Truth Magazine

By Edward O. Bragwell, Sr. 

“Children of light” are assigned three re- sponsibilities:

1. . . . must prove what is acceptable unto the Lord;

2. . . . must have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness;

3. . . . must reprove (ex- pose) the works of darkness.

I n the first par t of Ephesians chapter 5, the Apostle Paul contrasts the “children of light” (v. 8) with the “children of disobedience”(v.6). Light stands for all that is in harmony with God’s will, with darkness being the very opposite. “Children of light” are the same as children of obedience. “Children of disobedience” the same as children of darkness. In verses 8 through 11, “children of light” are assigned three responsibilities:

1. Children of light must prove what is acceptable unto the Lord (v. 10). There are two basic senses in which something may be proven: (1) “To establish the truth or validity of by presentation of argument or evidence” and (2) “To determine the quality of by testing; try out.” (Microsoft Bookshelf 98, Dictionary) In the first instance one proves a proposition by appealing to the objective evidence that sustains it. In spiritual matters, this evidence would be the Scriptures. In second instance, after one has proven the proposition by objective evidence, he may then “prove” its worthiness by putting it to the test in practice. It is this sense that “proving” is used in verse 10. Vincent says the meaning in this verse is that of “proving by your walk” (Word Studies of the New Testament, III:399).

“Children of light,” having already proven or established their walk to be in the light by the evidence, must now continually prove it in the second sense – experimentally by “proving (it) by (their) walk.” It is much like the old saying, “The proof of the pudding is in the eating.” Romans 12:2 suggests the same idea: “And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and accept- able, and perfect, will of God.” (Italics mine, eob).

Children of light must actively and constructively prove (walk in) “what is” acceptable, not merely oppose what is not acceptable. We cannot just be “aginners” (a-gin-urs) — yes, I know that word is not in the dictionary, but it ought to be.

There are church responsibilities to meet, such as public worship (Heb. 10:25; Acts 20:7), doing one’s share of the church’s work (Eph. 4:16), and helping set in order things lacking (Tit. 1:5). There are personal responsibilities to meet, such as personal evangelism (Acts 8:4), caring for the needy (Jas. 1:27) and other daily obligations of life that must be met — such as financial obligations (Rom. 13:8; 1 Tim. 5:8; Eph. 4:28; 2 Thess. 3:10), home duties (Eph. 5:22-

6:4), civic and civil functions (Rom. 13:1-5). When we faithfully practice these things were are “proving what is acceptable unto the Lord.”

We must prove what is acceptable unto the Lord — not ourselves, not our families, not our brethren, not our neighbors, but the Lord.

2. Children of light must have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness (v. 11). Back in verse 7, Paul writes, “Be not ye therefore partakers with them”—“them” being the “children of disobedience” (v. 6). One may have fellowship with a per- son or thing by joint-participation or partnership according to the basic meaning of the word “fellowship.” Or, he may have fellowship by way of endorsement or encouragement as is suggested by the “right hand of fellowship” (Gal. 2:9).

One must have no fellowship (joint- participation or encouragement) with the children of disobedience in either moral (Eph. 5:3-5) or doctrinal darkness (2 John 9-11). As children of light, we must not fellowship false doctrine (either its teaching or practice), in or out of the church. Nor can we fellowship immorality (fornication, adultery, homosexuality, etc), either in or out of a marriage relationship.

3. Children of light must reprove (expose — New King James) the works of darkness (v. 11). Christians cannot claim faithfulness simply because they do not jointly participate with children of disobedience in their darkness, or simply because they don’t overtly endorse or encourage them in their works. We must go a step further and reprove or expose the sins for what they are. Gideon (Judg. 6) did not merely refuse to join in the idol worship of his father, nor did he simply refrain from openly encouraging his father’s idols, nor did he merely build up the Lord’s al- tar and leave his father’s idols alone. He got busy and destroyed the false gods and the means of sacrificing to them. Under the Christian dispensation we are not to destroy the physical property of those engaged in false religion and immoral practices — like those who burn church buildings or bomb abortion clinics. The Christian’s weapons are not carnal, but are spiritual “casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing ever y thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ” (2 Cor. 10:5, NK J — italics mine, eob).

Churches are not sound simply for not being direct partakers with “children of disobedience.” Often elders and other brethren will console themselves, by saying something like this, “We do not go along with that doctrine or practice and we do not endorse it in any way.” Yet, if one gets in the pulpit and really exposes the false doctrines, practices, and teachers for what they are, these same brethren act like they are sit- ting in a bed of fire ants. As long as the opposition is passive and quiet they feel comfortable because the cost of their opposition is minimal, but when it becomes active and open the stakes are raised consider- ably.

So, while they claim to not jointly participate in the matters under consideration, they do not want anything openly said against them. When a church claims to be “straight” on the issues that separate us from the denominations, the institutional issues, the marriage-divorce-remarriage issue, the progressive creation issue (the doctrine that the creation days were long periods of indefinite length or that there were long periods of indefinite length between the days, that has been floating around lately among brethren), or any other issue that is vital to the faith, it might be good to ask a few questions. If you do not participate or encourage these doctrines and those that teach them, then do you encourage the local preacher to expose them plainly for what they are? Do you allow and/or encourage your Bible classes to be used to expose them? Do you invite preachers for meetings who are known to speak kindly and plainly against these errors, exposing them in such a way that there can be no doubt what these errors are about nor any doubt where that congregation stands.

Individual Christians and churches must be busy doing those things acceptable unto the Lord. At the same, time they must refuse to partake of sinful doctrines and practices in any way. Then, they must go a step further and expose sin and error for what it is. This would not be necessary if sin always appeared to be what it really is on the surface. It must be exposed by shining the light of the gospel on it — by takage them in their works. We must go a step further and reprove or expose the sins for what they are. Gideon (Judg. 6) did not merely refuse to join in the idol worship of his father, nor did he simply refrain from openly encouraging his father’s idols, nor did he merely build up the Lord’s al- tar and leave his father’s idols alone. He got busy and destroyed the false gods and the means of sacrificing to them. Under the Christian dispensation we are not to destroy the physical property of those engaged.

When it is pointed out that certain things are not binding today, someone says, “But, it’s perpetual,” which means, it has not ceased, they say. Let’s take a look at such reasoning:

A Perpetual Sabbath

The Seventh Day Adventists tell us that the sabbath day is still binding because it is a perpetual sabbath. They will quote, “Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant” (Exod. 31:16). It is reasoned that since the sabbath is perpetual, it is like perpetual motion, never ceasing. To be consistent with this reasoning, they would have to burn incense as well, for the Scriptures say, “And when Aaron lighteth the lamps at even, he shall burn incense upon it, a perpetual incense before the Lord throughout your generations” (Exod. 30:8). These folks do not burn incense. Why not, since it is perpetual? According to Leviticus 6:20, “. . . the tenth part of an ephah of fine flour for a meat offering perpetual.” If perpetual means without end, why don’t folks offer meat offerings and burnt offerings today?

God Often Limits Perpetual Things

A reading of Exodus 30:8 will show that these perpetual incense and burnt offerings were to be observed “throughout your generations.” This places a time limit on these Old Testament affairs. When the nation of Israel ended, so did their law, ordinances, sabbath and all! Paul told the Romans, “For Christ is the end of the law” (Rom. 10:4). We live today under the law of Christ (Gal. 6:2; John 1:17).

The rainbow covenant was said to be perpetual. In this promise God said, “And I will establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of the flood; neither shall there anymore be a flood to destroy the earth. And God said, This is the token of the covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations” (Gen. 9:11-12). This promise will continue uninterrupted as long as this earth stands. It’s perpetual until time shall be no more. Then, it will end. It’s that simple.

The book of Psalms is filled with exuberant expressions of praise to God. His various attributes are exalted and his wonderful works and blessings are gratefully acknowledged. Along with the recognition of his majesty, the book of Psalms exhorts to practical application of that recognition. Let’s look at an example of what I mean.

Psalm 89:5-8 reads as follows, “And the heavens shall praise thy wonders, O Lord: thy faithfulness also in the congregation of the saints. For who in the heaven can be compared unto the Lord? Who among the sons of the mighty can be likened unto the Lord? God is greatly to be feared in the assembly of the saints, and to be had in reverence of all them that are about him. O Lord God of hosts, who is a strong Lord like unto thee? Or to thy faithfulness round about thee?”

The italized portion of the passage is the practical application of the words of praise and glory that surround it. Yes, God is all those things and more; worthy of praise, incomparable, strong and faithful. Our acknowledgment of those attributes demands expression. In view of all that God is, how reverent our worship should be! I think of Isaiah when he recognized that he was in the presence of Deity. He said in Isaiah 6:5, “Woe is me! For I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts.” I am reminded of the reaction of the children of Israel at Mt. Sinai when they heard the voice of God and saw the multiple expressions of his presence. In Exodus 20:18, 19, we find, “And all the people saw the thunderings, and the lightnings, and the noise of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking: and when the people saw it, they removed, and stood afar off. And they said unto Moses, Speak thou with us, and we will hear: but let not God speak with us, lest we die.” In each case there was a profound sense of awe and wonder, as well as a sense of their own unworthiness in the presence of God.

It is a glorious and wonderful blessing to be able to worship God. What a privilege to be able to join our voices together in “psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody” in our hearts to the Lord; to sing “with grace in your hearts to the Lord.” We talk to God together and know that he is listening in our prayers. Each Lord’s day we commemorate the greatest manifestation of love the world will ever know, the death of the Son of God, in our partaking of the Lord’s supper. We also freely, and with joy in our hearts, give for the work of the Lord as we have been prospered, and together we study and seek to learn more fully “the engrafted word, which is able to save our souls.”

Is there a danger that familiarity can dull the sense of awe, reverence and wonder, when we come before the Lord to worship? Is there a danger that this incredible privilege might become commonplace? Truly, the more we worship the more we should come to adore him. The better we know God, the greater should be the sense of awe and holy fear. But I fear that in many cases, familiarity breeds a diminishing of the sense of reverence, wonder, and holy fear when we come together to worship God.

In Nehemiah 8, we find a situation where the Jews who had returned from Babylonian captivity requested to hear the words of the book of the law of Moses. This was the first time in a very long time that these people listened to the word. Verse 3 of Nehemiah 8 tells us, “And he read therein before the street that was before the water gate from the morning until midday, before the men and the women, and those that could understand; and the ears of all the people were attentive unto the book of the law.” Verse 5 says, “And Ezra opened the book in the sight of all the people; (for he was above all the people;) and when he opened it, all the people stood up.” The close of verse 7 tells us, “and the people stood in their place.” The last sentence of verse 9 informs us “For all the people wept, when they heard the words of the law.” What an incredible display of reverence and respect for God and his word that day was! It was also a pivotal day in the history of the Jews. For six hours or more the people “stood in their place” in the street, and “were attentive unto the book of the law.”

I would never say that reverence and respect for God demands that we all stand in a street for six or more hours and listen attentively to the word. But I do believe that reverence and respect means that we will sit attentively for 40 minutes and listen to his word. Perceived familiarity with God may very well be the thing that causes adults to be unable to sit without a drink of water for an hour long service. Or for those who do not have a medical reason, to be unable to endure perhaps a bit of discomfort and wait until services are over to go to the restroom.

Have we become so used to the idea of worshiping God that we cannot stay awake for one hour? Sometimes I think of the words of Jesus, “What, could ye not watch with me one hour?” (Matt. 26:40). Can’t the children be played with before and after services, and be taught that the services are a time for reverence and respect? Surely, nobody seeks to be disrespectful to God and his word on purpose. I believe it is something that folks just fall into without thinking, and that is the problem. If we truly think about our worship and who we are worshiping, we will humble ourselves and with awe devote our full attention to what we are doing.

As we consider our approach to God in worship there is a passage that comes to mind. It is found in 1 Timothy 2:8-10, which says, “I will therefore that men pray everywhere, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting. In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; but (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.” I do not believe that the principle of proper adornment is limited in God’s word to women only.

It appears to me that the context of 1 Timothy 2 is the matter of public worship. In verses 3-7 Paul digresses from that subject a little, only to come back to it in verse 8. In verse 9, the word for “adorn” means to put in order, arrange, make ready. “By the use of this word, Paul indicates that the adornment of the Christian woman should be one in which order, not disorder, obtains. And this orderliness must not extend merely to the relationship of the various articles of wearing apparel to one another, but also to the relationship of that apparel to her Christian character and testimony. In other words, the apparel must be congruous with, fitting to, and consistent with what she is, a child of God” (Wuest, Word Studies in the Greek New Testament, Vol. 2, 46).

The word translated as “modest” means well arranged, seemly, decent, according to a standard that is proper and decorous. Surely, when all such is considered, the point can and should be made that how we appear should always be, first of all, consistent with the character of one who follows Christ; and secondly, congruous with and decorous according to what we are doing. Obviously that principle does not apply only to women.

When we come together to worship God, should not our dress manifest the sense of reverence, respect, and awe that we have for him whom we are worshiping? Should it  not  be  appropriate  for  the  most  important privilege that we have? How can T-shirts, blue jeans, and such like, that are completely appropriate for certain activities we engage in, be appropriate when we come to worship the God of the universe? If such clothing is all that we have and the best we have, fine. But if it is not, what could be a more appropriate activity for wearing the best we have than worship? And certainly, when any man stands before the assembly to lead in prayer, preach, make announcements, serve at the Lord’s supper, isn’t it appropriate and decorous to be dressed in such a way as to show any visitors that might come that we are in awe of our God? Shouldn’t our dress at worship reflect the deepest reverence and respect and the knowledge that our worship to God is the most wonderful and glorious privilege that we have?

The biblical account of creation is initially set forth in simple narrative form in Genesis 1-2. The account shows every sign of being an historical narrative to be under- stood in its literal and obvious sense. Dealing fairly with the text itself demands one acknowledge that the first readers would have concluded a simple truth: God created the world and all things in it, including man, over a period of six literal, consecutive days at the beginning of time. However, this article will seek to address the view of the creation presented in other passages of Scripture as the inspired writers look back on the Genesis account of creation. In this way, we can see the divine commentary given to us to aid in properly interpreting this important and fundamental text.

Genesis 5:1-3

This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made He him; male and female created He them, and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created. And Adam lived a hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth . . . (ASV).

The fact that Adam and Eve were created on the same day is here affirmed. Two measures of time, a day and years, are used in the same context. Consistency demands the same rule apply to interpreting both. Was the day actually a long epoch or a literal day? Were the years a period of approximately 365 literal days or a collection of many epochs? Obviously, the literal sense of both “day” and “years” best fits the context.

Exodus 20:9-11; 31:14-17

Each passage views the six days of creation and following day of rest as analogous to the Jews’ six days of work and following day of rest, the Sabbath. The days are analogous in length, order, and function. If they are not meant to suggest such likeness, there would appear no legitimate purpose for the parallel made between them.

Psalm 33:6-9

By the word of Jehovah were the heavens made, and all the host of them by the breath of His mouth. He gathereth the waters of the sea together as a heap: He layeth up the deeps in store-houses. Let all the earth fear Jehovah: let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of Him. For He spake, and it was done; He commanded, and it stood fast (ASV).

God’s power as manifest in creation is the focus of this passage. When God spoke, it was done and stood fast. How could this passage be harmonized with an interpretation of the creation account which holds that God spoke to begin a process that took millions or billions or years to “stabilize” into the form ultimately reached? There is no way to harmonize the two for Psalm 33 is diametrically opposed to such views. Yet, our progressive creationists tell us that when God spoke into existence the heavens and the earth, he actually caused the big bang to take place 15 to 20 billion years ago which finally resulted in the earth forming some 4.5 billion years ago. They tell us that when God spoke light into existence on a first day, it took millions of years for enough cooling and clearing of the atmosphere to take place so that the sun, moon and stars could be seen to have already been made when he spoke to make them on a fourth day. Such interpretations may sprout from a fertile imagination, but they wither away when examined in the light of the plain teaching of Psalm 33.

Mark 10:6 and Matthew 19:4-6

In answering a question asked by the Pharisees about divorce, Jesus referred them back to the origin of marriage with Adam and Eve. Jesus affirmed, “He which made them at the beginning made them male and female” (Matt. 19:4, KJV ). The progressive creationist might respond that this refers to the beginning of marriage which may have come millions or billions of years after the beginning of creation. However, the parallel account of Mark 10:6 takes care of that quibble by saying, “But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.” If the progressive creationists are correct, man and woman were brought on the scene much closer to our end of time than the beginning. Again, the interpretation forced on the Bible by Progressive Creationism does not harmonize with other biblical references back to creation. Bert Thompson made the following point in commenting on the same passage:

In this context, there is additional information that should be considered as well. For example, concerning Adam and Eve, Jesus declared: “But from the beginning of the creation, Male and female made he them” (Mark 10:6; cf., Matthew 19:4). Christ thus dates the first humans from the creation week. The Greek word for “beginning” is arche, and is used of “absolute, denoting the beginning of the world and of its history, the beginning of creation.” The word in the Greek for “creation” is ktiseos, and de- notes “the sum-total of what God has created” (Cremer, Biblico-Theological Dictionary of New Testament Greek, 1962, 113, 114, 381, emp. in orig.). Unquestionably, then, Jesus placed the first humans at the dawn of creation. To reject this truth, one must contend that: (a) Christ knew the Universe was in existence billions of years before man, but, accommodating Himself to the ignorance of His age, deliberately misrepresented the situation; or (b) The Lord, living in pre-scientific times, was uninformed about the matter (despite the fact that He was there as Creator — Colossians 1:16). Either of these allegations is blasphemous (Thompson, Creation Compromises, 1995, 179).

Other passages could be addressed regarding the issue as well. However, these are sufficient to show that the biblical writers looking back on the creation account took it as a literal statement that God created heaven, earth and all therein in six literal, consecutive days with man’s creation taking place in that beginning of  thecreation week. Any conclusion to the contrary needs to deal with these passages as well as Genesis 1 and 2 in order to show from the contexts that such a conclusion is sustained by proper exegesis.