Truth Magazine

By P.J. Casebolt

“Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written . . .” (Gal. 4:21, 22).

The Galatians had already heard the message of Christ and him crucified (Gal. 3:1), and Paul marveled that they had been “so soon removed . . . unto another gospel,” which was not really another gospel, but a perversion of the true gospel (Gal. 1:6, 7). Like Israel of old who had left “the fountain of living waters, and hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns, that can hold no water” (Jer. 2:13), the Galatians had forsaken the law of Christ, the Spirit of Christ, and the grace of Christ for bondage under “the weak and beggarly elements” of the old law (Gal. 4:9).

When people make a comparison of two completely different ideas, and choose the one of lesser value, about the only alternative we have left is to show them the folly of their choice. Paul did this by challenging the Galatians to “hear the law” which they had chosen, even a law which was inferior to the law of Christ.

For different reasons, many religious people, including some in churches of Christ, journey back into the fulfilled, abolished law of Moses for sundry religious practices. As a general rule, these same people do not even hear what that law says about their favorite doctrine or practice. As a result, they are left without any authority or encouragement in their futile efforts from either the law of Moses or the law of Christ. In addition, such advocates are branded by both the law of Moses and the law of Christ as workers of iniquity,” or lawlessness (1 Sam. 15:22, 23; Matt. 7:23).

There are those who use mechanical instruments of music in worship because they like them, not because God likes them. Having no authority in the New Testament by way of command, approved apostolic example, and therefore not even a necessary inference, these “workers of iniquity” (lawlessness), return to the “weak and beggarly elements” of the Mosaic law in an attempt to justify the use of their mechanical instruments of music.

In their journey back to the Old Testament, passing efforts may be made to use the Greek term psallo or the symbolic language of Revelation to justify mechanical music in the worship of the church, but when they are faced with the conclusion that every worshipper (not just the piano player) has to psallo, and that the symbolic language of Revelation will also admit different colored horses and other beasts, birds, thunder and lightning into the worship of the church, these defenders of mechanical music generally end up saying, “David did it.”

“Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law” (of Moses) with respect to your mechanical instruments of music in worship, “do ye not hear the law?”

The law of Moses specified that certain instruments of music be used by specified men among the Levites, at specified times (Lev. 23:23-25; Num. 10:1-10; 1 Chron. 16:4-6, 40-42; 23:3-6, 30-32; 2 Chron. 29:21ff). On many of these occasions, burnt offerings and sacrifices and the observance of sabbaths and other feasts were also enjoined in conjunction with the instruments of music. Also, these things were obligatory to the Jews “for an ordinance for ever throughout your generations” (Num. 10:8).

Some of these instruments of music were invented by David. God permitted (or suffered) their use as he did other practices under the Mosaic dispensation, but all such practices ended with the Jewish generations along with the law itself (2 Chron. 29:25-28; Amos 6:1-6; Eph. 2:15; Col. 2:14-17). Even while David and others were using specified instruments of music at specified times/seasons, by specified Levites (Ps. 81:1-4), David said, “I will praise the name of God with a song, and will magnify him with thanksgiving. This also will please the Lord better than an ox or bullock that hath horns and hoofs” (Ps. 69:30, 31). God had no pleasure in these “burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin,” and the Lord said, “Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second” (Ps. 40:6-8; Heb. 10:5-10).

As Paul said to the Galatians concerning their departure from Christ back to the “weak and beggarly elements” of the law, I say unto the users and defenders of mechanical instruments of music in the worship of the church, “Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written . . .” (Gal. 4:21).

Having heard what “the law” said about instruments of music in worship, and having seen that the advocates of that practice do not even conform to the law in the use of their instruments, let us hear the law on similar subjects, such as the Sabbath, polygamy, divorce and remarriage.

The Sabbath pretenders of our day not only return to “the law” for justification of Sabbath keeping, but they compound their error by dividing asunder the very law which they pretend to honor. Sabbatarians claim that the Ten Commandments constitute the law of God, and that the statutes/judgments/ordinances which Moses wrote in a book constitute the law of Moses; that the law of Moses was abolished at the cross, but that the Ten Commandment portion (including the Sabbath commandment), remains.

The terms “law of Moses” and “law of the Lord” are used interchangeably in the Scriptures (Luke 2:22-24; John 7:19). When Jesus died on the cross, he fulfilled and abolished the entire law, not just part of it (2 Cor. 3; Eph. 2:15; Col. 2:14-17); he took away the first law/covenant, including Sabbath observance (Deut. 5:2, 3, 15), “that he may establish the second” (Heb. 10:9; 9:15-17). No one observes the Sabbath today as it was given, and no one is stoned to death for failure to observe the Sabbath. “Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law” with respect to instrumental music, Sabbath observance, polygamy, divorce and remarriage, “and such like” (cf. Gal. 5:21), “do ye not hear the law?”

When children of God attempt to justify themselves by “the law,” they fall from grace (Gal. 2:21; 3:11; 5:4). And let those who reject the law of Christ for the law of Moses, then refuse to hear the very law which they claim to honor remember this one thing: you will not escape with just the penalty of death by stoning for despising “Moses’ law” (Heb. 10:28). There is a “much sorer punishment” awaiting those who have forsaken the cleansing fountain of the blood of Christ and have returned to “broken cisterns” which can no longer hold even the blood of animal sacrifices (Heb. 9:13, 14; 10:29).

Some are critical of those who preach short sermons! I for one, do not believe that a gospel preacher should be limited to the length of his sermon. This article takes a look at the length of a sermon.

The Length of the New Testament

The New Testament I am using in the writing of this article has 248 pages. Not all that long, right? Ever thought about all the things the Lord said in 248 pages? His birth, earth-life, death, burial, resurrection, ascension are all recorded in a short essay. Of course there are other things Jesus did which are not written. “But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name” (John 20:30-31). The book of John that I read, has 23 pages, enough evidence to cause all to believe that Jesus is divine.

Few Words

Paul penned, “How that revelation he made known unto me the mystery: (as I wrote afore in few words” (Eph. 3:3). They mystery referred to here is the uncovering or revealing of the gospel of Christ, that men might read and understand. Paul said what he did in few words! I know of nothing that God wanted us to know that Paul left out, do you? Because a man speaks few words does not mean that he is not bold. Paul said he was “bold” (2 Cor. 11:21). Just because a man speaks few words does not mean that he does not condemn sin. Read what Paul said of sin in Galatians 5:19-21 and 1 Corinthians 6: 9-10.

Bible Sermons Were Short

All agree that Acts 2:22-36 contains the first gospel sermon as recorded on Pentecost. That sermon contains the facts, commands and promises of the gospel. This gospel sermon saves, Paul said (1 Cor. 15:1-2). Some say, “Well, Peter exhorted with many other words.” True, but this was after the sermon was preached (Acts 2:40). Folks don’t listen very long; that’s just the way it is! One reason some sermons get so long is that the preacher repeats everything two, three or maybe four times. Or, a lot of the preaching time is used to talk about unrelated sermon matters. In our preacher training program, we call that “chasing rabbits.” Many preachers lose their audience way before they get finished, in that the points of the sermon are not parallel and have nothing to do with the sermon topic at hand.

Short Servings

The preaching of a short sermon does not mean that the preacher is not interested in the disobedient and that he does not preach on needed issues facing the Lord’s people. If a man can preach a sermon in a brief time, due to study and good organization, he should not be faulted for such.

My dear beloved brethren: I am indeed perplexed over a most ungodly condition which is very prominent in our nation today. For example, the rapid rate of increase in divorce, abortion, and premarital sex statistically is alarming.

We may well ask who or what is responsible for this deteriorating condition, which continues to create many problems? Is there no cure for these ills and solution to these problems? Will you kindly permit me to share with you some of my humble experiences while in Hinduism?

Seventy-five years ago I was born a Hindu in George- town, Guiana, now independent Guyana, South America. My ancestors came from India being brought to George- town by the British people as immigrants to work in the sugar plantations.

At the age of twenty (February 1944), I was married to my wife, under the Hindu culture, and in keeping with Hindu tradition. My wife was thirteen years of age at the time. This beautiful and harmonious marriage has lasted for 55 years in which our family has grown to include one daughter, three sons and daughters-in-law and five grand- children. The young age of marriage may be attributed to Hindu custom and tradition, the system being characterized strictly by parental arrangements and supervision by both sets of parents. In the best interests and in consideration of the best welfare, parents of both myself and my wife were seeking and choosing the wife and husband respectively. With this thought in mind, both sets of parents will investigate and examine thoroughly the background and history of each prospective husband and wife; sometimes requiring months of periodical meetings together between the parents before they finally decide upon the proper partners for marriage. The final decision in this important matter is based upon the findings and analysis of the parents. While all of this investigation and study is being done by the parents, the boy and the girl do not even see each other. When the decision has been finalized by the parents agreeing for the son to marry the daughter, the parents of the son will then bring him to the girl’s parents’ home to meet the parents of his prospective bride. This is the first time the boy and girl have any knowledge that they are to become husband and wife. Thus, according to Hindu custom and tradition, the boy and girl have no choice but to respect the decision that has been made for them by their parents. They under- stand that, just as was the case in the lives of their parents and grandparents, they must live together “until death do us part.” Under Hindu arrangements divorce, fornication, adultery, abortion, and things of this nature were relatively unknown. In fact, virginity was highly respected and honored and both husband and wife, under this arrangement, have the highest regard for each other, although neither knows God or Jesus Christ or the gospel.

The girl was brought up to understand and came to a realization that her husband was all she possessed for the rest of her life. She must serve him “till death do us part.” This she has inherited from her Hindu culture.

I would now like to present some very interesting facts of the Hindu system which regulates the conduct of the prospective marriage partners. After the boy and girl have seen each other, they are not permitted any association with each other until after the marriage. Please note, that this rule does not imply a lack of trust, but I know it defeats the Devil in his devices to corrupt the prospective marriage partners before the marriage. During the waiting period before marriage, there is absolutely no love-making. In fact we did not know what love-making meant or was all about. We were simply following the rules and examples of our ancestors and this we understood that once married it was for all time and despite the hardships and trials they stuck together till the end. Since it was not possible to visit or touch your future companion until after marriage, we were ignorant of romance — dating, love- making, courting, kissing, etc.

Although Hinduism is idolatry and it may be backwards in culture. with the prohibition of the contact between the prospective partners, the Devil has a difficult time exercising of his plan. We may not altogether agree with these Hindu principles or Hindu culture, but I believe we can see the wisdom in some of these principles. In Hinduism, young women are taught by their mothers and grandmothers to love, respect and serve their husbands till death. During the Hindu wedding ceremony, the garment of the bride and the garment of the groom are literally tied (joined) together. As they walk slowly forward, she follows behind him in symbolic recognition of her husband as her guide and leader and in humbleness of heart she never feels equal to him. This is in great contrast with the attitude of many (some Christians) today. Too many wives today have very little, if any, regard for their husbands and this in a so-called “Christian nation.”

Now what is your estimation of the value of these Hindu principles. Please consider, if you will, that young people in our day and culture are most fortunate; living in a fully developed western civilization and “Christian” influences. They have the right or freedom of choice and decision. We are characterized by a society which professes to know God and his son, Jesus Christ, and yet we are besieged by the most degenerate prevailing conditions. The divorce rate is alarming, abortion may be had almost at will, and pre-marital sex is free on demand. Where are we lacking and who is responsible?

I do not recommend that in our culture marriages must be arranged by parents without the consent of their children as is practiced in Hinduism. But I humbly suggest we get back to the Bible, the teachings of Christ will make us better.

I’m told the congregation was formed about 1911. It was the result of instrumental music being brought into the local “Christian Church.” Some of my relatives had been charter members. Now several decades later I was preaching there two Sundays per month.

I understand that from the beginning, the Lord’s supper had been served using two silver plates, a silver pitcher and two silver goblets. Since the fruit of the vine started out in one silver pitcher, some in the church thought that made them “scriptural one cuppers.” Now after many, many years some were clamoring for individual drinking cups on the Lord’s table.

It was rather interesting to watch as the single goblet was passed down each side of the auditorium. Being more mind- ful of sanitary conditions than their forefathers, as each person took the goblet, he or she would turn it just slightly before sipping, in a vain attempt to find a clean spot.

More and more the elders were urged to get the individual cups. This was an especially tough decision for the oldest of the elders. You see, one of his granddaughters had married a man with strong convictions that the “one cup” was a matter of faith. He had long declared that the day individual cups came in, would be the day he and his family would leave. Of course the old brother hated to think that his decision would cause his granddaughter and several great-grandchildren to go elsewhere. But finally, at the insistence of the other elders, a new communion set was ordered with two trays of individual cups.

Then the fateful day arrived! Someone — I suspect one of the other elders, came early and set up the communion with the two trays of individual drinking cups. What would happen?

Shortly before time for the service to begin, the “one cupper” with his wife and children came in. It was a cold day and in those days no one had a coat room. Coats, hats, and mittens were just removed and stacked neatly on the bench beside each family. With this large family of three or four children, it took some time to remove all the coats and get everyone settled. All eyes were on them as the other members awaited the outcome. And then it happened! The man caught sight of the trays on the communion table. And true to his word, after a brief conference with his wife, they begin to hurriedly jerk the coats and hats back on and with a child under each arm they stormed out of the building to never return.

The old elder was bitterly saddened; but the rest of the congregation heaved a sigh of relief that an obstacle that had been there for years had finally been overcome. The individual cups were on the Lord’s table to stay. And so it is till this day!