Truth Magazine

By Training Our Children (3)

We have written of the pathetic influence of alcohol and other drugs; covetousness which expresses itself in robbery, shoplifting, embezzlement, and house breaking; evolution, sexual immorality, and atheism as taught in universities and high school. It is no marvel that men of faith are concerned for their children.

Are parents concerned enough to effectively teach against these evil forces? There is no way under the sun to deep these influences away from the children. They cannot grow up in a bubble isolated from every person and everything. The ungodliness about us is no secret from our children. The music of today and other offerings of television are as vulgar and as dangerous as anything that can be taught in the schools. Some parents provide a television, set for their son’s room and allow him to watch whatever he chooses without supervision. Then they may send him to a private school for better training in a better environment. They should not be surprised later to find that he is very familiar with the most deadly influences of evil. The environment in the home may have been in conflict with the environment in the school. Sometimes the environment in the home is better than it is in the public or even private school. That is not always the case. The parents should teach their sons and daughters how to discern between good and evil and to choose the good while rejecting the evil (1 Pet. 3:8-16; Heb. 5:12-14; Isa. 1:16-19). Parents are the ones who have the authority in the home, and they should make the decisions for the children until the children are old enough and mature enough to make them for themselves. The home environment is the one that will have the greatest influence on the child, and parents should not forget that fact.

Timothy grew up at Lystra where there were worshipers of idols who set out to worship Paul and Barnabas after a miracle was performed to confirm the gospel message. Lystra was also the place were Jewish bitterness led a mob to stone Paul until they thought he was dead. (See Acts 14.) This ancient Roman world also had unbelievers (humanists, if you please) who had the immoral attitudes and practices as described in the first chapter of Romans. How could Timothy grow up to be one of the most devout disciples of Christ (Phil. 2:19-23)? He must have been taught to abhor that which is evil and cleave to that which is good (Rom. 12:9).

I suppose that Timothy’s father, who was a Greek, may not have been the great teacher the child Timothy needed (Acts 16:1). His mother “believed, but his father was a Greek.” How could this believing mother give the world a strong and faithful gospel preacher in spite of the fact that she likely had no help from her husband? She and her child were surrounded by idolaters, atheists, and Jews who rejected Christ. What hope could she have? How could she give him the proper training? I do not know all about how she did it, but she did train him in the way he should go. She may have cried many times as she considered the difficulty of the task. She was evidently determined to succeed.

Timothy was blessed by his grandmother Lois as well as by his mother Eunice (2 Tim. 1,5; 3:14,15). Who else encouraged this young man in his early life we do not know. If it was possible for these women to succeed it is possible in this decade, but it is not easy. It was not easy then, and it is not easy now, but it can be done. The two special things they gave Timothy are faith and knowledge. (See references above.) With these two precious things well in place, Timothy could go out into a pagan world in face to face encounters with opponents of Christ. He could stand against the fiery darts of the wick ed one (Eph. 6:10-20).

How many parents are there that work very hard to instill faith that can withstand the attacks of the humanists? How many actually teach the word with skill? These are the basic things that lead to spiritual strength. Without these the children will certainly be lost, but with faith and knowledge they can stand. There is need for training in other fields also. Children must be taught skills that will help them to provide for themselves and their families in a physical way. They live in a real world, and they will face real problems of many kinds, physically, morally, and spiritually.

Maybe we can find a place where grammar, math, and physics can be taught if parents demand that the teachers teach these useful subjects rather than situation ethics, sex education, and atheism. In many areas, there are enough parents with respect for righteousness to push the humanists back if they would keep in touch and use their influence. Parents can certainly teach so as to build faith and knowledge, and they can demand that the schools do not destroy their work.

After Paul had visited Lystra, there were other Christians in the city besides Timothy’s family. Let us hope that there were worthy associates for Timothy as he grew into manhood. It would have been the responsibility of Eunice and Lois to see that he knew the best. It would not have been their task to see that he was the most popular in the big crowd. They would have gone out for quality of friends instead of quantity.(1 Cor. 15:33). Timothy did not grow up in a bubble in an intensive car unit at the hospital, but he did have intensive care. He knew how to keep his faith and morals while in touch with people. His training enabled him to be a soldier of the cross in a wicked world. This is the very best training which can be given only by truly dedicated teachers to willing pupils.

The Greek and Roman world was without hope and without God, but there were plenty of games for fun and exercise. Athletics was given a place of special importance.

We can be sure that athletics was not so important to Timothy that Eunice’s spare time from necessary work was taken in getting him to the games. “Bodily exercise proriteth little: but godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come” (1 Tim. 4:8). Yes, exercise has its place, but it is not first place. It is not to wholly consume the time that parents should have with their children. The games are not so important that children cannot attend gospel meetings or do other worthwhile things. They may, in our day as well as in the Roman Empire, easily become the tail that wags the dog.

Timothy did not have the need for physics and math that many Americans have, but Americans today have the same need for faith in and knowledge of the sacred writings that he had. Young people then were in a wicked and unbelieving world just as children of our day are facing sin and unbelief. Faith and Bible knowledge then came by hearing the word of God (Rom. 10:17). They come the same way today. What we really need now is a great increase in the number of people who are determined that their children will have unfeigned faith and useful knowledge of the will of God.

Guardian of Truth XXX: 5, pp. 142-143
March 6, 1986

By Fred A. Shewmaker

Some are asking, “How can there be a law of silence of the Scriptures, where the Scriptures are silent?” This may not be the exact words you would use to phrase the question. Please remember that it is not always possible to word something precisely as others would phrase it. Probably not all who are asking this question choose the exact words when asking it. As the question is asked here, it appears to me, to be a fair representation of what is being asked. At any rate, because this or a similar question is being asked, this article will be an examination of “the law of the silence of the Scriptures.” loosed in heaven.”

In Matthew 16:19 Jesus told Peter, “I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (KJV). We are interested in the binding and loosing. It is certain that this part of the verse applies to all the apostles because in Matthew 18:18 Jesus repeated this to them (“the disciples” – Matt. 18:1 – to whom Jesus was speaking were His apostles; compare Mk. 9:33-37).

Many English translations fail to make clear whether the binding and loosening take place first on earth and then in heaven or first in heaven and then on earth. This is true with regard to both Matthew 16:19 and 18:18. There are many people also who today do not readily understand the terms “bound” and “loosed.” In this examination of the law of the silence of the Scriptures efforts will be made to: clarify the order of the binding and loosing, find the meanings of “bound” and “loosed” and to show that this is a statement of “the law of the silence of the Scriptures.” These efforts will be made by noticing how the statement is rendered in several translations.

Young’s Literal Translation of the Bible (Robert Young, 1898) renders it: “And whatever thou mayest bind upon the earth shall be having been bound in the heavens, and whatever thou mayest loose upon the earth shall be having been loosed in the heavens.” Although Young did not place a comma between “be” and “having, it should be easy for a reader to see that this shows already forbidden in heaven, and whatever you permitted either to bind or loose a thing without that thing “having been bound (or loosed) in the heavens.”

This also may be seen in The New Testament Revised and Translated (A.S. Worrell, 1904): “And whatsoever you shall bind on the earth shall have been bound in Heaven, and whatsoever you shall loose on the earth shall have been loosed in Heaven.”

The Amplified New Testament (The Lockman Foundation, 1958) has: “And whatever you bind – that is, declare to be improper and unlawful – on earth must be already bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth – declare lawful – must be what is already loosed in heaven.”

The New American Standard New Testament (The Lockman Foundation, 1960) reads: “And whatever you shall bind on earth shall been bound in heaven, and whatever you shall loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.”

The two translations that will now be cited are not as clear regarding the order of binding of loosing. Still, they are worth noticing because they help us with understanding the meanings of “bound” and “loosed.”

The New English New Testament (1961) translates the statement: “What you forbid on earth shall be forbidden in heaven, and what you allow on earth shall be allowed in heaven.”

The New Testament in Modern English (J.B. Phillips, 1962) renders it: “Whatever you forbid on earth will be what is forbidden in Heaven and whatever you permit on earth will be what is permitted in Heaven!”

The translation that will now be cited combines both a clarification of the order of binding and loosing with the use of terms which help us with understanding the meanings of “bound” and “loosed.”

The New Testament in the Language of the People (Charles B. Williams, 1955) renders the statement: “And whatever you forbid on earth must be what is already forbidden in heaven, and whatever you permit on earth must be what is already permitted in heaven.”

The renditions of this statement by Jesus which have been cited show that the order of binding and loosing is: first in heaven before on earth. They also show that “bind” and “loose” mean: Bind – “declare to be improper and unlawful” or “forbid.” Loose – “declare lawful,” “allow” or “permit.”

Jesus was not merely talking about His apostles revealing God’s law, He also was stating God’s law regarding anything not referred to in the word of God – “the law of the silence of the Scriptures.” Is a thing allowed, if it is not even referred to in the word of God? Many today are answering, “Yes, it is allowed.” However, the law of the silence of the Scriptures, as Jesus stated it is: “Whatever you permit on earth must be what is already permitted in heaven.” It is totally, completely, absolutely and altogether certain that a thing not even referred to in the word of God is a thing for which we do not have heaven’s permission. To do such a thing is a violation of “the law of the silence of the Scriptures.” This shows there can be a law of the silence of the Scriptures, where the Scriptures are silent. Not even the apostles, who were guided by the Holy Spirit into all truth (Jn. 16:13) which is the word of God (Jn. 17:17), were allowed to permit a thing about which God is silent. That makes it certain that no man today has a right to permit any thing about which God is silent.

Guardian of Truth XXX: 5, pp. 146-147
March 6, 1986

By Robert F. Turner

Augustine (354-430), Bishop of Hippo and renowned theologian, was also the father of a concept of grace that laid the background for many false doctrines of our day. If you are studying “free will,” “depravity,” “miraculous conversion,” “faith only,” “enabling power within the saint,” or “impossibility of apostasy,” you should do your home work on this man’s teaching and influence upon the “Christian” world. I recommend History of the Christian Church, by Philip Schaff (Vol. 3, Eerdmans), but I warn you Schaff is a Reformed scholar, deeply steeped in Calvinism and the Historic concept of “church.” If time and inclination permit, tackle Basic Writings of Saint Augustine, edited by W.J. Oates (Baker Book House, reprinted 1980).

According to Augustine, Adam in Eden possessed freedom of will, to do good; reason, to know God; and the grace of God. By “grace” he meant an “enabling power” without which Adam could not persevere in good. Augustine said the consequences of Adam’s sin were: (1) Loss of the freedom of choice; (2) Obstruction of knowledge (right understanding); (3) Loss of the grace of God, meaning loss of the power which enabled man to perform the good he willed: (4) Loss of paradise; (5) Concupiscence (the predominance of flesh over spirit); (6) Physical death; and (7) so-called “original sin” or the hereditary guilt which passed to his posterity. With Augustine, this is the “native bent of the soul towards evil;” so says Schaff.

This concept, while not entirely originating with Augustine, was given prominence by his great influence on theology. His controversy with the British monk, Pelagius, became the “issue” of that day and for generations to come. A preponderance of earlier church writers had argued “free will” on the part of man — had in fact charged that denial of free will was a mark of heretics. But now total depravity, necessity for miraculous “grace” (i.e., power), etc., became orthodox teaching. Any who questioned this was branded “Anti” — excuse me, I meant “Pelagian.” (Name-calling is an ancient substitute for reasoning.) At a much later date the Roman Catholic church developed their doctrine of “works of supererogation;” and Reformers reverted to Augustinian theology, reemphasizing a miraculous operation of the Holy Spirit in conversion. John Calvin’s Christian Institutes (first published 1536) systematized the Augustinian concept, deeply affected about eighty percent of the “Protestant” churches, and produced the “evangelical” type of “conversion” common today.

A careful look at current articles on salvation and perseverance reveals traces of Augustine’s erroneous definition of grace as an “enabling power.” God did, as an expression of His grace, give a measure of the Spirit necessary for the working of miracles (Rom. 12:6; Eph. 4:7). By extension or metaphor the gift itself, or various blessings of God, may be called “grace” (1 Cor. 15:10; Acts 6:8). But this is a far cry from saying “grace” is an “enabling power,” or assuming that salvation by grace necessitates some direct or immediate operation of divine power on the subject.

“Grace” is a benevolent attitude or disposition; good will, and favorable intentions (cf. Lexicons; and Moulton & Milligan). The Greek, charis is not always clearly differentiated in meaning from chara (joy), and has a tangent meaning,”thanks, gratitude.” Evangelicals abuse the word when they refer to their “experience of grace” — as a “better felt than told” power by which they are miraculously regenerated. And “our” brethren misuse the term by applying it as an “enabling power” by which Christians persevere.

Paul wrote of God “who saved us, and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before times eternal. . .” (2 Tim. 1:9, emph. mine). Grace is an attribute of God, like love, mercy, truth, and justice. The “glory” of God is His essence, so that a manifestation of His characteristics “glorifies” God. Now read carefully, “And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth” (Jn. 1:14). The supreme manifestation of deity (Jesus Christ) is the supreme manifestation of “grace and truth.” From God’s eternal nature came the love and mercy that offers salvation to all mankind, “according to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Eph. 3:11).

“God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son. . .” We should do more than counter “faith only” advocates when we read that verse. We should recognize the eternal grace of God which gave the world a Savior (1 Tim. 4: 10). Salvation is the “gift of God” (Eph. 2:8): not a “Watkin’s liniment” reserved for special cases, apply when needed; but Christ on the cross, the means of redemption for all mankind. Check the following emphasis against the context of Romans 3. “All have sinned . . . being justified . . . by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ . . . a propitiation . . . for the believer.” We receive God’s grace by coming to Christ and abiding in Him. The “enabling power” is in the good news (gospel) of Christ (Rom. 1: 16), whom the world is invited to receive (Mk. 16:15-16).

God’s grace benefits the alien sinner when he ceases to be an alien – when he comes to Christ. Christ’s blood (sacrifice) paid the penalty of sin, so that God can be just, even as He declares one free of guilt (Rom. 3:26). By the same principle, having come to Christ, man continues to be benefitted by God’s grace – to the extent he is faithful to Christ. That is the essential meaning of the much controverted passage in 1 John 1:5, and controversy would cease if we would interpret details in the light of fundamental truth; rather than alter the basic principle to fit our concept of some detail.

To sum up: salvation is from God, the gift of God, proceeding from His very essence or eternal nature. The means by which God chooses to give that salvation is Jesus Christ: God gives of Himself, expressing grace toward man. The operation (or the “way” God chooses to do it; again, the fruit of divine characteristics of justice and mercy) is forgiveness, through blood. He paid the price of our sins “once for all” (Heb. 10:10-f). The condition upon which individuals participate in or become benefactors of this salvation, is faith, and of course this is obedient faith (Rom. 16:26; Heb. 5:9). We must give up “self” and trusting in self, and put our trust in Jesus Christ (Matt. 16:24). Man is free to accept or reject God’s grace, but must give account in final judgment for this momentous decision.

Guardian of Truth XXX: 6, pp. 167, 183
March 20, 1986

By Ron Daly

Friends, it is imperative that you read carefully this article with an open Bible and an open mind. In order to ascertain the truth regarding any issue one must possess the proper attitude. It is not possible to be saved without love for the truth (Jn. 8:32; 2 Thess. 2:10-12)!

This material is not presented with the purpose of “throwing mud” or belittling any man or church. I am not in the work of preaching or writing, intending to cause embarrassment to overwhelm anyone. My foremost responsibility as a preacher of the gospel is to “preach the word in love” (2 Tim. 4:1-4; Eph. 4:15).

I am not your judge or anyone else’s, nor do I intend to arrogate (to assume or to claim unduly or proudly; usurp) the divine prerogative of God Almighty and become a judge!

Also, it is apparent that some of the readers will become “upset” and “bitter” because of the plainness of speech which I will employ in the presentation of the following material. But please allow me to state that the salvation of one soul is so blessed and the damnation of one soul is so terrifying that I cannot hold my peace and beat around the bush when spiritual matters are at stake (Jer. 20:7-13). With all the fervor in my soul, I beckon you who really want to go to heaven, and who are really interested in what the word of God says to read this with the intent of obeying God’s written message irrespective of tradition, circumstances, and family religion. What force on the earth is so significant that you will risk losing your soul? For, “what shall a man be profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his soul?” (Matt. 16:26) Is not the question of Jesus in the preceding Scripture worthy of your careful consideration?

Finally, the points which shall be enumerated in this paper are not to be construed as personal attacks against any man or body of men. I care not about a “bunch of who shot John and who slapped Sally.” That is a “pile of garbage” which is totally immaterial! The important issue is “What does the Bible teach?”

Our question for study and contemplation relative to a present crisis is:

“Why, According to The Bible Are Denominations Sinful?” (Psalms 127:1; Matt. 15:9,13,14)

According to the teaching of the Bible, denominations are sinful for the following reasons:

(1) They have been in a state of spiritual warfare, division, and blatant confusion since their very beginning! We are plainly told (1 Cor. 14:33) that “God is not the author of confusion, but of peace.” We may put this situation into proper perspective by demonstrating our argument in the form of a syllogism. Note the following reasoning which is irrefutable. Major Premise. God is not the author of confusion. Minor Premise: Denominations are in a state of confusion. Conclusion: Therefore, God is not the author of any denomination on the earth!

Many individuals have been driven into unbelief (atheism-infidelity) as a result of the “rotten,” “filthy,” “hypocritical,” “low-down” division which exists in denominationalism! The basic reason why many are forsaking religious principles is that they do not know whom or what to believe! (One church teaches one thing about a subject, and another church teaches an entirely different thing about the same subject! Sometimes these differing churches are located on the same street or city block.) Friends, I know that you are disgusted and disgruntled about the whole mess! I do not understand how or why you kind people continue to remain in such a pathetically and unchangeably sad situation.

The Lord teaches (John 17:20-21) that men are brought to believe that God sent the Christ through the “unity” (oneness) of believers. Jesus said, ” . . . I pray, for them also that believe on me through their word; that they all may be one . . . that the world may believe that thou didst send me.” Oh to God that the prayer of His Son would be given heed! Sectarianism in word and deed, strives to make the prayer of Jesus a farce. It mocks and scoffs at the teaching of the Bible in Ephesians 4:3 that we should “give diligence to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.” Why? Because denominationalism is advocating the erroneous doctrine that a man has the right to believe and practice whatever he desires as long as he is sincere. The Bible teaches the very opposite in the following language: “Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them that are causing the divisions and occasions of stumbling, contrary to the doctrine which you learned: and turn away from them.”

(2) Denominations are sinful also because they give people a false sense of security by promulgating the false teaching that a man is “justified by faith alone.” Note carefully what the following creed-books say regarding this doctrine:

(a) The Discipline of the Wesleyan Church (1972 edition, p. 29, article 113) states, “Wherefore, that we are justified by faith only is a most wholesome doctrine and very full of comfort.”

(b) Baptist Church Manual by J.M. Pendleton (p. 48), says, “. . . that justification includes the pardon of sin, and the promise of eternal life on principles of righteousness; that is bestowed, not in consideration of any works of righteousness which we have done, but solely through faith in the Redeemer’s blood. . . .”

(c) Discipline of the Colored Methodist Episcopal Church (1950 edition, Article 9, pp. 5, 6) states, “wherefore, that we are justified by faith only, is a most wholesome doctrine, and very full of comfort.”

I have cited the disciplines of three denominations to show conclusively, that most denominations teach salvation at the point of “faith only” without any other acts of obedience.

Let us compare the doctrine of “justification by faith only” to the Bible and see how it measures up. Does the Bible teach that a man is “justified by faith only?” If so, we ought to believe it, and if not, we ought not to believe it. Let us read James 2:24 and see what it teaches. “Ye see then, that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.” The disciplines say, “Yes, justified by faith only,” and the Bible says, “Not by faith only. ” Which do you believe, the “disciplines” or the Bible? At this point it is clear that the word of God flatly contradicts Baptist, Wesleyan, and Methodist doctrine! Do you see my point when I say that denominationalism – sectarianism is sinful? How could it be otherwise when it contradicts the Bible? Aren’t you ready to leave denominationalism? There is not a time during the history of man on the earth when faith only ever justified anyone. God has always demanded humble submission. Read the entire second chapter of James and the eleventh chapter of Hebrews and note that faith justified when it obeyed!

Furthermore, if man is justified by faith only, that would exclude and countermand passages which show that we are saved Oustified) by other things such as, the word (Jas. 1:21), grace (Eph. 2:8-9), and baptism (1 Pet. 3:21). In other words, there is no way that we could be saved by faith only and be saved by something else also. The Bible teaches that other elements do save us, therefore, we are not saved by faith only!

(3) Denominations are sinful because they were built by men and wear names which glorify men and not the God of heaven! Friends, follow me carefully at this point, for I will now give you several churches by name, when they were built, and by whom. Remember, the following statements can be proven as definite facts of history.

(a) Roman Catholic Church – Boniface III, 606 A.D.

(b) Baptist Church – John Smyth, 1607 A.D.

(c) Methodist Church – Charles and John Wesley, 1739 A.D.

(d) Episcopalian – Henry VIII, 1531 A.D.

(e) Lutheran Church – Martin Luther, 1517 A.D.

(f) Jehovah’s Witnesses – Charles Taze Russel, 1872 A.D.

(g) Nazarene Church – Phineas F. Bresse and J.P. Whitney, 1895 A.D.

(h) Salvation Army -William Booth, 1876 A.D.

(I) Pentecostal Church – Several men, 1899, 1900, 1914 A.D.

Not one of the aforemention denominations can be found on the pages of your New Testament! Everyone of them was founded too late to be on the pages of God’s word.

But, there is a church that you can read about in your New Testament that was not built by men (human authority), but by the Son of God Himself. In Matthew 16:18, He said, “I say also unto thee that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.” The church which Jesus promised to build is “the tabernacle which the Lord pitched (constructed), not man” (Heb 8:2). According to Acts 2, it was built on the first Pentecost after the resurrection of Christ. See especially Acts 2:47, for in this text it is clearly shown that there is only one true church (Eph. 4:4; 1:22-23).

The New Testament likewise gives us the designations of the church. Each appellation found for the church in the New Testament gives glory and honor to the Godhead, not man. Inspiration identifies the church as (1) the church of the living God (1 Tim. 3:15), (2) the church (Col. 1:18), (3) the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:27). The local congregations were called (1) the church of God, (2) the church of the Lord (Acts 20:28), (3) churches of Christ (Romans 16:16). Why friends, is man not satisfied with calling Bible things by Bible names and doing Bible things in Bible ways? Is it not always better to serve God in His appointed way?

(4) Human churches (denominations) are also sinful because they pervert New Testament worship and hence, do not worship God “in spirit and in truth” as we are instructed to do (John 4:23-24). Carefully read succeeding paragraphs as I enumerate some of the specific items of worship which are completely corrupted by denominations.

(a) They employ mechanical instruments of music in worship. Most denominations use guitars, drums, organs, bass fiddles, saxophones, harps, and other instruments of human invention. The New Testament is explicit regarding the kind of music which God demands in worship! Which kind is it? The Bible says we are to “sing and make melody in our hearts to the Lord” (Eph. 5:19). God has given us the authority for only one kind of music in the worship of the church. Men who love God and the Bible and who know what the word of God authorizes will sing without the addition of mechanical instruments (Col. 3:16; 1 Cor. 14:15; Jas. 5:13; Heb. 2:12; 13:15). To add another kind of music to the worship of the church is blatant sin, the nature of which is so despicable as to result in the damnation of a soul (2 Jn. 9-11; Rev. 22:18-19)! There is not a direct statement in the New Testament which explicitly declares that we may use it, nor is there an approved apostolic example of a congregation in the first century using such, nor do we find a passage which implies by the language used that such was done or may be done!

Many, in a feeble effort to find (?) justification for mechanical music in worship make an appeal to the Old Testament. But this presents a problem; the Old Testament is not law for people in this dispensation of time. The old system of religion was nailed to the cross. Jesus died to establish the new covenant (Matt. 26:28; Heb. 8:6-13; Col. 2:14-16; Gal. 3:23-27). The actions of David in the Old Testament do not set precedent for our actions! If a thing cannot be proven to be the case by the New Testament, it cannot be proven to be the case at all! For we must cite authority for all that we do (Col. 3:17)!

(b) Sectarian churches also partake of the Lord’s Supper one, two, three or four times a year, when the Bible teaches beautifully that the early disciples met each first day of the week to “break bread” (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 11:17-34). Not monthly, quarterly, semi-annually, or yearly. But weekly! Nor is there any authority for partaking of the Lord’s Supper on Monday, Tuesday, or Wednesday. The Bible specifies the “first day of the week.” Sunday is the only day that we may scripturally observe the supper and please God.

(c) Denominations also pervert God’s specific manner for the raising of money which enables the local church to accomplish its work of preaching the gospel (1 Tim. 3:15; 2 Cor. 11:8; Phil. 4:15-17), edifying the body (Acts 20:32; Eph. 4:11-16; Col. 2:19), and relieving destitute saints (Acts 11:27-30; Acts 6:1-6; Rom. 15:25-27; 1 Cor. 16:1-2; 1 Tim. 5:9-16). In order to get funds for their activities, denominations have “ticket sales,” “pie suppers,” “rummage sales,” “bar-b-que dinners,” “car washes,” “bingo parties,” “fish fries,” and “picture shows.” The New Testament reveals that God only appointed one way for a church to raise money and it is for each member to lay by in store (treasure up) on the first day of the week. This pattern is found in 1 Corinthians 16:1-2. It is sinful to do anything which violates God’s pattern, for all things must be done according to the pattern (Heb. 8:1-5). If the people are taught to observe God’s way they will not appreciate any other way (Prov. 14:12; Jer. 10:23).

In connection with the perversion of giving most denominational churches also have several collections in one assembly such as the building fund collection, the Sunday school collection, theflowerfund collection, the collection for your dues, the missionary fund collection, and the benevolent fund collection. Friends, for this there is no divine authority. The Bible says give as you have been prospered, and when you do that once you are not required to give any more in that assembly on the first day of the week. When you do what the Bible says, you have met the requirements of God. You ought not allow people (preachers and/or elders) to use you for their selfish ambitions!

The Bible also tells us when to give. It says “on the first day of the week.” Thus, there is no Bible authority to participate in congregational contributions on any other day! It is sinful to have congregationally involved collections on Wednesday night or Friday night! The same reasoning which will allow me to take a congregational collection on a day other than the “first day of the week” will also allow me to partake of the Lord’s Supper on some other day than Sunday. If not, why not? Regarding both the Lord’s Supper and the contribution, we are specifically told what to do and when to do them; “the first day of the week” (1 Cor. 16:2; Acts 20:7).

(d) Denominations also pervert God’s worship in that they have special singing done by special groups such as quartets, duets, trios, solos, choirs, choruses, sextets, and quintets. It can be proven from the Bible and from religious history that the manner of first century singing was congregational or singing in unison. The New Testament teaches us that each saint is to lift up his or her voice in unison. We are told (Eph. 5:19) that we are to speak to “one another.” This language does not exclude anyone. All are admonished to sing according to the instruction (Col. 3:16). There is not one passage in the New Testament which intimates that a congregation may use the services of a choir or any other group to sing for the church!

Such great history works as Schaff’s History of the Christian Church, The Church, The Restoration, and Falling Away by J.W. Shepherd, and Eusebius’, Ecclesiastical History plainly demonstrate that the early disciples sang congregationally as enjoined by the epistles of the apostles.

Further, when we employ groups to do our singing for us, we definitely are participating in “worship by proxy.” If we can get special groups to sing for us, why not get the same group to pray, teach, visit the sick, give, and all other duties which we are all commanded to do? Singing by groups is fundamental if you desire to have your animal emotions stirred while you are entertained!

Conclusion

Now, my dear friends, we come to a very significant question which many people ask regarding the destiny of denominationalism. The question is, “Do you mean to tell me that all of the honest, sincere, dedicated, and hardworking people who are members of denominations will ultimately be lost if they do not repent and come out of sectarianism?”

According to what the Bible teaches, the answer is, “Yes, Yes!” A person may be sincere, dedicated, hard-working, and kind in religion and yet on the great day of judgment, because of having done things for which there is no Bible authority be sent to hell fire. Matthew 7:21-29 emphatically demonstrates that just being religious does not declare that one’s service is pleasing to God!

I have done my best, guided by the truth to expose just a few of the erroneous doctrines and practices which are a part of denominationalism. This is a very, very serious and sober situation. It involves the destiny of your eternal soul. What is your decision? Are you ready to obey the gospel by believing the Christ to be God’s Son and that His word is true (Heb. 11:6; Rom. 10:17)? You must also repent of your sins (Acts 17:30; 2 Pet. 3:9), confess your faith in the Christ (Rom. 10:10; Matt. 10:32), and be baptized into Christ for the remission of your sins (Acts 2:38; 22:16; Gal. 3:27; 1 Pet. 3:21; and Mark 16:16). Be faithful unto death and you will receive a crown of life (Rev. 2:10; 2 Tim. 2:4-10).

Guardian of Truth XXX: 5, pp. 140-141, 148-149
March 6, 1986