Do you share Paul's spirit about this?

Philippians 1:15-18 "Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will: The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds: But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel. What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice."

Are you able to rejoice when Christ is preached with impure motives? It seems that Paul was. But I must confess that I really struggle with this. Yes, even in some cases that intellectually I think may meet Paul's criteria my heart still recoils.

Paul is not speaking of a compromised or falsified gospel. That was anathema to him: "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you that that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed (Gal. 1:8)." When he contrasts "whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached" the reference must be to the reason or motive rather than the true facts about who Christ was and what He did.

In the case Paul affirms in Philippians, Christ WAS being preached. It seems there are two classes of preachers in mind, those with impure motives (some preach Christ of envy, strife & contention) and those with pure motives (some preach Christ of good will & love). The pretence is evidently that the pretended cause is to forward the gospel of Christ, when in fact the true motivation is an attempt to cause more affliction to come Paul's way. Their envy and strife is directed toward Paul.

What is the relation of verse 19? "For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ..." Does the "FOR" mean that the reason he is rejoicing that Christ is preached is BECAUSE this spreading knowledge will result in his (Paul's) deliverance from his present imprisonment? The attempt of the envious ones will be thwarted. Their pretence causes Paul to rejoice, and eventually lightens his affliction rather than adding to it. He is ready to die for Christ, but expects to be delivered (saved) from his bonds and minister once again to the Philippians (vs. 25,26). Or should we take a more "standard" interpretation -- regardless of how Christ is preached, the truth will not return void, but will accomplish what God sends it to do? Or both?

We should also consider that to some extent this passage emphasizes the importance of the message over the messenger. With that thought I am reminded of Jonah. He was a running, disobedient, whale-vomit-stinking, sulking, pouting prophet who didn't care for those to whom he was sent to preach. But ultimately he did preach the preaching that God bid him!

I suppose I've never found a particularly comfortable middle ground of interpretation of this passage. What think ye?

Out of pocket

Will probably be out of pocket a couple of days, and then will get to posting again (d.v.). In the meantime keep commenting on what's here already.

Another John Gill quote

I had a blog relative to Gill a few days back. I received this via e-mail yesterday and thought some would be interested in this quote.

"Thy God hath commanded thy strength: strengthen, O God, that which thou hast wrought for us....O God, thou art majestic out of thy holy places: the God of Israel is he that giveth strength and power unto his people. Blessed be God" (Psa. 68:28 & 35).
John Gill on these verses: "For this work sometimes seems to be very low and weak, and needs strengthening, and it is God only that can do it, and he will do it (I Peter 5:10); and this shows that the grace of God is not only necessary at first conversion, but to be continued for the performing of the work of grace until the day of Christ....His peculiar covenant-people, his Israel he is the God of. These are weak, and encompassed with infirmities; he has strength in himself for them; he has promised it to them, and he gives it to them as a pure gift and unmerited favor of his" (Gill's Commentary on the Psalms).

This day in 1945

Interesting!

July 19, 1945 - At the direction of Attorney General, Montgomery Ward was seized by United States Army troops because of its refusal to obey National War Labor Board orders. Montgomery Ward chairman Seward Avery was carried out of his office by the troops.

Pharisees and legalism

Did Jesus rebuke the Pharisees for observing the law too strictly?

John Gill on the ministry of the Word

In a reply on the "Hyper-Calvinism" blog, I mentioned that is a charge often leveled against English Baptist pastor John Gill (1697-1771). Here is a quote from him relative to the subject, plus some of Gene Bridges thoughts on the matter. I post this not as proof of Gill being right or wrong, but simply as a matter of record and opinion concerning what he actually believed, which is sometimes a source of controversy.

“The ministry of the word is for the conversion of sinners; without which churches would not be increased nor supported, and must in course fail, and come to nothing; but the hand of the Lord being with his ministers, many in every age believe and turn to the Lord, and are added to the churches; by which means they are kept up and preserved: and hence it is necessary in the ministers of the word, to set forth the lost and miserable estate and condition of men by nature, the danger they are in, the necessity of regeneration and repentance, and of a better righteousness than their own, and of faith in Christ; which things are blessed for the turning of men from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God.” -- John Gill, Body of Divinity, Vol. 2, as quoted by Tom Nettles in his book By His Grace and For His Glory, p.106 (Read Nettles 73-107 for further discussion of Gill & Hyper-Calvinism)

“Gill's use of the offers vocabulary usually throws people who read it today without knowing his operative categories. You have to remember, Gill was an academic who was trying to be extremely precise. His precision is his downfall, because others who were not as precise have taken and still take his work and misunderstand it, thus historians have had a hard time with where to place him...Gill divides the supra scheme into two parts: positive and negative, where the positive is active, with God effectuating His decree to elect by regeneration; it is passive with respect to reprobation by God passing men over, not by God putting fresh unbelief in their hearts and minds. He says that the degree of reprobation "puts nothing in them, it leaves them as it finds them, and therefore does them no injustice." ...Gill did not deny duty faith. This is the single most commonly adduced charge against him, and it seems based on his rejection of the offers vocabulary. True, he did state: GOD does not require all men to believe in Christ and where he does it is according to the revelation he makes of him. He does not require the heathen, who are without external revelation of Christ to believe him at all; and those who have the outward ministry of the word unattended with the special illuminations of God's Spirit are obliged to believe no further than the external revelations they enjoy reaches. (Cause of God and Truth). However, he is simply stating here that man is not condemned for disbelieving the gospel, rather he is condemned for his sins. The basis for the condemnation of those who have never heard is not their rejection of Christ, but their sins. In short, if they die without hearing the gospel, they are justly condemned and their separation from the gospel reflects the presumptive judgment of God. This is not, as some have thought, a denial of duty faith. Elsewhere he writes that "It is man's duty to believe the word of the Lord and obey His will, though he has not a power, yea, even though God has decreed to withhold that grace without which he cannot believe and obey." ... Gill's take on the offers vocabulary is what really throws us for a loop today, because when we see "offer" we think "free offer of the gospel" and the duty of the minister to urge people to come to Christ. First, Gill teaches that is men's responsibility to call everyone to come to Christ. Secondly, for Gill, he was making a category distinction over those who spoke of an offer of grace. Grace, he says, is not offered in the gospel, it is given by God. To speak of an offer of grace is therefore a category error. Gill's other category for offers is the offer of the gospel. The preacher is to offer the gospel to every person, for, unlike offering grace, offering the gospel is his duty and within his power. ("The minister should preach the gospel with a view to seeing all his hearers converted..it is one part of the gospel ministry to persuade men.")” -- Gene M. Bridges on Gill, excerpts from a Baptist Board thread 30 May 2006

East Texas Singing Convention - one month away

If you are interested in old shape note religious folk music (or if you would enjoy a day or two of almost non-stop singing), I would like to invite you to the 151st anniversary of the EAST TEXAS SACRED HARP SINGING CONVENTION -- held at the Community Center @ South High & Fairpark in Henderson, Texas, Saturday August 12th, and Sunday August 13th -- 9:30 a.m. til 2:30 a.m. (d.v.). Continental breakfast and lunch are provided, plus there will be a Saturday night informal gathering which includes a light supper and opportunities for more singing, socializing, or recreation.

Come see us. For more information, directions, etc. message me. For more info on Sacred Harp - The Sacred Harp Home Page and Sacred Harp Singing in Texas.

"Shaped notes -- helpful for those who know them, unobtrusive to those who don't."

Finding out you're wrong

"If our views are correct, we need not fear when they are examined and scrutinized in the most exacting manner using the highest possible standards. Let them be tested. It will do them no harm. If such examination finds error in our beliefs, thank God for it! We should be happy to be instructed in the way of God 'more perfectly'. To learn of my errors today means I am wiser than yesterday!" -- Bill Lee, Director of the Baptist Standard Bearer, in "To Our Readers", The Baptist History Collection CD-Rom, 2005

BTW, The Baptist History Collection is a great value buy for those interested in Baptist history. Check it out at The Baptist Standard Bearer, Inc.

Who or what is a Hyper-Calvinist?

Question: "Who or what is a Hyper-Calvinist?"
Answer: "Anyone who is more Calvinistic than I am!"

Some folks regularly write about and against "the Hyper-Calvinists" as if that is some readily identifiable group, when in fact it is not.

Free Will Baptists look at Southern Baptists and say they are hyper; while Southern Baptists look at Calvinistic Southern Baptists and say they are hyper; while the Calvinistic Southern Baptists look at the Limited Predestinarian Primitive Baptists and say they are hyper; while the Limited Predestinarian Primitive Baptists look at the Absolute Predestinarian Primitive Baptists and say they are hyper! You get the picture.

Many would think the Absoluters wouldn't have anybody to point the finger at, but then there's the Outside the Camp folks who believe a true Christian "...obviously believes that Arminianism is a false gospel, that all who hold to it are lost, and that all who claim to believe the true gospel but who speak peace to those who bring a false gospel of Arminianism are lost." I'm not sure if there is anyone more hyper than that! ;-O

The point is not just about what the above groups believe, but to point out that "Hyper-Calvinism" is truly a matter of perspective. AND the use of the term is generally pejorative, a type of argumentum ad hominem debate sometimes called poisoning the well. The fact that one is a Hyper-Calvinist should be "proof" enough that they are wrong, shouldn't it?

Ultimately, if we're reading discussion about "Hyper-Calvinism" we must try to find in the context of the writer just whom he/she thinks is a Hyper-Calvinist to properly understand what is being written.

Liberty of Conscience

"There is one aspect of liberty of conscience in which the baptist is frequently misunderstood and sometimes baptist themselves have failed to grasp it. Whereas baptists have always claimed total liberty of conscience for all men so that the 'Turk and the Jew' should be afforded freedom to practise their faiths uncoerced by civil and clerical powers, yet within the christian church the baptist has affirmed and enforced a strict discipline of conformity to scriptural faith and practice. Hence, any toleration of heresy or deviation from biblical standards is utterly abhorrent to the baptist."

-- From The Baptist: An Historical and Theological Study of the Baptist Identity, by Jack Hoad (London: Grace Publications, 1986)

The Good Samaritan

Luke 10:30ff. The story of the Good Samaritan is full of deep truth. Perhaps sometimes we are so intent on mining those nuggets that we miss the simple wealth strewn on the surface -- that we ought to be good helpful and compassionate neighbours.

Why should we help? be compassionate? be a good neighbour?

The condition of the hurting: "stripped of his raiment...wounded and...half dead" v. 30; The world is a sinful world full of hurting people. If this was a perfect place perhaps there would be no need. But it isn't and there is.

The unconcern of others: "a certain priest...saw him, he passed by on the other side...a Levite...came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side." vs. 31, 32; Jesus commanded Peter to "follow me", but Peter shifted attention by questioning what John was supposed to do. Jesus replied, "What is that to thee? Follow thou me." We are not responsible for others.

The command of the Saviour: "Go, and do thou likewise" v. 37 (cf. v. 27: "Thou shalt love...thy neighbour as thyself.") When Jesus commanded Peter to "follow me", Peter wanted to shift attention to John. Jesus replied, "What is that to thee? Follow thou me." The command of the Saviour ought to be enough. Everything else is secondary.

Singing Convention -- planning meeting

The 151st anniversary of the EAST TEXAS SACRED HARP SINGING CONVENTION will be held at the Community Center @ South High & Fairpark in Henderson, Texas, Saturday August 12th, and Sunday August 13th -- 9:30 a.m. til 2:30 a.m. (d.v.).

IF you are local enough to be interested and available, we are having our final planning meeting tomorrow -- Sunday July 9th -- at the Depot Museum in Henderson (514 N High St) at 2 o'clock p.m. We will meet under the pavilion. Come by and see the East Texas Convention historical marker that was erected last year, AND volunteer to help with some of the necessities of carrying on the convention.

In that day blog site

Ever since I knew how, I have carried a link to the "In that Day" blog site of Elder C. C. Morris. His purpose is to discuss Biblical eschatology. The blog has been inactive for awhile, but he is renewing it. If you've looked at it in the past and it wasn't active, drop back by and take a look in the next week or so.

On Predestination

Predestination...is a formative from two Latin words, prae (before), and destinatio (a purpose, destination, determination, etc.), so to predestinate is formed of prae and destino, of like import. Hence to predestinate is to purpose, to determine beforehand. So the Greek word rendered to predestinate, signifies to define, to bound, to determine, etc., beforehand. Hence predestination is a counseling, purposing or determining beforehand. And these words, as is well known, relate to the conclusion a person arrives at relative to his own future management, rather than to a rule to be observed by others. Thus men predestinate, not absolutely, at least not with certainty, for whilst all is certainty with God, time and chance happeneth to all men. A man predestinates to build a house; he predestinates the size, the form, the kind of materials, the class of workmen he will employ, etc., and if he knew, as God knows, he would predestinate the exact time and expense it should take; and this predestination is to govern his own arrangements in contracting for, and ordering the building, etc. So God’s predestination is that according to which He governs the world; and conducts all things relative to salvation and glory. It extends with the utmost precision to every event that occurs under His dominion, even to the fall of a sparrow, and to the hairs of our head, and to the small dust of the balance; for nations are counted as the small dust of the balance by Him; and His infinitude extends as directly to the notice of the one as the other, Matthew 10:29-30; Isaiah 40:15. So the term predestination is evidently used in the New Testament; as in Romans 8:29, "He also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son". This is not given as a rule to which the elect must conform themselves, but a declaration of what God, by His grace, will do with, and for them. And so in Ephesians 1:5. Thus, while God’s decree forbade Adam’s eating of the tree of knowledge, He predestinated his eating of it; that is, God foreknowing with certainty that Adam, if left to encounter the temptation in his own creaturely weakness, would sin, predestinated so to leave him to meet the temptation, and to permit the temptation to be presented to him. So every sin which God permits to take place in the world, from the greatest to the least, from the crucifying of Christ to the parting of His garments among the soldiers, God predestinated its taking place and its working for the greater good. Acts 2:23, and 4:27-28; and Psalm 22:18, compared with Matthew 27:35. This predestination is not a constraining the will of the individuals, but a leaving them to act it out under the attending circumstances. Thus God works all things after the counsel of His own will (Ephesians 1:11), permitting sin to transpire where He sees it for good, and restraining it in other cases; and constraining by His providence, or grace, to acts of goodness, etc. - Elder Samuel Trott, 1845

The scriptures are very clear that God predestinated the crucifixion of His Son: Acts 4:24-28 "And when they heard that, they lifted up their voice to God with one accord, and said, Lord, thou art God, which hast made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is: Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things? The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ. For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done." God's counsel determined before (prooizo, same word also translated predestinate) the crucifixion of Christ. Consider also: Acts 2:23 "Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:" and Luke 22:22 "And truly the Son of man goeth, as it was determined: but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed!" If God determined before (predetermined or predestinated) the crucifixion of His Son, this shows the predestination is broader than just determining beforehand concerning those whom He would elect. Also Acts 17:26 indicates that at least some times and events are determined before: "And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;"- R. L. Vaughn

We do not know what is predestinated tomorrow, but tomorrow we will know a little of what was predestinated to come to pass yesterday. - Elder Stanley Phillips of Mississippi

Plurality of Elders

Plurality of elders = pastors plural instead of pastor singular

The New Testament practice indicates a plurality of elders in each church. There is a consistent use of the word "elders" (plural) and the word "church" (singular). There were multiple leaders in Jerusalem (Acts 15:4), Philippi (Phil. 1:1), Ephesus (Acts 20:17ff.), and the churches to which James was writing (James 5:14). The use of "them" in Hebrews 13:7,17 also seems to be in agreement with the concept of plurality of elders.

Acts 14:23 - And when they had ordained them elders in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, on whom they believed.
Acts 15:4 - And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them.
Acts 20:17 - And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church.

Phil. 1:1 - Paul and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons:

James 5:14 - Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:

In the New Testament books, elder, bishop and pastor is one office/function; For example:

Titus 1:5-7 For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee: If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly. For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre;...

Acts 20:28 - Paul tells the elders at Ephesus to pastor the church over which the Holy Ghost has made them overseers.

I Peter 5:1-4 Peter tells the elders to pastor and be responsible as overseers.

The plural elders are of equal standing; equal in the sense that there is not one ruling over the others. Jesus indicates the ideal for equal Christian servants in Matt 20, Mark 10, Luke 22. We can still recognize that among these equals there are those with differing gifts and even differing amounts of experience.

Matthew 20:25-27 But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant...

A pastor should never be called the head of the church. There is one head, that is Jesus Christ.

Matt. 21:42 - Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?

Eph. 1:22 - And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,

Col. 1:18 - And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

The concept of someone "in charge" seems to come more from the world than from the New Testament. Take the apostles, for example (see Matt. 20:25-27). Which one did Christ put in charge over the others? Were they equal? Does this equality mean there was no leadership? Is there a New Testament example of one elder being in charge of the others?

This does not negate the fact that some elders may be gifted in one area and some in another. The exercise of those gifts provides leadership in various areas. The elders work together. There are differences in gifts and differences in amounts of experience. Needs, problems and circumstances arise, and leadership rises from within the eldership to meet those needs based on their gifts and experiences. One may lead in one instance and another in another.

One practical difference in what I am saying from those who disagree, is that "leading" elders move as leaders by exercising their spiritual gifts and having them recognized by the church, rather than being appointed to a "leadership position" over and above others. We must not fail to differentiate here between assigned leadership and natural leadership, gifts & calling (cf. Acts 9:15). When the church at Antioch set apart Paul & Barnabas, they did not put one "in charge" over the other. See Acts 13:1-4. They set them apart to the work to which God had called them. God obviously had a special calling for the Apostle Paul. Even at that, though, there was not a contrived authority under which Barnabas assumed he must always acquiesce to whatever Paul wanted. See Acts 15:36-39. There is probably also the apostolic element that must be figured in. I do not believe there was a "head apostle" and "assistant apostles". But the apostles in relation to the early church occupied a special place not held by any officers today.

Some of these cases on their own may seem to prove little. But when the consistency of them becomes apparent, they speak volumes.

Acts 14:23 - Paul & Barnabas ordained elders in every church in Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch. Nothing is notable that would indicate any of one the elders is different from the others. They appointed plural elders when they went to the churches of Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch (Pisidia). This they did in each place. This they did without electing or ordaining one elder in charge over the others.

Acts 15 (esp. 2,4,6,22,23) - With the church and the apostles, the elders deliberate the question "except ye be circumsized ye cannot be saved". No one elder seems to be distinguished from another. They are mentioned as a body or group. Paul & Barnabas take the lead in opening the session, declaring how God was working among the Gentiles. Certain Pharisees rejoin against their testimony. Peter rebutts, recalling how God sent him to Cornelius. Quietened by Peter's address, the body listens to Paul & Barnabas again. Then James takes the lead in closing the session, giving his "sentence" (judgment). This might be taken by some as authoritative, as in James making the decision. But should it be? The apostles, elders and the whole church did not acquiesce to James because of his authority, but gladly agreed because it seemed good to them.[This James is not James the brother of John (Acts 12:2), but apparently James the Lord's brother; seems to be called an apostle by Paul in Gal. 1:19]

Acts 20:17 - Paul called the elders of the church of Ephesus to meet him in Miletus. He addresses them equally, as a body, exhorting them to feed the flock over which the Holy Ghost made them overseers. He met with them all, taught them all, exhorted them all, warned them all, and prayed with them all. No one is drawn to the forefront for special charges or recognition.

Phil. 1:1 - The church at Philippi has plural elders. Paul & Timothy write to the saints at Philippi. Bishops are addressed, but none more than others.

1 Thess. 5:12,13 - The church at Thessalonica has plural elders. Those that labour among and are over are a "them" plural. "And we beseech you, brethren, to know them which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you; And to esteem them very highly in love for their work's sake." None are said to "be over" them more, or to be esteemed more.

I Timothy 5:17-20 - Those who "rule well" are plural in number. While this is general instruction to Timothy to teach others, the practical application appears to be plural elders in a singular church. Who is going to count them worthy of double honour? Who is going to not muzzle them? Who is going to hear accusations? Who is going to rebuke them? The local church.

Hebrews 13:7,17 - "Them which have the rule over you and watch for your souls" are described in a plural manner. One is not said to rule more or to watch more, or that one is to be obeyed more or remembered more.

James 5:14 - The sick are to call to themselves the elders of the church. Admittedly, the author is writing a general epistle, but in a real-life situation the singular sick person is instructed to call elders plural. The lack of a presbytery or plural eldership in a single church might not make that impossible, but would certainly mitigate against it being readily followed.

Rev. 2:1,8,12,18,3:1,7,14 - I mention this passage because of the common view that the "angel" of the church is the (singular) pastor. If this is true, it seems to be so in exception to all other cases noted. Several possibilities exist, including the fact that angel in its simplest meaning is simply the messenger from or to the church in each of these places. Or as the old English Baptist Hanserd Knollys contends, angel could be used figuratively as a collective noun representing the elders of the church (especially since this is a book of signs & symbols). Nevertheless, it seems that the main burden is for those against plurality of elders to show why their interpretation is not consistent with the rest of the New Testament.

Other mentions of elders in the churches or passages that might have application, IMO: Acts 11:30; Acts 13:1; Eph. 4:11; I Tim. 3:1-13; I Tim 4:14; Titus 1:5ff., I Pet. 5:1ff., & III John 9.
[Side note - the same idea appears to be true when the church at Jerusalem appoints deacons. Two rose to a prominence of sorts because of their gifts and activity. BUT, the church appointed seven men equally over the work and did not assign one a title or status over and above the others.]

Two by Two, but what about the Sevens?

“Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female,” Genesis 7:2

Most of us know about God bringing the animals into the ark two by two, but what were these extra clean beasts Noah was to take in by sevens, male and female? There are a number of lessons we can draw from this.

The distinction of clean and unclean beasts, being before the flood, was in view of the sacrifices that Noah would need to offer to the Lord upon exiting from the ark after the waters subsided, Genesis 8:20. Although Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord, Genesis 6:8 (Eternal electing grace), and God prepared that ark to preserve Noah and his family alive through the judgment of the world (a type of salvation), yet, it all could not be without the shed blood of innocent victims, all typical of the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus- Hebrews 9:22.

Why clean animals? While some proclaim loudly today that ‘Christ made sin’ means that He actually became guilty with sin charged to Him, and died guilty of the sin of His people, NOTHING could be more foreign to the Scripture types and teachings. Why the importance of CLEAN animals? It is because they typified Christ the SPOTLESS LAMB, ‘who did NO sin, nor was guile found in his mouth,’ 1 Peter 2:22. Scripture says that He died THE JUST FOR THE UNJUST, 1 Peter 3:18, NOT the GUILTY for the unjust. He was made sin (legally and judicially CHARGED with the sin of His people BY IMPUTATION only). Our sin was laid on Him, not put in Him. He died FOR our sin, not IN it. He was numbered AMONG the transgressors, He was NOT a transgressor. He was affected BY our sin, not infected with it. His soul was made an offering for sin, not made sinful. It was for this reason that God was pleased to bruise Him, because He was just, holy and the PERFECT sacrifice, and thereby the JUST God and Savior, Isa. 45:21; Isa. 53:6.

The clean animals were to be taken into the ark by sevens. Is not seven the number of perfection, pointing to the perfect work of the Lord Jesus in His cross death, perfectly redeeming and justifying there ALL of His elect once for all? See Romans 3:24 with Hebrews 9:15.

by Ken Wimer in Shreveport Grace Church bulletin; July 2, 2006

Truth changes not

I was reading the 22nd chapter of Kings and the thought struck me that this is a great illustration of how the truth does not change to fit circumstances. King Ahab of Israel decided to take Ramoth-gilead back from the Syrians and invited Jehoshaphat King of Judah to go with him. All Ahab's prophets prophesied a victory, but Jehoshaphat was suspicious, calling for an opinion from a "prophet of the Lord". One was available -- Micaiah -- but Ahab didn't like the fact that he usually prophesied something negative concerning him. But Micaiah was called and he prophesied the truth -- that Ahab would not return from the battle alive.

King Ahab only wanted to hear something good, but that did not change the truth. "And the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, There is yet one man, Micaiah the son of Imlah, by whom we may enquire of the LORD: but I hate him; for he doth not prophesy good concerning me, but evil."

Four hundred prophets spoke the opposite, but that did not change the truth. "Then the king of Israel gathered the prophets together, about four hundred men, and said unto them, Shall I go against Ramothgilead to battle, or shall I forbear? And they said, Go up; for the Lord shall deliver it into the hand of the king."

Zedekiah dramatically illustrated Ahab's victory, but that did not change the truth. "And Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah made him horns of iron: and he said, Thus saith the LORD, With these shalt thou push the Syrians, until thou have consumed them."

Micaiah was struck on the face, but that did not change the truth. "Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah went near, and smote Micaiah on the cheek, and said, Which way went the Spirit of the LORD from me to speak unto thee? And Micaiah said Behold, thou shalt see in that day, when thou shalt go into an inner chamber to hide thyself."

Micaiah was thrown in jail, but that did not change the truth. "And the king of Israel said, Take Micaiah, and carry him back unto Amon the governor of the city, and to Joash the king's son; And say, Thus saith the king, Put this fellow in the prison, and feed him with bread of affliction and with water of affliction, until I come in peace. And Micaiah said, If thou return at all in peace, the LORD hath not spoken by me."

Good king Jehoshapahat went to the battle with Ahab, but that did not change the truth. "So the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat the king of Judah went up to Ramothgilead."

Ahab disguised himself to not appear to be a king, but that did not change the truth. "And the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, I will disguise myself, and enter into the battle; but put thou on thy robes. And the king of Israel disguised himself, and went into the battle." (about here I want to ask Jehoshaphat, "Just how stupid are you?" but the question often comes ringing back to me, "Just how stupid are you?")

Some Syrian archer was just shooting arrows in his simplicity, but that did not change the truth. "And a certain man drew a bow at a venture, and smote the king of Israel between the joints of the harness: wherefore he said unto the driver of his chariot, Turn thine hand, and carry me out of the host; for I am wounded. And the battle increased that day: and the king was stayed up in his chariot against the Syrians, and died at even: and the blood ran out of the wound into the midst of the chariot."

Delay of time does not change the truth. Not only must we consider Micaiah's prophecy, but also Elijah's. Some three or more years before he had told Ahab, "Thus saith the LORD, In the place where dogs licked the blood of Naboth shall dogs lick thy blood, even thine." So when the battle was over and Ahab was dead, "...one washed the chariot in the pool of Samaria; and the dogs licked up his blood; and they washed his armour; according unto the word of the LORD which he spake."

Psalm 117:2b - "...the truth of the LORD endureth for ever."

Be Strong

2 Timothy 2:1-7: "1 Thou therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also. Thou therefore endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ. No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier. And if a man also strive for masteries, yet is he not crowned, except he strive lawfully. The husbandman that laboureth must be first partaker of the fruits. Consider what I say; and the Lord give thee understanding in all things."

A Strong Christian is:
1. A Teacher who commits, verse 2.
2. A Soldier who endures, verses 3,4.
3. An Athlete who competes, verse 5.
4. A Farmer who labours, verse 6.

Old Testament Scripture...

...used in New Testament times. Here are some examples.

The gospel that Paul preached was according to the Old Testament scriptures - I Corinthians 15:1-4.

Philip preached Jesus to the eunuch using the Old Testament scriptures in Isaiah - Acts 8:35.

Paul demonstrated that Jesus was the Christ from the Old Testament scriptures - Acts 17:1-4.

Many Bereans believed as a result of searching the Old Testament scriptures - Acts 17:10-12.

Apollos convinced Jews in Achaia that Jesus was the Christ using the Old Testament scriptures - Acts 18:28.

The Old Testament scriptures testify of Christ - John 5:29.

The Old Testament scriptures are able to make one wise unto salvation - II Timothy 3:15.

The Old Testament scriptures teach salvation by faith - Romans 4:3; 10:8-11; Galatians 3:8,22; I Peter 2:6.

Jesus knowing

John 13:1-5: "Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end. And supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him; Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he was come from God, and went to God; He riseth from supper, and laid aside his garments; and took a towel, and girded himself. After that he poureth water into a bason, and began to wash the disciples' feet, and to wipe them with the towel wherewith he was girded."

Jesus knowing
The Present "the Father had given all things into his hands" Judas' betrayal, the trial, conviction and crucifixion were all part of God's definite purpose

The Past "that he was come from God" sent by the Father

The Future "that he went to God" Heb. 12:2

7 Churches of Asia

Some Thoughts on the Seven Churches of Asia in Revelation chapters 2 & 3.

This letter (book of Revelation) was sent to seven churches of Asia (Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamos, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, Laodicea). So when each church received the letter she also read the messages to the other churches as well as her own. The messages to these churches are:

1. Local - to these 7 historical churches (1:4)
2. Admonitory - an admonition to all of the Lord's churches throughout history. ("saith to the churches")
3. Individual - lessons to anyone who will listen ("he that hath an ear", 2:7, et.al.)

Prophetic (possibly): Some people believe that these 7 churches are prophetic of the church age -- in other words, 7 periods of history within the church age. It doesn't seem to have worked out historically according to the general prophetic idea usually based on these churches.

There is a general pattern to the seven letters:
1. Greetings - "unto the angel of the church of..."
2. Description of the Author - "he that holdeth the seven stars...he which hath the sharp sword...etc."
3. Commendation of good works (except for the church at Laodicea)
4. Condemnation of sin, error, etc. (except for Smyrna & Philadelphia)
5. Warning - "Repent...be faithful...hold fast...etc."
6. Exhortation - "hear what the Spirit saith..."
7. Promise - "To him that overcometh will I give...be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee...etc."

The last four messages (Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, Laodicea) reverse the order of the Promise and the Exhortation. It is also interesting to note the order in which the churches are addressed. The churches that receive the first and last letters are in grave danger of judgment - repent or I will come quickly and remove thy candlestick, and I will spue thee out of my mouth - though the first (Ephesus) has several good things to commend it and the last (Laodicea) seems to have none. Then the 2nd & 6th mentioned (Smyrna, Philadelphia) receive only commendation. The three placed in the middle of these four (Pergamos, Thyatira, Sardis) are between these two extremes and receive commendation, condemnation and warning.

Singing blogs

After eight or nine blogs on singing, perhaps you all are growing a little weary -- I couldn't even get a Baptist reaction by posting a Reformed position on singing Psalms only! Ha. Well, we'll move on to something else. ;-)

Where to sing - Henderson, TX August 12

The preceding blogs have dealt with various opinions about singing and how to sing. Now here's WHERE to sing -- East Texas Sacred Harp Convention in Henderson, Texas August 12th and 13th. Click link for info and map.

How to sing -- George Root

I ought to say something about the condition of music in our part of the country in those days. Not many years before, a singing-school had been held in the old red schoolhouse, where "faw, sol, law, faw, sol, law, me, faw" were the syllables for the scale -- where one must find the "me" note (seven) to ascertain what key he was singing in, and where some of the old "fuguing tunes," as they were called, were still sung. I well remember how, shortly after, we heard a new system of teaching music had been introduced into Boston, in which they used a blackboard and sang, "do, re, me," etc., to the scale. But how silly "do" sounded. We thought it smart to say that the man who invented that was a dough-head, and how flat were fa and la, in comparison with the dignified "faw" and "law." Later, however, when some tunes connected with the new movement came we changed our minds about the man who was at the head of it. Nothing before, so heavenly, had been heard as the melody to "Thus far the Lord hath led me on" (Hebron); and one of the great things in going to Boston was that I should probably see Lowell Mason.

-- George F. Root, The Story of a Musical Life

How to sing -- David Blount

1. Why Sing?
We must begin then by asking, Why sing in worship? The first and last records of singing in Scripture (Exod. 15:1; Rev. 15:3) have a link: redemption is the common theme - the church praising her deliverer, her Saviour. But more than example, we have command to sing: "Serve the Lord with gladness: come before his presence with singing" (Psa. 100:2).

2. Why Sing Psalms?
If we are to sing praise to God, then the immediate question which arises is, What are we to sing? As regards the Psalms there can be no doubt about their appointment for singing: "O come, let us sing unto the Lord...Let us...make a joyful noise unto him with psalms" (Psa. 95:1,2). The New Testament contains similar exhortations, especially those couched in the two controversial verses - Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16. Churches which today effectively practise an "exclusive hymnody" should at the very least be asking themselves why God's hymnbook has NO place in their singing.

3. Why Sing Psalms Only?
The key texts here are: Eph. 5:18,19; Col. 3:16.
A. Believers are commanded to become filled with Christ's Spirit by the indwelling of His word.
B. This is to be accomplished by mutual instruction through singing.
C. Therefore the phrase "psalms and hymns and spiritual songs" denotes the Psalms of David, because they alone satisfy both of these conditions, i.e., they are the word of Christ and they are designed for singing...There is no record of Jesus or His apostles singing anything but psalms.

The psalms, hymns and songs are all said to be "spiritual" or "Spirit-given." Which of our hymn-writers would claim that for his writings? We are sure though that the Psalms are the very words of the Spirit and therefore the perfect vehicle to serve the purpose of singing in worship, which is, not the outpouring of our feelings, but the discipling of our souls.

-- Excerpted from David Blount in Why sing Psalms only?

How to sing -- Ephraim Rotewell

In early America, the "New Way" of singing -- by reading music and following "rules" -- was a threat many a New Englander feared.

"The new Singers will bring in Popery upon us before we are aware of it. Truly, I have a great jealousy, that if we once begin to sing by Rule, the next thing will be to pray by Rule, and preach by Rule; we must have Common Prayer, Forsooth, and then comes Popery."

-- Ephraim Rotewell, New England Courant, March 20, 1722

How to sing -- Thomas Symmes

Objections to the "New Way" of singing, by one favoring the "Usual Way"

(1) That it is a New Way, an Unknown Tongue. (2) That it is not so Melodious as the Usual Way. (3) That there are so many Tunes, we shall never have done learning. (4) That the Practice of it gives Disturbance; Roils & Exasperates men's Spirits; grieves sundry good People, and causes them to behave themselves indecently & disorderly. (5) That is Quakerish & Popish, and introductive of Instrumental Musick. (6) That the Names given to the Notes are Bawdy, yea Blasphemous. (7) That it is a Needless way, since their good Fathers that were Strangers to it, are got to Heaven without it.

-- Thomas Symmes, Utile Dulci. 1723

Note: Symmes was a proponent of the "new way" or "regular way" of singing -- learning to sing by reading music rather than memorizing tunes. He presented the above in the form of a dialogue to give the arguments for the "Usual Way" and against his viewpoint. Of his own views, he writes:

"Singing by Note is giving every note its proper pitch, and turning the voice in its proper place, and giving every note its true length and sound. Whereas the Usual Way varies much from this. In it, some notes are sung too high, others too low, and most too long, and many turnings or flourishings with the voice (as they call them) are made where they should not be..."

How to sing -- Unknown

First, find your range. Identify whether you have a high voice (soprano) or low voice (tenor) or somewhere in between. If you sing out of your voice range, you will never sound good no matter how much you practice. Start by seeing how low and how high your voice will reach. Determine which sounds better and which pitch is most comfortable to achieve.

Next, try matching your voice to other singers and then practice singing along with their songs. When practicing singing, sing loudly rather than softly. This builds strength in your vocal cords and strength is what will eventually enable you to control them better.

Breathing is an important aspect of singing. Draw your breath from deep down and learn to use the breath to emit the sound from your diaphragm rather than your throat or nose. With practice, your breathing will become coordinated with your vocal cords as you strengthen and smooth your vocal cords.

-- Unknown

How to sing -- Thomas Cassidy

Guidelines for Music Selection and Use.
"And even things without life giving sound, whether pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped?" (1 Corinthians 14:7).

1. Words - The words of the songs we sing are very important. "Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things." (Philippians 4:8).

2. Life-style and testimony of writers. "O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh." (Matthew 12:34). Is the life-style and testimony of the writers in agreement with God's Word? What do the writers think of Jesus Christ? "Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The Son of David." (Matthew 22:42).

3. Effect on listeners. Does this song cause listeners to give glory to God or to the singer? What does this song motivate one to do or to be? Does this song cause the hearers to want to grow closer to the Lord, and to be more Christ like, or is it merely entertaining them?

4. Appropriateness. "To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:" (Ecclesiastes 3:1) Is this musical selection appropriate for this service or occasion?

Criteria for Evaluating Music.

1. Words: The words of the song must be doctrinally correct.

2. Melody: The melody must be strong and clear. A strong melody will build to one major climax and possibly several minor climaxes. Variety is the key.

3. Harmony: Harmony should show some creative ability on the part of the composer/arranger. Avoid music that does not resolve; that overuses chord clusters (clusters destroy tonality which is an absolute); that utilizes "blues" notes as found in "rhythm and blues" music.

4. Rhythm: Rhythm is a vital part of music but should not dominate. There should be a natural accent in the rhythm.

-- Excerpted from A Biblical Philosophy of Christian Music by Thomas Cassidy, First Baptist Church of Spring Valley, California, © 1995

How to sing -- W. M. Cooper

Suggestions

In order to get the best results in Harmony possible, the committee respectfully offers the following suggestions.

First: Be sure to pitch the songs properly. For this duty select some brother for the day, and let others keep silent.

Second: Sing according to time. Give measured notes full time, and observe rests in all instances.

Third: Do not sing too loudly. The fault of too loud singing may be avoided to a great extent by pitching music properly.

Fourth: Never sing alto in the high voice. There is no symphony whatever in such singing. Boys may sing alto, and the ladies may sing alto in the grave voice. It will be better for men not to try to sing this part unless they sing it in the grave voice.

-- W. M. Cooper, The B. F. White Sacred Harp, 1960 (but found in earlier editions; probably as early as 1902 or 1907)

How to Sing -- John Wesley

John Wesley's Directions for Singing

I. Learn these tunes before you learn any others; afterwards learn as many as you please.

II. Sing them exactly as they are printed here, without altering or mending them at all; and if you have learned to sing them otherwise, unlearn it as soon as you can.

III. Sing all. See that you join with the congregation as frequently as you can. Let not a slight degree of weakness or weariness hinder you. If it is a cross to you, take it up, and you will find it a blessing.

IV. Sing lustily and with a good courage. Beware of singing as if you were half dead, or half asleep; but lift up your voice with strength. Be no more afraid of your voice now, nor more ashamed of its being heard, than when you sung the songs of Satan.

V. Sing modestly. Do not bawl, so as to be heard above or distinct from the rest of the congregation, that you may not destroy the harmony; but strive to unite your voices together, so as to make one clear melodious sound.

VI. Sing in time. Whatever time is sung be sure to keep with it. Do not run before nor stay behind it; but attend close to the leading voices, and move there with as exactly as you can; and take care not to sing too slow. This drawling way naturally steals on all who are lazy; and it is high time to drive it out from us, and sing all our tunes just as quick as we did at first.

VII. Above all sing spiritually. Have an eye to God in every word you sing. Aim at pleasing him more than yourself, or any other creature. In order to do this attend strictly to the sense of what you sing, and see that your heart is not carried away with the sound, but offered to God continually; so shall your singing be such as the Lord will approve here, and reward you when he cometh in the clouds of heaven.

-- From John Wesley's preface to "Sacred Melody", 1761

How to sing

Yesterday, Chris Stoddart posted John Wesley's directions for singing on our Sacred Harp/Shape note discussion list. After that I decided to post that and some other "directions for singing" here on my blog.

Almost everyone has an opinion about "how to sing"! So, starting tomorrow, for the next several days I will post the opinions of others (without comment, but you can comment) under the title "how to sing" -- although some are more general opinions about music and not just about how to sing.

How to sing -- George Root
How to sing -- David Blount
How to sing -- Ephraim Rotewell
How to sing -- Thomas Symmes
How to sing -- Unknown
How to sing -- Thomas Cassidy
How to sing -- W. M. Cooper
How to Sing -- John Wesley

Opinions still wanted

Some of you posted your opinion in answer to a question on one blog post. Your opinions are still wanted. Click here: Your Opinion???

Just read

"Isn't it time to stop asking the LORD to bless what we are doing, and start doing what HE has [blessed] and is blessing?" - Billy Wright, Jr. in "Another Way: House Churches, Part 4", Baptist Monitor, p. 11, June 2006

Thoughts - yes, no, doesn't matter, other??

Respect of persons

James 2:1-9 - "My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons. For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment; And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts? Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him? But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats? Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called? If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well: But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors."

Respect of persons is incompatible with the faith (v. 1ff.). "...have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ...with respect of persons" -- the two are incompatible. Worldly partially does not fit God's spiritual people (or at least should not!). We should judge "righteous judgment" (John 7:24). God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34). Jesus did not "regard the person of men" (Matthew 22:16).

Respect of persons is inconsistent with the facts of the Christian situation (vv. 5-7). Their own Christian brothers and sisters were more likely to be "the poor of this world", while the rich were oppressing Christians and blaspheming Jesus. Is not this still true today? Cf. I Corinthians 1:26-28.

Respect of persons is a transgression of God's law (vv. 8.9). Respect to person is sin. But if we fulfill the royal law of Christ -- love thy neighbor as thyself -- we will not have respect to persons and will treat all preferentially equally above ourselves (Philippians 2:3).

Philippians 2:5-8 - "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross."

Two upcoming singings

Two rural Rusk County (Texas) churches will have their annual homecomings on back-to-back weekends.

Sunday June 11th: Smyrna Baptist Church, starting at 10:00 a.m., this singing will be from the "little book", seven-shape note accompanied singing. For a map to this location, see here: Smyrna map (not the same singing, but the same location)

Sunday June 18th: Zion Hill Baptist Church, starting at 10:00 a.m., this singing will be from the Sacred Harp, four-shape unaccompanied singing. For a map to this location, see here: Zion Hill map

All are welcome. All are invited. In each case, dinner will be served and donations will be received for the associated cemeteries -- Holleman Cemetery and Zion Hill Cemetery.

The Door

Genesis 7:16: "...and the Lord shut him in."

God shut the door of the ark. All outside were shut out. All inside were shut in. Doors are opened and shut according to God's prerogative (e.g. Rev. 3: 7,8; II Cor. 2:12; Col. 4:3).

Jesus said, "I am the door; by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture." John 10:9.

More likely

Sometimes we dismiss substantial portions of Scripture that do not fit our theology. More likely we should dismiss substantial portions of our theology that do not fit Scripture!

All things to all

The “all things to all” text.

I Corinthians 9:19–23 – “For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more. And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law. To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. And this I do for the gospel’s sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you.”

What does “all things to all” mean? Some think it means we should use great flexibility of methods to preach the gospel. Others go further, suggesting we must do “whatever it takes” to reach the lost (perhaps even reaching the unstated conclusion that the end justifies the means). Was the apostle Paul a wishy-washy hypocrite who would use any available gimmick to further his cause? Does I Corinthians 9 suggest that? Does the historical account of his ministry demonstrate that?

I Corinthians 9:19–23 means something quite different than what many of us have been taught – we must be willing to yield our rights for the sake of the gospel – a meaning that will harmonize with both the context and what the Scriptures reveal about how Paul conducted his life and ministry.

The broad context is an entire letter written by the Apostle to clarify doctrine and practice and to correct error in the Corinthian church. The letter may be readily divided into two main parts: Chapters 1–6, in which Paul deals with issues that had been reported to him (cf. 1:11 & 5:1) and Chapters 7–16, in which Paul deals with questions sent to him by the church (see 7:1). These are usually introduced by the words “now concerning” or “now touching” (peri de).

The immediate context is Paul’s addressing the question of whether to eat meat offered to idols (Chapters 8–10). Paul stated that every Christian had the right (liberty, freedom, power) to buy and eat such meat. It is only meat and an idol is nothing. But the freedom should be given up if this becomes a stumblingblock to a weak brother (8:9–13). Paul was not asking them to do something he himself would not do (8:13). These are not words merely written for effect. In Chapter nine he illustrates the principle and fortifies his case by the example of his own practice.

Paul’s example was that he had given up some of his rights and privileges in preference to the furtherance of the gospel (cf. 9:23, 10:33). Paul shows that it was his right as an apostle to receive some maintenance or support by the Corinthian church. Yet he emphatically states that he (and Barnabas) had not used this power (exousia, right, freedom) “lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ.”

Placed in context, we see verses 19–23 as Paul’s next example of the principle. Paul was free – both a free born Roman citizen and a free child of God – yet he has voluntarily become a servant in order to gain as many as possible. Though he was free from the law, in his dealings with the Jews, he would if necessary lay aside his freedom in order to interact with the Jews (as in Acts 16:1–3).

These thoughts are followed by Paul’s asserting the need for self–discipline (verses 24–27). The Jews, despite their privileges and advantages (10:1–4), abandoned self–discipline, gave in to their lusts, and brought on themselves judgment and destruction (10:5–13). The Christian is to have no part in idolatrous practices (10:14–21), but is at liberty to purchase and eat the meat previously offered to idols (10:25–30). The good of others and the glory of God (10:23, 24, 31–33) must be the guiding principle. There is an important correlation between 10:32 and 9:19–22: Give none offence (cf. 8:13), neither to the Jews (9:20), nor to the Gentiles (9:21), nor to the church of God (9:21; the weak were brothers – 8:11–13).

What some others say.

“He would not sin against God to save the soul of his neighbour, but he would very cheerfully and readily deny himself. The rights of God he could not give up, but he might resign his own, and he very often did so for the good of others.” – Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible

“Though his conscience is free before God, he does not disregard man. Rather, he lives to serve other men. This is meant in a spiritual way – that is to render true spiritual service to man; not that Paul catered to every man’s whim or personal preferences.

“Paul required Timothy to be circumcised lest he be perceived, as a man of Jewish descent, of lightly esteeming the law – Acts 16:3. Paul did not require Titus to be circumcised lest he, as a Gentile, be perceived as condoning or compromising with the Judaizers who falsely asserted that it was needful for Gentiles to submit to circumcision – Galatians 2:3–5.

“These last two examples are important because they prove that becoming ‘all things to all men’ has nothing to do with appeasing others or fitting into a culture foreign from your own. It was all about abstaining from the appearance of condoning evil and error and always behaving in such a way as to magnify truth and right in the eyes of men.” – Mark Osgatharp, Landmark Missionary Baptist Church, Wynne, Arkansas

“Paul is commenting on his willingness to lay aside external ideas and even the manner in which he approached some religious convictions for the greater good of being able to minister to the flock of GOD in general...Paul’s willingness to circumcise Timothy was born out of this spirit of willingness to compromise on non–essential matters. Later he would not circumcise Titus for this very reason, because some had made circumcision a necessity.” – Mike McInnis, Grace Chapel, O’Brien, Florida

“I am made all things to all men; which is to be understood, as in all the other instances of his being so, not in cases and things criminal and sinful, contrary to the moral law, and the dictates of his own conscience, subversive of the Gospel of Christ, and of the order and discipline of it, but in cases and things of an indifferent nature:” – John Gill’s Exposition of the Bible

Conclusion.

The primary application of this Scripture is the setting aside of our rights or liberties that we have as a direct consequence of our status as children of God. Will we insist on our rights to the detriment and destruction of others, and for our own glory rather than the glory of God? We should not interpret Paul’s “all things to all” based on our own preconceived ideas, but by his own practice. Are we, like Paul, willing to give up, if necessary, every right we have and every privilege we enjoy in order to further the gospel? If not, perhaps we have not learned the true meaning of I Corinthians 9:19–23.

Here are links to two blog posts by Tom Ascol that also address the subject:

• 1 Corinthians 9:19-23, Paul on Accommodation
• All things to all men

The Letter to Philippi

The letter from the Apostle Paul (and Timothy, 1:1) to the church at Philippi seems to have been written from Rome while Paul was imprisoned.

1. Paul is in prison, 1:12-16,19ff.
2. Paul mentions the palace (1:13) and Caesar's household (4:22).
3. During the imprisonment at Rome, Paul faced two possibilities - life or death. Compare that to 1:19-26.
4. Christians in Macedonia (where Philippi is) were active in the collection for the saints at Jerusalem (II Cor. 8:1-5; 9:14). Silence about it in this letter would indicate it was already a thing of the past.

Memorial Day

My father is a World War II veteran. It was with great pride that we took him to the World War II Memorial when it was dedicated in Washington, DC a couple of years ago. Two great-grandfathers and two great-great grandfathers fought during the War of Northern Aggression (aka the "Civil War"). Sometimes when I think about this conflict I get "chill bumps" and tears come to my eyes.

So it is with fear and trembling that I say something that might be taken as unpatriotic or that might cast reflection on our men in uniform, past and present. But what I say I believe needs to be said, because it is true.

There is nothing wrong with remembering fallen soldiers. But the great memorial day for the people of God is not a day in May. It is the day Jesus Christ hung on the cross and through His blood saved His people from their sins. Therefore, being not our own but purchased with a price, our lot in life becomes that of strangers and pilgrims in this world seeking a city whose Builder and Maker is God. Following the teachings of the New Testament will make us good citizens who are obedient to the laws of the country in which we dwell. But let us not be entangled with this world, and let us remember whose kingdom we are.

The "Civil War" will provide an illustration of that which I try to describe. Within the United States of America, in states lieing both North and South, dwelt those who professed their citizenship to be in heaven, and that they were merely pilgrims and strangers in this land. Yet, heeding the call of earthly kingdoms, Christian brother took up arms against Christian brother. Forgetting their loyalty to their God, they played out their loyalties to their warring countries in determined destruction. Professed members of one spiritual kingdom denied that profession and the loyalty thereof to fan the flames of fleshly, political and geographical loyalties. But what of me? But what of you? Where do our loyalties lie? To God and His kingdom, OR to an earthly king, state or power?

I cannot say what I would have done had I been living then. I cannot say that what I am doing now is always right. But I can say on the authority of Scripture that ALL our loyalty is due the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, our Sovereign Creator who is worthy to receive ALL glory and honor and power. Anything less is heresy!

Tri-directional Singing

In Colossians 3:16 (& Eph. 5:19), the benefit and purpose of singing is seen in three directions:

1. For others, "teaching and admonishing one another"
2. For one's self, "in your heart"
3. To God, "to the Lord"

"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."

Songs and doctrinal correctness

Some of these thoughts originated in another forum, discussing songs that are not completely doctrinally correct. The songs mentioned here are mentioned because they were mentioned there. They may or may not be familiar to you. The songs are for examples and their use doesn’t necessarily mean I endorse all their sentiment.

Some people seem not to care whether a song is doctrinally correct if they like it (tune, beat, tempo, etc.). Others seem so critical that they wouldn’t like the words of anything they didn’t write/right. Perhaps somewhere in the middle of this is the place to be.

I can think of four options a person might have for handling this: sing the song without comment; sing the song but with a comment about the problem; sing the song with altered wording; or don’t sing the song. There may be other options, but I can’t think of any right now. My personal opinion is generally against altering the wording of someone else’s hymn/poem. Either use it or find another hymn. It just seems more honest not to tamper with someone else’s song.

Here are some questions that might be helpful to ask when considering what to do with songs that could be “suspect”.

1. What is the hymn writer trying to communicate?
Perhaps we may be overly critical of some point in a song when we don’t really understand what the songwriter is trying to say. “Lord, build me a cabin in the corner of Gloryland” – seems the writer is trying to express that he doesn’t deserve a mansion – “I feel I’m not worthy, to receive all of this” – and that a cabin up there is better than a mansion down here (“Don’t care for fine mansions on earth’s sinking sand”). Not bad thoughts to express, in my opinion. I suppose the main problem is that it falls short of recognizing that Jesus has nevertheless promised us a mansion.

2. Is the overall message solid with a few questionable words, or is the overall theme of the hymn suspect?
“O What a Savior”; “they searched thru heaven and found a Savior” – the hymn writer used a literary device that doesn’t come off well in this song, IMO (though in Revelation 5, John seems to see something in a vision that uses a similar device). The writer is hopelessly straying in sin and a Savior is sought out to save him. Overall the hymn writer seems intent on glorifying the Savior, giving His death credit for saving even the vilest of sinners. He probably didn’t intend to imply that God wasn’t sure what He was doing and had to look around to see if He could find a Saviour. Yet it does give that impression to many people.

3. Does the rest of your church see a problem with these words? If not, could it just be you?
“There is a fountain filled with blood” -- Perhaps one might not like the particular poetic picture drawn by Cowper, but the point that the blood of Christ cleanses us from all sin comes through clearly. Not only my church, but many churches over several hundred years seem to have approved of the text. That doesn’t make it right, but should give reason for me to consider it carefully if I think something is wrong with it.

4. Is it a factual error, a doctrinal error, or perhaps only a minor interpretational thing?
I suppose all errors are ultimately doctrinal errors, but a song that presents Jesus as not born of a virgin would be a different type of error than one that puts the wise men at the manger rather than a house, as Matthew says. Further, this factual error about the house is different from the interpretational error where some people interpret certain Old Testament verses as prophecy of this event and believe there were three wise men and that they were kings.

5. Is it wrong because it doesn’t tell the whole story, or does it tell the wrong story?
“Jesus is coming soon”; “all of the dead shall rise” – all of the dead certainly are going to rise. Perhaps the writer thinks all indiscriminately will rise at Jesus’ 2nd coming, or perhaps he believes the resurrection of the just and unjust will be separate and didn’t explain it in detail. Some think the resurrection of all will be at the same time, while others believe it will be separated by 1000 years or so. It seems that whatever one’s millennial persuasion, most believe that “all of the dead shall rise.”

6. What would you do if a preacher or teacher taught what is being sung? If he were a visiting preacher, would you invite him back? If he is the pastor, would it be ignored? would he be reprimanded? run off?
Another way to put this is to ask if we are harder on our songs than we would be on our teachers? The songs are easy victims – can’t talk back, don’t get their feelings hurt and we don’t have to challenge them face to face. Someone criticized the song “My Sins Are Gone” because “...The chorus has a line that says, ‘In the sea of God’s forgetfulness that’s good enough for me’ but, one cannot find the phrase sea of forgetfulness in the Bible.” How many times do we preachers preach using some phrase or word that is not found in the Bible?

7. Is there another song that expresses the same truth without the objectionable feature?
“Just a little talk with Jesus” was criticized because it mentions a little “prayer wheel turning” -- which is something Tibetan Buddhist monks do/use. Cleavant Derricks (1910-1977) was a black Baptist preacher/songwriter. The idea of a prayer wheel seems a little strange to me, but I find it unlikely that he had a Tibetan Buddhist prayer wheel in mind. More likely it was something like an attempt to describe a feeling that incited him to prayer. It is very unfortunate that those familiar with a Tibetan prayer wheel might think of that rather than what Derricks meant. Perhaps there is another song that similarly exhorts one to prayer, without such an objectionable phrase. This question should probably ultimately follow up all of the other questions. If we can express the same truth without the objectionable features, shouldn’t we do it? But also we should extend grace towards those who don’t come to exactly the same conclusions as we do.

Finally, remember that the only inspired songs are found in the book of Psalms! If we cannot bear to sing any perceived error, however minor, perhaps we should adopt the same mentality as some of the Reformed brethren – sing the Psalms only and exclude all hymns of human composure. Rather than that, I think I would apply some or all of the questions above and then follow one of three options – sing the song without comment; sing the song but with a comment about the perceived problem; or not sing the song.

Stand fast

2 Thessalonians 2:15: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."

According to Franklin Senters, "Stand fast means to act like a mannequin on your beliefs. Don’t be persuaded by the latest and greatest thing that comes along. Stand solid on the word of God. Don’t let someone with a new interpretation of the scripture entice you to believe something different than what is really there in the Word of God. It also means keep standing. Don’t quit."

A High Calling May Require a High Price

John the Baptist had a high calling - John 1:6 "There was a man sent from God, whose name was John." John 1:23 - "He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord,..."

John the Baptist paid a high price - Matthew 14:10 "And he sent, and beheaded John in the prison."

John got the attention of the people (Matthew 3:1-6; Luke 3:1-14); turned their attention to Jesus (John 1:29-37; Luke 3:15-18; Matthew 3); and got out of the way (John 3:30; Luke 3:16-20).

Manna - a Lesson on God's Provisions

Exodus 16:14-21

God provides for His people, v.14; Psalm 37:25
God's provisions operate in relation to His commandments, vs. 16,19,23; Matt. 6:33
God's provisions operate in proportion to man's ability and need, vs. 17,18; Josh. 5:12
God's provisions often are not appreciated by mankind, Numbers 11:6
Material provisions are temporal; Spiritual provisions are eternal, John 6:48-51

THREE GROANS

Romans 8:22-28

1. The Groan of Creation, verse 22.
2. The Groan of Ourselves, verse 23.
3. The Groan of the Holy Spirit, verse 26.

Shameful day in history

May 17, 2004: In Massachusetts, same-sex couples exchanged marriage vows for the first time in the United States.

Aside from Biblical considerations -- we understand that judges don't make their decisions based on the Bible -- Massachusetts has ignored history, legal precedent and established social order, not to mention the simple meaning of the word "marriage".

Be filled with the Spirit -- A "Grammar" Lesson

"And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess, but be filled with the Spirit;" Ephesians 5:18

Be filled with the Spirit is imperative; therefore it is not a suggestion, but a command.
Be filled with the Spirit is plural; therefore it is not for a few, but for all.
Be filled with the Spirit is passive; therefore it is not fulfilled in acting, but submitting.
Be filled with the Spirit is present; therefore it is not once for all, but in progress.

Singing in Tyler, Texas

There will be a Sacred Harp singing at Bridge Pointe Baptist Church, Saturday May 20, beginning at 10:00 a.m.

For more information, check the following site:
Second annual Bridge Pointe singing

Old Cool Springs Cemetery

Today the "New Salem Invincibles" sponsored a workday at the old Cool Springs Cemetery. The abandoned cemetery is what is left of the old Cool Springs community in southern Rusk County, Texas. The cemetery had many downed trees that left markers broken and out of place (though before today someone had cut most of them up and removed them). The last burial there took place in 1938.

A church was located there at least as early as 1857, when Cool Springs Baptist Church was among the thirteen churches that met at Mt. Zion Church, Rusk County, Texas, to form the Mt. Zion Baptist Association. The oldest marked grave is of Elizabeth Brown in 1865, but the cemetery is likely older. It is not known exactly when the church ceased to exist. Research in Mt. Zion Association minutes should reveal about the time they quit representing in the association. Cool Springs hosted the Mt. Zion Association in 1881 and 1891; and the church was still meeting in 1903 -- my great-grandfather, M. L. Vaughn, pastored there in 1902-03.

A group of about two dozen folks met to fellowship around shovels, weedeaters, chain saws, rakes, axes and various sorts of clippers. Much progress was made, but much work remains to be done. The group decided to meet again on Saturday May 27 for another workday.

Pictures of Cool Springs Cemetery and headstones

Your opinion???

I was asked if I would get opinions on something. What do you think of preachers telling jokes in the pulpit? Is it appropriate? Always? Usually? Once in awhile? Never?

I've heard preachers who seem to plan a joke to explain or highlight a point; I've heard some who seem to use the sermon material as something to string their jokes together; I've heard some who didn't plan jokes but thought of them as they were preaching -- anyway, what is your opinion?

This day in 1863

May 10, 1863: Confederate General Stonewall Jackson died after being accidentally shot by his own troops.

Poor, needy and thirsty

"When the poor and needy seek water, and there is none, and their tongue faileth for thirst, I the LORD will hear them: I the God of Israel will not forsake them" Isaiah 41:17.

Whatever people may say or preachers teach, no one in this world will ever appreciate the Lord Jesus Christ, and the fullness that there is in Him, till they are brought by the eternal Spirit of God to feel that they are poor and needy.

It is God's way, and has been in ages past, and will be still to the end of time, to teach His people first of all their lost state and condition. Many of God's saints can look back to when they were in deep soul trouble. The beginning with them was sorrow, accompanied with much heart searching, but the end will be peace and eternal glory with their God.

— Excerpt from a sermon preached in 1901 by B. C. Turner, Leicester, England (thanks to W. W. Fulton)

Baptist Accomplishments

John Canne was born sometime around 1590 in England. He was frequently persecuted by his enemies, but very much loved by his friends. Canne organized the Broadmead Church in Bristol, England in 1641, after returning from Holland. The greatest work of Canne's life was his marginal references to the Bible. It was published in Amsterdam in 1637. This monumental work took over twenty years. It was the first English Bible with references throughout. His leading principle was that the Scripture was the best interpreter of Scripture. Canne died in England in 1667.

John Gill was born in Kettering, England in 1697 and died in London in 1771. He was pastor of the Horselydown Church from 1720 through 1771. Gill was almost entirely self-educated, having only a few years of grammar school in Kettering. He left the grammar school rather than be forced to attend the Anglican Church. He taught himself Hebrew, Greek, and Latin. His Commentary on the Whole Bible, which can still be purchased, was published in the years 1746-1768. He is the only individual to comment on every verse of the Bible.

Two Prayers of Paul

II Timothy 4:14 Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil: the Lord reward him according to his works: 15 Of whom be thou ware also; for he hath greatly withstood our words. 16 At my first answer no man stood with me, but all men forsook me: I pray God that it may not be laid to their charge. 17 Notwithstanding the Lord stood with me, and strengthened me; that by me the preaching might be fully known, and that all the Gentiles might hear: and I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion.

In this passage of II Timothy, we find a request by the apostle Paul for two groups of people: (1) for Alexander the coppersmith, who was bold and withstood the work of God, Paul asks the Lord requite him according to his evil work; but (2) for those who were weak and failed to stand for the work of God, Paul asks the Lord forgive them. May the Lord bless us to understand the difference.