I Have Performed…

I Have Performed

The above statement sounds really good until you consider its context, 1 Samuel 15:13. It came from King Saul after he fought against the Amalekites. God said to Saul, “Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them…” (1 Samuel 15:3). God gave this command to “punish Amalek for what he did to Israel, how he ambushed him on the way” (1 Samuel 15:2). So, Saul went out and “destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword” (1 Samuel 15:8), but kept the king and the best of the livestock alive. When Samuel came to meet Saul after the battle, Saul uttered these words, “I have performed the commandment of the Lord.” The problem wasn’t that Saul didn’t do some of what God told him to do, but he didn’t do all of what God told him to do. For this reason, Samuel said, “Because you have rejected the word of the Lord, He also has rejected you from being king” (1 Samuel 15:23).performed commandment

Many people today make the same claim. They say, “I have performed the commandment of the Lord” when they have really only done some but not all that God has commanded. Jesus told his apostles that they should teach disciples “to observe all things that I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:20). Jesus wants us to obey Him in all things, not some. Jesus said, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4). If we neglect one “word” from God, then we have not performed his commandment, regardless of what some may claim. Our behavior in Christ ought to conform to all that Christ has said, not just part.

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on I Have Performed…

New Testament Law

NEW TESTAMENT LAW

There is much disagreement on the Law among those claiming Christ as savior.  The chief dissention is between the side that hold to the paradigm that God must be obeyed for salvation and the side which says salvation is not dependent upon one’s obedience to God because it relies on works.  For the doctrine of salvation by faith alone to be true, there can exist no New Testament Law in God’s word.  The very presence of Law in the New Testament forever dispels the myth of Salvation by faith alone, or salvation apart from works.

Since the Word of God explicitly says that Jesus is the author of salvation to the obedient (Hebrews 5:9) and Jesus Himself declared in Matthew 7:21 that only those who do the will of God will be allowed in the Kingdom of Heaven, this goal of this work is to establish the presence of New Testament Law in God’s Word.  For a Christian to be obedient, there must exist something to obey.  That which a Christian must obey, therefore must be law.

There is more than one law spoken of in the New Testament.  Both Old Testament and New Testament law are mentioned and contrasted in Romans 3:27, “Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.”

1. The Old Testament Law of Moses, Old Law, or the Levitical Law, which prevailed from the time of Moses until the cross.

a. The Law of Moses ended at the cross of Christ.

* The Law of Moses abolished: Ephesians 2:15-16 reads, “Having abolished in His [JESUS] flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments, [LAW OF MOSES] contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; 16 And that he might reconcile both [JEWS AND GENTILES] unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby…”

* The Law of Moses was Nailed to Jesus’ Cross: Colossians 2:14, “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances [Law of Moses] that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross…”

b. The Old Testament Law of Moses was incapable of saving anyone.

* The Law of Moses could not justify. Acts 13:39, “And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.”

* The sacrifices offered under the Law of Moses could not take away sin permanently. Hebrews 10:1-4, “For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect. 2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins. 3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year. 4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.”

* The Law of Moses could not make anyone perfect. Hebrews 7:19, “For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.

 

c. With the Death of Christ Came A Changing Of the Law.

* Jesus is our new High Priest. Hebrews 3:1, “Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus…”  Hebrews 6:20, “Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.”  Hebrews 7:26, “For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens….”  Hebrews 8:1, “Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens…”

* The Changing of Priesthood Required a Changing of the Law. Hebrews 7:12, “For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.”  The Law of Moses having been abolished at the cross has been replaced with the changing of our High Priest.

* Jesus is a lawgiver. James 4:12, “There is one lawgiver [Jesus], who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou that judgest another?”  Those who claim there is no law under the gospel must first explain how James is not referring to Jesus and at the same time, produce who else James is referring to in this passage.   Moreover, those who deny law under Christ must explain the existence of a lawgiver in God’s Word that gave no law.

d. The New Testament Law Referenced in God’s Word.

*Galatians 6:2, “Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.”

* James 1:25, “But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.”

* James 2:8, “If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well…”

* Romans 3:26-28, “To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. 27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works [Old Testament Law]? Nay: but by the law of faith [New Testament Law]. 28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith [Law of Faith] without the deeds of the law [Old Testament Law]. Paul is contrasting the two laws.  In so doing, he directly associates Faith with Law.   There is law in the New Testament.  Paul called it the law of Faith.

* Romans 8:2, “For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.” Two laws are contrasted in this verse.  The law of Sin and Death must be Old Testament law and the other law which frees us from the Old law must be the New Testament Law.

* Romans 8:7, “Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.” Paul is contrasting the flesh with the Spirit of God.  Those in the flesh are non believers where those in the Spirit of God are Christians.  Non Christians are not subject to the law of God, where Christians are.  One cannot be subject to a law that does not exist.

* Romans 7:22-25, “For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: 23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. 24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? 25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.” Paul is talking here about the struggle every Christian endures.  The desire of our flesh over our desire to obey God’s law.   Paul says here that he serves the Law of God with his mind.  Any law that we serve under the Christian age must be of necessity be New Testament Law.  Paul cannot serve law where none exists.

* 1 Corinthians 9:21, “To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.” Paul here specifically declares that he is not without law but living under the law to Christ.  Paul cannot declare his fealty to Christ’s Law if none exists.

e. The New Testament Law Transgressed.

*James 2:9, “But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.” This cannot be a reference to the Law of Moses because this was written to Christians living after the Law of Moses was abolished. Being in the same context as James 2:8, it is clear this is a reference to the royal law there mentioned.

* James 2:11, “For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law.” See comments above.

* James 2:10, “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.” One cannot be guilty of offending a law that was abolished.  Neither can one be guilty of transgressing a law where none exists.

* 1 John 3:4-5, “Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. 5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.”  Verse 5 included to show the context.  Jesus is said here He took away “OUR” Sin.  John is written to Christians.  The Old Testament Law, [Law of Moses] was abolished at the cross and was no longer in force.  The Law in this context can be transgressed, is in force and is transgressed by sin.  Law in this passage can be nothing other than New Testament Law.

* Romans 4:15, “Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.” Romans 5:13, “For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.”   These statements are in the context of Old Testament Law, however the implications of what is here stated extend further than just the Law of Moses.  If there were no law under Christ, it would be impossible to sin.  One cannot break a law where none exists under either the old covenant or the new covenant.  The implications here are that if there were no law under the New Covenant, there would be no sin and as such, no one would be lost and in need of saving.

 

f. New Testament Law fulfilled.

* Romans 13:8-10, “Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. 9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.”   The Old Testament Law was abolished at the cross.  It is no longer in force.  Any law fulfilled after the cross of Christ is by necessary inference New Testament Law.

* Galatians 6:2, “Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.” It cannot be reasonably denied that New Testament Law exists with a command to fulfil it. However, it is a logical necessity that one cannot fulfil law where non exists.  And on the same note, as demonstrated in the previous section, neither can a law be transgressed where non exists.

g. Jesus’ commandments are law.

* Matthew 22:36-40, “Master, which is the great commandment in the law? 37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” The Old Testament Law contained commandments that had to be obeyed.  Since God’s commandments were law in the Old Testament, they must be law in the New Testament.  Jesus here mentions “all the law and prophets”.   It can be argued that Jesus was referring to both the Old Testament and New Testament Law in this context.  In any event, Jesus connected His commandments with Law.  Commandments are statements requiring obedience.  Law is a system that governs behavior.  A system that governs behavior must by necessity contain statements that must be obeyed.

h. Christians Will Be Judged By Law.

* John 12:48, “He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day” In the previous section we saw that Jesus commandments are law. Jesus said in John 12:48 all will be judged by His words.

* James 2:12, “So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.” Since both Jesus words and the Law of Liberty  are going to be the basis of our judgement then it is a logical necessity that the words of Jesus are New Testament Law.  Furthermore, since we are going to be judged by Law, it is a necessary inference that Law exists in the New Testament.

i. New Testament Law justifies.

* Romans 2:13, “(For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.)” Paul here declares a law that justifies.  We know for a fact this cannot be Old Testament law he is talking about because scripture is abundantly clear that the Law of Moses cannot justify.  Acts 13:39, “And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.”  The only other possible Law that could justify those who keep it can be New Testament Law.  There are no other possible choices.  Paul’s reference to any law that justifies establishes the fact that New Testament law exists beyond any reasonable doubt.

Logical Conclusions From The Word of God:

As stated earlier, Law is a system that governs behavior.  A system that governs behavior must by necessity contain statements that must be obeyed.  Statements that must be obeyed are commandments.

Jesus said all must do the will of God to enter the Kingdom of Heaven in Matthew 7:21.  Jesus Christ either must be obeyed, or can be disobeyed for one to inherit eternal life.  There is no middle of the road here.  If Jesus does not need to be obeyed, then Matthew 7:21 and a whole host of other scripture bearing on this constitutes a false statement in the Word of God.  If there exists a single commandment in God’s Word which must be obeyed, then it is a logical necessity that everything He commanded likewise must be obeyed.

The same can be said of Law.  One cannot have a law without directives governing the actions of others.  Neither can there be directives governing one’s actions without law.  The two are mutually inclusive of one another.

If there is no New Testament Law, then there are no directives governing one’s behavior.  If this were the case then not even John 3:16 and 6:29 would need to be considered as a necessary condition upon which salvation depended.  Even those claiming there is no New Testament Law MUST concede that one needs to have faith to receive eternal life.  And New Testament Law makes it abundantly clear faith is a requirement.  Any condition upon which salvation depends whatsoever is by definition law.

Conditional Statements:

  1. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.” Galatians 5:19-21, “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, 21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.”

If there is no New Testament Law, there are no restrictions governing behavior and Paul’s statements in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and Galatians 5:19-21 are false.   Restrictions that govern behavior are law, therefore New Testament Law exists.

Conclusion:  Does the New Covenant Contain Law?

There are at least 7 direct references to Law in the New Testament; Galatians 6:2, James 1:25; 2:8, Romans 7:22-25; 8:2; 8:7, 1 Corinthians 9:21.  Law must therefore exist for it to be mentioned in the Word of God.

James 2:9; 2:10; 2:11; 1 John 3:4-5 demonstrate the transgression of New Testament Law.  Where there is no law, there can be no transgression, Romans 4:15; 5:13.

Romans 13:8-10 and Galatians 6:2 reference the fulfillment or keeping of Law.  One cannot keep law where non exists.

The New Testament contains Commandments of Jesus.  Commandments govern behavior, therefore they must be law.

Jesus is said to be a lawgiver in James 4:12.  Jesus gave us commandments, thereby giving us law.

Christians are accountable for their behavior and will.

The evidence from the Word of God overwhelmingly demonstrate the existence of New Testament Law.

Context determines which law is in view of the inspired writer.  When the context is speaking of Law that has been abolished or ineffective, the Old Testament Law is the one intended by the writer.  Conversely, when the context is speaking of a law that is effective and is effective and in force, New Testament Law is the one in view.

The belief that there is no law in the New Testament that is binding on Christians today is driven by the doctrine of salvation by faith alone.  For salvation by faith alone to be true, there can be no New Testament Law.   The positive existence of New Testament Law thus precludes the salvation by faith alone doctrine from being scriptural.  James words in James 2:24 ring true, “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.”

Posted in David Hersey | Tagged , , | Comments Off on New Testament Law

“Pienso luego existo” (René Descartes)

“Pienso luego existo” (René Descartes)

Pueden haber varios factores alrededor de esta icónica frase. Considero desde mi filosofía cristiana que Descartes lo que desarrolló fue un sistema de duda sistemática compleja buscando principalmente en el contexto de sus días desacreditar la existencia de Dios en vez de solo una frase para ser citada por los filósofos posteriores. Si realmente esto es lo que se buscaba, me  temo por mucho que no funcionó. Algunos filósofos modernos como Anthony G.N. Flew en el debate público que duró varías noches  con el Dr. Thomas B. Warren al Norte de Texas en 1977 hacía uso de esta filosofía para según él probar que Dios no existe. Hasta un siemple estudiante de primer ingreso  de la carrera de derecho como yo, puede construir un silogismo impenetranble que afirma lo contrario a la “inmensa”sabiduría de Descartes en esta frase. Observe con migo:Descartes

  • P.M Pienso luego existo.
  • P.M. Dios piensa. 
  • C. Por lo tanto, Dios existe.

Descartes cuestionó su propia existencia, cuestionó los sentidos, incluso no podía estar seguro si su mano derecha al frente de él era real o tan solo una invención de su subconsciente. La única cosa de la que pudo estar seguro fue precisamente de que no podia dudar de su duda. Si usted duda de su duda estarás inmerso en una prision de la que no puedes salir. Esta es la inconsistencia número 1 que yo le  encuentro al sistema de Descartes y toda la filosofía construida detrás de la frase. El Maestro expresó en Juan 8:31-32 que la verdad podía ser conocida, y es esa verdad la que nos provee la seguridad de los hechos. De regreso a la frase, note consecuentemente si estoy dudando necesariamente estoy pensando ya que la duda es un elemento del pensamiento. De la frase que nos compete y que ha hecho eco en latín  “cogito ergo sum” lo mas importante es el “ergo” traducido literalmente sería “pienso entonces soy”. El “entonces” es una conclusión lógica subsecuente, por lo que Descartes podía estar seguro de otra cosa más… a saber; su existencia. Lo que expone su segunda inconsistencia, pues su método estaba basado en la duda y su propia existencia es afirmada en su frase. Puedo observar que la frase incluso  suguiere una falacia.  La “Post hoc ergo propter hoc”  se trata de un tipo de falacia en el que se da por sentado que si un fenómeno ocurre después de otro, es que está causado por este, a falta de más pruebas que indiquen que eso es así. Quizás no intento afirmar que del todo la frase de Descartes es una falacia pero que fácilmente suguiere esto en principio. No se si en realidad debería de cuestionar este tema de la manera  que lo hago y  debería aceptar solamente la información brindada en clases de Filosofía que he recido, pero honrando la corriente racionalista de Descartes, estoy poniendo en tela de duda su sistema. De hecho lo expuesto anteriormente podría ejemplicarse de la siguiente manera:

  • Pienso que existo, luego existo.
  • Pienso que estoy cansado, luego estoy cansado.
  • Pienso que soy joven, entonces soy joven. 
  • Pienso que soy un rey, luego soy rey.
  • Pienso que soy un árbol, luego llego a ser árbol.

Puntualmente estoy convencido que hay 3 graves problemas con la filosofía de Descartes y su frase “pienso luego existo”:

              I.     Primero, “La insistencia en un estándar de certeza absoluta elimina el término medio de la evidencia razonable. La evidencia razonable es absolutamente necesaria para el pensamiento y para el sistema de convicción.  Observamos que en la orden de ofrecer a su hijo Abraham tuvo tres días de viaje hasta la  montaña  en el Génesis 22 lo que le dio suficiente tiempo para dudar. En el camino de Emaús en Lucas 24 aquellos dos hombres nos revelan que en Jerusalén murmuraba y dudaban sobre todo lo que había sucedido en referente a la persona de Jesús, los tres días fueron necesarios para suscitar una duda razonablemente lo  suficientemente necesaria como para provocar convicción. Un ejemplo más practico podría ilustrarse, cuando golpeo mi puño contra una pared, tengo un nivel insuficiente de certeza de que la pared es real, entonces, ¿qué nivel de certeza se necesita? Es un tanto absurdo. Los seres humanos necesariamente operan en un nivel de fe en sus sentidos, ciertamente suficiente y necesaria para la existencia humana.

            II.     En segundo lugar, “la insistencia en la claridad y distinción absoluta para la mente reflexiva escéptica elimina la consideración de cualquier aspecto en el que la realidad trascienda la representación completa y determinada”.  De hecho, el hecho mismo de que Descartes supiera que sus sentidos ocasionalmente lo “engañaban”, demuestra que sus sentidos por lo general (típicamente) le proporcionaban percepciones precisas. La Biblia enseña que generalmente podemos confiar en nuestros sentidos, incluso al grado de pecar, reconociendo la necesidad de salvación y accediendo a la remisión de los pecados (p. ej., Génesis 13:15; Mateo 5:13; Hechos 13:44; Juan 20:24-30; etc.). El argumento de Descartes es inteligible solo si la naturaleza ilusoria de los sueños, por ejemplo, no inhibe nuestra comprensión general de la realidad.

          III.     En tercer lugar, Descartes no proporcionó una razón convincente al menos no en el ámbito racional, para rechazar la posibilidad de que un demonio estuviera colocando ideas falsas en su conciencia. Debido a que toda la evidencia de Descartes era racional y ninguna era empírica, su base para pensar que Dios existe era una idea “clara y distinta” de una Persona, “infinita, eterna, inmutable, independiente, omnisciente, omnipotente”, “poderoso” . ¿Por qué esa idea no pudo haber sido colocada en la mente de Descartes por un dios que en realidad es engañoso? Descartes terminó donde empezó, pero no antes de intentar derrocar al empirismo.

Considero fuertemente que Kant pasó mucho tiempo en las proposiciones de Descartes antes de proponer sus teorías donde va a lidiar con lo empírico y también con el fenómeno neumático (todo lo que es espiritual) y que no va a negar del todo la existencia de este plano como tal.  De cualquier cosa todas las cosas han llegado a existir (incluido el ser humano) gracias al creador de todas las cosas; el Dios de la Biblia.  La explicación más fácil, la más lógica y la que puede ser demostrada es la de la deidad que ha orquestado nuestra existencia y es al mismo a quien debemos todo nuestro ser racional y pensante que nos separa de todos los demás serés humanos. El pensar es un regalo y al mismo tiempo una hermosa característica que nos relaciona directamente con nuestro Padre celestial. ¡Pensar en un don, no lo desperdiciemos!.

Posted in Heiner Montealto | Tagged , , | Comments Off on “Pienso luego existo” (René Descartes)

Outwardly Religious

Outwardly Religious

The prophet Jeremiah spent decades of his life sharing the Words of God to an outwardly religious Israel/Judah.  The people to whom he was prophesying were a people that had been chosen of God.  They were chosen as a promise to Abraham that through Him “all the families of the earth shall be blessed”.  Jesus the Savior of all mankind would come through the lineage of Abraham.  The descendants of Abraham, the Israelites/Hebrews were enslaved by the nation of Egypt.  They originally came to that state as a family of 70 but grew under their bondage.  God through Moses delivered the people and brought them to Mt. Sinai of Arabia.  There they were told by God, “If you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession among all peoples, for all the earth is mine; and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.”  God then brought them to the land of Canaan as He had promised Abraham.  Before entering, Moses shared with them these words, “This day the Lord your God commands you to do these statutes and rules.  You shall therefore be careful to do them with all your heart and with all your soul.”  Moses then shared with them the blessings God would bring upon them if they obeyed and he also shared the curses to come upon them if they disobeyed (Deuteronomy 27/28).  Israel failed in following the commandments of God with all of their heart and soul.  Thus, a disobedient, hard-hearted people set on destruction was the nation to whom Jeremiah would prophecy.

Jeremiah 6:10 – “…the Word of the Lord is to them an object of scorn: they take no pleasure in it.”

Israel, being the nation chosen to be blessed above all others, had a rich history of God’s deliverance and grace.  They built a great temple in Jerusalem which God agreed to acknowledge with His presence.  Nations knew of the might of the God of Israel.  Israel had great and constant sacrifices to God.  Yet, despite the display of their religiousness, most of the people had no love for what God had instructed them or recognition of what he had done for them.  They were a nation of hypocrites and God was about to destroy them by the hand of the Chaldeans led by Nebuchadnezzar.  Jeremiah saw this.  Jeremiah experienced this.  His prophetic words called for their repentance, but the heart and soul devotion spoken of by Moses was not present with these people.

Hypocrites aren’t just a danger to themselves; they are a danger to others.  Their outwardly religious hypocrisy influences others to discount the glory, power, and provision of God.  God will not be mocked by pretend, superfluous religiosity.  God knows what He wants; He knows what He has commanded.  Due to blatant hypocrisy, many people walk away from or avoid religious bodies of people claiming to be God’s faithful.  They see great displays of religion, but little substance regarding the teaching and keeping of the commandments of God.  Studies show that young people recognize this hypocrisy and not being properly instructed in the scriptures or seeing hearts embracing the Word of God, they are walking away from “organized” religion in great numbers.

Acknowledging that the true worshippers of God are abundantly surrounded by hearts which truly have no pleasure in obeying God’s commandments, what is mankind to do?  Walking away is not the answer.  Business is full of hypocrisy, but people keep engaging in it so they can make money.  Society is full of hypocrites, but people rarely leave and become hermits.  Married life has hypocrites, but people keep on marrying.  Heaven is going to be the only place where there will be no hypocrites, but if a person avoids obeying the commandments of God and being part of the Lord’s Church, they will spend their eternity in hell with the hypocrites they tried to avoid.  So true worshippers, such as Jeremiah, continue on in the midst of the hypocrisy, following God’s commands and sharing His Word.  They call for repentance, they call for devotion, they call for the obedience which God commanded.  They do so knowing that many, even most, will not listen, will not turn, and will be destroyed.  In the maelstrom, those truly seeking God, do not turn away from the truth or the love of it, despite the presence of hypocrisy.  The devoted work to change it.  Committed souls may have to dust off their feet from time to time, but they move on, not away from, and steadfastly cling to the Words and commandments of God.

God has chosen the Church which Jesus built (Matthew 16:18, Acts 2:47) as the home of the believer.  He has provided a path that is a light to the feet of those who will follow, “for the ways of the Lord are right, and the just shall walk in them: but the transgressors shall fall therein.”.  In seeking the path of God, do not be distracted by the weak and flailing hearts of others.  Do not turn back when you see others falter or worse yet, relish in their disobedience to God while putting on a show of religious pomp.  “…for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.”  “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength…” Jeremiah trusted and obeyed God completely.  His devotion was not a show, but it was a labor of love in the midst of an outwardly religious Israel whose hearts had gone cold.  Inside and out, let us keep the fires of our heart burning in service and honor to our God.

 

 

Posted in Travis Main | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Outwardly Religious

Inspired

Inspired

A few weeks ago in a sermon, I spoke about the Bible doctrine of inspiration.  In that lesson we discussed how some people will accept some of the Bible as inspired, but not all of it.  One sub-category of this group is individuals who say they believe the words of Jesus but not the words of the apostles.  This idea sounds good to some, and it has appeal to those who are seeking to eliminate the Apostle Paul’s teachings especially in areas such as roles of women in the church and certain sexual sins. inspired

However, if we simply go by the teachings of Jesus, we will find that this belief cannot hold true.  In John 16:13, Jesus Himself had this to say about the teaching of the apostles: “Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will show you things to come.”  In other words, the things that the apostles taught were from the same Holy Spirit that Jesus had in His life.  The Holy Spirit brought the teaching that Jesus wanted the apostles to have, and led them into “all truth.”  The apostles also were able to lay hands on others to give them the ability to prophecy (Acts 8:14-17).

We conclude that to reject the apostles is to reject the Holy Spirit, and to reject the Holy Spirit is to reject Jesus Himself.  We cannot simply pick and choose which words we want to accept and which words we don’t want to accept because we will end up rejecting Jesus altogether.  Let us resolve to love all of God’s word, not just the parts that we like.

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Inspired