Truth Magazine

By Randy Reynolds

When one ceases to faithfully serve the Lord, normally it is not an over-night departure. It is a gradual process that involves a few steps before it finally takes place. This is why it is very difficult to reason with those who have fallen. By the time it happens they are generally unwilling to be touched by those truths that once motivated them to faith and service. Yet, the effort must be made because they may still be moved to return to the Lord.

The apostle Paul, in Romans 1:20-21 (although at this place he addresses the Gentile nation who at one time existed without a written revelation from God) seems to address the events that are at work in a person’s life before his fall.

For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are with-out excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but be-came futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.

Within these two verses (actually within verse 21) we find what may be referred to as steps that are at work in the life of one who had at one time been enlightened. Some have suggested that there are four steps that are involved. Concerning this person the apostle Paul would say, “So that they are without excuse.”

They Are Without Excuse Because They Once Knew God

This statement simply implies that at one time they knew some things about God. They knew that he is alive, they knew of his great power and they knew of his divinity. When applying this to a Christian we could say that they knew of the love that he has for his creation in the sending of his Son to suffer and die upon the cross. Also, they once knew the precious promises that God has given to the faithful. The hope of heaven was once a hope that they held onto. The Hebrew writer speaks of this hope as anchoring the soul, making us both steadfast and sure (cf. Heb. 6:19).

In my estimation it is precisely this that the writer of Hebrews writes of in that same sixth chapter. “For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame” (Heb. 6:4-6).

Imagine, if you can, one reaching the point of totally rejecting those good things of God that you now enjoy. Imagine allowing the precious faith that you now enjoy and treasure to suffer shipwreck. They are without excuse!

They Are Without Excuse Because They Did Not Glorify Him as God

There is a lot involved in glorifying him as God. The word glorify is translated from the Greek word doxazo. According to Strongs this word means “to render (or esteem) glorious (in a wide application): (made) glorify (-ious), full of (have) glory, honor, magnify.” Simply put, they failed to treat him as God. They failed to reverence him, worship him, obey him and to live their lives according to his inspired will. The Lord sums up this point in John 15:8 where he says, “By this My Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit; so you will be My disciple.”

A good example of this very thing can be found in the life of Moses. In Numbers 20:1ff the children of Israel are without water again. They will receive their water for a second time from a rock. The first time that this took place is in Exodus 17:1-7. On this occasion God told Moses to “strike the rock” with his rod and it would bring forth water for them to drink. On the second occasion God told Moses to “speak to the rock” in order to get water. Moses chose to strike the rock with his rod once again.

Obviously God was upset with Moses. But look how God expresses his displeasure with Moses, “Then the Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, ‘Be-cause you did not believe Me, to hallow Me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore you shall not bring this congregation into the land which I have given you’ (Num. 20:12). The word “hallow” (sanctify KJV) is qadash in the Hebrew and it means “to proclaim holy, sanctify (-ied one).” That’s what Moses failed to do by his disobedience.

Wearing the name “Christian” is a serious thing. It is a name that ex-presses who we are and what we are. It is an identification of ownership, we belong to the Lord. The wearing of this name gives one the opportunity to either bring “glory” or to bring “dishonor.” Obedience brings honor, disobedience brings dishonor. They are without excuse!

They Are Without Excuse Because They Were Not Thankful

Seemingly they failed to see God as the source of their good gifts. They were like nine of the ten lepers that Jesus had healed. All ten came to the Lord desiring to be healed, but only one came back and glorified God for their cleansing, (cf. Luke 17:11-19). In verse 17 Jesus asked these two questions, “Were there not ten cleansed? But where are the nine?”

Being thankful is simply expressing our gratitude to the One that made so may wonderful gifts possible. The apostle Paul tells us that we are to give thanks in everything simply because it is the will of the Father (cf. 1 Thess. 5:18).

In Ephesians 1:3-13 the apostle Paul mentions the blessings that we have through Jesus Christ, and in v. 3 he calls them “spiritual blessings.” Then beginning in v. 4 Paul begins to name some of those spiritual blessings: we are “chosen” v. 4, we are “adopted” v. 5, we are “accepted” v. 6, we have “redemption in His blood” v. 7, we have been “gathered together in one” v. 10, we have an “inheritance” v. 11, and finally in v. 13 we have been “sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise.” No wonder James tells us, “Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning” (Jas. 1:17). When one is in the process of falling, he has cast aside his thankfulness for the many blessings that God has blessed him with. They are with-out excuse!

They Are Without Excuse Because They Became Futile in Their Thoughts and Their Foolish Hearts Were Darkened

The word “futile” (vain, KJV) means something is empty or worth-less. Jesus said in Matthew 15:9, “Andin vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the comm. ndments of men.” Solomon in the book of Ecclesiastes refers to basically everything as vain when a person is living his life with-out God, that is without God being the focus of his life.

This is how those to whom Paul spoke became futile in their thoughts. Instead of having God as their Master, they became their own master. They thought that their own ways were superior to God’s ways. The inspired wisdom of the prophets inform us that God’s ways and thoughts are much higher than ours, (cf. Isa. 55:8-9), and that God never intended for man to direct his own steps (cf. Jer. 10:23).

With the Gentile nation whom Paul addressed, this resulted in idol worship. The true glory of God was exchanged by them for the images of man and the images of animals. When one falls from his faithful walk as a Christian, he goes back to the ways of the old man of sin and sorrow. When he does, his life is likened to a dog who returns to his own vomit or to the washed pig who returns to wallowing in the filthy mire, (cf. 2 Pet. 2:22). They are without excuse!

I know of no greater tragedy than this for one who once “knew” the Lord! Sadly enough, not every one comes to his senses. Not every one realizes that life with the Father is much greater than life with harlots, riotous living and mealtime with the pigs (cf. Luke 15:11-32).

Guardian of Truth XL: No. 20, p. 6-7
October 17, 1996

By Author Unknown

If we only knew that the smiles we see Often hide the tears that would fain be free,

Would we not more tender and loving be, If we only knew?

If we only knew that the words we say

Oft may drive the peace from some heart away, Would we speak those words in the selfsame way,

If we only knew? If we only knew that some weary heart

Has been burdened more by our thoughtless art, Would we cause the tears from those eyes to start, If we only knew?

If we only knew, as we onward go,

Many things that here we can never know, For more patient love we would often show, If we only knew.

Guardian of Truth XL: No. 19, p. 23
October 3, 1996

By Donnie V Rader

A reader of Guardian of Truth asked that we print an article answering the question of whether Christians (and their children) can celebrate Halloween by giving out candy, going “trick or treating,” decorating or having a Halloween party. Brother Willis has asked that I answer the question.

The History Of Halloween

To understand why there would be a question about whether Christians can have anything to do with Halloween, let’s look at the history of Halloween. The following quotes show the pagan and Catholic back-ground to Halloween.

Now a children’s holiday, Halloween was originally a Celtic festival for the dead, celebrated on the last day of the Celtic year, October 31. Elements of that festival were incorporated into the Christian holiday of All Hallows’ Eve, the night pre-ceding All Saints’ (Hallows’) Day. Until recent times in some parts of Europe, it was believed that on this night witches and warlocks flew abroad; and huge bonfires were built to ward off these malevolent spirits. Children’s pranks replaced witches’ tricks in the 19th century, but most of the other Halloween customs are probably survivals from the Celtic festival (The New Grolier Multi-media Encyclopedia).

Customs and superstitions gathered through the ages go into the celebration of Halloween, or All Hal-lows’ Eve, on October 31, the Christian festival of All Saints. It has its origins, however, in the autumn festivals of earlier times.

The ancient Druids had a three-day celebration at the beginning of November. They believed that on the last night of October spirits of the dead roamed abroad, and they lighted bon-fires to drive them away. In ancient Rome the festival of Pomona, goddess of fruits and gardens, occurred at about this time of year. It was an occasion of rejoicing associated with the harvest; and nuts and apples, as symbols of the winter store of fruit, were roasted before huge bonfires. But these agricultural and pastoral celebrations also had a sinister aspect, with ghosts and witches thought to be on the prowl.

Even after November 1 became a Christian feast day honoring all saints, many people clung to the old pagan beliefs and customs that had grown up about Halloween. Some tried to foretell the future on that night by performing such rites as jumping over lighted candles. In the British Isles great bonfires blazed for the Celtic festival of Samhain. Laughing bands of guiders (young people disguised in grotesque masks) carved lanterns from turnips and carried them through the villages.

In the United States children carved faces on hollowed-out pumpkins and put lighted candles inside to make jack-o’-lanterns. Halloween celebrations today reflect many of these early customs. Stores and homes display orange and black figures of witches, bats, black cats, and pumpkins. People dressed in fanciful outfits go to costume parties, where old-fashioned games like bobbing for apples in tubs of water may be a part of the festivities. Children put on costumes and masks and go from house to house “demanding” “trick or treat.” The treat, usually candy, is generally given and the trick rarely played. Some parents feel this custom is dangerous. There have been numerous instances in which sharp objects or poisons have been found in candy bars and apples. To provide an alternative to begging for candy from strangers, many communities schedule special, supervised parties and events at Halloween. The United Nations has used the Halloween observance to collect money for its children’s fund (Compton’s Interactive Encyclopedia, 1993, 1994).

In fact, it goes back to a practice of the ancient Druids in Britain, France, Germany, and the Celtic Countries, who lived hundreds of years before Christ was born. This celebration honored one of their deities, Samhain, Lord of the dead. Samhain called together all the wicked souls who had died within the past twelve months and had been condemned to inhabit the bodies of animals. The date for this celebration was the last day of October, the eve of the Celtic new year. It was a time of falling leaves and general seasonal decay, and it seemed appropriate to celebrate death. That’s what it was  a celebration of death. It honored the god of the dead and the wicked spirits of the dead. The Druids believed that on this particular night the souls of the dead returned to their former homes to be entertained by the living. If acceptable food and shelter were not provided these evil spirits would cast spells, cause havoc and terror, and haunt and torment the living. They demanded to be placated. Look closely. Here is the beginning of “trick-or-treat.” Evil spirits demanding a “treat.” If they don’t get it, you got a “trick.”

But how did all this become associated with Christianity? There’s another part of the story that goes back to Rome. The Roman Pantheon was built by the Emperor Hadrian in about A.D. 100 as a temple to the goddess Cabal and various other Roman deities. It became a principal place of worship where Roman pagans prayed for their dead. Then, Rome was sacked, the barbarians came in and they took over the Pantheon, along with everything else. After several centuries it fell in disrepair. In A.D. 607 it was recaptured by the Emperor Faces and he turned it over as a gift to Pope Benefic IV.

Benefic reconsecrated it to the Virgin Mary. This was part of a general policy that wherever pagan celebrations were well established, they would be continued and incorporated into Christian worship. (Only the names were changed to protect the innocent.) So, if you worshiped a certain god, and you were conquered and “Christianized,” you could continue that same celebration. Only now you would offer it to one or another of the saints. No longer were Roman pagans gathering to pray to the goddess Cybele for their dead. Now the Roman Catholics were gathering to pray to the goddess Mary for their dead. And they did so in the same temples.

For two centuries the major celebration in the Pantheon took place in May and was called “All Saints Day.” Then in A.D. 834 it was deliberately moved to the first of November. Why? To coincide with those ancient Druidic and pagan practices that had been going on for centuries (John H. Howe, “How Happy Is Halloween?”, Christianity To-day, October 21, 1977).

From these quotes we learn that Halloween, as we know it today, grew out of the merging of a pagan and Catholic celebration. That’s what raises the question about whether Christians and their children can participate in Halloween activities.

Halloween Activities That Christians

Cannot Participate In

There are a lot of things associated with Halloween in which Christians cannot participate: (1) Abusive and mean activities toward children. There are always a few people who will put sharp objects, razor blades, drugs or poison in candy or apples. (2) Destruction of other’s property. Detroit has its problems with “Devil’s Night” on the eve of Halloween when fires are set over the city. Less destructive actions included eggs thrown at cars, paint sprayed on cars, stores and houses and pumpkins stolen and smashed in the streets. (3) Any celebration of death or pagan acts like those of the Druids. (4) Any celebration of “All Saints” (All Hallows’) day by praying to the saints. Christians cannot have any part of these acts that are contrary to the word of God (by either being unkind to others or performing religious acts that are not authorized by God, cf. Matt. 7:12; Col. 3:17; 2 John. 9).

A Children’s Holiday

1. Just because the background and origin of Halloween is pagan and Catholic does not mean that it has that connection today with all who celebrate Halloween. There are many things that have a pagan or Catholic background that are not thought to be either pagan or Catholic in significance today. For example, “Christmas had its origin in a pre-Christian age among the pagans. It was adopted into the so-called Christian holidays by the Roman Catholic church. Even the name `Christmas’ is of Catholic origin. Encyclopedia Americana tells us, `The name is derived from the medieval Christes Masse, the Mass of Christ(Ferrell Jenkins, “Christmas,” Guardian of Truth, December 21, 1995, 756). Yet, Christmas today (as a civil holiday, not an observance of the birth of Christ) does not bear the significance of a pagan or Catholic back-ground. To enjoy time off work, being with family, eating a turkey, and exchanging gifts does not meanone is being pagan or Catholic. The same would be true of Halloween.

Those who think that letting children “trick-or-treat” or have a Halloween party is being either pagan or Catholic would do well to consider the names of the days of the week and the names of the months of the year. Many of them have a pagan background. (Monday  Moon’s day; Tuesday  Tiwes [Pagan god of war] day; Wednesday  Woden’s [chief Teutonic god]; Thursday  Thor’s [Norse god of thunder]; Friday  Freya’s [Norse goddess of love and beauty] day; Saturday  Saturn’s day; Sunday  Sun’s day; January  from Janus [Roman god of gates or doorways]; March  from Mars [Roman god of war]; May  from Maia [a goddess, the eldest of the Pleiades]. Even our term “holiday,” which we use to refer to New Years, President’s day and July 4, comes from “holy day”. How-ever, they have lost their Pagan or religious significance.

2. No Bible principle is violated by costume parties, children “trick-or-treating” or carving a pumpkin, etc. These activities do not honor the dead. Nor do they honor the saints. That is not to say that some would not make a connection between any observance of this day and the pagan and Catholic concepts. With Christmas many observe it as the birth of Christ. However, that does not mean that everyone who exchanges gifts or puts a wreath on their door is honoring Christmas as the birth of Christ. Likewise, some make Halloween a night of pagan activities. However, that doesn’t mean that it bears that significance to all.

If no Bible principle is violated, there is no sin involved (Rom. 4:15). Obviously, any who would violate his con-science by participating in any Halloween activity should abstain. To violate one’s conscience is a sin (Rom. 14:23).

 Guardian of Truth XL: No. 20, p. 1
October 17, 1996

By P. J. Casebolt

We are not surprised to see sectarian concepts in sectarianism  unscriptural doctrines and practices associated with the confusion and division of human denominational-ism. But sectarianism should be confined to that area, and not be practiced or sanctioned in the Lord’s church, God’s “called out” people  called out of the world and sectarianism.

I do not believe that the church of Christ of which I am a member, and which is identified in the New Testament, is either a sect or sectarian. Some members of the Lord’s church may believe in, or even practice certain sectarian ideas. It may even be possible for a whole congregation, or even congregations in a given geographical area to be partially or wholly given to sectarianism. Some brethren and congregations even identify themselves physically and men-tally with the denominations of men. But that does not prove that Christ’s faithful, spiritual body on earth, either in a local or “brotherhood” (1 Pet. 2:17) sense is a human sect.

One sectarian concept that I still witness among brethren is the Catholic idea of communion, or the Lord’s supper. It is evident in both word and deed that some think all they need to do with respect to public assemblies of the church is to “get” (or receive) communion.

We can have the Lord’s supper at the beginning or end of the assembly, and some brethren will come only to “get” communion. We can have the Lord’s supper in the morning, afternoon, or evening, or all three, and some brethren will abuse these times which have been set for the convenience of brethren in a given congregation. But abuse, per se, is not proof that a practice is wrong.

Some brethren are opposed to Lord’s day evening communion, depending on their definition of “evening.” Some say all of the church must be assembled at one time, which could postpone the observance of the Lord’s supper indefinitely. Now, I have received literature from California that insists the Lord’s supper is “not a breakfast,” and must be observed exclusively in the evening (whenever the evening is). In some parts of the country, the noon meal is lunch, to others it is dinner, while some call the evening meal dinner instead of supper.

The Bible says that we are to observe the Lord’s supper “on the first day of the week” (Acts 20:7), and that is as near as we can come to establishing either the time or frequency of the Lord’s supper. But the idea that “taking the sacraments” as “the most important act of worship” or doing it to receive absolution from sin for the past week or for another week is purely sectarian in nature, and may contribute to other erroneous ideas concerning the public assemblies of the church and when we should observe the Lord’s supper.

Another sectarian idea still being entertained by some brethren is the notion that the local preacher is “the” minister, that he needs some kind of flattering title (cf. Job 32:21, 22), that he should do all of the “visiting” for a congregation, that he should “manage” the affairs of the local church either with or without elders, and that the preacher’s prayers for the sick are more effectual than other prayers, especially when those prayers are offered within three feet of the patient and not from a distance.

I use the term “located preacher” or evangelist in the same sense that Paul was located for a period of time at Antioch, at Ephesus, at Thessalonica, or at Corinth. The “work of an evangelist” is proscribed by apostolic example as well as by teaching in such epistles as 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus. And a preacher is not only a minister, he should be a “good minister” (1 Tim. 4:6); but he is not the only minister in a congregation.

Both preachers and brethren should resist influences in either the world or the church that are of purely sectarian origin. And while a preacher’s wife certainly ought to be an asset to the preacher’s work and may have individual talents of her own in ministering to the Lord, I’m hearing speech that sounds more and more like the sectarian concept of an “evangelistic team” composed of some “Reverend and Mrs. John Doe” who entertain, counsel, or edify public assemblies of some church on an equal basis.

Those who have more talents must give an account for more, and for how those talents are used. But let us not promote the idea that a preacher’s wife who cares for the needs of her husband and children and “guides the house” is somehow not reaching her full potential in helping to qualify her husband as an evangelist. Recognizing and weeding out such sectarian concepts is what keeps the church from be-coming sectarian in its identity. Let each of us do our part.

Guardian of Truth XL: No. 19, p. 22
October 3, 1996