Truth Magazine

By Larry Ray Hafley

The article below is by Bill Jackson. It is entitled, “Some Say A Get-Together For Food Is Not Fellowship.”

Those brethren who call themselves “noninstitutional” are quite steadfast in the position that we, the rest of their brethren, are liberals of the rankest sort in calling our meals together “fellowship.” In fact, they’d have a collapse of much of their system if they admitted the meal/fellowship connection. Here is one instance of creating a doctrine, promoting a doctrine, fostering division by a doctrine, and then refusing to notice some of God’s Word for fear that the doctrine would be disturbed. Here is an item or two:

(1) Clearly, the early church had such meals, called in Jude 12 “love feasts.” All material we can find on this indicates it was a fellowship meal for the saints, with the poor among the saints included, though they could not provide any of the food items.

(2) Most significant is the fact that when Paul was instructing on dealing with the fornicator in 1 Corinthians 5, in the commands that all recognize meant a withdrawal of fellowship, he said “with such a one, no, not to eat” (v. 11). If participating in a meal together is not fellowship, then why, in teaching to withhold fellowship, did Paul forbid eating with the offender? The point should be clear.

“Fellowship” is joint-participation, communion, sharing, etc., and has dozens of applications. Having a meal together is one form of fellowship!

Brother Jackson constructs his straw man and attacks it. Hitting a “blocking dummy” on the practice field is one thing, but blocking a genuine opponent is quite another. Bill sets up his dummy and knocks it over. As we shall see, his dummy will turn on him.

Bill Jackson opposes the building of gymnasiums and Family Life Centers by a local church. He has referred to such actions as a “craze.” However, Bill believes it is scriptural for the church to build, stock and maintain a “fellowship hall” for “A Get-Together,” bridal showers, wedding receptions, etc.

Suppose an advocate for gyms, such as Furman Kearley, editor of the Go$pel Advocate, were to write an article entitled, “Some Say A Get-Together For A Ball Game Is Not Fellowship.” Suppose he said, “Those who call themselves ‘non-recreational’ are quite steadfast in the position that we, the rest of their brethren, are liberals of the rankest sort in calling our ball games together ‘fellowship.’ In fact, they’d have a collapse of much of their system if they admitted the ball game/fellowship connection. Here is one instance of creating a doctrine, promoting a doctrine, and then refusing to notice some of God’s word for fear that the doctrine would be disturbed. Here is an item or two:

“(1) Clearly, the early church had such ball games, called in 1 Corinthians 10:7, ‘play.’ All the material we can find on this indicates that after brethren have a fellowship meal, they rise ‘up to play,’ with the poor among the saints included, though they could not provide any of the game items.

“(2) Most significant is the fact that when Paul was instructing on dealing with the fornicator in 1 Corinthians 5, in the commands that all recognize meant a withdrawal of fellowship, he said ‘not to keep company . . . with such an one.’ If participating in a ball game together is not fellowship, then why could we not continue to ‘keep company’ with the offender? The point should be clear.

“‘Fellowship’ is joint-participation, communion, sharing, etc., and has dozens of applications. Having a ball game together is one form of fellowship!”

Bill needs to hit his dummy again, for it is blocking him. Bill, how would you answer the article above if it were used to authorize the church to build gymnasiums? The ball is in your court, Bill. Your serve.

Social meals do meet the general, dictionary definition of “fellowship.” So do ball games. When a Baptist Church baptizes someone, it is a “baptism,” but it is not scriptural, New Testament baptism. When Christians gather at a park for a picnic, there is “fellowship,” but it is not the fellowship of the New Testament, for “truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ” (1 Jn. 1:3; cf. 1 Cor. 1:9). Bill is correct, though. “‘Fellowship’ . . . has dozens of applications. Having a ball game together is one form of fellowship! ” Therefore, gymnasiums built by the church are scriptural, right brother Bill?

Brother Jackson’s View Of Gymnasiums

No, Bill does not think gyms are scriptural. He has written, “But where, oh where, would one go to in God’s Word and find justification for building a gym, and with the necessary special flooring and all the required equipment for games, etc.?

” . . . By the ‘reasoning’ of some in ‘justifying’ the gym, what is next – a swimming pool? Swimming is one of the best of exercises! How about a golf course? A bowling alley? Why not own a stable of horses, and, thus the members could exercise both themselves and the congregation’s mascots? And, too the riding trails could be planned to circle the golf course, go around the gym, circle the swimming pool and polo field, etc.” (Bill Jackson, “After The Gymnasium, What Then?”).

But if Bill can authorize the church’s building dining rooms and cafeterias because they qualify as “fellowship,” why cannot gymnasiums and Family Life Centers be authorized, since they, too, comprise “one form of fellowship”?

Furthermore, Christians may not only go to the park for a picnic and a soft ball game, they may band together to own a gas station. Since fellowship “is joint-participation . . . and has dozens of applications,” could we say that “having a meal, playing a softball game and operating as gas station are forms of fellowship”: therefore, the local church may build fellowship halls, gymnasiums, Family Life Centers and gas stations? Could we, brother Jackson? If not, why not?

Bill is not opposed to brethren who want to jointly participate and share in the “fellowship” of a gas station. He is not anti-gas station. He just does not believe the church is authorized to own and operate one. Bill is not opposed to brethren who want to jointly participate in ball games and have fellowship while they play. He is not anti-fun and games. He just does not believe the church is authorized to own and operate a park or a gym. So, we are not opposed to brethren who want to share a common meal. We just do not believe the Lord has authorized the church to provide facilities for social meals, picnics, banquets, wedding showers, receptions, etc.

Jude 12 is not the authority for a fellowship hall. It does not mention a church, nor a work of the church, let alone a banquet room or feast provided out of the treasury of the church. But if “fellowship” at a “love feast” justifies a “fellowship hall,” then “fellowship” in a ball game justifies a gym. Brother Bill’s straw man has turned on him again.

Further, 1 Corinthians 5 does say “not to eat” with “such an one.” A meal would cause one “to keep company” with the fornicator. Playing ball with this brother would cause one to “keep company with” him, too. So, ball playing constitutes one form of “fellowship.” Thus, “The point should be clear.” Churches may build gymnasiums? The eating would include regular meals and “love feats” in a “fellowship hall,” but brother Jackson assumes what he must prove, i.e., that the Corinthian church had a “fellowship hall” and that it was authorized. (When the disciples did eat their food “with gladness and singleness of heart,” Luke says they ate it “at home” – Acts 2:46.) Later, to the Corinthians, Paul penned, “What? Have ye not houses to eat and drink in? Or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you in this? I praise you not . . . And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come” (1 Cor. 11:22, 34).

The verses above do not support Bill’s banquet and feat rooms, but if they did, remember that a basketball game is “one form of fellowship”; hence, the church may build gyms; softball is “one form of fellowship”; thus, the church may have its own park. Bill Jackson opposes a gym built by the church. In fact, he has said that those who argue for the right of a church to have gym have “taken leave of their senses!” However, his argument for a fellowship hall on the basis that it is “one form of fellowship” will authorize a gym on the very same foundation. Bill, I told you that your blocking dummy would hit back!

If I were one of the liberal athletic supporters contending for a gym, I would feed brother Jackson out of his own spoon. (You can probably find such a spoon in his fellowship hall.) When Bill answers their argument, he will answer himself. That is food for thought. Perhaps Bill will swallow it after he chews on it awhile. Hopefully, he will see the truth and spue the whole thing out of his mouth. Bon Appetite!

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 21, pp. 648-649
November 2, 1989

By Joe Price

The proponents of Realized Eschatology, or the “A.D. 70” doctrine, have deceived and are deceiving some brethren into believing that all the end time events have already been accomplished. Its advocates have caused unsuspecting Christians to accept the belief that the events of 70 A.D. in the destruction of Jerusalem satisfy all the prophecies of a future return of Christ, resurrection of the dead, judgment and reception of the eternal inheritance. It would have us believe that the “last days” existed from 30-70 A.D., and that the “eternal days” began at 70 A.D. We are supposedly living in the “eternal days”! The “Bible” of this doctrine, Max King’s The Spirit of Prophecy, has this to say on page 81: “. . whenever faulty interpretation creates a time period that doesn’t exist in the Bible, more error will follow by attributing to that period something that cannot belong to it.” I say “amen” to that! This 40-year “gap” where the old and new covenants supposedly “overlapped” is the result of faulty interpretation, and it has borne its evil fruit! (See Part II of this series for more information on the overlapping of the covenants.)

Simply stated, the A.D. 70 doctrine has the following things being accomplished on that date:

(1) Second coming of Christ (as per 1 Cor. 15:23).

(2) Resurrection of the dead (as per 1 Cor. 15).

(3) Judgment Day of the Lord (as per 2 Pet. 3: 10; et. al.).

(4) Establishment of the new covenant.

(5) Completeness in Christ (adulthood, adoption, redemption).

(6) Kingdom full established.

(7) Reception of the eternal inheritance.

To document these positions as central to this doctrine, consider this assessment from the pen of Max King:

The fall of Judaism (and its far reaching consequences) is, therefore, a major (emp,, King’s) subject of the Bible. The greater portion of prophecy found its fulfillment in that event, including also the types and shadows of the law. It was the coming of Christ in glory that closely followed his coming in suffering (1 Pet. 1:11), when all things written by the prophets were fulfilled (Luke 21:22; Acts 3:21). It corresponded to the perfection of the saints (1 Cor. 13:10) when they reached adulthood in Christ, receiving their adoption, redemption, and inheritance. The eternal kingdom was possessed (Heb. 12:28) and the new heaven and earth inherited (Matt. 5:5; Rev. 21:1, 7) (The Spirit of Prophecy, p. 239; emp. Mine, jp).

In Part I of this series, we addressed the major problems of this doctrine by looking at what the New Testament has to say about the second coming of Christ (including the judgment and the resurrection of the dead). In Part II, we discussed why 70 A.D. is made such a focal point in this system of error, which emphasis upon the old and new covenants and the allegory of Galatians 4:21-31. In this final article, we must consider some of the consequences of this doctrine, and see that it is not a harmless, private conviction which can be held without hurting oneself and others, but a pernicious theory of error which engulfs the souls of men in destructive heresy! Given this doctrine’s premise that God’s scheme of redemption was not complete until 70 A.D., there are some very grave consequences which necessarily follow.

Problems Regarding Resurrection

(1) Luke 20:34-36. NO marriage and no death after 70 A.D.! This consequence centers upon the view that the “last days” are to be defined as the closing period of the Jewish age, 30-70 A.D., with the “Eternal days” continuing from that point. “We are now (emp. King’s) in that world ‘which is to come’ . . .instead of being in the last days (emp. King’s) we are in eternal days (emp., King’s), world without end (Eph. 3:21)” (Ibid., p. 81). So, in the New Testament, those who lived between 30-70 A.D. were in the “last days,” while we now live in the “eternal days.” However, in Luke 20:34-36, Jesus contrasts “this world” and “that world” following the resurrection of the dead, and concludes that while marriage occurs in “this world,” it will not be so in “that world.” Plus, those who “are accounted worthy to attain to that world, and the resurrection of the dead, . . . die no more” (vv. 35-36). Are people still marrying after 70 A.D.? Of course they are! Are they still dying? Most certainly! Is the period of Christianity in which we now live termed the “eternal days” in the New Testament? No! Otherwise, following 70 A.D., Christians would be prohibited from marrying, and neither could they die anymore! The A.D. 70 doctrine is false!

(2) Acts 24:15. The Pharisees and Paul looked for the same kind of resurrection. Here, it must be remembered that the A.D. 70 doctrine holds that the resurrection of the dead discussed in such places as 1 Corinthians 15 is the resurrection of Christianity out of Judaism (The Spirit of Prophecy, p. 200). But, if this is the truth of the matter, then the Pharisees held a very strange hope concerning the resurrection! Paul states that his accusers before Felix were looking for “a resurrection both of the just and unjust, ” the same as- Paul. Must we conclude these Jewish accusers were looking forward to the day when Christianity would arise to dominance, while Judaism would be destroyed under God’s wrath! Surely this is not what they were “looking for” (v. 15; Jn. 11:48-50), but we are told they were looking for the same resurrection Paul hoped for. Maybe the apostle Paul was wrong in his assessment of the Jews’ hope, or, maybe the A.D. 70 doctrine is wrong in its assessment of the resurrection of the dead! What do you think!

(3) 1 Corinthians 15.20-23. The bodily resurrection of Jesus is called into doubt by this doctrine. Christ is presented as the “first fruits” (v. 20) of the dead, which identifies him as the beginning and the guarantor of a future, bodily resurrection (vv. 21-22,35-49). The resurrection of the dead endorsed by 1 Corinthians 15 is a future, bodily resurrection of mankind, based upon the fact of Christ’s bodily resurrection. If, however, the body to be raised in 1 Corinthians 15 is “Christianity out of Judaism,” why must we believe in the bodily resurrection of Christ? If the later fruit (resurrection of the dead – v. 21) is not the bodily resurrection of mankind, there is no real reason to believe the “first fruits” (vv. 20,23) was the bodily resurrection of Christ! (The first fruits and the later fruits must be the same type of fruit!) The whole issue of Jesus’ bodily resurrection is called into doubt, and is a logical consequence of this doctrine. Are the proponents of the A.D. 70 doctrine ready to accept this consequence of their doctrine? If one will not accept the consequences of his position, he should renounce his position as the error that it is!

These are but three consequences regarding resurrection from the dead which logically result from the A.D. 70 doctrine. Like the error of Hymenaeus and Philetus (who said the resurrection is past already, 2 Tim. 2:16-18), the A.D. 70 doctrine “proceed(s) further in ungodliness,” as it eats like a cankerous sore upon the souls of men, spreading its decay and overthrowing the faith of saints. The plea of this writer is that those who currently hold to this doctrine will see its destructive effects upon “the faith of some” (v. 18), and renounce their acceptance of it.

Problems Regarding Human Redemption

(1) Forgiveness of sins was not fully accomplished until 70 A.D. This doctrine. does not regard forgiveness of sins as an accomplished fact until 70 A.D. “When (emp., King’s) would ungodliness be turned away from Jacob, or their sins be taken away? When Christ, the deliverer, came out of Zion. When (emp., King’s) did Christ come out of Zion? Not at his first coming, but his second coming” (The Spirit of Prophecy p. 63; emp., King’s). The cross of Christ is thus removed as the focal point and means of accomplishing forgiveness, and replaced by 70 A.D.! Such a consequence reduces the Scriptures to shambles, and makes deceptive the many appeals to people before 70 A.D. to receive the forgiveness of their sins through the death of Christ. In Acts 2:38, the apostle said, “Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins; and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” This Jewish audience did not have to wait until 70 A.D. to have their sins remitted! Acts 22:16 gives instruction to Saul to “wash away thy sins, ” by being baptized. Baptism puts one into the death of Christ (Rom. 6:3), to enable justification by his blood (Rom. 5:8-9). Forgiveness of sins was accomplished by the cross of Christ! In Romans 6:17-18, when the Romans “became obedient from the heart” to the gospel, they were “made free from sin, ” and “became servants of righteousness.” This happened long before 70 A.D.!

Referring back to the quote at the start of this article from page 239 of The Spirit of Prophecy, notice that Realized Eschatology says that our adoption, redemption and inheritance were accomplished at the fall of Judaism (70 A.D.). Yet Galatians 4:3-7 places the means of bur adoption at the first coming of Christ (vv. 4-5), and its reality prior to 70 A.D., when Paul says “ye are sons” (v. 6). Our redemption was accomplished at the cross (Gal. 3:13-14; Heb. 9:1112). Our inheritance as sons of God is thereby assured (Rom. 8:16-17; Gal. 3:18). Forgiveness and its blessings are ours today because of the cross of Christ, not because of the fall of Judaism in 70 A.D.

(2) Maturity or completeness in Christ was not possible before 70 A.D. So implies King’s quote from page 239 of his book. However, Colossians 2:10 says “in him ye are made full.” In chapter 1:27-28, Christ was being proclaimed “that we may present every man perfect in Christ. ” They were not proclaiming the fall of Judaism in 70 A.D. as the means of perfection (completeness, full growth, maturity)! This doctrine concludes that no Christian could be mature in Christ before 70 A.D. – not apostles, not elders, not any child of God! The ramifications of that consequence are mind boggling.

Problems Regarding the Establishment of the Kingdom

By misapplying Hebrews 12:28, this doctrine concludes that the kingdom was not fully established until 70 A.D. However, we again find this doctrine at odds with revealed truth. In Isaiah 2:2, it was prophesied, “And it shall come to pass in the latter days, that the mountain of Jehovah’s house shall be established on the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.” Realized Eschatology would have God’s house or kingdom only partially established in the “latter days,” and only fully established at 70 A.D., their “eternal days.” Isaiah implies full and complete establishment in verse 2, and reveals this would occur when the law and the word of Jehovah would go forth from Jerusalem (v. 3). The gospel of the kingdom was preached from Jerusalem unto all the nations following Jesus’ ascension (Lk. 24:45-49; Acts 1:5; 2:14-26). Therefore, the kingdom predicted by Isaiah was established as he said it would be, on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2).

Jesus said the kingdom would “come with power,” and that some of his disciples would not taste of death until they saw it come (Mk. 9:1). The “power” referred to must be the heavenly power of Holy Spirit baptism, received by the apostles on the day of Pentecost (Lk. 24:49; Acts 1:4-5,8; 2:1-4,33). There is no hint in the Scriptures that this was only partial power, or that the kingdom and its blessings were only partially present! Full power and full blessings amounted to a fully established kingdom on the day of Pentecost! What parts are missing? Its king (Lk. 1:32-33; 1 Tim. 1: 17; 6:15)? Its territory (Mk. 16:15)? Its subjects (Acts 10:34-35)? Its law (Mk. 16:15; Jas. 1:25)? People did not have to wait until 70 A.D. to fully possess the kingdom! They were being translated into the kingdom (Col. 1: 13) from Pentecost onward. To deny the full establishment of the kingdom before 70 A.D., is to deny the fulness of its king (Jesus), its gospel (power to save, Rom. 1:16), and its blessings (Eph. 1:34) before 70 A.D.! This is untenable and blasphemous!

Problems Regarding Worship

(1) Should the Lord’s Supper be observed after 70 A.D. ? According to 1 Corinthians 11:26, in partaking of the Lord’s Supper we “proclaim the Lord’s death till he come. ” Since the A.D. 70 doctrine makes every coming of the Lord in the New Testament mean 70 A.D., we wonder, what are its advocates going to do about the Lord’s Supper? There are two options open to them, and both are equally unacceptable. First, they could conclude that after 70 A.D., the Lord’s Supper no longer proclaims Christ’s death. But, this destroys the central meaning and effect of the Supper! Secondly, they could conclude that the Lord’s Supper is no longer applicable to Christians, and cease partaking of it. Some Christians are currently wrestling with this consequence of their doctrine. Either horn of this dilemma is sharp, and will cause pain and great damage to the one who attempts to sit upon it. Which shall it be? Instead, why not renounce this system of error which places such devastating consequences upon the Christian’s observance of the Lord’s Supper?!

(2) One must eliminate from his worship every hymn and spiritual song referring to the return of Jesus Christ and its events. I have witnessed Christians not singing with their brethren (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16) because of this consequence! Why sing about something you believe has already occurred? Are you willing to renounce your brethren as guilty of false Worship whenever they sing about the future return of Christ and its events? And, to be consistent in your worship, you will have to make that choice about the Lord’s Supper. Will you eliminate it, or destroy its meaning?!

These consequences should be weighed in the light of God’s revelation of truth. Realized Eschatology opens a can of worms that some brethren have not realized. Some may try to ignore its consequences, but this will only lead to hardened hearts. To accept these consequences will steep a person deeper in error and apostasy. God’s remedy is still available – repentance of this sinful doctrine (Acts 8:22), confession of the sin (1 Jn. 1:9), and doing works worthy of repentance (Acts 26:20; Lk. 3:8) by renouncing this doctrine of man.

Comforting Christians Concerning Christ’s Coming

1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 provides us a fitting conclusion to this series of articles. In this passage, the apostle comforts the saints with assurance that Christians who die before Jesus returns will not miss out on any of the events and blessings of that grand day. He contrasts living and dead Christians throughout this passage – alien sinners are not in view here. Jesus “himself” will descend from heaven (this did not happen in 70 A.D.). Audible and visible events will occur. A “shout” commanding death to give up its prisoners will go forth (Jn. 5:28-29). The “voice of the archangel” will herald the power and victory of Christ’s return (cf. 2 Thess. 1:7). The “trump of God” shall sound, signaling deliverance and liberty from death (cf. 1 Cor. 15:52; Ley. 25:9-10). These things did not happen in 70 A.D. The dead in Christ shall rise first, with the living Christians being “caught up in the clouds,” and all the saints shall “meet the Lord in the air” (this did not happen in 70 A.D.). Then, “so shall we ever be with the Lord.” We will ever be with the Lord in this resurrected, changed, caught-up state (this did not happen in 70 A.D.)! We can comfort one another with these words (1:8), but there is surely no comfort in the words and doctrines of Realized Eschatology. It provides no final and decisive solution to the sin problem humanity faces. It presents a world in sin which will forever continue. The Bible reveals that with the Lord’s personal return (Acts 1:9-11), this sin-cursed world will be destroyed (2 Pet. 3:5-12), with a new order taking its place (2 Pet. 3:13). In view of these realities, Christians should be comforted in their hope of the future return of Christ (1 Thess. 4:18; 2 Thess. 1:10; Col. 3:4). But, sinners and perverters of God’s word should be converted, for it will certainly be “a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb. 10:31; 2 Thess. 1:7-9).

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 21, pp. 650-652
November 2, 1989

By Wayne Burger

One of the most oft asked questions by those who visit our service is, ” Why do you not use instrumental music in your worship?” That is a good question – one that is worthy a biblical answer. It can be answered in just a few words, “Wd do not use it because God,has not authorized the use of mechanical instruments of music in worship to him.” All that one does is to be done “in his name” (or by his authority, Col. 3:17). Since he has not told us to use instrumental music, we do not have the right to assume that it is alright to worship him by means of the instrument.

That answers the question but below is more information to help one understand why we do not use instrumental music in our worship services.

It Is Not Because

1. We do not like instrumental music. Members of churches of Christ like instrumental music as well as anyone else. Often musical instruments are owned and played at home or in situations other than worship services.

2. We cannot afford them. When we were in the mission field, often people suggested that we did not have mechanical inst ruments of music in our services because we were few in number and the church was just getting started. No, we could have afforded them then and could afford them now – that is not the reason.

3. We do not have anyone to play them. Some of the most musically talented people in the world worship with the church of Christ. Many members play the piano and other instruments. Some even make their living teaching instrumental music. But, they do not. play,these instruments when they gather to worship God.

4. We just want to be different. Not using instrumental music makes us different from most religious groups, but that is not the reason we do not use them. We do not mind being different but we do not refrain just to be different or difficult.

There are other religious groups who do not use mechanical instruments in their services. The Greek Orthodox Church does not use instrumental music and it is for the same reason which we do not. They say that they are not authorized in the New Testament. Remember also that they study from the Greek New Testament – in which the Bible was first written.

In fact most denominational groups did not use instrumental music until about 100 years ago. Leading authorities in many denominations can be quoted as to why they oppose their denomination using instruments of music.

5. It is just our personal preference. It is not a matter of us choosing the opinion of acapella. music over instrumental music. It is a matter of faith. That is, it is a matter of what God has authorized. What one does in worship must be according to what God has authorized. God has not left the acts of worship to the opinion of men. It is a matter of faith (legislation from God) not opinion of man.

Whether or not something is right or wrong is not determined by opinion. Different people may have different opinions as to what the speed limit ought to be but the laws of the land determine what it will be. When one violates that law his opinion about what the speed limit ought to be will not satisfy the courts of the land.

The same principle is true with regard to one’s relationship to God, even to the worship of God. There may be a variety of ideas as to what will make God happy, but the only way that one can know what he desires is to read what God has written on the subject.

The New Testament is our authority for what God desires in worship. The New Testament does not authorize instrumental music in worship. Even though the Jews used instrumental music to worship God in the Old Testament, they did not when they became Christians.

There are several passages in the New Testament which tell about the worship of the church and all of them authorize singing – none authorizes using instrumental music. Note the passages below which speak of singing.

Ephesians 5:19: “Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord.”

Colossians 3:16: “Let the word of Christ dwell in you 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.”

James 5:13: “Is any among you afflicted? let him pray. Is any merry? let him sing psalms.”

See also Romans 15:9; 1 Corinthians 14:15; Hebrews 2:12; 13:15.

Can you find a passage which gives us the right to use instrumental music? Let us know if you have in mind a passage.

Why not instrumental music? Because it is not authorized by God. We are to walk by faith – which means we walk by the instructions which God gives (Rom. 10:17). Where God has not spoken we do not have the authority to do. (Reprinted from The Word of Life, 2 Apr. 1989, published by Wylie Church of Christ, Wylie, TX.)

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 21, p. 654
November 2, 1989

By Mary Mayberry

In the final scene of the movie classic, “The Wizard of Oz,” Dorothy came to realize that “There’s no place like home!” How true! After a long day at work, we look forward to the rest and relaxation of home. Soldiers stationed on foreign soil long for the time when they can go home to family, friends and sweethearts. The most commonly asked question in a hospital is, “Doctor, when can I go home?”

The Bible speaks of heaven as the enduring home of the soul. Abraham sojourned in a strange land, but “looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God” (Heb. 11:10). Jesus told his disciples to “rejoice because your names are written in heaven” (Lk. 10: 17-20). The Christian’s greatest hope is finding a home with God. What a joy it is to know that, if we are faithful, one day heaven will be our home. In the words of the chorus of that old gospel song: “When the saved get to heaven, what a day of rejoicing that will be! When the saved see Jesus, they will sing and shout the victory.”

The Various Uses of the Word “Heaven”

What is heaven? Of the several words translated “heaven,” the most important are the Hebrew shamayim and the Greek ouranos. This Greek word appears 284 times in the New Testament. The word “heaven” is used in three distinct ways in the Scriptures: First, it refers to the atmospheric heavens, i.e., the sky. It describes the region where the birds fly and where the clouds and tempests gather (Gen. 1:20; Lk. 4:25).

Secondly, it refers to the celestial heavens, i.e., outer space, It describes the firmament in which the sun, moon and stars are located (Gen. 1:14-18). The Old Testament had no word for “universe,” so the concept was expressed in the words “heaven and earth.”

Finally, the word heaven refers to the perfect and eternal abode of God (Deut. 26:15; Matt. 7:21; etc.). Heaven is the present dwelling place of God and his angels, and the ultimate destination of men and women who love him. Paul described this paradise of the soul as “the third heaven” (2 Cor. 12:2-4). In other words, the “third heaven” refers to a place distinct from the atmospheric and the celestial heavens. Both the Old and New Testaments recognize that this present physical universe is not eternal. When the Lord returns, this old earth will be destroyed and it will be replaced by “a new heaven and a new earth” (2 Pet. 3:10-13; Rev. 21:1).

What Is Heaven Like?

Let us examine the description of heaven that appears in the New Testament with a special focus on Revelation 21-22. Remember that heaven is a spiritual place, but it is described in human terms so that we might comprehend its lofty greatness.

First, let us understand that heaven is not just a mood or a state of mind. It is a place, a place as real as these United States! Jesus said, “I go to prepare a place for you” (Jn. 14:3). Those who inhabit heaven will have an undeniable existence. Our bodies will be different, but they nevertheless will be real (1 Cor. 15:42-44,50; 1 Jn. 3:2).

Secondly, heaven is described as a city (Heb. 11:16; 13:14). Not a village or a small town or a hamlet, heaven is a magnificent and spacious metropolis. This great city, the New Jerusalem, is described from the outside. Heaven is surrounded by a wall of solid jasper which sits upon a great foundation, composed of twelve beautiful stones. Twelve gates line the wall, each made of a solid pearl (Rev. 21:18-21). The city lies foursquare, i.e., its length, height and breadth are all the same. It measures 12,000 furlongs, or stadia, in each direction (Rev. 21:16). In other words, it is 1,500 miles long 1,500 miles wide, and 1,500 miles high. Obviously these figures are symbolic. The number 12,000 is a combination of the numbers 12 and 1000, both of which are used in the book of Revelation to represent perfection or completeness.

To enter the city, one must pass through the pearly gates. The pearl is the only gem that is conceived by suffering. Pearls are formed within the shells of certain mollusks as mineral layers are deposited as a protective coating around an irritating and painful foreign object, such as a grain of sand. The symbolism is obvious: The suffering and sacrifice of Christ provided access to heaven. Furthermore, there is a cross that we each must bear. Those who are faithful to God will suffer persecution as they travel the path to heaven.

This heavenly city is also described from the inside as a place of overwhelming beauty. Its inhabitants will not face the multitude of problems that are encountered here on earth. Many urban areas face decline and decay. However, heaven will have no burned out warehouses or dilapidated slum districts. Empty buildings will not dot the landscape. Heaven has a beautiful street made of pure, transparent gold (Rev. 21:21). This boulevard is lined by fair mansions (Jn. 14:1-3).

Heaven is a spacious city. Earthly municipalities suffer with problems of overpopulation and congestion, but in heaven there will be room for all. Jesus said, “In my father’s house are many mansions.” According to the measurements given in Revelation 21:16, the city is 1,500 miles long and wide. This equals about 2,250,000 square miles. What a spacious city!

Heaven contains a beautiful, luxuriant and fruitful garden (Rev. 22:1-2). James Montgomery once said, “If God hath made this world so fair where sin and death abound, how beautiful beyond compare will paradise be found.” Paradise was lost because of sin, but in heaven Eden is restored. The river of life flows through the midst of the city, and on either side of the river is the tree of life. This tree yields twelve kinds of fruits, and “the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations.” Think of that! The blind will see, the deaf will hear, the lame will walk, and the sick will be made well! In heaven, there will be no more tears, sadness, pain or death (Rev. 21:4). The sorrow and tragedy of this life will no longer trouble us. Death will no longer curse mankind. Pain will be a thing of the past. Heaven is a place of perfect and eternal happiness.

Heaven is a place of total security, with no danger from without or within. Although surrounded by great and high walls (Rev. 21:12), heaven is so secure that its gates will never be shut (Rev. 21:25). All threat of evil will then be gone because Satan and his followers will have been cast into the lake of fire (Rev. 20:10; 21:8). What a contrast with the perilous cities of men! Our inner cities are crime-ridden cesspools of violence. However, the citizens of heaven will not have to fight the scourge of drugs, gambling, alcoholism, vice, etc. We will have nothing to fear in heaven. It is a place of light, with no night or darkness (Rev. 21:23-25). Heaven will be a city of righteousness, and evil will not enter therein (Rev. 21:27). God Almighty will serve as our Protector.

It is a place of newness (Rev. 21:5). Earthly treasures are subject to decay, but not heavenly treasures (Matt. 6:19-21). They are incorruptible, undefiled, and will not fade away (1 Pet. 1:4). In heaven we have a better and an enduring substance (Heb. 10:32-34).

In heaven the saints will enjoy complete fellowship with God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit (Rev. 21:23). The redeemed of all ages will delight in the immediate presence of God, forever gazing upon the splendor of his majesty. We will see him even as he is (1 Jn. 3:2).

Heaven is a place of rest from our earthly labors (Rev. 14:13). Yet, there will be activities in heaven to engage man’s energies and highest faculties (Lk. 19:17; Matt. 25:20-21), Whatever their form, these activities will be the glory of God, and will therefore be a form of worship.

Conclusion

In summary, let it be said that heaven is a delightful place Qn. 14:1-3), a place of beauty (Rev. 21:1-22:7), of life (1 Tim. 4:8), of service (Rev. 22:3), of worship (Rev. 19:1-3) and of glory (2 Cor. 4:17). However, is it easy to go there? Many people seem to think so. They ignore God’s will, rebell against his commandments, and yet think that somehow they will be able to slip through the pearly gates. The Bible does not support this view! No one will get to heaven by accident. It is not easy to go to heaven (Lk. 13:24; Matt. 7:21-23; Rev. 22:14-15). Heaven is a prepared place for prepared people. Obedience and faithfulness are required. Yet, the rewards are worth every effort. It has been said, “If the way to heaven be narrow, it is not long; and if the gate be straight, it opens into endless life.” As C. S. Lewis once said, “If you seek heaven you will get earth thrown in; if you seek this earth you will miss both heaven and earth.” Are you laying up for yourself treasures in heaven (Matt. 6:19-21)?

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 20, pp. 622-623
October 19, 1989