No one preaches on it!

      Over the years I have heard people make general statements about what preachers don’t preach. I love it when they say it to me and I turn around and say, “I preach on that!” Only to hear, “Well, you are rare.” I do not believe that statement either. After all, how does one know what is preached in all the pulpits across the land? Anyway, one such general statement was made recently that no one preaches on the sin of gluttony. Well, I have spoken on this from time to time, as others have, and I shall do so with this article.

Is there such thing as the sin of gluttony? Even though it is not specifically mentioned, it is mentioned. Just as smoking and doing drugs is not mentioned specifically, they, too, are mentioned. In Galatians 5:19-21, Paul lists a number of transgression, that those who practice such will not inherit the kingdom of God. In verse 21, the apostle said, “and the such like…” This would include all other sins that relate to the works of the flesh.

When you read the list of wicked acts people are guilty of committing, you will notice that many of them have to do with uncontrolled desires. This is the reason that the text followed up the fruit of the Spirit that should exist in God’s children, and one of which was self-control (vr. 23). 

Some might think that a person who is addicted to heroin doesn’t need it to live, so how can one, who needs food to live, ever be considered addicted to food? The answer has to do with self-control. There are times people eat because they are depressed, feel lonely, or reasons other than they are hungry. Christians, must be able to walk away and be able to resist. Those who can’t are transgressing (I Cor. 9:27).

I have asked myself on many occasions,: Am I eating because I have not eaten in a while and I need my strength, or have I just eaten and can’t resist the temptation to keep eating, losing my self-control? Remember, even the crack addict eventually stops for a brief time, until the desire comes again. Let us beware of the danger.

                                                                                                                                                                                                         Chuck

How do you restore them? 

 The scriptures make it perfectly clear that there is a danger facing every child of God, and that is falling away (Heb. 3:12; 4:1; I Cor. 10:12 etc.). Knowing that there are Christians that turn their back on the Lord, we need to understand what the role of the faithful are when that happens. Since we know that those who fall away have a duty to return, let’s focus our attention on the responsibilities placed upon the faithful towards those who have departed.

We read in James 5:19-20, these words, “Brethren, if anyone among you wanders from the truth, and someone turns him back, let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save a soul from death and cover a multitude of sins.” This text gives us plenty of insight as to the duties the faithful have towards the unfaithful.

The first thing that we glean from these inspired words is that Christians can know when another Christians turns his back on the Lord. I am not saying God’s people can read the thoughts of others. It’s just that this text implies that children of God can help their brothers and sisters in Christ because they can know when one has wanders away from the truth. How? Because the faithful know what the truth is. Therefore, when another does not abide in those truth, they are found out.

So what does one do when they see a member of the body of Christ not abiding in that truth? The worst thing we can do is ignore it. When the church at Corinth did that, they were rebuked (I Cor. 5:1-7).   To think, “It is none of my business” is not proper thinking. It is our business to be concerned for the spiritual welfare of our Christian family, and of course their physical needs too. Not only that, we have the ability to know when a member of the body of Christ is transgressing. If that were not true, then how could one fulfill their duty in helping to restore the fallen?

Getting back to how we help the fallen, Paul gives us some incite as to how we can help them, and he said be spiritual (Gal. 6:1). In other words, the ungodly can be helped by godly people. This is why Jesus said that one must remove the beam out of their own eye before they remove a speck from their brother’s eye (Matt. 7:1-4). It isn’t wrong to identify and try to help the fallen. The problem comes when one is playing the hypocrite while trying to do so.

Looking at the text in James 5 again, we need to see that we are told that those who have wandered away need to be told to turn back, else they will remain lost in their sins. That may sound harsh, but you cannot sugar coat the lost state of someone. They need to know what they have done was wrong and what they need to do to fix it. There are many examples of brethren doing this. Paul did it to Peter (Gal. 2:11-14); Peter did it to Simon (Acts 8:20-23); and Paul did it to the church at Corinth (I Cor. 5:1-7), etc.

No matter what a brother or sister has done, the goal is to bring them back. There need not be hatred towards them. Even when efforts to restore them are rejected and they are withdrawn from, they still need to be admonished as a brother and not as an enemy (II Thes. 3:15).  Of course, the step of delivering one to Satan, the withdrawing, happens after the wayward member refuses to meet and talk so as to get help. When that happens a church has no alternative other than to mark them (Matt. 18:15-17; Rom. 16:17-18).

The motivation to help a fallen member is easy to see. We don’t want to see anyone lost. Our desire is to help them get to heaven is our goal. It is out a love that we look out for one another. But the sad truth is, it isn’t always appreciated, but we must do the will of our Father.  

                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Chuck

Why did He create man?

      A couple of weeks ago I was in a class and was asked an interesting question. The person wanted to know that since God is omnipresent and omniscient – everywhere and all knowing (Heb. 4:13; Psa. 139:7-10), if He knew man would be so wicked, why did He create man?

Although this is a question that only God can answer, there are some things revealed in the scriptures that might give us some insight. We need to remember that just because our God is all knowing, it does not mean He cannot chose NOT to know things, He can. When Jeremiah spoke to the people of Judah, God said, “they have also built the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings to Baal, which I did not command or speak, nor did it come into My mind.” (Jer. 19:5).

Since our God did not think of something, did that limit His power? Of course not. Now, if God chose to know everything it would seem a little strange that in Genesis 5:6, we would find these words, “And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart.”  It would seem odd that God would create man in the beginning, knowing full well that the world would become so evil, that He would be upset about it.

 The scriptures reveal that God put in place a plan of redemption before the world was even created (Eph. 1:3-4). Does this mean that God knew that Adam and Eve would sin? It is not out of the realm of possibility. However, having a plan in place to help redeem mankind if they sinned, doesn’t mean our Creator knew it. I am not suggesting He didn’t know, all I am saying is, there are things our God can choose not to know.

Am I thankful mankind was created? Absolutely. But regardless of whether our Father chose to know everything, it doesn’t remove His great love for with He loved us. Giving us a soul that can live with Him forever – that is awesome just to think about (Gen. 1:26; Matt. 16:26).

                                                                                                                                                                                                           Chuck

The use of church funds

      We all know that religious groups today have used their collections to fund everything from pizza parties, senior trips to building gymnasiums and having day care centers. The question is, are there binding examples that will limit the use of church funds, and help use know what they are to be used for?                                                                                 

Let me just say that if there are no binding examples in scripture, then we must just as well discard the Bible, for the flood-gate would open up. This is no more true than when it comes to the church funds that are collected. And since many do not respect approved examples as a means to establishing authority, you have religious groups doing anything they want with their funds. This is the reason why people make light of this whole discussion.

We can quickly set some boundaries if we have a scripture that will come right out and limit the use of church funds. There is and it is found in I Timothy 5:16. Read this text carefully. You will notice that Christians were given a responsibility to take care of a financial need that the church was not responsible for thus making a distinction between the work of an individual and the work of the church. Failure to see this, we cause one to miss the binding examples surrounding church funds.

Local church take up a collection each Sunday (I Cor. 16:1-2), for the work of the church. What are those works? Evangelism (Eph. 3:10); Edification (Eph. 4:120 and helping needy saints (II Cor. 8:1-4).  Within these three areas we have examples of churches sending to brethren in need. We have examples of preachers being supported directly, to preach (II Cor. 11:8). Notice that we do not have examples of churches sending money to another church to support preachers. Is that significant? Yes. The pattern of sending directly to the one preaching hold the local church accountable to making sure they support faithful men. If church “A” sent funds to church “B”, and the support a false teacher, how does church “A” know it?  We need to see the wisdom of God in providing us with approved examples as a means of establishing Biblical authority.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                     Chuck

Why are examples binding? 

 Establishing Biblical authority for everything we do is vital for every Christian (Col. 3:17; I Pet. 4:11). However, how people go about establishing that authority has caused much disagreement in the religious realm.  Some have argued that examples are not a reliable tool in proving that God expects and demands His people do them today. Let’s consider this matter.

The first thing we need to understand is that we are talking about approved examples. When you find followers of Christ doing things that they were punished for, obviously we are NOT to follow their example (Acts 5:1-4; I Cor. 5:1-3, etc.). We also need to see that approved examples are governed by general and specific authority. By that I mean, when we read about Christians gathering in an “upper room” to worship (Acts 20:8), we are not limited to meeting in an upper room only, because there are examples of people meeting in different places (Rom. 16:3-5, etc.). Therefore, there was the specific command to worship (Jn. 4:24), but where you do it is open, thus, it is general.

I imagine one of the easiest ways to show that approved examples are binding today is due to the fact that we are told they are. Paul, in addressing the saints in Philippi, stated, “The things which you learned and received and heard and saw in me, these do, and the God of peace will be with you.” (Phil. 4:9). Nothing is more powerful than being told to follow the example of Jesus Christ (I Pet. 2:21).  There is authority in imitating, which again, is why Paul said to “imitate me” (I Cor. 4:16).

The difficulty in learning about the binding of examples, is knowing what was done lawfully as a custom that isn’t binding today. After all, we know that when Christians took the Lord’s Supper on the first day of the week (Acts 20:7), that it wasn’t a custom. We know there was commands to gather together regularly to remember the death of Christ (Matt. 26:26-28; I Cor. 11:23-26). So, knowing that Paul waited in Troas, 7 days (Acts 20:6), before heading back out. This way he could assemble with the saints on the first day of the week. We know we do not have authority to take the Lord’s Supper on any other day of the week.

When the above point is made, those is disagreement will then say, how come you do not greet one another with a holy kiss (Rom. 16:16)? If we state that it was the greeting custom of that day, they want to know how you know what examples are custom and what examples are binding today? The answer again goes back to understanding general and specific authority. If we had an example of Christians assembling on a different day of the week in a different place and time, then obviously the first day of the week would not be binding.  How did people greet one another in New Testament times? We might say, with a holy kiss? Yes. But was the emphasis on the “holy” or the “kiss”? Our greetings must be genuine. Did Judas greet Jesus with a “holy” kiss, when he betrayed the Lord? Of course not. 

The word greet means to welcome or salute. This is exactly how you could greet brethren even in a letter, which Paul often did (I Cor. 16:19; Phil. 4:21; Titus 3:15, etc.). Keep in mind that all examples that are binding today have a specific significance attached to it.  With Jesus resurrecting on the first day of the week, with the Holy Spirit coming upon the apostles and preaching the first time since Christ’s ascension, on the first day of the week, points to the significance of the example of the Christians taking the Lord’s Supper on that day. So, when you focus on the holy “kiss”, there isn’t any such significance attacked to the kiss in itself.  It is the holy greeting we need to focus on.

In our next article we will examine the work of the church in the area of binding examples. 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Chuck