Wonder How?

Sometimes You’ve Just Really Got To Wonder… Don’t You?

Sometimes you’ve just really got to wonder just how it is that God could love us so much as to send His only begotten Son into this world, to endure the hell He knew well in advance He’d have to (Eph. 1:4, 3:8-12),  in order to save any eternal souls (Isa. 53:1-10; Matt 26:47-27:50), when so few would even care (Matt. 7:13-14)…

Sometimes you’ve just really got to wonder how any thinking person with any kind of a conscience whatsoever could even consider staying in bed or at home on Sunday mornings when they are physically capable of getting up and getting out, instead of coming to celebrate the Savior to say “Thank You” to Him who would not even stay in Heaven, but would go through whatever it took, as long as it meant they’d have no way there unless He did… (Phil. 2:5-8).

Sometimes you’ve just really got to wonder how people who have made their lives into such a complete mess, can somehow think they don’t need God’s helping, healing, life-giving guidance in order to fix the mess they’ve made and to help them avoid falling into it again (Matt. 11:27-28), don’t you?

Sometimes you’ve just really got to wonder how people can be so carelessly and callously short-sighted as to concentrate only on this brief, momentary, Satan-beleaguered and sin-beset earthly life (Matt. 6:19-33), when they all have an eternal soul which will end up somewhere (Matt. 25:31-46).

Sometimes you’ve just really got to wonder how, as they get older and death gets closer, they can still stay away from studying, learning, loving, and obeying the one thing – God’s Word – wherein they can then become assured of eternal life (1 Jn. 5:11-13); and also how they can stay away from pleasing, praising, and worshipping the Lord in spirit and truth (Jn. 4:23-24), as He is the ONLY WAY to eternal life (Jn. 14:6).

Sometimes you’ve just really got to wonder… don’t you?

Posted in Doug Dingley | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Wonder How?

Share the Dream: Evolution, Racism, and the Origin of Races

In 1963, Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his famous “I have a dream” speech on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in our nation’s capital. Thanks to his non-violent approach and his gift for oration, King—along with hundreds of others—led this country toward the American Civil Rights Movement and away from racism and desegregation. While no one would argue that the task of providing equal rights is complete, the landscape today reflects that numerous changes have occurred over the past fifty years.

In many respects, it appears things are moving in the right direction. Racist signs and separate water fountains have been removed, and laws have been put into place to ensure equality. However, while changes have been made, and society appears to be moving collectively in the right direction, a silent current has been moving individuals in the opposite direction. This opposing current has a strong undertow, and will eventually be looked upon with disgust and repugnance. This racist tenet remains cloaked under the banner of evolution.

If the evolutionary theory of “survival of the fittest” is correct, then the animals living today are “the fittest.” In essence, this godless theory teaches we get better over time. Now apply this theory to mankind. According to evolutionists, mankind evolved out of Africa and eventually migrated to Europe and Asia. And yet, how does every single form of media portray early “Neanderthal” like creature? Has National Geographic ever depicted an “early man” or ape-like creature with fair skin? The common theory being taught in classrooms today is that dark skinned people evolved out of Africa and eventually gave rise to fair skinned populations in Europe and Asia. A cursory glance will quickly reveal that early man is always depicted with dark skin. Mankind supposedly got “fitter” and lost that color. Allegedly, Caucasians evolved from the Negroid race—thus, fair skinned people are allegedly a more evolved, and thus, superior race.

Now consider that this is the only legalized theory of human origins in public classrooms today. Students all across America are being shown images of dark skinned, ape-like creatures that paved the way for white men. Ironic, is it not that the ACLU, an organization that is supposed to advocate “individual rights by litigating, legislating, and educating the public,” is defending a theory that undermines the core of their mission. The ACLU is defending an atheistic theory that by its very definition demands that there is an inferior race.

On college campuses all across this country Charles Darwin’s infamous Origin of Species has become a staple of required reading. But how many people are aware of the full title of Charles Darwin’s book? While new editions have deleted the subtitle, Darwin’s original work was titled: The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection—or The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.Darwin’s phrase “favored race” indicates that he thought – and taught – that there is a race that is not favored. In his second book, The Descent of Man, Darwin noted:

At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace the savage races throughout th

Posted in Brad Harrub | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Share the Dream: Evolution, Racism, and the Origin of Races

Jesus Custom?

What are Your Habits Spiritually?

We are creatures of habit, whether we think about it or not. You likely put socks on the same foot first each day. You start brushing your teeth at the same location in your mouth each day. The bank cashes your checks, for your signature habitually is the same. Our lives are filled with customs.

The same is true of individuals in the Bible. Pilate’s custom was to release a prisoner during the Passover feast, and he tried to use this custom to release Jesus (Matt. 27:15). The reason Joseph and Nicodemus wrapped the body of Jesus in strips of linen and spices was because that was the Jewish custom (John 19:40). It was also the Roman custom not to kill a person without them first having a trial (Acts 25:16).

Jesus’ custom was to pray. Jesus was a man of prayer, and there were times when He spent hours, sometimes the entire night, praying (Luke 6:12). The night He came walking on the water to the disciples, in the tempest on the Sea of Galilee, involved His prayer life. He sent them away in the boat so He might spend private time in prayer (Mark 6:45-46). Luke’s account of how He spent His last week before His death is interesting. “And in the daytime He was teaching in the temple, but at night He went out and stayed on the mountain called Olivet” (Luke 21:37). Judas knew Jesus’ custom of praying and led the mob to Gethsemane. “Coming out, He went to the Mount of Olives, as He was accustomed, and His disciples also followed Him” (Luke 22:39). Jesus prayed often. Do you?

Jesus’ custom was to teach. A study of the life of the Master shows that teaching others was His habit in life. Whether it was the multitude which followed Him to the mount for His sermon there, or Zacchaeus in the tree, or the woman at the well, or those around the Sea of Galilee, His custom was to teach. Mark says, “And as He was accustomed, He taught them again” (Mark 10:1).

Jesus’ custom was to worship regularly. He went to the temple at age twelve, because His parents’ custom was to worship regularly (Luke 2:42). As an adult, His custom was to worship every Sabbath in the synagogue (Luke 4:16). The gospel accounts of His life shows He was always present at all the feasts. Jesus’ custom was to worship regularly. Do you?

There are others who have another custom. The Lord rebukes the custom of some in the first century.  “Not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near” (Heb. 10:25). Some have the attitude that weekly worship is optional, but such is not the case. Jesus’ custom was to worship regularly. What is your custom? Some habitually neglected the meeting together. What is your custom?

Posted in Dan Jenkins | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Jesus Custom?

Second Serving of the Lord’s Supper

The death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus are central to Christianity.  Christ lived His life upon earth knowing He would be sacrificed for mankind and it would be in brutal fashion.  Today Christians proclaim the message of the Lord’s death, how and why it came to be, and how death was defeated, when they partake of the Lord’s Supper.

Many questions have arisen about partaking of the Lord’s Supper.  How often is it to occur?  Is there a specific time?  Is it the real body of Christ?  Can the fruit of the vine be alcoholic?  Who can partake of the Lord’s Supper?  Does partaking make our sins forgiven?  The list of questions goes on and on.  This examination aims to answer more questions regarding the Lord’s Supper and specifically address the practice of offering a second partaking of it.

When we ask questions about our current practices or traditions, some folks become very concerned.  They worry that by asking these things we may disrupt unity and sow discord.  Certainly doing that would be terrible.  God hates discord (Proverbs 6:16-19).  Yet understand that unity as Christians only comes in Christ through the Word of God.  There is one Faith according to Ephesians 4:5.  This is the gospel Christ brought.  It is a gospel that brings a sword of division between strangers, friends, and family (Matthew 10:34-39).  In wielding this sword, Jesus did not sow discord disrupting unity, He shared the truth of the Word of God (John 17:17) and brought about unity.  Truth shatters the vices of the wicked and its value is beyond measure (Proverbs 23:23, Matthew 13:44).

All Christians should be comfortable with finding authority for partaking of the Lord’s Supper whenever they do so (Colossians 3:17).  That is the aim of our examination.  As we look at different passages and ask questions, we will try to come to a clearer understanding of our worship practices.  We will also consider differing points of view and weigh their merit.  Ultimately, it is up to each of us to study and confirm the scriptures (2 Tim. 2:15).  Remember “[We do] not live by bread along, but by every word of God.”(Matthew 4:4).

Why do Christians partake of the Lord’s Supper?  As mentioned in the beginning, it is a proclamation of the message of the Lord’s death (I Corinthians 11:26).  In Matthew 26:26-29, Jesus gives his disciples unleavened bread and the fruit of the vine.  Before doing so in each case He acknowledges God.  With the unleavened bread Jesus expresses it is His body.   With the fruit of the vine He expressed it as His blood.  This language was figurative and meant to be representative of His coming sacrifice.  This is the first account of four gospel accounts of this setting.  From these accounts we know Jesus told the disciples to remember Him in this supper.  Later, following Jesus resurrection, He instructed the disciples to teach all nations to observe what He had commanded them (Matthew 28:18-20).  This evidently included the partaking of the Lord’s Supper as Paul conveyed to the Corinthian Church the necessity of doing so (I Corinthians 11:23-26).

When do Christians partake of the Lord’s Supper?  The partaking of the Lord’s Supper is something that widely varies in different religious bodies.  Some eat it yearly, quarterly, monthly, and weekly.  There are many variations.  The importance as always is discovering what the first century Christians did.  Historically, we know they partook once each Sunday, the first day of the week.  However, history does not hold any weight when it comes to the scriptures.  It is from the mouth of God we find authority.  Acts 20:7 provides an example as to when the Christians met and partook of the Lord’s Supper and that was the first day of the week.  No other direct example with a specific time regarding the Lord’s Supper is mentioned in scripture.  However, with Biblical authority, once is enough if that is all the Bible has to say on the matter.  Such a time certainly makes sense though as Jesus was resurrected overcoming death on the first day of the week (Mark 16:2-9).

How do Christians partake of the Lord’s Supper?  It has already been seen that the elements are to be unleavened bread and the fruit of the vine.  God is to be approached before the partaking of each.  Also stated previously is that the supper is a proclamation of the Lord’s death until He comes.  I Corinthians 11:27-32 expresses those partake unworthily drink judgment unto themselves.  Because this partaking is directed at the Lord, it is worship (John 4:24). It must be done with minds on Christ and according to truth (which is the proper pattern of partaking the supper).  Partaking in the proper way is the crux of the context in I Corinthians 11 and will take up the remainder of this examination.  The context of this passage focuses predominantly on Christians breaking up into divisions (vs. 18) in a common meal rather than partaking as a complete assembled body.  Whether or not Christians should partake apart from one another is a very important aspect of taking the Lord’s Supper in truth or not.

When tackling the topic of assembly and the Lord’s Supper, the entire purpose of the first day of the week must be contemplated.  Going back to Acts 20:7 the disciples met for the purpose of taking the Lord’s Supper.  Did they do other things?  Yes.  However, they met for the purpose of the Lord’s Supper.  We have no other record of assembling on the first day of the week for another stated purpose.  Moving to I Corinthians 11:18-34, Paul starts out by identifying the Church was broken up into factions.  He also identified they were making the Lord’s Supper a common meal.  Most importantly he states they were not coming together to eat the Lord’s Supper.  The inverse of that is they were supposed to be assembling for the purpose of eating the Lord’s Supper.  This is the same purpose given for assembly in Acts 20:7.  Where other spiritual activities going on?  Yes, but twice now the stated purpose has been the Lord’s Supper.  The actions of the Corinthians made them partakers who were spiritually sick and eating judgment unto themselves.  In exhortation, Paul tells them to separate their common meals from worship and to wait for one another before eating the Lord’s Supper as an assembled body.  One other very important passage in this discussion of assembling and partaking the Lord’s Supper is I Corinthians 10:16-17.  Here Paul states eating the Lord’s Supper is a sharing, a fellowship, a communion in the body and blood of Christ.

If Acts 20:7, I Corinthians 11:18-34, and I Corinthians 10 are to be followed then this sharing occurs on the first day of the week as part of an assembly whose purpose for assembling was to partake of the Lord’s Supper together.  There are no passages in scripture showing any other manner of eating the Lord’s Supper at any other stated time. Biblical authority is very clear.  At this point let us turn our attention to arguments against what we have examined and to questions about second offerings of the Lord’s Supper.

The first common objection to the stated Biblical fact that Christians were coming together on the first day of the week for the purpose of partaking of the Lords Supper is that it minimizes or cheapens the other aspects of worship.  Of course, this is not true at all.  In regard to the acts of worship, giving, praying, singing, teaching, partaking of the Lord’s Supper, all are directed toward God (John 4:24) and are thus of equal importance and should all be treated with the same reverence.  They are equally bound together as worship the same as hearing, believing, having faith, repenting, confessing, baptizing, and living faithfully are bound together for salvation. None are greater than the other.  It has been said by some that I Corinthians 16:1-2 is an example of giving being a purpose for gathering.  However, being commanded to give when an assembly occurs is not the same as that being the purpose for the assembling in the first place.  For instance, I can tell my son that every Saturday when he goes to visit his friends to greet their Mother and Father.  I can also tell him each week I want him to go to His friends because he needs to build the friendships.  The purpose for the visit is building friendships, the greeting of parents is commanded, but not the purpose for the visit.  Giving appears to be incidental to the day and specifically tied to the expedience of Paul avoiding collections.

Another objection is cited using I Corinthians 10:16-17 to support partaking outside of the assembly of Christians on the first day of the week.  It is offered that the communion or sharing going on is stated by Paul to be with the Corinthians while he himself was far away.  In other words the sharing did not have to be literal.  Thus, Christians can take part in the communion anywhere and be authorized to do so.  But if this is true, why would it be stated in I Corinthians 11 that the Christians were to be coming together to partake of the Lord’s Supper.  This would be a contradiction.  Rather consider Paul, in his location, literally met with Christians on the first day of the week the same as those in Corinth and they did so for the purpose of sharing the Lord’s Supper.  Thus, he discusses the worship practice they both were engaged in.

Third and fourth objections focus on the concept of “tarry” or wait in I Corinthians 11:33.  First it is stated that tarry means the Corinthians were to wait for others so they would not be hungry.  However, that would be applying to something which Paul said to remove from the worship – the common meal.  Paul certainly did not condone the common meal.  Second it is argued if the Christians had to tarry for others before they partook then they would never be able to partake because someone is always sick, traveling, working, etc.  Rather than this, what Paul was trying to establish was the Corinthians not partake in their divisive groups when they chose, but rather eat together in a full assembly of those present to partake of the Lord’s Supper.

Having observed some objections to what we have examined thus far in scripture, it is time to turn out attention to the second serving of the Lord’s Supper.  Typically, this is done during an evening Bible Study assembly.  This practice is very common in a great number of Churches.  It is offered for those who missed the earlier serving.  In all instances I have heard of or experienced the majority of the body of the church has not come together for the purpose of partaking of the Lord’s Supper and does not commune with those partaking.  This is an interesting situation because we have no scriptural example for this behavior.  Even outside of scripture, second services weren’t heard of until the 1600’s and then they were simply presented as Bible Studies most often for children.  It appears the practice most likely came into being during WWII at which time there was no small objection to it.  However, history does not determine Biblical authority.  The problem again, we have no Biblical authority for such a scenario.  That being said, let us look at arguments for having a second serving of the Lord’s Supper.

The first argument is that Christians are commanded to partake of the Lord’s Supper.  As noted this started with Jesus and was taught by the apostles.  However, we also noted this was to be done with authority and meet the pattern set – the assembly, the proper purpose, the proper elements, the proper manner, the proper time, etc.  Biblical authority shows us churches meeting on the First day of the week as the Body of Christ and eating the supper together as that body, not in small groups apart from one another, at different times, and with most of the body not there for the purpose of eating the Lord’s Supper.  If a Christian is not forsaking the assembly, God certainly will not condemn the Christian missing the partaking.  I would say this of the sick, infirm, those with emergencies, and other aspects that are not forsaking.  No second serving would be needed.

A second argument is made based upon expedience.  I Corinthians 6:12 and I Corinthians 10:23 are used to point out that it may be lawful to set a worship time at 11 am, but it may also not be expedient for some.  Let me suggest as above, that those not forsaking would certainly be forgiven by God and therefore would not need a second service.   However, let me say I know of a situation similar to this.  I am aware of a congregation with so many people that the group comes in two different groups at two different times to the same building for the purpose of partaking the Lord’s Supper.  The purpose is right and the pattern of partaking is right.  The elders have used the expedience of two separate times to engage an action that is identical to the first century as far as the action of partaking.  The entire body may not be together in this instance, but it’s not because they do not want to do so.  Tarrying would not help in this case.   If this situation is in violation of God’s Word, I cannot pinpoint the violation clearly.  It would have to be in the area of not having the full body present. However, the case is not a portion of the body choosing to not be present, they simply cannot be present.

There are two items I would like to address because I have been asked to do so.  The first situation is that of an individual who is baptized in a congregation who has already partaken of the Lord’s Supper. It is my conviction that this individual simply wait until the next week to partake with the body because it is God’s intention that Christians partake with the body.  Second is the situation of the chronically infirm, aged, or others simply physically unable to assemble.  In this case it is my conviction that God will not hold that person accountable for not partaking of the Lord’s Supper which is something outside of their control.

In closing, I want to add some personal thoughts.  Whatever your current position on partaking the Lord’s Supper, I suggest you do not violate your conscience.  This is discussed in Romans 14 and I Corinthians 8.  If you fully believe from your study you need to partake of the Lord’s Supper some other time on Sunday because you missed Sunday morning, then I certainly don’t condemn you.  Also if you missed Sunday morning and you don’t partake of the Lord’s Supper, I won’t condemn you either.  Let us continue to grow in the matter and strive to glorify God.

Posted in Travis Main | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Second Serving of the Lord’s Supper

The Church of Christ

The Church of Christ: A Denomination?

Whenever we talk about the church of Christ,  we are not talking about a denomination or  conglomeration of denominations, but God  purposed the church as the Bible reveals (Eph. 3:10- 11). Prophets prophesied of it (Isa. 2:1-3; cf. 1 Tim.  3:14-15). Jesus Christ promised it (Matt. 16:18; 9:1). He  purchased it with His blood (Acts 20:28). On the Day of  Pentecost following His death, burial, resurrection and  ascension, it came with power (Acts 2). Notice with me  this undenominational church in light of the religious  confusion today by answering the following important  questions.

In times of the New Testament, were Christians  members of some denomination? No, Christians in  New Testament times were not members of some  denomination because denominations did not exist. In  fact, the first denomination did not form until hundreds  of years later. Were Christians in the times of the New  Testament members of the church of our Lord? Yes.  Why were they members of the church of Christ? They  were members of the church of Christ because the Bible  says so (Acts 2:47; 1 Cor. 1:2; Phil. 1:1). Therefore, it  is possible to be a member of the church in the Bible  without being a member of a denomination.

If we were to follow the New Testament, would  its commands lead one to become a member of a  denomination? No, in order to become a member of a  denomination, one must do something more than what  the New Testament commands. Would it lead one to be  a member of the church of our Lord? Yes!

If following the New Testament will not lead one  to become a member of a denomination, what must one  do to become a member of a denomination? He must  leave the teachings of the New Testament. This shows  us that there is a great difference between the church of  our Lord and denominationalism.

Do those in denominations strictly adhere to  the teachings of the New Testament? If they did, they  would not be a denomination. We can see a difference  in what some do and what the New Testament teaches.  For example, concerning the plan of salvation, most  denominations teach other things. Concerning worship,  most denominations teach other things, although God  means what He says and says what He means—Cain  and Abel, Nadab & Abihu and such like illustrate this  (John 4:24; Acts 20:7). Scholars agree to what these  things mean, but it is a matter of whether God means  what He says.

If everyone quit following everything but the  New Testament and just followed the New Testament,  what would happen? Denominations would crumble  and go away. Would the church crumble? No, because  following the New Testament makes one a member. Are  there Christians in denominations? If so, how did they  get there? (cf. Acts 2:47).

Therefore, we learn that Christians were not  members of denominations in the times of the New  Testament. Obeying the New Testament does not make  one a member of a denomination. To become a member  of a denomination, one must leave the teachings of  the New Testament. Those in denominations do not  strictly adhere to the teachings of the New Testament.  If everyone followed only the New Testament, no one  would be a member of a denomination!

Posted in Sam Willcut | Tagged , , | Comments Off on The Church of Christ