Truth Magazine

By Jimmy Tuten

The inspired writer of the book of James tells us that our religion can be vain (Jas. 1:26). When religion becomes vain it is a faith that has lost its real value, its substance, and importance. It is empty, void and worthless. It has become a religion that is a sham, a pretension where one’s faith is not demonstrated with evidences of true faithfulness (Jas. 2:19-24, religion and faith are used in this context as that which is subjective, i.e., one’s piety or holiness).

But when is religion vain? The answer to this is so very important to the true believer who wants to practice pure religion. It would be a terrible thing to learn in the end of this world that our religion was vain and worthless. By some it is feared even now, in the eighties, that most professing believers lead lives that are mere pretensions. The love of display, the love of the spectacular is growing among professed members of the body of Christ. There is a prevalent attitude that opposes all preaching except totally positive preaching. In fact, some are asking, “Is there a place for the negative in our preaching and teaching?” The Bible teaches that it is important that we preach the whole counsel of God (Acts 20:27). This involves both the negative and the positive. Timothy was commanded to “reprove, rebuke, exhort,” but some today would have him only exhorting (2 Tim. 4:1-2). Surely we must emphasize what is right, but we have to condemn that which is wrong, too. Is it possible to stand for truth and not stand against sin at the same time? Certainly not! Sound doctrine is indispensable to pure religion. But it should be understood that just as a perverted doctrine corrupts, so does a neglected gospel. The “I don’t intend that anyone say no to my planned path of worthy living and fleshly indulgences” philosophy is the very thing that has led churches to be anxious no longer to be distinguished from the denominations. The result is that the trend is to even lift the preacher above the gospel by demanding pulpit pleasers who preach a sugar-coated, honey-dripping, lovey-dovey kind of preaching. Real, sound gospel preaching is on the decline (1 Cor. 1:18-31). There is an increase of vain religion. Brethren, we simply cannot let our pride of intellectual attainment in the field of modern scholarship keep us from preaching the simple gospel that must of necessity “romp on toes” wherever there is a perverted and neglected gospel (Gal. 1:6-9). We are to speak the truth in love, but this involves reproving and rebuking, sometimes.

History will bear out the fact that the “new face” of the Lord’s church today came about because of a gradual abandonment of basic, doctrinal teaching in favor of more socially relevant themes. This was followed by a loss of conviction that denominational people are lost and the ultimate disregarding of scriptural differences. We need to understand that truth is not negotiable whether it be in a unity meeting like the Joplin, Missouri meeting (Aug. 7-9, 1984), or anywhere else. Do you wonder why there is a dying evangelistic spirit among us? This is it! Denominationalism is wrong no matter which way one cuts it.

We can exhort our young preachers to attain a greater degree of education under the guise that the day of “cornfield” preachers has come to an end, but we will reap the fruit of a corrupted church. You can put emphasis on the need to communicate to the young and aggressive minds as if they needed something different from the rest of us, but you will end up with a “the old style, plain book-chapter-and-verse” preaching must go the way of the flat-top and crew-cut hair styles philosophy. There will be more “sharing a text” in our pulpits rather than taking a text. In short, the Jerusalem gospel will be replaced with current religious thought. It is not possible to preach Christ and honor Him while at the same time avoiding the preaching of His doctrine and gospel (2 Jn. 9; Rom. 1:16-17). The most practical way to turn people’s attention to the Lord is to turn their attention to His Word. We must overcome the temptation to make a show of religion. The child of God must continually ask himself the question: “Does the kind of preaching I involve myself in make my religion real and genuine?” Or after all, “Is my religion vain?” It is important then that we give attention to the question, when is our religion vain?

Our Religion Is Vain When We Do Not Bridle Our Tongues

James 1:26 says, “If any man thinketh himself to be religious, while he bridleth not his tongue . . . this man’s religion is vain.” We deceive ourselves if we claim to be religious and at the same time do not bridle our tongues. As a youngster I had a high-spirited house that Dad had bought for us to ride. We had to put what we called “a cutting bit” in her mouth that was attached to her bridle. Only in this way could we hold her in check and control the horse. There was no other way to make her obey us. To bridle the tongue, therefore, means to hold the tongue in check, to control it that it may always obey judgment.

The tongue can be a most evil member. The apostle says, “and the tongue is a fire, the world of iniquity. . . ” (Jas. 3:6). The tongue is set on fire of hell and defiles the whole body. The old Hindu proverb is true: “conquer your passions and you conquer the whole world.” When I think of the description of the tongue as a restless evil full of deadly poison, I think how unruly it is when let loose (Jas. 3:7-8). It is sad to see evidences in the body of Christ today of the tongue divising “every wickedness, like a sharp razor, working deceitfully” (Psa. 52:2). Much of the trouble that plagues the family, the community and the church is often devised and stirred up by an unholy tongue. Most of our vexations come largely from the lack of control of the tongue. It is no wonder that the wise writer said, “A fool’s mouth is his destruction, and his lips are the snare of his soul. . . ” (Prov. 2:23). Furthermore, time can scarcely heal the cruelly inflicted wounds of a talebearer’s tongue. As I write I think of the bleeding hearts and souls wounded almost to death by the cruel tongue of the slanderer. How sad! Surely our religion is vain if we control not our tongues while claiming to practice pure religion. To say that what we are hearing throughout the brotherhood is a mixed bag is an understatement. Bane and blessing earmark our era, and sorting the good from the bad is seldom easy. The facetious “you can’t trust them Christians” of the past has all but become a reality of the present. Let us not deceive ourselves. Rest assured that He who has a sharp tongue soon cuts his own throat. Let us, as someone has aptly said, “be sure your brain is engaged before putting your mouth in gear.” Eternity demands it! Your religion could be vain.

Our Religion Is Vain When We Do Not Practice What We Profess

Religion is vain when we do not practice what we learn from God’s Word (Jas. 1:25). Our brethren in Christ profess much in reference to religion. We claim to advocate the truth, the whole truth, as revealed by Jesus (1 Cor. 2:6-12). But our “we speak where the Bible speaks” profession has become a pretension. The institutional churches have made a sham of the plea with their denominational practices which have caused them to lose their distinctiveness. In other areas, we, the conservatives, make loud boasts with little practice sometimes in comparison to what we profess. The fact that some of us profess great faith in Christ and the allsufficiency of His Word, yet become discouraged, allow zeal to slacken and do little beyond “keeping house,” is obvious. Such religion is vain, empty and worthless. This no longer involves isolated cases scattered throughout the brotherhood. The vainness has become rather widespread.

Charles Colson, writing in Moody Monthly (Sept., 1985) under the heading, “Stabbing the Conscience of a Sleeping Church, ” has effectively pointed out that the refusal to believe Cathleen Webb’s recent recanter of her testimony as a 16-year-old (Cathleen Crowell, then) that convicted Gary Dotson of rape in 1977 was due to the judge’s not believing her when she said she is now telling the truth (that Dotson did not rape her) because of her conversion to Christ. Understanding that the denominational concept of conversion must be taken into consideration, we note that Colson concluded two things about the implications of her so-called repentance: (1) “For those who have not experienced the One who transforms lives, what happened to Cathleen Webb is inexplicable.” (2) “Cathleen Webb’s (she is now married, jt) actions seem incomprehensible because the world so seldom sees genuine repentance in action” (p. 14). The latter point is what Colson sees as a stab at the church (denominationalism). But, is it not a stab at the Lord’s Church too? Are we generally showing any better sincerity of practice of religion than Christendom as a whole? Have we picked up on how the public generally views the court case involving the Collinsville elders (Church of Christ)? You guessed it: “It’s just a.display of hypocrisy on the part of the Church of Christ elders.” In this area, this writer and others whom I have talked to are seeing more and more vain religion in our ranks. Only when we answer the question rightly: shall we practice before the world what we profess? will we restore New Testament, primitive Christianity.

So in addition to our general failure to act on our so-called belief that we are the New Testament church and that the gospel is the power to save, many are seeing more and more Pharisaical attitudes when it comes to prejudices toward each other. Prejudice is sinful (Matt. 7: 1; 13:15). We cannot show partiality toward certain brethren and expect to go to heaven (Rom. 12:9-10; Jas. 2:1). We cannot believe every evil report that is spread without investigation (“Doth our law judge any man, before it hears him, and know what he doeth?” [Jn. 7:51]). With so much gossip in circulation about this preacher or that preacher, this brother or that brother, along with the refusal of the gossipers to even talk to those whom they condemn, some are asking, “How can they claim to be Christians, let alone preachers?” I too, wonder! “For they say and do not” (Matt. 23:2-3). In some quarters our practice is a shame and disgrace, and some of our most respected brethren (?) live in such a way that they should never get out of the pulpit once they get in it, and never get in it when they get out. Such displays make religion vain.

Our Religion Is Vain When It Does Not Make Us Better

Just this past week in two of the home studies that I am conducting with weak and newly converted members, I have had occasion to stress the need for evidence of growth in the faith. Wherever there is growth there will be evidences of such progress. For example, in 2 Peter 1:5-8 one finds such expressions as “giving all diligence,” “if these things be in you, and abound,” and “neither be barren nor unfruitful.” Concerning this very thought the apostle Paul admonished Timothy: “meditate upon these things; give thyself wholly to them; that thy profiting may appear to all” (1 Tim. 4:15). More literally Paul is saying, “think hard about all this, and put it into practice, and everyone will be able to see how you are advancing” (The Jerusalem Bible). So, as a Christian my religion should show advancement and not retardation. If my religion does not make me better in every way in every respect, what does it amount to, as it respects me? Am I benefitted at all when I am not a better man? Would my profession not be empty, vain, worthless and fruitless? How often the Christian gives way to his or her evil passions and desires, and religion becomes vain!

In my vocation as a Christian, if I am not made more wise, just and live more in harmony with the Golden Rule (Matt. 7:12), has not my practice become vain? Brethren, and preachers in particular, by reason of growth, should have more of that wisdom which “is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruit, without variance, without hypocrisy” (Jas. 3:17). Christians should not harbor resentments, be filled with sinful prejudices and engage in hurtful and damaging talk. The most sinful among us do not need their sins (?) paraded before the brotherhood. What is needed is some concern for the soul of the brother or sister and an effort to restore such a one (Gal. 6:1-2). How many have been driven into complete abandonment of the faith by vain religionists among us who seem to have little or no milk of human kindness and mercy in them? Can we not learn that it is usually those who are not important who most often make the mistake of thinking that they are? Too many are ever learning but never coming to a knowledge of the truth.

My religion should make me a better citizen who promotes and maintains civic righteousness in every community. it should make one a better wife or husband, son or daughter, better employer and employee, and if it does not, religion is vain. Yes, if my profession and practice as a child of God does not make me better in every way and happier in this life and in the life to come, it is undoubtedly a vain religion.

Conclusion

We who claim to be Christians only and are pleading earnestly the restoration of apostolic Christianity wherein there has been departure, are absolutely right in theory and profession. But, what about our practice? Are we living the Christ-like life? Are we any better than those who are still in the bondage of modern denominationalism? If it is not vain, we will not only say, we will do! Listen once again to what our Lord said: “Not everyone that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 7:21).

Engraved on an old slab in the Cathedral of Lubeck, Germany are the following words:

Ye call me Master but obey me not,

Ye call me Light but see me not,

Ye call me Way but walk me not,

Ye call me Life but desire me not,

Ye call me Fair but love me not,

Ye call me Rich but ask me not,

Ye call me Eternal but seek me not,

Ye call me noble but serve me not,

Ye call me mighty but honor me not,

If I condemn you, blame Me not.

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 20, pp. 619-622
October 17, 1985

By Lewis Willis

I have carefully selected the term “warning” in the above title. A danger confronts you and your school age children, and you need to be warned about it so that you can detect it if and when it appears. I see grave consequences if you are indifferent to this warning. Here it is.

The Humanist Magazine (Jan./Feb., 1983, p. 26) published an article by humanist author John Dunphy. I saw a quotation from his article in Torch Magazine, June 1985, and I feel it is important to share with you what he said:

. . . a viable alternative to Christianity must be sought. That alternative is humanism. I am convinced that the battle for humankind’s future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a New Faith: a religion of humanity that recognizes and respects the sparks of what theologians call divinity in every human being. These teachers must embody the same selfless dedication as the most rabid fundamentalist preachers, for they will be ministers of another sort, utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit in conveying humanist values in whatever subject they teach, regardless of the educational level. . . . The classrooms must and will become an arena of conflict between the old and the new. . . (All italics mind, L.W.)

This is a frightening statement of intent on the part of the humanist. It is clearly the objective of these people to overthrow Christianity if possible. They intend to elevate each man to the role of God, allowing him to set his own standards and values as he desires. So set on this objective are they that, they themselves call their mission a “battle” for man’s future. Fortunately, they identify for us the battleground on which they will fight. The public school classroom will be used by humanist teachers to instill the “religion” of humanism. They themselves perceive it to be “a new faith.” (Christians are not permitted to teach or practice their “religion” in the public schools. This admission that humanism is a “religion” which is being taught in the schools presents artillery to Christians in opposing humanism. In the view of the courts, “religion is religion,” whether it is Christianity or Humanism, and the same laws that apply to one should apply to the other. A test case in the courts might well be a future weapon to use in the battle against humanism, though I somehow doubt that the American Civil Liberties Union is going to be terribly interested in representing Christians in such a fight.)

I do not know how it will “play” in the courts, but I suspect you could rattle some cages in some school administration conference rooms if you presented Mr. Dunphy’s admission that humanism is “a new faith” or a “religion.” Administrators are fully aware that the Supreme Court has prohibited the teaching of religion in the classrooms of this nation. It seems to me that it is at least worth a try.

Humanists are dedicated to their cause and they are taught to pursue their purpose “as the most rabid fundamentalist preachers” do. They admit their pulpit will be the nation’s classrooms, and they intend to vigorously wage their battles in that arena on every educational level. This means that no student in the nation’s schools will escape the efforts of these people during the years of his education. We are all well aware of the fact that the most lasting influence upon a person will be his earliest influences. We are also aware that you cannot realize much success in teaching New Testament Christianity to a child once he is 16 years old. The greatest success is realized when parents begin this teaching process as early in the child’s life as possible. Humanism acknowledges this and they are announcing that they intend, if possible, to begin instilling the precepts of humanism in the minds of our children, beginning at the kindergarten level.

Therefore, I was just thinkin’. that those who are fore-warned are fore-armed. I suppose by now that all of our children have returned to classes for the school year. The parent can close his eyes to reality and ignore this danger. Or, he can inquire of his child concerning what he is being taught. If he discovers that this junk is being taught to his child, he can loudly object to it. Paul told Timothy to “fight the good fight of faith” (1 Tim. 6:12). If the classrooms prove to be that battleground, then let us stand and fight! Keep in mind, it is your child’s life and soul for which you are fighting. Take the time to talk to your kids and learn what is happening.

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 20, p. 627
October 17, 1985

By Mike Willis

Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery. Meditate upon these things, give thyself wholly to them; that thy profiting may appear to all (1 Tim. 4:14-15).

This exhortation was given by Paul to the young preacher Timothy. The “gift” to which he referred was most probably some miraculous spiritual gift given by the laying on of Paul’s hands (2 Tim. 1:6), accompanied by prophecies and the laying on of the hands of the elders. Whatever gift was given to Timothy, he was responsible for using in the Master’s service. What was true with Timothy’s miraculous gift is also true of the individual abilities and opportunities which God has given to each of us. Like the one-talent man (Matt. 25:14-30), we are responsible for using our several abilities and opportunities in the kingdom of God. Several dangers threatened Timothy, and every other servant of God, in using his abilities and gifts in the Master’s service.

The Danger of Entanglement

In writing his second letter to Timothy, Paul said, “No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier” (2 Tim. 2:4). Each of us has certain responsibilities which he cannot avoid. Some things have to be done in order to survive. A man has to mow his lawn, keep his cars looking reasonably clean, maintain his house, earn a living, be involved with his children’s schoolwork and outside activities, and other things. There is a real danger that a Christian may become so entangled in these affairs that he neglects his obligations to God.

In the parable of the sower, the seed that fell among thorns was choked out by the “cares and riches and pleasures of this life” (Lk. 8:14). We have witnessed many Christians who became so involved in the affairs of this life that they neglected and forsook the Lord.

Sometimes preachers become like those mentioned in Philippians 2:20-21 -“For I have no man like-minded, who will naturally care for your state. For all seek their own, not the things which are Jesus Christ’s.” Isaiah described the spiritual leaders of his day saying, “Yea, they are greedy dogs which can never have enough, and they are shepherds that cannot understand: they all look to their own way, every one for his gain, from his quarter” (Isa. 56:11). The desire for wealth has caused some preachers to become more involved in selling than in preaching. (This is not to be understood as a blanket condemnation of every preacher who has his own business. Some churches leave a preacher little choice but to supplement his income because they pay him so little and never give him a raise. Others find medical situations that keep them tied to a job in order to have sufficient medical coverage.) The result is that the exercise of one’s spiritual abilities and use of his opportunities are neglected.

Paul’s exhortation to Timothy needs to be repeated: “give thyself wholly to them” (1Tim. 4:15).

The Danger of Laziness

Some men neglect their “gift” because they are simply too lazy to develop and use it. They are content to let others put forth the effort and make the sacrifices to serve. They are willing to let others do the work while they sit at home and watch television.

In every congregation with which I have labored, I have known of men and women who had the ability to teach a Bible class but who were unwilling to put forth the effort to do it. If each of us had the same attitude, no one would preach, teach classes, or lead singing. The same excuse which permits one man not to use his abilities and opportunities will allow every other man to quit doing what he is doing.

Preaching is a work which permits temptation to laziness. There are no bosses watching over a man to be sure that he works a reasonable number of hours each day. He can wait until Saturday, pull out someone’s outline from a book, look over it and preach it on Sunday morning; few would notice what had been done and many would not care. If he neglects the work of finding and working with contacts, he can excuse himself by saying, “No one wants to hear the gospel these days.” Some neglect their gifts because they are lazy. They are content to sit in front of a television and drink Pepsi, to go hunting and fishing, and take frequent vacations. When brethren object to this conduct, these preachers complain that the brethren have no appreciation for a gospel preacher and his work.

A preacher who is truly committed to his work finds that there are not enough hours in the day to do all the things which need to be done. His interest in the word of God calls him to long hours of study; his concern for the lost makes him look for opportunities to have home Bible studies. He is frequently the one most available to relieve the physical needs of those in a congregation (such as cutting firewood, mowing a yard, etc.). Truly a dedicated servant of God can find plenty of work in the kingdom of the Lord.

Paul’s exhortation to Timothy needs to be repeated: “give thyself wholly to them” (1 Tim. 4:15).

The Need for Every Man’s Contribution

Peter wrote, “As every man hath received the gift, even so minister the same one to another, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God” (1 Pet. 4: 10). Every man needs to realize that his gifts, abilities, and talents are needed in the local church. The church is compared to a body (1 Cor. 12:1-3 1) in which every member has a function. If one member chooses not to use his abilities, he not only hurts himself, he also hurts the whole church because these gifts are to be used to “minister the same one to another.”

Suppose that every qualified song leader in your local congregation decided, “I quit.” The whole church would suffer. The usual edification which we receive from the singing would diminish as those who have no song leading ability stumble through and butcher the singing. Suppose that every qualified teacher refused to teach. The entire congregation would suffer because of their refusal to teach.

Sometimes I meet a member of the church who has had his feelings hurt while serving in some capacity. Perhaps some unthoughtful and unkind person made a harsh and unjust criticism of their work or made a justified criticism in such strong words that they became discouraged. A common response is, “I won’t teach any more” or “I won’t try to lead singing any more.” Like the one-talent man, they are ready to go bury their talents and sit around stewing and pouting. The whole church is suffering because of such behavior. Their refusal to serve has the same effect on the church as one leg refusing to walk would have on the body.

Conclusion

Each of us has different abilities and opportunities to serve in the Lord’s kingdom. We are responsible before God for those opportunities to serve. Consequently, we need to give special attention to Paul’s admonitions to “neglect not the gift that is in thee” and to “give thyself wholly to them.

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 21, pp. 642, 662
November 7, 1985

By Tom Roberts

All of religion is academic without a power or force to make it vital. This can be seen in the dead and sterile litanies of Roman Catholicism and other world religions. Whether the prayer wheel of the Buddhist or the counting of beads by the Catholic, such religion is “vain,” springing from the doctrines of men rather than the mind of God (Mt. 15:9). That which gives New Testament Christianity its life is the object of our faith, Jesus Christ: crucified, raised and glorified. “Faith to the saving of the soul” (Heb. 10:39) is that “obedience of faith” (Rom. 1:5) which offers to God both worship and living that is patterned after His will. All men should realize that it is not mere “doing” or religious activity that God accepts. He is not obligated to accept our efforts, regardless of their zeal, just because we have performed them (Mt. 7:23). What we do, therefore, must be in accord with the will of God and must be accompanied with sincerity and love or it is empty and fruitless (Jn. 4:24; 1 Cor. 13: 1ff). With these thoughts as a preface, let us consider the cross of Christ and its meaning to the Christian.

The Misunderstood Cross

Paul accused the Athenians (Acts 17) of superstitious worship because of their idolatry. If this same apostle could see how people view the cross today, he would accuse us of the same practice. Many people, both in and out of the church, have come to revere a cross, made of “gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device” (Acts 17:29) as a talisman, a good luck charm or the focal point for the dispensing of God’s grace. Thus, the form of a cross is often used in architecture to provide a “sacred building” in which the teaching of Christ is ignored. It is often worn as an ornament or sign of authority among “clergy” who usurp the authority of Jesus. One is often elevated above an altar in cathedrals where the very divinity of Christ is denied. Shapes of crosses adorn many walls in homes where the name of Christ is taken in vain, if at all. The “sign of the cross” has become, for both the criminal and priest, a superstitious ward against evil and a mans of bestowing blessings and grace. So pervasive, in fact, is the adoration of the cross that we might just dispense with Jesus and retain a cross itself as the efficacy and essence of religion. Such foolishness would be equal to keeping the bath water and throwing out the baby. There is a great need today to understand the biblical intent of the cross of Christ.

The Cross: Both Real and Symbolic

Whatever else we understand about the cross, we must realize that there was a real cross, an intrument of torture and death. Jesus died a lingering and suffering death on such a “tree.” It matters little what shape the cross took. Whether simple or ornate, an “X” or a “T,” it was a means of capital punishment in the Roman world and Jesus accepted its embrace. But the “relic” of the cross is nonexistent and supposed “splinters of the true cross” are simple frauds foisted upon the simpleminded with no purpose to be served among believers. Yet the Bible retains much teaching about the cross and suggests a vital relationship between the Christian and the cross. Without falling into superstition, how may we receive the benefits of the cross today? How does the cross fit into the pattern of true worship?

To understand this, we must understand that the Bible uses figures of speech. Figures of speech are not intended to obscure but to elucidate. Such is true in this case. We are far removed from the real wooden cross but not from the meaning of the cross, its symbolism. The figure of speech to which we refer in our study is metonomy: a part of a thing standing for the whole. In this case, the cross of Jesus has come to include the entire spectrum of the gospel. So meaningful and complete is the imagery of this word that is not necessary to refer individually to the events of Jesus’ death or to the elements of justification, salvation and saving grace. It is enough to “preach the cross” (1 Cor. 1:18). Paul could say that he determined not to know anything save “Jesus Christ and Him crucified” (1 Cor. 2:2). Those who opposed Jesus were said to be “enemies of the cross of Christ” (Phil. 3:18). It is in the cross of Christ that we should glory (Gal. 6:14). Care should be taken lest the “word of the cross” (1 Cor. 1:18), here equated with gospel preaching, should be mingled with the wisdom of men so that the “cross of Christ should be made of none effect” (1 Cor. 1:17). Is it not clear, therefore, that the cross stands for the whole message; metonomy, the part for the whole? With this properly digested, we can determine what the cross means to us today. Errors of men cannot obscure the beauty of the cross when we understand its true meaning. It is quite evident that God intended for the cross to have an impact on our thinking and our lives. Let us study that we may be blessed by the “word of the cross.”

The Meaning of the Cross

The cross of Christ tells us that sin is a curse. When used as an ornament around the neck, a cross says little about the ugliness of sin. But when we look at sin through the cross of Christ, we see sin as God does: ugly, deforming, condemning, separating man from his Creator. Sin is so terrible -that it made God send His only begotten Son to the cross to pay for its cost. Las Vegas does not present a true picture of sin. In the nightclubs and on TV, sin is glamorous, gaudy, fun, titillating, exhilarating. But sin causes deathseparation from God (Rom. 6:23; Isa. 59:1,2). Jesus became a curse for us, hanging on the cross (Gal. 3:13), and I should see this when I see the cross.

The cross of Christ tells us that a sacrifice for sin was made. Blood was appointed by God to be the atonement for sin (Lev. 17:10, 11). The blood of animals was insufficient to do the job of reclaiming the soul of man but the blood of Jesus was the perfect sacrifice. The Hebrew writer eloquently explores this subject when he speaks of the inadequacies of the blood of animals as compared with the “body prepared” for God (Heb. 9). 1 should see this when I see the cross.

The cross of Christ tells us that substitution was made. “The soul that sins shall die” (Ezek. 18:4). 1 sinned, therefore I ought to die. But thanks be to God that His grace permitted it to be different. As the story of Abraham and Isaac and the substitute ram for sacrifice foreshadowed it, the cross declares it plainly. Jesus Christ was sent by God to be a substitute for me. He took my punishment and death. “By his stripes we are healed” (Isa. 53). 1 should see this when I see the cross.

The cross of Christ tells us that atonement was made. God’s wrath is justly and divinely directed against sin and the sinner. The sinner dies and is without excuse because of his sin (Rom. 1, 2, 3). Sin is rebellion against a loving God and the wrath of God will be poured out as against Sodom and Gomorrah unless this wrath can be stilled. But man has no means to calm this wrath. How can we escape? The story of the cross has its roots in the Old Testament and the faint glimmer of hope expressed under the Law becomes a radiant light in the Gospel. When the high priest went into the Most Holy Place once each year, he brought the blood of an animal to the mercy seat on the ark of the covenant. If you will do a word study, you will find that the mercy seat is the seat of atonement-the place where the wrath of God is to be atoned. However, the blood of animals could not accomplish this great work; it remained for the blood of Christ to do it. When Jesus appeared before the throne of God with His own blood, God accepted this as atoning for the sins of the world. Atonement for sin has been made, and I should see this when I see the cross.

The cross of Christ tells us that reconciliation was made. So long as man was in sin, he could not draw nigh to God but, was in fact, an enemy. With our best intentions and greatest works, we could not bring about this healing of enmity, reconciliation. Since atonement was made by the sacrifice on the cross, it was possible for God to invite man back into a saved relationship. Paul said that this was the great work of the apostles, appointed by God to be ambassadors, entreating on behalf of God, “be ye reconciled unto God” (2 Cor. 5:18-20). Note that atonement precedes reconciliation and that God had to initiate them both due to our sinful condition. I should see this when I see the cross.

The cross of Christ tells us that fellowship with God is possible. Now that atonement has been made and reconciliation is possible, I can be forgiven. While atonement was made for the sins of the world, not all men will be saved. Not all will obey the call of the gospel through the ambassadors, the apostles, to be reconciled to God by the cross. To some, the word of the cross is foolishness; to others, it is a stumblingblock (1 Cor. 1). But if we reject the cross and the word of the cross, we reject reconciliation. If we reject reconciliaiton, we reject the peace with God that forgiveness brings. If we accept the cross, we may enter into a relationship with God reminiscent of that between Adam and Eve and God in the garden before sin intruded. Fellowship-a mutual sharing in heavenly matters-is found only in Christ. I should see this when I see the cross.

The cross of Christ tells us that I must become dead to the world and alive to God. “If then ye have been risen with Christ. . . ” (Col. 3: 1) presupposes that we have died with Christ. “For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God” (Col. 3:3). But how does one become dead to sin? “How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin” (Rom. 6:2-6).

Yes, we must crucify the old man of sin. We must walk in newness of life after having been buried in Christ. How is all this done? Paul said it is done when we are baptized. I should see this when I see the cross.

Let Us Take His Cross

There is a cross for us to bear. It is not a silver or gold ornament with no real meaning but that of vanity and false humiliation. The cross that Jesus bore was that of “obedience unto death, yea, the death of the cross” (Phil. 2:8). Our Lord said, “And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it” (Mt. 10:38,39). If we understand this, we can understand the cross of Christ. And all the ornamental jewelry and superstitious architecture in the world will not bring us any closer to the service of God unless we do understand it. Are you wearing your cross or bearing it?

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 21, pp. 641, 663-664
November 7, 1985