Truth Magazine

By William C. Sexton

There are different ways of classifying things, all of which can be helpful in allowing us to see matters more fully. So it is, I believe with looking at sin. Therefore, we are challenged to look in this direction. We need to think of the different ways we can and perhaps often do sin, in order that we might improve our lives.

The wages of sin is death (Ram. 6:23). Such is defective, missing the mark; such is deceptive, offering something that it cannot deliver; such is destructive, keeping one separated from God, the source of life (Isa. 59:1-2; 2 Thess. 1:7-10; Jas. 1:15). Consequently, we need to learn how to identify, shun, and be forgiven of sin. Hiding the word of God in our heart is the remedy to keep one from sin (Psa. 119:11) and that word tells us what sin is!

Types Based On Disposition

Ignorance – not knowing what it is, being deceived (Acts 3:18) is one kind of sin. Peter said the Jews killed Jesus in ignorance. Jesus’s prayer on the cross is indicative of the ignorant nature of the action (Lk. 23:34). Likewise, Paul pointed to the ignorance of the people when he spoke to the people in Antioch (Acts 13:27) “because they knew him not, nor the voice of the prophets which are read every sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him.” Paul, himself, prior to his conversion, had acted in ignorance in opposing the Christians (Acts 26:9-10).

We need to ever keep in mind, however, that being ignorant does not keep one from being accountable, having the sin charged against him (1 Tim. 1:12-15).

Jesus pointed to not knowing the Scriptures as the cause of the error of certain ones (Mt. 22:29). Therefore, we need to know the Scriptures in order that we may not sin against God and our fellow man!

Weakness – knowing better but not having the strength to say “no” or restrain oneself from so acting – is another type of sin. By following the path of least resistance, many do things that are not pleasing to God. By going places they should not and drinking, smoking, etc., people become involved in behavior that is not beneficial but rather harmful; even if the beginning is small, it opens the door to bigger and more corrupting things.

Peter allowed himself to be carried away by pressure in circumstances to deny and withdraw (Mt. 27:73-75; Gal. 2:11-14). In a different circumstance (Mt. 16:21-23; 26:31-34), Peter had become boastful, refusing to entertain the idea that he would deny the Lord; yet when the hour came, he yielded to the pressure. So, none of us should become too highly lifted up in our pride, for any of us many find the pressure to be of such a degree that we would yield to it.

Later, Peter committed a similar sip, by withdrawing from Gentiles, contrary to what he had preached. Such was a sin, and needed to be called to his attention, hoping that he would see the blame and seek forgiveness. Paul pointed to his sin and recorded the same for people of the future to see that even a man such as Peter could and did sin and was in need of forgiveness.

Rebellion – knowing but not caring – is a type of sin that is destructive, in that it is committed by a person with a disposition that is almost unreachable! It is not that the sin cannot be forgiven, but that it is next to impossible to get such, a person to meet the conditions of pardon, repentance and prayer (Acts 8:22; 1 Jn. 1:9). There are those who have seen themselves as being able and wise enough to push themselves on to safety (2 Pet. 2:9-15).

Many are practicing openly what they know is not allowed by God and decent people in society. They know better but they do not care to violate the rule of God. There is little hope for such people, unless they suffer a set back such as will cause them to re-evaluate their life and total existence.

Many such people have to be placed in confinement; thus, we have the institutions for such people; prisons are an unfit place to have men and women spend time, but some people are not “fit” for society, so they are restrained. Some, religious people, however, openly violate God’s rules and, for awhile, get by with it; their day is coming however (Ram. 14:10-12; 2 Cor. 5:10; Phil. 2:9-11).

Beloved, we can see the different sins, as coming from or being committed by a different type of person, thus revealing something of the character and the likelihood of them seeking and finding forgiveness. Yet, let us remember that each sin can be forgiven and needs to be; but the conditions are the same, and unless such conditions are met, the penalty of death remains (Acts 22:16; 1 Jn. 1:9).

Types Based On Action

Moral – behavior that is immoral – is a sin that is common today and has always been. The standard of morals, of course, is God’s book, the Scriptures, and behavior contrary to them is sinful. So much of this is observable in our land today! The world’s standard is, “if it feels good, do it,” if it doesn’t hurt someone immediately. -Laws of decency are violated; killing, stealing, sexual behavior of fornication and adultery are engaged in by many; at times these sins are committed by “church members,” and at times with no shame! It is a shame that some religious people do commit such; but it is worse when they try to find sanction for such in God’s word.

However, at the other end of the spectrum, some feel that if you are a good moral person, then you are safe and have no need of salvation, forgiveness of sins. All have sinned and are in need of forgiveness, however; it is needful that we recognize this and act accordingly (Rom. 3:23; 6:23). What we need to do is compare ourselves with the inspired word and respond accordingly, not using other people as the standard (Jas. 1:21-25).

Doctrinal – teachings other than the truth of God’s word is sinful too. Much of the Bible (if we will look closely we can see) is taken up to correct mis-concepts and misdeeds! Paul wrote to the Galatians (1:6ff) to refute a perverted gospel and announce that no one had the right to preach “another gospel” without having the curse of God resting on him!

Peter pointed firmly to the need of keeping our speaking confined to the “oracles of God” (1 Pet. 4:11). Even in stronger language, Paul told the Romans (3:3-4) how to be “justified” in what they said and “overcome” when judged: “let God be true, but every man a liar.”

Jesus proclaimed that some worshipped God, His Father, “in vain,” teaching for “doctrine the commandments of men” (Mt. 15:9) “Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrine the commandments of men” (Mk. 7:7).

Religious Practices – doing things in religion which are not authorized by God – constitute another category of sins! Early in the Law (Lev. 10:1-2), God let it be known what His sentiments toward deviating from His proscriptions in worship were!

People have added various things to what the New Testament authorizes since the first century. Yet, the Scriptures are plain: “Let the word of Christ dwell in your richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord. And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him” (Col. 3:16-17). John (2 Jn. 9) pointed to the separated state for those who go beyond the teachings of Jesus while announcing the security of those who remain or “abide” within the teachings!

Doing more or less is walking on dangerous ground (Rev. 22:18-19). Historically, the organizational arrangement has been changed by many, to suit their own likeings. Yet the New Testament arrangement is congregational, (Acts 14:23; 1 Pet. 5:1 ff). The work that the Lord gave the church to do has been changed by some to suit their likes, too. Beloved, we need to see the gravity of such. It is not a small matter to “change” what the Lord said to something else! But many have done so in the past and, no doubt, many will continue to do the same. You and I then need to be careful that we do not participate with such people.

Is There A Difference In Results?

A prevalent idea advanced by some today is that some sins are a lot worse than others. The implication of what some are claiming today, it seems to me, is that some sins will cut one off and another will not. I raise the question: Where is the passage that affirms such?

1. I would suggest that the Scriptures point to some becoming so involved in sinful conduct that it is next to impossible to get the person to meet the terms of forgivensss (cf. Heb. 6:4-6; 10:25-31). But I am aware of no Scripture that affirms that some sins can go undetected and be undestructive to the person. If you know of such a passage, please show it to me. I would like to find such a passage.

2. 1 am aware of the fact that the type of sin one commits may very well be reflective of the character of a person and thus be predictive of that person’s response to God’s will. As we have said before, he who openly rebels against God’s will is not likely to be affected by God’s “goodness” to lead to “repentance” (Rom. 2:4-11). But as I read my New Testament, I am impressed with the destructive nature of “sin,” not that some are bad while others are not so bad.

3. If we can convince ourselves that there are some sins that will not cause us to be lost, what will that do to our watchfulness? Will that tend to cause us to be as careful as we should be or cause us to be less careful? To me the answer is clear!

4. Most important, as I see it, is – what do the Scriptures say? Where is the passage that says some sins will not destroy if not forgiven? Or, where is the passage that says sins undetected will be taken care of -forgiven – by the Lord without any specific response by the sinner? If such is taught by God, then we need to teach it. If such is not taught by the Scriptures, however, what are we doing when we teach such?

5. There is a legitimate concern by some, I believe, relative to being pressed down and overcome by one’s sense of the situation. The idea is, “If I have to recognize all of my sins and repent specifically of each in order to be saved, then I’m afraid that I’ll overlook one.” Satan, no doubt, the adversary of man, will try to use that type of thinking to get us to give up! However, will he not, on the other end, use the idea if you can get by with one sin, then surely more than one, so why be careful, too (2 Cor. 2:11; 1 Pet. 5:8)?

So, it comes down to the facts stated or unstated in the Scriptures. Look for that passage and stand on it. Faith based on anything other than the word of God (Rom. 10:17) is faulty!

Truth Magazine XXIV: 48, pp. 780-781
December 4, 1980

By Eugene Crawley

Asa, who succeeded his father Abijah as king of Judah, was a good king for a number of years. His reign was one of prosperity, and the land was quiet ten years. The reason for this is, I believe, summed up in 2 Chron. 14:2, “And Asa did that which was good and right in the eyes of the Lord his God.” The writer goes on to enumerate a number of things he did which were pleasing to God, including “and commanded Judah to seek the Lord God of their fathers, and to do the law and the commandments” (vs. 4). Thus, Asa was blessed greatly during his reign, and Judah with him, because of their faithfulness.

When told by Azariah, the prophet, “The Lord is with you, while ye be with him; and if ye seek him, he will be found of you; but if ye forsake him, he will forsake you,” Asa took courage, and put away the abominable idols out of all the land of Judah and Benjamin (2 Chron. 15:2, 8). As a result of his faithfulness and God’s blessing, many in Israel, who had previously forsaken the Lord and His law, returned to faithfulness, “They fell to him out of Israel in abundance, when they saw that the Lord God was with him” (vs. 9).

However, like other kings who prospered greatly, Asa became proud and independent and in his last days forsook the Lord. He made a league with the king of Syria when Baasha, king of Israel came up against Judah. Instead of relying upon the Lord as before, Asa now indicated by his actions that he was self-sufficient and did not need the Lord. Upon such action, Hanani the seer came to Asa, and said, “Herein thou hast done foolishly: therefore from henceforth thou shalt have wars” (2 Chron. 16:9). This declaration of truth made Asa angry and he had the seer put into prison (vs. 10).

Such things, according to Paul in Romans 15:4, were written for our learning. We should therefore profit from such examples. We should be impressed with the fact that God blesses the faithful, but punishes the disobedient. Also, that He is no respecter of persons. In spite of the fact that Asa and others during the Old Testament period were faithful for awhile and then sinned, did not keep God from punishing them. Neither did it keep him from revealing the dark spots in their lives, thus proving that He renders according to one’s deeds.

There are a number of lessons that can be learned from this account of Asa. Let us note a few of them. The fact that a man is faithful and prospers for a number of years is no guarantee of continued faithfulness; nor is it assurance that God will overlook some-sin, or at short period of unfaithfulness. Judah did well to follow Asa during the time he did good and right in the eyes of the Lord, but they would have been foolish to continue following him when he forsook the Lord. It would have been foolishness for them to reason as some do today, “Well, he used to be faithful, and was a sound teacher, so I am going to continue following him.” To blindly follow one who has been right, accepting all that he teaches without proving it by the word of God, is indeed to act foolishly. Every teaching should be tried or tested by the divine standard, the inspired Scriptures and not by what anyone says or thinks is right.

Asa also acted foolishly by becoming angry at the seer. He simply delivered God’s message. But because it did not please Asa because it was a condemnation of his action, he had him imprisoned. But this did not change God’s judgment; it did not alter one word of what He had said. Some today could well take warning from this. To become angry with the teacher when he is simply delivering God’s message and render evil to him does not change in any way the word of God; for we shall face it in judgment (John 12:48; Rev. 20:10-12).

Another observation of value is that those who have forsaken the Lord and His law will come to those who are faithfully doing God’s will, as those of Israel did with Asa. The influence of faithfulness is great, and we should see to it that our lives are influences for that which is good and right. May God grant courage to all who contend earnestly for the faith, that they may ever be steadfast.

To forsake the Lord and His word, and rely upon one’s own wisdom and strength is to act foolishly. “Herein thou hast done foolishly” should never be said of any child of God, and when it is necessary it is to one’s disadvantage. Therefore live so that such can never truthfully be said of you!

Truth Magazine XXIV: 48, pp. 777-778
December 4, 1980

By Earl Robertson

It is often times alleged that our “customs and traditions divide us, and not the word of God” and that “means and methods” are the basis of our divided state. One preacher recently said on the radio that our personal “opinions and priorities make us intolerant: that we won’t have anything to do with anyone who disagrees with us.” There might be some local churches experiencing such, but such is not a brotherhood problem. The liberals have forced the division and now assert that it is nothing more than “opinions, means and methods” that causes it. We challenge them to tell us by name what these customs, traditions, opinions, means and methods are that have divided the churches of Christ. The ecumenical spirit assumed by some dialoguers has caused a fever in these men which renders them unable to know the difference between faith and opinion, methods and organization, sing and play.

This reminds me of what Larry Miles recently wrote in Word and Work, a premillennial journal of Louisville, concerning why R.H. Boll was not allowed to remain front page editor of the Advocate. Boll was teaching premillennialism. It is a false system. He wrote, “Rather than allow him the freedom to interpret the scriptures as the Lord has revealed to him, these brethren sought to make it a test of fellowship . . Today there is virtually no fellowship between the Anillennial and the pre-millennial brethren. The pre-mil brethren have always sought fellowship and have offered fellowship. We must not be willing to make opinions tests of fellowship” (April 1980, pg. 112). If premillennial views are no more than opinions, why do they hold and press them to the dividing of the body of Christ? If human institutionalism (church support of such) is nothing more than human opinion, why do these brethren press their opinions to the dividing of the church? They are the ones who have split the body of the Lord!

John wrote, “That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ” (1 John 1:3; cf. Acts 4:20). This is the only basis for fellowship. Read what the apostles declared! They wrote what they saw and heard. They had fellowship with God on that basis, and so can we.

Truth Magazine XXIV: 48, p. 777
December 4, 1980

By Norman E. Fultz

In a recent Bible class as we were considering Acts 14:23 regarding elders in the early church, someone called attention to the fact that the passage also mentions prayer -and fasting and questioned why we do not fast today? Members of the class were assigned to see what they could find out about fasting with the results to be discussed the next week. Since this is a topic not frequently discussed, perhaps it will be of interest to readers of this journal.

The term “fasting” simply means to abstain from food or drink for a period of time longer than the normal time between meals. It may be for a relatively short interval (Judges 20:26) or for several days (Esther 4:15-16). It may be either a deliberate action on the part of the abstainee (Acts 13:2) or necessitated by a lack of food, therefore the result of the immediate circumstances (1 Cor. 4:11; 2 Cor. 6:5; Matt. 15:32). It may be either total abstinence or “abstaining from customary and choice foods” (Thayer on Matt. 11:18). The occasions prompting deliberate fasts were several, as we shall see a bit later. A fast might be either individual (2 Sam. 12:16) or a group affair (2 Chr. 20:3).

Origin Of Fasting

An interesting comment appears in Crudent’s Concordance: “Fasting has, in all ages, and among all nations, been much in use in times of mourning, sorrow, and afflictions . . . . There is no example of fasting, properly so called, to be seen before Moses; yet it is presumable that the patriarchs fasted, since we see that there were very great mournings among them, such as that of Abraham for Sarah, Gen. 23:2; and that of Jacob for his son Joseph, Gen. 37:34.”

The first instance of fasting enjoined on Israel was that of the day of atonement, the tenth day of the seventh month. It is called “afflicting the soul” (Lev. 16:29-30; 23:27-28; Isa. 58:3, 5). It was to be as strictly observed on that day as was the cessation from any work (Lev. 27:29-32). By the time of Jeremiah, it was referred to as “the fasting day” (Jer. 36:6) and later simply as “the fast” (Acts 27:9). Moses commanded no other fasts, though the practice of fasting became more widespread with the passing of time.

Expansion Of The Practice

Since no other fasts were enjoined by the law, we may only wonder how the practice became more widespread. Perhaps since the day of atonement was one of such solemnity and “affliction of the soul,” the practice easily became associated with other occasions of affliction, sorrow and mourning whether of an individual or of the Hebrew nation. It seems to have developed as a response on the part of those facing hardship, in deep penitence, seeking to avert national calamity, or deeply imploring God about other matters. We shall consider some illustrations of these.

Facing hardship. When Israel fled before the face of the few men of Ai, “Joshua rent his clothes, and fell to the earth upon his face before the ark of the Lord until the eventide, he and the elders of Israel, and put dust upon their heads” (Josh. 7:6). Being upon his face before the Lord “until the eventide” is thought by some to infer that they fasted for at least part of the day in question. David fasted days while his child by Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah, was ill (2 Sam. 12:15-23).

Deep penitence. Ezra fasted for some period of time when grieved for the great transgression of Israel in taking of foreign wives (Ezra 10:6). See also Neh. 9:1-2.

When Israel put away Baalim and Ashtoroth at the insistence of Samuel, they “fasted on that day and said there, We have sinned against the Lord” (1 Sam. 7:6). And in the days of Joel, through him, God pled “turn ye even to me with all your heart, and with fasting, and with weeping, and with mourning . . .” (Joel 2:12).

In their civil conflict with Benjamin, after a heavy loss in battle and not knowing whether to further engage the effort, “the children of Israel, and all the people, went up, and came unto the house of God, and wept, and sat there before the Lord, and fasted that day until even. . .” (Judg. 20:26). And Saul of Tarsus, during his days of penitence, “neither did eat nor drink” for three days (Acts 9:9).

To avert a national calamity. When Judah was under attack by Moab, King Jehoshaphat proclaimed a fast for the nation (2 Chr. 20:3-4). Much later, when Mordecai asked Esther to intercede for the Jews before the king of Persia, she countered by suggesting a three day fast by him and the Jews in Shushan the palace while she and her maidens also fasted before her going in unto the king uninvited to seek favor for the Jews (Esther 4:15-17). And to prevent the overthrow of Nineveh threatened by Jonah, “the people of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth . . . .” (Jon. 3:5). In his effort to call the nation to repentance and prevent the devastation of which he was warning, Joel called upon the people to “Sanctify a fast, call a solemn assembly” (Joel 1:14; 2:12, 15).

When deeply imploring God. Hannah, when she was imploring God for a son, “wept, and did not eat” (1 Sam. 1:7-18). Ezra, preparing to lead a group of captives from Babylon to Judea, “gathered them together to the river that runneth to Ahava” and “proclaimed a fast there, at the river of Ahava, that we might afflict ourselves before our God, to seek of him a right way for us, and for our little ones, and for all our substance . . . . So we fasted and besought our God for this: and he was entreated of us” (Ezra 8:15, 21, 23). And of Anna the prophetess it is said that she worshiped God with “fastings and with supplications” night and day (Lk. 2:37).

It is to be noted from all the above that though only one fast was actually commanded by Moses, the many instances of fasting apparently met with God’s approval. However, in the days of her apostasy, the Israelite nation was rebuked for hypocritical fasting (Isa. 58:3-4). They were externally “afflicting the soul,” but “in the day of your fast ye find pleasure, and exact all your labours,” and “ye fast to make your voice heard on high,” Isaiah charged.

Jesus and Fasting

In reality, Jesus had very little to say about fasting. In Matt. 6:16-18, He warned against hypocritical fasting as Isaiah had done. In saying that it should not be done to be seen of men, He indicated that fasting was a private matter between the person and the Father. Once when questioned about why John’s disciples and the Pharisees fasted often but His own disciples did not fast, Jesus stated that a time would come in which they might well fast, “when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them.” He thus shows that fasting is associated with deep sorrow or remorse. But here again he did not suggest that fasting would become a regular ceremonial type of thing. The inference is that it is a private matter. Furthermore, in the parable of the old and new garments and wineskins, He shows that fasting (probably as a prescribed act or ritual such as that of the Pharisees) is a part of the old observances and not of the new which He enjoins (Matt. 9:14-17; Mk. 2:18-22; Lk. 5:33-39).

On one occasion when the disciples were unable to cast out a demon and asked why, Jesus replied, “This kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting” (Matt. 17:21; Mk. 9:29). However, this is a disputed text. The American Standard leaves the whole verse out in Matthew’s account, relegating it to a footnote and explains, “Many authorities, some ancient, insert verse 21.” In Mark 9:29, the passage says, “This kind can come out by nothing, save by prayer.” And again the footnote adds, “Many ancient authorities add and fasting.”

As Mr. Cruden said, “It does not appear by our Savior’s own practice, or any command that He gave to His disciples, that He instituted any particular fasts, or enjoined any to be kept out of pure devotion.”

It is true that Jesus Himself in the wilderness “fasted forty days and nights”, but He did not enjoin such on His follower

Early Christians Fasted

Not all fasting was devotional. Fasting, simply “not eating” was sometimes the result of the circumstances, there simply being no food. This was the case when Jesus fed the five thousand and again when He fed the four thousand (Matt. 15:32-38; Mk. 8:1-9; 6:33-44). It was likely also the case in some, if not all, of Paul’s fasting (1 Cor. 4:11; 2 Cor. 6:5; Phil. 4:12), with the exception of the time between his seeing the light on the road to Damascus and the coming in unto him of Ananias when “he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink” (Acts 9:9) and when elders were appointed in Lystra, Iconium and Antioch and Pisidia (Acts 14:23). Whether he was among those who fasted on the fateful ship bound for Rome is a bit difficult to ascertain (Acts 27:21, 33).

The instances of fasting on the part of the early Christians was apparently devotional. However, there are only two undisputed instances of such fasting, to my knowledge. Of some at Antioch of Syria, whether the disciples generally or the “prophets and teachers” specifically, it is said “they fasted” (Acts 13:2, 3). And again as noted above, when elders were appointed on Paul’s first preaching tour it is said they “prayed with fasting” (Acts 14:23).

Paul’s statement in 1 Cor. 7:5 to husbands and wives regarding the conjugal rights of marriage not being withheld “except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer” most assuredly indicates something of a devotional air. But “fasting is not found in some of the older manuscripts in this passage; therefore, not in the ASV and other translations. In fact, of the many versions I checked, only the King James and the Phillips paraphrase had “fasting.” A footnote in The New Testament From 26 Translations said, “`Fasting’ is now recognized as not adequately supported by original manuscripts.”

The reference to Cornelius “fasting until this hour” (Acts 10:30) runs into the same difficulty, it being found in the King James, but not even in Phillips. The same footnote is affixed in the N. T. in 26 Translations as that on 1 Cor. 7:5.

After summarizing the references to fasting in the New Testament, Zondervan’s Pictorial Bible Dictionary says, “There are, therefore, in the New Testament only four indisputable references to voluntary fasting for religious purposes, two by our Lord in the Gospels, and two in the Acts of the apostles. Jesus does not disapprove of the practice, but says nothing to commend it. The apostolic church practiced it, but perhaps only . as a carry-over from Judaism, since most of the early disciples were Jews.”

Why don’t we fast? In view of what we have seen in this study, we conclude that while there is nothing inherently wrong in the practice and that while one may fast if he so desires, let it be a private matter. There is no basis upon which fasting as a devotional ceremony may be imposed on a congregation.

Truth Magazine XXIV: 48, pp. 775-776
December 4, 1980