Want to Fix Hollywood

Want to Fix Hollywood

Yesterday, I was talking with an elder about all of the individuals in Hollywood who are now being accused of immoral behavior. He mentioned that now would be a good time for pulpits to remind members how a man should treat a woman. I agreed and added that it would be a good time to also teach families about sexual immorality.

Oh the immoral behavior of Hollywood.

Oh the immoral behavior of Hollywood.

Think about the following scenarios and ask yourself: Where are young men learning these simple behaviors?:

  1. How to open doors for young ladies.
  2. How to be courteous to young ladies.
  3. How to speak to young ladies without using vulgar terms or talking to them in a disrespectful manner.
  4. How to talk to young ladies parents.
  5. How to hold an umbrella for a young lady.
  6. How to give your coat up if a young lady is cold.
  7. How to give a compliment in the proper way.
  8. How to stand up and protect a young lady who is being threatened or bullied.

The reality is most of these chivalrous behaviors are never learned because they are not taught in school and they are often neglected in the home. The concept of growing young boys into strong knights has been kicked aside in our world of gender equality.

I know it is not popular today in our politically correct climate, but I am not concerned with political correctness—God made men and women differently. Peter wrote, “Husbands, likewise, dwell with them with understanding, giving honor to the wife, as to the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life, that your prayers may not be hindered” (1 Peter 3:7). Our young men need to be taught how to treat a lady!

Right now thousands of Christians are horrified and angered by all of the sexual misconduct that is being reported in Hollywood. Yet, one wonders how many of those same Christians are horrified at what goes on Prom Night at their local high school? How many of those parents are outraged that their children are messing around or having premarital sex with someone they are not married to? One wonders how angered parents are at the immoral behavior that goes on beneath their very roof?

Right about now many Christians are reading this thinking, “It’s not the same thing.” I will grant you that is true that two teens in the backseat of a car is not the same as someone in power using his/her position to sexually abuse someone else. However, in the eyes of God sin is sin. Sexual immorality—whether it be at the hands of a manipulative Hollywood producer or an unmarried high school senior—is sin.

Do you want to “fix” Hollywood? You want to stop all of the sexual immorality that is being reported on the news? Then start at home. Teach your children what a healthy relationship is supposed to look like. Demonstrate a happy marriage that they can use as a blueprint. Teach them purity—and don’t compromise just because the world accepts it from teens. Don’t embrace the attitude that all teens are going to mess around—because Christians are called to be different from the world.

We can’t teach the world about God and what He has to offer if our families look just like the world. Before we can “fix” Hollywood with the saving blood of Jesus Christ we must first make sure that our own children have put away the old man. Moms and Dads, spend some time this week training up your boys to be men—real men, who know how to treat young ladies.

Posted in Brad Harrub | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Want to Fix Hollywood

Repentance: Public Confession?

Public Confession?

If a Christian falls away to sin and it is known both within the church and outside, is it necessary for that Christian to repent before the church? Could you please give some scriptures in answer? I have always been taught that the repentance should go as far as the sin, in other words, if it is known within and without the church, it needs to be addressed before the whole church. I know private sins are then only between the individual and God.

Must we confess our sin to the church?

Must we confess our sin to the church?

Where does the Bible teach that when we sin in a public way, we must confess our sin to the church?

The Bible speaks both about private sins and public sins and what our attitude should be toward both. In thinking about private sins, there are two types. The first are private sins that are known only between God and us, individually. When we sin in this way, we have the obligation to confess that sin to God. John writes in 1 John 1:9, “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” Once we have repented and made that confession to God then the blood of Christ forever erases that sin.

There is a second kind of private sin that can be committed as well. This is when one brother sins against another brother. This kind of sin is not public because it was only committed in the presence of a one or a few Christians. The Bible teaches that when such a sin is committed that we are to handle it in as discreet a way as possible. Love will not try to publish this sin beyond its original circle of influence but will try to keep the sin concealed to as few as possible. 1 Peter 4:8 says, “above all things being fervent in your love among yourselves; for love covereth a multitude of sins�.” However, Jesus makes it clear that while our attitude should be to deal with this in a private way, if the person who has committed the sin refuses to repent of that sin, then others are to get involved. Matthew 18:15-17 says, “And if thy brother sin against thee, go, show him his fault between thee and him alone: if he hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he hear thee not, take with thee one or two more, that at the mouth of two witnesses or three every word may be established. And if he refuse to hear them, tell it unto the church: and if he refuse to hear the church also, let him be unto thee as the Gentile and the publican.” There is a three step process that is laid out here. First talk to the person individually and if the problem is resolved, let it go. Second, if the problem is not resolved one on one, then take two or three more with you so that the matter may be established. Third, if the problem still cannot be resolved, then bring it before the church. Then the church has the obligation to withdraw fellowship from the one who has sinned. Let’s be clear, however, this is still in regard to sin that was first committed in a semi-private environment.

Public sins, however, are handled quite differently within the New Testament and we have several examples of public sin. The first public sin that was committed within the church was that of Ananias and Sapphira. We find this recorded in Acts 5:1-11. This couple sold some land and gave part of the price to the church, but claimed that they had given the entire price to the church. In essence they lied about the amount of money they had given to the church. In a very public way, Peter confronted Ananias about the money. No doubt, opportunity was given Ananias to change his story and confess the truth, but he did not do this and God took his life away. In the same day, Peter asked Sapphira about the money and she too refused to tell the truth and she met the same fate as her husband. Now while God does not use miraculous means of church discipline today, the church is still expected to exercise earthly discipline in this regard. The great failure of Ananias and Sapphira was not in that they sinned, for all men commit sin according to 1 John 1:8 and 10. The failure of Ananias and Sapphira was that they failed to confess their very public sin in a public way–before Peter and the rest of the church. Had they made confession, no doubt, they would have been forgiven.

In Acts 8 we read of another public sin. Simon the sorcerer was watching how the apostles were bestowing miraculous gifts to the newly converted Christians and offered Peter money for the ability to bestow miraculous gifts as well. Simon’s motive for wanting these gifts was that he wanted to use them for his own profit. However Peter rebukes Simon in Acts 8:20, 21. He then tells Simon these words, “Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee. For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity. Then answered Simon, and said, Pray ye to the Lord for me, that none of these things which ye have spoken come upon me.” Notice that Simon was given the opportunity to repent just like Ananias and Sapphira. However, instead of refusing to repent, he did repent and asked for them to pray for him. Simon gives us an example of one who sinned publicly and then realized his mistake and made correction. The result was that he confessed his sin, asked for prayer and was forgiven.

In Galatians 2:11 Paul tells us that Peter committed a public sin. Paul writes, “But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.” Paul rebuked Peter in a public way for Peter’s hypocrisy. Again in this example we find public sin dealt with in a public way.

Finally, we have the example of the man who was committing fornication in the church at Corinth. The sin in which this man was engaged was a public sin. Paul writes in the first part of the chapter that it was “commonly reported” regarding this man’s situation. The remedy that Paul gives for this problem was to handle it in a very public way. In 1 Corinthians 5:13 Paul tells the church at Corinth to “�put away from among yourselves that wicked person.” Was the problem regarding this person that he had committed a sin? This was not the problem at all, but that he refused to admit his sin and repent of it. We find in 2 Corinthians 2:6, 7 this man did repent, but that the church in Corinth refused to forgive him. Paul writes, “Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many. So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow.” What do we learn from this example? There was a public sin. The man initially refused to repent. The church withdrew fellowship from him. He then publicly repented and confessed. The church then was obligated to forgive him. Herein lies the pattern for dealing with public sin today.

In James 5:16 we read, “Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed�.” This is perhaps the most direct passage of scripture that deals with confessing sins one to another and it addresses both semi-private and public sin. The Bible teaches that there are separate processes for handling these sins. There is a process for private sin, semi-private sin, and public sin. We must honor God’s pattern in this regard. God is consistent, however, with each of these situations. If we sin privately and we refuse to confess to God privately, then we will have no forgiveness. If we sin semi-privately and we refuse to confess semi-privately we will have no forgiveness. If we sin publicly and we refuse to confess publicly then we will have no forgiveness. The bottom line is when we sin, whether private, semi-private, or public, and then act as if it is no big deal and refuse to repent and confess our sin (regardless what kind of sin it is), we are rejecting God’s plan for our ongoing salvation. We are refusing to acknowledge that forgiveness is in the blood of Christ. We are rejecting the covenant for which Jesus died. Let us always seek to acknowledge our sins in the way that God would have us acknowledge them, according to the pattern set forth in the scriptures.

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Repentance: Public Confession?

The Law and the Prophets

The Law and the Prophets

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.

For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.

Matthew 5:17-19

First off, let’s define “the Law or the Prophets” and “the Law.”  These phrases are commonly used in the New Testament to refer to the Old Testament (cf. Matt. 7:12; 22:40; Rom. 7:1ff; Gal. 3:10ff).  An even better example is Jesus’ reference to “the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms” (Luke 24:44), because these three terms show us how the Jews of Jesus’ day defined and categorized the Old Testament canon.  “The Law of Moses” refers to the Torah, the first five books of the Old Testament (Genesis through Deuteronomy) which were authored by Moses and contain the laws given to Israel by God through Moses during their wilderness wanderings.  “The Prophets” refer to what was known as the Nebhiim, the category in which were found the Old Testament books known as “the former prophets” (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings [the latter two would later be divided up into 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings]) and “the latter prophets” (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and a scroll containing the 12 books which we categorize today as “the minor prophets” of Hosea through Malachi).  “The Psalms” refer to what was known as the Kethubhim, the category in which were found three poetical books (Psalms, Proverbs, and Job), five rolls (the Song of Solomon, Ruth, Lamentations, Esther, and Ecclesiastes), and several historical books (Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, and the Chronicles [again, the latter would later be divided up into 1 and 2 Chronicles]).

Thus, the Old Testament Scriptures of Jesus’ day were called “the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms,” “the Law and the Prophets,” or simply “the Law,” and were ordered in a way that started with Genesis and ended with the Chronicles.  We see an allusion to this when Jesus, while condemning the Pharisees, said to them, “so that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of innocent Abel to the blood of Zechariah…whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar” (Matt. 23:35).  He was referring to a murder recorded in Genesis 4:4, the first book of the Jewish canon of the Old Testament, and to a murder recorded in 2 Chronicles 24:21, the last book of the Jewish canon of the Old Testament.  Basically, Jesus was telling the Pharisees that on them would come all the blood of the prophets in the Old Testament “from Genesis to Chronicles” (in the same way we would say, “from Genesis to Malachi”).

Now that we have established what Jesus meant when he referred to “the Law and the Prophets,” let’s examine what he meant when he said he had not come to “abolish” them but rather to “fulfill” them.  The Greek for “fulfill” basically means “to complete,” or to “bring to realization.”  Paul would later show that one of the purposes of the Law (i.e., Old Testament) was to prepare the way for the coming of the Messiah (Gal. 3:24-25).  Thus, Jesus, being the Messiah whose way the Law would prepare, would naturally come to “fulfill” it rather than destroy it.  This he did by fulfilling its prophecies (Luke 24:44) and its demands (Gal. 3:11-13; Heb. 4:15), something none of the Jews could do due to their sin.  Since he fulfilled it, he took it out of the way when he died on the cross (Eph. 2:14-15; Col. 2:14) and by doing so fulfilled its prophecy that it would be replaced with his new covenant and testament (Heb. 8:6-13; 9:15-17; cf. Jer. 31:31-34; Rom. 7:1-4).

That being the case, why did he then say that “not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law” until “heaven and earth pass away”?  Here’s the thing, though.  He didn’t actually say that.  There are many who believe that Christians are obligated to obey the laws of the Old Testament today, and thus think that is what Matthew 5:18 is saying: that the Old Testament will be in effect until the end of the world.  That is not the case, because what Jesus actually said was this:  “For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.”  He is not say that the Law would stay in effect until the end of the world.  He is saying that the world would not end until everything in the Old Testament was accomplished…something that took place when he died on the cross.  Keep in mind, he said this three years before he himself fulfilled the Old Testament on the cross.  During those three years, not one thing about the Old Testament changed, not even the tiniest iota or dot…and heaven and earth did not pass away, either.  However, at the end of those three years he took the Law out of the way at the cross and fulfilled it completely.

Since the Old Testament laws would be taken out of the way at the cross and replaced with the laws of Christ in the New Testament, why did he then say that those who are great in the kingdom of heaven will be those who both obey and teach the commandments of the Law, and those who are least in the kingdom of heaven will be those who do not obey these Old Testament commandments and teach others to do the same?  He said this for two reasons, both of which have to do with the time in which he made this statement.

First, remember that the Sermon on the Mount, a sermon whose theme was the approaching kingdom of heaven (Matt. 4:17, 23; 5:3, 10, 19-20; 6:10; 7:21), was preached three years before he died on the cross and the kingdom, the church, arrived (Acts 1:6-9; 2:1ff; 8:12; Col. 1:13; 1 Thess. 2:12; Rev. 1:4, 6, 9).  The Law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms were still in effect at the time of the Sermon on the Mount (cf. Gal. 4:4).  His Jewish audience, as well as Jesus himself, were obligated by God to obey those commandments.  Some of these Jews would later be converted to Christianity and added to the kingdom, the church in Acts.  With this in mind, ask yourself this:  If you were a Jew who was in the habit of rebelliously disobeying the laws of the Old Testament, what makes you think you would obey the laws of Christ in the New Testament as a citizen of his kingdom?

Secondly, Matthew 5:20 and the rest of the chapter gives us insight into what Christ was thinking when he made that statement.  Verse 20 reads, “For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.”  What were the scribes and Pharisees doing that was so bad?  Basically, they were adding their own traditions to the established Word of God in the Old Testament (Matt. 15:1-9) and were focusing only on obeying parts of the Law rather than all of it (Matt. 23:23).  This is seen in the rest of chapter 5, where Jesus time and again tells his Jewish audience, “You have heard that it was said…” (a reference to what they were being taught by the scribes and Pharisees), followed by, “But I say to you…”

An examination of each case of what Jesus cited as being taught to the Jews of his day by the scribes and Pharisees would reveal that in some cases they were teaching only following the letter of the law while ignoring the spirit behind it (i.e., focusing on the commandment to not murder while ignoring the anger that would lead to murder [vs. 21-26], or focusing on the commandment to not commit adultery while ignoring the lust that would lead to adultery [vs. 27-30]).  In one case, the scribes and Pharisees were apparently telling the Jews to “hate their enemy” (Matt. 5:43), while the Law actually commanded the opposite (Ex. 23:4-5; Prov. 21-22).  In another case, they were taking a command which in its proper context prompted the death penalty for the murder of babies and moving it out of context to teach vengeful retaliation (Matt. 5:38-42; cf. Ex. 21:22-25).

Therefore, the scribes and the Pharisees were proving through their teachings and actions that they were not following the commandments of the Old Testament, and were teaching others to do likewise.  That is why they would be called “least” in the coming kingdom of heaven, and why Jesus would enjoin his listeners to make their own righteousness exceed theirs.  For again, if one was in the unrepentant habit of disobeying and misinterpreting Old Testament commands while teaching others to do the same, they would certainly not be welcome in Christ’s kingdom of the church which upheld the laws of the New Testament.

Posted in Jon Mitchell | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on The Law and the Prophets

It is Finished

It is Finished

Tragically, men have taken the words of the Bible out of context. Consider the following illustration. When Jesus said, “It is finished,” there was no way anyone there could have understood what He meant. Have you ever thought what the Jewish leaders thought was finished at the cross?

What wasn't finished at the cross?

What wasn’t finished at the cross?

It was not finished for the religious leaders who crucified. I do not know how many of them heard Jesus say, “It is finished,” but they definitely thought the death of Jesus brought the finish to problems which had plagued them for many years.

The preaching of John the Baptist was the beginning of their first-century problems. When John saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees in his audience, he said, “Brood of vipers…flee from the wrath to come…bear fruits of repentance…even now the ax is laid to the root of the trees…” (Matt. 3:7-10).

The death of John did not end their problems. Read Jesus’ rebuke of them in the “eight woes” of Matthew 23 to see that Jesus was even more severe. After His death, they could have taken Jesus’ words about it being finished and said, “Thank God, it is finished,” but they would have been so wrong. Bible words always have a Bible context!

It was not finished for those who thought the threat from Rome had past. Rome was very much aware of the unrest that the teachings of Christ was creating. Both Pilate and Herod knew of Him. The Jewish leaders could say, “We have no king but Caesar” (John 19:15), but the multitudes wanted Jesus as their king (John 6:15). Those leaders might have thought that the death of Jesus would finish the threat of Roman intervention, but they were wrong. It was not finished, and in that generation, Jerusalem was leveled. Jesus’ words, “It is finished,” have a Bible concept.

It was not finished for those who thought they would never have to deal with Jesus again. We have His very words in that book which God has provided for us. That book also tells of the words and actions of those who killed Him. It is not true that His death ended it all. One day that book will be opened and these same men will face the One they crucified!

What was finished? Not the work of Jesus, for He was raised and is our mediator with God. He continues to work on our behalf. What was finished? It was the work God had given Jesus to do. Redemption, salvation, the purchasing of the church, atonement, the uniting of all men in the one glorious body, the remembrance of sin, the end of that old covenant, the destroying of the power of Satan—all that the New Testament shows has been brought to us.

Bible words always have a Bible context!

Posted in Dan Jenkins | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on It is Finished

The Personal Standard

Perfecting The Art Of: Self-Deception, Destruction, And The Drawing Away Of The Disciples After Them.

The Word of God is truth (Jn. 17:17). Every individual word is true (Matt. 4:4), as well as the entire totality thereof (Psa. 119:160). No part or portion of the Word of God is a matter of one’s own, private interpretation (2 Ptr. 1:20-21). It is the perfectly pure (Psa. 19:7-11) and totally timeless (Psa. 119:89, Matt. 19:4-6; 1 Tim. 2:11-15) standard by which we shall all be judged on the last day (Jn. 12:48-50, Rev. 20:11-15).

God's standard will not fail.

God’s standard will not fail.

In a somewhat similar manner, the spirit of mankind hasn’t changed a whole lot over the years either. As King Solomon in all of his God-given wisdom once said regarding such, “There is nothing new under the sun” (cf. Eccl. 1:8-9). Take for example, today’s occasional God-professing but personally and secretly pride driven disciple; he or she who wants and will insist on their own way no matter what, and despite whatever the biblical truth of the matter actually is; he or she who has already come to some biblically-contradictory conclusion on a timeless topic with eternal implications, but for whatever privately-held and personally pride-driven reason, absolutely refuses to sit down, sincerely study, deeply discuss, honestly understand, humbly accept, and truly repent of their egregious error.

Some of today’s biblically-addressed topics wherein this rebellious and God-defying attitude might be seen as most in evidence could include, but not be limited to, such subjects as so-called “social drinking” (the public consumption of alcohol by any saint); marriage, divorce, and remarriage; the divisive sin of denominationalism; women’s roles in the church; and even, sadly, such things as the essentiality of repentance and baptism both before and in order to obtain the forgiveness of one’s sins amongst other things.

Now, the overall point of this article is not to seek to prove that such God-resisting and rejecting mindsets have existed for millennia (for that is pretty blatantly obvious from even a peripheral skimming of the Scriptures), but to warn and to outline in far greater detail, the fact that their tactics in today’s church have not changed a whole lot from those of their pride-filled and scripture-resisting and rejecting predecessors from previous centuries.

For example, when God’s “old paths” truth (Jer. 6:16) is fully and faithfully presented by either an elder, preacher, or bible class teacher regarding some of the harder teachings of scripture, some will simply walk away, never to return (Jn. 6:60-66). Others may travel to a nearby, truth-nullifying congregation where God’s word is not so clearly taught, in order to have their “ears tickled” (2 Tim. 4:3-4), their sins remain unaddressed, and their consciences therefore falsely comforted. Still others, like Korah and his crew, might seek to assemble a gang of rebellious, religious, congregational leaders and openly revolt against God’s chosen plan (Num. 16:1-50). And while these sorts of scripture-rejecting rebellions are all fairly easily seen and identified, others in ages past have practiced a far more secret, subtle, and sinister form of subterfuge… laboring at length to lay the groundwork for a far more sly and stealthy sneak attack on their intended target – seeking to strike from within before the faithful leaders or people of God ever know what hit them (See 2 Sam. 15:1-14)!

Hence, Jesus’ warning to His disciples very early on in His ministry to always be on guard and aware of such devious, dubious, extremely well-disguised but still ravenous ‘wolves in sheep’s clothing’ (Matt. 7:15-20) – a crucial warning also echoed by the Apostle Paul to the leadership of the first-century congregation of the Lord’s church at Ephesus (See: Acts 20:17-38). In that text we see several essential and eternally-vital elements:

  • That it is by fully and faithfully declaring and defending the whole and total counsel of God that God’s messenger can stand innocent before Him (vss. 26-27);
  • That after Paul’s departure, “savage wolves” would come in among them from the outside (vs. 29), as well as the fact that even from within their very own number, would come some personally power-hungry and pride-driven disciples “speaking perverse things to draw away the disciples after themselves” (vs. 30). (It is also interesting to note that the Apostle Peter says something very similar in 2 Ptr. 2 + 3, wherein he warns of sinister false teachers who would secretly bring in damnable heresies, denying the truth and causing it to be blasphemed in their greedy lust for money, while the Apostle Paul warns of those false teachers who would do so out of their lust for personal power and the acquisition of their own following.)
  • That it is only by faithfully proclaiming and defending God’s word – no matter the opposition, cost, or consequences – that one can be truly and fully assured of heaven (vs. 32).

Such stealthy, Absalomic opposition from within by any who might covet more personal power and their own following as opposed to humbly accepting and following the Lord of glory and His word, can come in many and various forms. Some might resort to gossip, slander, and/or character assassination regarding those who refuse to compromise God’s truth (Jer. 6:28; Prov. 10:28; Matt. 26:59-67; Ro. 1:28-30). Others may seek to bribe or “buy” either another’s loyalty, influence, or their own way into power (Matt. 26:14-16; Acts 8:18-23). Others seeking more personal power or control may be seen continually inserting themselves into situations they have no legitimate business being involved with, thus becoming “busybodies” as opposed to ‘minding their own business’ as the scriptures command all Christians to do (2 Thess. 3:11-12; 1 Tim. 5:13; 1 Thess. 4:11-12). Still others – like Paul mentioned in Acts 20:29 – might show up only when/after the man of God is gone and the flock appears to be less protected. Hence, Paul’s admonition to the Ephesian leadership in verse 32. Let the church beware (Matt. 7:15-20)!

Posted in Doug Dingley | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on The Personal Standard