Living Like Your Dying

Living Like Your Dying?

In 2004 country music star Tim McGraw released the single “Live Like You Were Dying.” The song was written by Craig Wiseman and Tim Nichols and details a discussion between two men after the one had found out that he had a terminal illness. The question was, “How’s it hit you when you get that kind of news? Man whatcha do?” The answer amongst all the details was, “Some day, I hope you get the chance, to live like you were dyin’.”

This past week I was asked, “What would you do if you knew that you had only one day left to live?” Discussing that question with two other Christians we decided that we wouldn’t really do anything any different than what we do already. There wouldn’t be enough time to go skydiving, Rocky Mountain climbing, or to ride a bull. But as Christians we would just keep doing what we were doing. But the more I thought about that the more I thought it wasn’t really accurate.

What I would do would be to do MORE of what I already do and do it more fervently, passionately, and with more urgency.

I would…

  • Tell Those In My Life What They Mean To Me.
  • Tell Everyone I Came Into Contact With About Christ.
  • Tell The Church And My Family To Be Obedient And Faithful.
  • Tell God I Was Sorry For My Sins.
  • Thank God For The Blessings Of This Life
  • Thank God For His Son.

Unfortunately most people, including Christians, live as though they will never die. Yet, Psalm 89:48 says, “What man is he that liveth, and shall not see death? Shall he deliver his soul from the hand of the grave?” We are all going to die and then we will face God in Judgment (Hebrews 9:27).

Most folks don’t know the moment of their death. We far to often, as mere mortal creatures, step into eternity without preparation. But we do not have to! What we need to realize is this…

These realizations will change our lives and alter our eternal destiny. So live each day like you were dying. You may only have one left!

Posted in Tim Dooley | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Living Like Your Dying

Tolerance

The Heart of the Matter: Tolerance

Having looked into the tearful eyes of parents whose children have abandoned the Faith, I have learned that there are a million miles between our children “going through the motions” in reference to their spiritual lives versus our children possessing  hearts that dictate their actions. In this column, I hope to share with you what I hope to instill in the hearts of my own children and those whom I love.

At a recent seminar, a gentleman asked me what was so wrong with my children being educated in the public school system about the Muslim religion. His question mirrored the sentiments of many living today. Simply put, many people want us to be tolerant of everything. In fact, our children are being indoctrinated with the notion that the only real “sin” is the sin of intolerance. The mainstream media has done a phenomenal job of convincing our culture that we should accept all beliefs and all lifestyles, and to do otherwise is shameful. Anyone who dares not be totally accepting is considered narrow-minded or judgmental. Today, many people have embraced the notion that one belief system is as good as another and that one religion is as good as another. You have your God and I have mine. This idea of “total acceptance” and compromise has led many New Testament Christians to wonder if there really is one way, or will all “good people” go to Heaven?

Here’s what I intend on teaching my children about tolerance.

I pray that you grow up with a healthy dose of intolerance in your heart. Intolerance is not a sin. Consider that the very first commandment of the Ten Commandments was “Thou shall have no other gods before me” (Exodus 20:3). Our God is a jealous God (Deuteronomy 4:24), and He will not tolerate you accepting or embracing other gods. As we look through the Bible, we see multiple examples of individuals who were intolerant of unrighteousness. We know Elijah was intolerant of Jezebel (1 Kings 19). Paul was intolerant of witchcraft books (Acts 19:11-19). Peter was intolerant of the unrepentant Jews (Acts 2:37-39). Jesus, the Son of God, was intolerant of moneychangers making the temple into a den of thieves (Mark 11:15-18). Jehovah God was intolerant of the vile homosexual behavior in Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19—Don’t forget, He even overthrew the inhabitants of the all the Cities of the Plain: Zoar [Bela], Admah and Zeboim v. 22).

Many of the same people who are crying for mankind to tolerate everything have overlooked many examples of intolerance that have utterly reshaped the country in which we live. For instance, what would this country be like if George Washington had tolerated British troops? Where would we be today if Thomas Jefferson had tolerated King George III? What if Fredrick Douglas had tolerated slavery, or Martin Luther King Jr. had tolerated segregation? What would America be like if Winston Churchill had tolerated Adolf Hitler or if Susan B. Anthony tolerated only men voting? Part of what made these individuals great was that they were strong enough to stand up for their convictions. They recognized something as “wrong,” and they didn’t tolerate it.

This doesn’t mean we are to be unkind or harsh—as there may be some occasions in which you find yourself having to tolerate a particular situation (e.g., drunk people downing more alcohol at a ballgame who paid money for a seat just like you.) We are always to live our lives as Christians, but we can still recognize things that are good and right versus those that are not. Tolerance of all beliefs means you don’t perceive anything as a standard for “right” or “wrong.” This embracing of everything ultimately means we are giving our approval to whatever behavior, belief, or lifestyle people choose.

 

 

Never forget, Jesus Christ said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me” (John 14:6). That’s not a question of tolerance…it’s a statement of Truth! Those who profess a belief in God or Christianity need to grasp inflexibility of that statement. There is only one Way—period! You will meet many “good people” in your lifetime who may earnestly desire to go to Heaven instead of Hell, but unless they “tolerate” the words of the Son of God and obey Him, they will be lost. For those who believe this is judgmental, we should ask them why they question the Creator’s plan—are they intolerant to Him and His scheme of redemption for eternal salvation?

Posted in Brad Harrub | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Tolerance

Preacher, Reverend, Pastor, or ?

Question: Why do churches of Christ not call their preachers Reverends or Pastors like most of the denominations do?

Answer: Because both would be unbiblical at the very least, and perhaps blasphemous at the very worst, at least in one case. Consider; the title “Father,” when applied to religious leaders is strictly condemned by Christ Himself, “for you have one Father, who is in Heaven” (See Matthew 23:1-12 for comment and context).

Likewise, the term “reverend” is found only once in the Scriptures and that is in the great Psalm 111, verse 9 (KJV) where it says, speaking specifically of God alone, “Holy and reverend is His Name” (Emphasis mine – DED). Only Jesus is equal with God; certainly no mere mortal ever was, is, or ever shall be. Not even the miracle-working apostles ever dared lay claim to equality with God. And yet, unlike the Catholic religious leaders who, despite Jesus’ outright condemnation of such, continue to insist upon being called by the name reserved for God in Heaven alone and thereby presumptuously put themselves on His level, we believe that the term “Reverend,” which no human being in the Bible was ever referred to by, and a term which was Biblically said to be exclusively His Name, should certainly never be used to address or title any human being, as that would also presumptuously put them on His level as well, wouldn’t it? It would be like calling some mere mortal sinner “the Savior (of mankind),” “the Alpha and the Omega,” or, “the Head of the church;” descriptive terms respectfully and Biblically given only and exclusively to Christ Himself (1 John 4:4; Jude 25; Revelation 22:13; and Ephesians 1:15-23). Actually, I suppose that the  Protestant Denominations commit a similar atrocity when they remove the name that is above all names from their church and refer to themselves by Luther’s, the Baptist’s, or some other man-honoring name in which there is no salvation, instead of the name of Christ (Acts 4:12).

Speaking of Protestant Denominations and some of their man-made teachings, perhaps no other term of description for specific servants and their service in the church is as misused in the denominational world around us today as is the word “pastor.”

“ Pastor ” is from the Greek word “poimen,” which means “shepherd.” This is apparent from several passages in which Jesus Himself used the term to refer to Himself as “the good shepherd” in John, chapter 10 (verses 2, 11, 12, 14, and 16). In fact, in the 18 occurrences of this word “poimen” in the entire Greek N. T. text (Matthew 9:36, 25:32, 26:31; Mark 6:34, 14:27; Luke 2:8, 15, 18, 20; John  10:2, 11, 12, 14, 16; Ephesians 4:11; Hebrews 13:20; and I Peter 2:25) it is always translated as “shepherd” – except for the one verse in Ephesians 4:11 where it is translated “pastor.”

“ Pastor ” actually denotes one who is a shepherd of God’s flock. In the Bible, these very same shepherds are also known as: “elders,” and “overseers” or “bishops.” All four of these terms in Scripture are describing the same exact individual (Compare different translations on the following passages: Acts 20:17-30; Philippians 1:1; I Peter 2:25 and 5:1-4). But the Bible is crystal clear that these “poimen”/pastors, elders, overseers, bishops MUST possess certain qualities  without compromise; and these are the God-given “musts” of I Timothy 3:1-7, and Titus 1:5-9 (i.e., must be male, the husband of one wife, having believing children, etc). If one does not possess each and every one of these God-required qualities and qualifications, he simply is not a pastor/elder/overseer/shepherd according to God’s eternal standard. (Note: a very concise and in-depth study of this very topic can be found and downloaded completely free of charge from http://www.clevelandcoc.com/?page_id=148.)

So, how do we refer to our religious leaders in congregations of the churches of Christ? Well, biblically of course! (Whatever was good enough for God’s first-century church is good enough for God’s 21st or any other century church.) They are biblically, correctly, and therefore congregationally referred to as an “evangelist” (See Acts 21:8; Ephesians 4:11; II Timothy 4:5), a “minister” (See Luke 1:2; I Corinthians 3:5; II Corinthians 3:6, 6:4), and/or a “preacher” (See Romans 10:14; I Timothy 2:7; II Timothy 1:111; and II Peter 2:5).

Posted in Doug Dingley | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Preacher, Reverend, Pastor, or ?

Adversity

Attitude Toward Adversity

When I think about all that Paul endured as a Christian, I am so amazed at the price he paid just to be a follower of Jesus.  False teachers in Corinth tried to parade all they had done for the Lord as evidence of the fact they preached the truth. This forced Paul to give an abbreviated summary of how much he had suffered. “From the Jews five times I received forty stripes minus one. Three times I was beaten with rods; once I was stoned; three times I was shipwrecked; a night and a day I have been in the deep; in journeys often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils of my own countrymen, in perils of the Gentiles, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; in weariness and toil, in sleeplessness often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness—besides the other things, what comes upon me daily: my deep concern for all the churches” (2 Cor. 11:24-28). Has anyone ever suffered more?

It is even more amazing to see how Paul describes such adversity. He calls it light affliction which is just for a moment, and says it is not worthy to be compared to what awaits us (2 Cor. 4:17; Rom. 8:18). Light afflictions? Wonder how he might look at what we are suffering.

Yet we get depressed when anyone says even one word about the religious convictions we have. We sometimes cower in fear and remain silent when others are advocating and defending sin. When we occasionally have to refuse to go where our friends are going because we know this is not a place where we should be, we feel bad.

Paul says that all who live godly lives in Christ will suffer persecution (2 Tim. 3:12). We may have fewer friends, who think it strange that now that we are Christians we cannot live as we once did (1 Pet. 4:3). We may have family problems simply because Jesus shows that being a Christian causes others to have such disdain for us (Matt. 10:34-35). Early Christians could not buy or sell or get money because they would not worship pagan gods. You may have been bypassed for promotion simply because you would not “go with the flow” of your employer.  It may be rare, but I have known Christians who have suffered physical abuse because they followed the Lord.

What do we learn from this? We are going to suffer in some way, but it is nothing to compare with what those early Christians suffered. If they called their torture light affliction, how would they describe the inconveniences in our lives? All that matters is our attitude. They rejoiced that they were worthy to suffer for Him (Acts 5:31). Do you have this joy?

Posted in Dan Jenkins | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Adversity

Genealogy

Harmonizing the Genealogy Accounts of Jesus

From the time that sin first entered the world, God had made certain promises to mankind concerning a redeemer or “Messiah” who would eventually free him from the bondage of sin. This was first promised, in Genesis 3:15, to Satan that the seed of Eve would bruise his head.  A second promise was made to Abraham, in Genesis 12:3, that all the nations of the earth would be blessed through his seed. This promise was again made to David in 2 Samuel 7:12-13, that the world’s redeemer would come from his seed and would establish a kingdom that would last forever. Both Matthew and Luke list the genealogy of Jesus to show that he was this promised Messiah. The accuracy of their genealogical record is shown by the silence of the critics.

“The silence of the enemies of the Gospel, both Heathen and Jewish, during even the first century, is itself a sufficient proof that neither inconsistency nor corruption could be then alleged against this part of evangelical history. If a charge of this nature could have been supported, it unquestionably would have been made.” (Adam Clarke’s Commentary)

This silence is a strong argument for the case of Jesus as Messiah and these records show that he was not only a descendant of Abraham through David, but that he was also a descendant of Adam and Eve.

The Genealogical Record by Matthew

In the first century it was accepted by the Jewish people that the Messiah would be a direct descendant of David.

“Natural sonship to David on the part of the Messiah was of vital importance to many Jewish inquirers…The tradition, universal from the earliest times among believers and granted even by the bitterest opponents, that He was connected with the line of David may also be readily accepted.” (International Standard Bible Encyclopedia)

Matthew wrote his Gospel account to the Judean Jews in order to prove that Jesus was the Messiah. He began his Gospel account with a genealogy of Jesus. In chapter 1:1, Matthew stated that Jesus Christ was a “Son of David”, a descendant of both Abraham and David. The significance of this mentioning is that, “God had given certain unconditional, eternal covenants [to Abraham and David] that determined the course of the history of the nation of Israel.”  (Pentecost, J. Dwight, The Words and Works of Jesus Christ)Thus he showed that Jesus was of the royal lineage of David through Joseph and Solomon.

Matthew’s genealogy traces the Messianic line beginning with Abraham and ending with Joseph the husband of Mary. This line is shown through three artificial groupings, each consisting of fourteen generations: from Abraham to David, from David to the Babylonian captivity, and from then unto the birth of Jesus. There is a purpose these groups were edited, by the omission of certain names, so that they would each equal fourteen generations.

“Matthew focuses attention on the Davidic descent of Jesus in a subtle way. In Hebrew there are no vowels written, so David’s name would be written DVD. Each letter had a numerical significance, as the Hebrews used the alphabet in counting. For example, in their system, D=4, V=6. Thus the letters in David’s name total fourteen. Hence Matthew lists fourteen names in each of the three groups.” (D.J. Pentecost)

This would serve to emphasize the lineage of David and really drive home to the Jews the physical royalty of Jesus Christ.

 

The Genealogical Record by Luke

 

Luke’s record of the lineage of Jesus emphasizes his messiahship to the entire human race. Luke, writing to a largely Gentile audience knew that they would not be impressed that Jesus was the “Son of David” so he presented Jesus as the “Son of Man” and traced his lineage all the way back to Adam. This “Son of Man” Messiah would not only rule over Israel, but would rule over all nations and would be the world’s Messiah.   While Matthew reckoned his genealogy through the line of Joseph his earthly father, Luke reckoned his genealogy through the line of Mary. This record did not concern itself with the legality of Hebrew patriarchal lineage, but is a record of Jesus’ natural generation.

Mary was also a descendant of David; her lineage diverged from that of her husband in that she is a descendant through Nathan, a younger son of David who did not inherit the throne, while Joseph was a descendant through Solomon.  The fact that Mary also descended from David silences those who claim that Jesus was only a descendant of David by virtue of the virgin Mary’s marriage to Joseph and not by any blood relationship. This reconciles the problem of the virgin birth and the origin of Christ through the line of David.

Another far deeper problem existed, to harmonize the incarnation and the Davidic origin of Jesus. This is also reconciled by the tracing of Jesus lineage through Mary.

“This problem had been presented in shadow and intimation by Jesus Himself in the question: “David himself calleth him Lord; and whence is he his Son?” It is further to be noticed that in the annunciation (Lk 1:32) the promised One is called at once Son of God and Son of David, and that He is the Son of God by virtue of His conception by the Spirit—leaving it evident that He is Son of David by virtue of His birth of Mary. With this should be compared the statement of Paul (Rom 1:3, 1): He who was God’s Son was “born of the seed of David according to the flesh, and declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead.” (ISBE)

This silences the critics that attempt to deny Jesus as the Messiah on the grounds of his physical descendant of David.

The descendant line of Jesus the Messiah has never been seriously questioned. Luke and Matthew both established Jesus as a physical descendant of David. This was in fulfillment of many prophecies showing the Messiah as a “Son of David”. Luke went even further than Matthew and established Jesus as the”Son of Man” through his descendant from Adam. These two genealogical accounts serve to emphasize Jesus’ relationship to the Jewish people through his kinship to the royal line of Israel and to the gentile world by his descendant from the common ancestor of all mankind.

Posted in Jack McNiel | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Genealogy