on almost every portion of it, thus bringing into existence classic commentaries kept in print even today. Some of the great and classic works of biblical interpretation were done in what we like to call the “golden age” of Bible study: the 17th, 18th and early 19th centuries. There are works produced in that period of time that …

As I was driving home the other day, a song came on the radio that I haven’t heard in a long time. It’s sung by the country singer Don Williams and its entitled, “You’re My Best Friend.” It’s a simple little song with very simple music and lyrics, you know, the kind that you’d pick and sing while sitting on the front porch on a cool summer evening. It’s a simple love song, a song from a man to his wife. Here’s the chorus: You’re my bread when I’m hungryYou’re shelter from troubled windsYou’re my anchor in life’s oceanBut most of allYou’re my best friend It sounds almost biblical doesn’t it? The fact is that our spouses should indeed be our best friends, the ones that we can confide in, the ones that we can share our troubles with, the ones that we desire to spend our time with. Is your wife or your husband your best friend? God set up the marriage union long ago, “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24). The marriage relationship is an honorable one (Hebrews 13:4) and isn’t to be taken for granted. Our husbands and wives are meant to be a blessing to us, not a burden. Men, do you treat your wives as good as you treat your best hunting or fishing buddy? Would you rather hang out with the fellas than spend time with your …

There are times when an individual has to be steadfast, not giving ground but remaining unmovable in doctrine and in morality (1 Corinthians 15:58). The writer James (1:6-8) condemned the double minded man, unstable in all his ways and compared him to the surge of the sea, driven by the wind and tossed. Jesus, in praising John the Baptist asked the question, “What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind?” (Matthew 7:11). The apostle Paul encouraged spiritual maturity and that Christians should no longer be tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine (Ephesians 4:11-16). There is a great need for stability among saints in this present age. However, there are times when an individual needs to bend with certain winds of circumstances. If he doesn’t, he is liable to break. Some people are so set on being stern, no matter what, that they have become miserable in life. Confucius wrote, “The grass must bend when the wind blows across it.” We have to learn to be flexible concerning things that we cannot control or change. There are disappointments that we must accept in life. Most of us have planned a trip at one time or the other and something happened that prevented us from doing so. There is the example of an individual who seemingly was in perfect health but contracted a crippling disease that prevented him from participating in sports. Either he learns to bend or …

Perhaps there are no more sobering passages in all of the inspired Scriptures, when taken in their context, than the seventh and eighth verses of the sixth chapter of Galatians. These verses state: “Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man sows, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.” These verses give the summary of man’s attitude, his life and his destiny. We notice first of all that the warning against deception is given. No man likes to think that it is possible for him to be deceived. Yet, examples are too numerous of those who have been deceived by the various political figures or systems. Certainly, no one would be so simple or foolish as to argue that the various religious leaders have not been deceitful with the people. These leaders have convinced the masses that obedience to God’s Word is not necessary. Husbands, wives, parents and children sometimes deceive one another. As disappointing as it is to be deceived by others, the greatest deception of all is self-deception. How many times have we heard someone say, “I know that the Bible says it, but…” That person has deceived himself into believing that God really didn’t mean what he said. Several factors must be taken into consideration in contemplating the law of sowing and reaping. (1) All men are sowers. (2) What is …

[Christian Courier 40 (2005): 39.] In the mid-to-late 1800’s there was a tragic split in the American “restoration” movement–the noble effort that sought to throw off the shackles of modern denominationalism and return to primitive Christianity. The key issues precipitating the division were: (a) the introduction of instrumental music as an accompaniment of Christian worship; and, (b) the crafting of the “missionary society.” Our focus in this brief piece will be to consider the problems associated with the missionary society, since this has become a “hot button” topic in recent years. In the late-40’s/early-50’s there was a division in the church that involved, at least in part, a disagreement between brethren over whether or not churches could support chartered “homes” that specifically were designed for the care of destitute children. Prior to this time, there was no serious dispute about the matter; such was deemed a perfectly scriptural way of helping orphaned youngsters. When it became expedient (or was required by law) for such arrangements to “incorporate” –so as to meet certain standards or to seek the protection of the law against frivolous litigation–some brethren rose up in opposition. They claimed that a “human institution” had been formed (with a board of directors, etc.), and that such was unscriptural. It was irrelevant to them that absolutely nothing had changed in basic structure–except that the work now had a “legal” status, rather than the more informal arrangement of the past. The critical cry became, “an ‘institution’ parallel to the missionary society has …

Why is it that the Gospel invitation has fallen into disfavor these days? We hear it being criticized with fervor. Those preachers who still offer the invitation at the end of a sermon are characterized as hard cast in the mold of extending the invitation merely because of “tradition.” I have always included an invitation at the end of my sermons. I have never done so because of tradition and don’t intend to start in the future with that motive in mind. “What must I do to be saved” is still the most important question that the human mind can entertain. As a Gospel preacher I am persuaded that those who hear me preach from time to time should hear the answer to that all-important query. However, the current fashion is for preachers to end their discourses with nary a word of explanation of what one must do to be saved. Those who are accustomed to the frequent hearing of the Gospel invitation will understand that there are probably those present in the assembly who are not so familiar with it and who need to respond to it. The denominations have long been accustomed to giving the wrong answer to that question. What is the difference in giving the wrong answer to heaven’s great question and in giving no answer at all? [The last mission on which Jesus Christ sent his apostles pertained to salvation (Mark 16:15-16). The first recorded Gospel sermon concluded with “the invitation” (Acts 2:38, 40-41). If we …

Fishing was their livelihood. It put food on their tables and roofs over their heads (Mark 1:29). Fishing “paid the bills.” But these two brothers quit their boats and nets and immediately followed Jesus (Mark 1:18). Remember also that Simon and Andrew not only left their jobs, but their families as well (Mark 1:30; cf. Matt. 19:27). It was kind of like being in the army reserves and receiving a call to serve in Iraq (cf. 2 Timothy 2:4). The brothers were already acquainted with Jesus (cf. John 1:35-42; 2:1; 2:13, 17, 22; 3:22; 4:1-27, 31, 43-45; Luke 5:1ff), but some time later, he summoned them to active, permanent duty (cf. Revelation 2:10). Vocation. Close relatives. Simon and Andrew walked away from both. “So when they had brought their boats to land, they forsook all and followed Him” (Luke 5:11; cf. Gen. 12:1). Read those words again slowly. Let them sink down into your heart. “…They forsook all…” Would you quit your job at a moment’s notice? Would you close your business on an impulse, pack your bags and then bid farewell to your loved ones for an undisclosed length of time? No? Simon Peter and Andrew did. Now stay with me for a moment. Don’t get lost. Could this be why some of us never set and attain genuine New Year’s resolutions? Could this be why many are unwilling to pursue real change in their lives? Could this be why goals are often little more than lofty “pie-in-the-sky” wishes? You see, following …