Truth Magazine

The very mention of this word often times sends chills down a person. In our society when we hear that some- one is addicted to something, or someone, it immediately brings to our minds certain words. Helplessness, lack of self-control. Webster even defines the word “addict” as such: “to give oneself up (to some strong habit) a per- son addicted to some habit, esp. to the use of a narcotic drug.”

My point is that this word often carries with it a negative meaning in our society. I believe that although it is true that some folks can and do become addicted to things that are harmful and that are certainly contrary to God’s teaching it is possible to be addicted to good things! By good things I mean something that is not wrong according to God’s holy word, something that violates no Bible principles. Yes I believe that if I want to be pleasing to God I had better be “addicted” to certain things.

Let me share with you some addictions all Christians need:

1. Study (2 Tim. 2:15). If I’m a Christian I better be addicted to the study of God’s word.

2. Prayer (1 Thess. 5:17). If I’m a Christian I better be addicted to prayer. I had better be talking to my God on a daily basis.

3. Truth (John 17:7). If I’m a Christian I better be addicted to the truth. It is truth that will set us free. “Thy word is truth.”

4. Self-control (Rom. 6:12). If I’m a Christian I better be addicted to controlling my flesh. I must not live after the flesh.

5. Souls of Others (Ezek. 3:18). If I’m a Christian I better be addicted to teaching others the gospel. For one day I will give an account of my love for or my lack of love for the souls of others.

Perhaps you can think of more things for which a Christian should be addicted. I believe you get the idea of what I am saying about the word addiction. It can and does carry with it a negative idea concerning some things in our society but I hope you can see the positive side of being addicted to certain things. Paul (1 Cor. 16:15) makes the following statement:

I beseech you, brethren, (ye know the house of Stephanas that it is the first fruits of Achaia, and that they have addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints (KJV).

This word addicted here is the Greek word tasso which means “have set themselves.” The NIV uses the word “devoted.” The American Standard uses the word “set.” They were addicted or devoted or set to the ministry of the saints. Are we?

Just think of the parallels that can be made between an addict in our society and their addiction, verses a Christian that is addicted to God.

1. Can’t live without it.

2. Must have it.

3. Need it.

4. The will and desire to do whatever it takes to be near or have that for which they are addicted.

5. The changes that an addiction can cause in one’s life.

Yes if you’re a Christian, I hope you are addicted to Jesus and his word. If you are not, let me be the first to tell you just what you are missing.

There is no high that can take you higher than Jesus! There is no drink that can pick you up or do as much for you, like drinking from God’s holy word! Are you addicted to the gospel? If not, open up the Bible and read for yourself about the love God has for you and the provisions he’s made that you and I might have eternal life. Just remember being addicted to God is not only good for your body but it’s good for your soul too. Yes, like all addictions it’s going to cost you. But don’t all addictions.

By Tim Haile

Does it really matter how we worship God? Some say no, but what does the Bible say? “God is a Spirit: and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth” (John 4:24). This verse tells us that worship is pre- scribed. That is, God has told us both what to do and how to do it. We must do what (“in truth”) God says to do, in the way (“in spirit”) that he said to do it! Men are not at liberty to just make up their own form of worship. In the area of religious service, God is not pleased with human ingenuity (Prov. 3:5-6; Jer. 10:23); he is pleased with human obedience (1 Sam. 15:22-23).

When it comes to our worship to God, we must cultivate a genuine desire to please God, and discipline ourselves to put God’s desires ahead of our own.

Almighty God Is the Object Of Our Praise

It is sinful when a person fails to properly honor God as his Creator. This sin preceded many others in a great list enumerated in Romans chapter one (Rom. 1:21, 25). For the most part, the Gentile peoples had abandoned and rejected the very God who had created and sustained them (Acts 14:17; 17:24-28). These sinners fabricated gods (idols) that would approve of their own sinful attitudes and actions. These idols were “dumb” (1 Cor. 12:2). They were incapable of even communicating with their misguided servants, much less doing anything for them. Isaiah 44:9-20 provides an excellent expose on the folly of idolatry. This type of outright idolatry is rare in our day, but is it possible that some people fail to give God the glory that he rightly deserves? I am afraid so.

People who do not appreciate the value of the object of their worship are not inclined to exercise great care in their worship. Those who know the Bible understand that God alone is worthy to receive our honor (John 4:24). When John fell down to worship an angel, the angel told him, “Do not! I am your fellow slave, and of your brothers who hold the testimony of Jesus. Worship God” (Rev. 19:10). When the crowds at Lystra attempted to worship Paul and Barnabas, Paul told them, “Men, why are you doing these things? We also are human beings like you in every way . . .” (Acts 14:15). True worship is rendered, not to men and angels, but to the living God who made all things. We worship the God who loved us (John 3:16), the God who died for us (Acts 20:28; John

15:13), and the God who teaches us (1 Cor. 2:13). This God is ever present, all-powerful, and all wise. True worshipers are strongly motivated to “give glory” to their God by “continually offering up the sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of their lips, confessing His name” (Luke 17:18; Heb. 13:15).

Does It Matter How We Approach God In Our Worship?

It is certainly possible for a person to worship God unscripturally. That is, either his attitude or his actions are wrong when he attempts to per- form his worship. Several examples could be cited. Cain’s “works were evil” in the worship that he offered unto God (1 John 3:12; Gen. 4:3). God killed Nadab and Abihu because they “offered strange fire before the Lord, which he commanded them not” (Lev. 10:1-2). Their actions constituted a corruption in worship. The same was true of the people in Malachi’s day. The people had “robbed God of tithes and offerings” (Mal. 3:8). He said they offered polluted bread and sick animals in their sacrifices to God, and that even their Governor would not be happy with that type of sacrifice (Mal. 1:8). What type of sacrifice do we offer when we approach God? Are there any signs that may suggest that our attitude or actions are wrong? Let us consider a couple of areas that may help us conduct a proper examination of ourselves (2 Cor. 13:5).

How We Behave During Worship

Worship is serious business, but I have attended places where the worship assembly was more like a community action meeting than a worship service. Rather than listen, concentrate, and participate, people would talk during prayers and singing. With some churches, members are so careless with their trash that the seats and floor of the auditorium will look like many movie theaters following worship services. Do some people forget that “all things are laid bare and exposed to the eyes of him with whom we must reckon” (Heb. 4:13)? God watches us in our worship assemblies. After punishing Aaron’s sons for their religious negligence, God told Aaron, “I will be sanctified in them that come nigh to me” (Lev. 10:3). This strong statement indicates that God does indeed care how we approach him in our worship.

How We Dress for Worship

Have you ever participated in a worship service in which the man who made the comments for the Lord’s supper, admonishing us to remember the sacrificial death of our divine Savior, was himself wearing a Goofy T-shirt? Please don’t get excited or upset. We are not suggesting any type of worship dress code, but we are suggesting that those who come “nigh unto God” to honor him, should understand the relative importance of such an occasion, and they should dress for that occasion. When Christians wear the same slouchy clothes to worship services that they might wear to a ball game or to a family outing, they say that their attitude towards the one event, differs in no way from the other!

Please consider the following principles from the Old and New Testaments. We do not appeal to these passages in an effort to establish a standard or dress code, but these examples do set forth basic principles about putting God first in all that we do, including what we wear in worship.

How would you dress if you were going for an interview with the Governor (Mal. 1:8)? Isn’t one much greater than the Governor with us when we gather for worship (Matt. 18:20)?

The Levitical priests were not to wear common clothes when ad- ministering their duties (Exod. 28). Christians are a “kingdom of priests before God” (Rev. 1:6).

The church is the bride of Christ (2 Cor. 11:2). Do you generally wear the same kind of clothes to a ball game that you would wear to a wed- ding? What do you wear to church services?

The Lord’s supper is a memorial supper designed by God for Christians to commemorate the death of Jesus on the cross (1 Cor. 11:23-29). Funerals are memorial services for the purpose of remembering and honoring the dead. How do you generally dress when attending a funeral service?

Should we be careful about what we wear to worship services? At the very least we can say that one should not have an apathetic, lackadaisical attitude about what he wears as he presumes to approach the God of heaven and earth, to worship him.

When We Arrive at Worship

Is it appropriate for people to consistently show up late for worship services? We know that it is sinful to forsake the assembly (Heb. 10:25), but is there anything wrong with partially missing the assembly? In order to have an assembly people must have agreed upon certain assembly terms. Of necessity, there must be a certain time and a certain place. These two factors are essential. These terms are accepted by persons who follow the approved apostolic example of joining a local church for the purpose of corporate work, study, and worship (Acts 9:26; 11:26). Let us understand that such local church assemblies are God’s way for his people to fulfill these duties (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 14:26; Acts 2:42). Willful negligence in failing to respect the meeting times and place of the local church constitutes disobedience to God.

Let us not think of church services in the same way we do a movie. It may be somewhat annoying to some people, but arriving at the movie a little late is not a sin. Willfully and consistently arriving at church services late reflects disinterest and apathy. It certainly shows that we have failed to “seek first the kingdom of God” as Matthew 6:33 teaches. It also suggests that we do not “love the Lord   . . . with all of our heart, soul, and mind” (Matt. 22:37). We have allowed something else to take God’s place.

For the Christian, worship to God is both a privilege and a responsibility. It provides us with a means of both thanking and praising the sovereign God of the universe. Let us therefore “come boldly unto the throne of grace” and serve God with diligence and zeal. Let us never be characterized by laziness and carelessness, for it is this attitude that will cause God to “vomit us out of His mouth” (Rev. 3:16). Neither let us be characterized by the rebellious spirit of Jeroboam that would allow us to set up our own golden calves of corrupt worship (1 Kings 12:28). Let us strive to be true worshipers, worshiping God in “spirit and in truth.”

First we were treated to a dose of “values clarification” which, like all such deceitful terms, really means just the opposite: “values confusion,“ or “values substitution. ”They have succeeded in making many believe that they have clarified something, when in reality their devotees are now confused over what is of value and what is not. The proponents of so-called “values clarification” have succeeded in great part in getting their values substituted for the values which our founding fathers used to form this nation. The only thing that the ungodly have clarified is their determination to destroy the values of others.

Now, we are being treated to a different medicine of “smooth and fair speech,” and, like the previous one, it also is deceitful. (What can you expect from those who are servants of the Father of lies? — John 8:44) The American Psychological Association has come out with an article, in defense of consensual sex between adults and children, in which we are told that we should use “value-free” terms. We are told that we should abandon such terms as “child abuse,” “molestation,” and “victims,” in our discussion of pedophilia, when the cases are about consensual sex, and should discuss the issue with “value-free” terms!

First the purveyors of ungodliness confused and substituted values, and now they are trying to abolish them altogether! In other words, we should not speak of any sin as being sinful! Anything that man wants to do should be spoken of in euphemistic lingo! How convenient!

The Nor th American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) says: “Sex does not pose the danger to minors claimed by police, prosecutors and prudes crusading against man/boy love.” (Note how deceitfully the statement switches from “sex” to “love”! No one is crusading against a man loving a boy, but against a man having sex with a boy. However, isn’t “love” a value?) As to values, is not the above quote a statement of the value (to the pedophile) of consensual man/boy sex? (He considers it of great value!) When the pedophile calls others “crusading prudes,” is he using a “value-free” term? The ungodly want everyone else to use “value-free” terms, but they are exempt from their own law; they refer to us as “crusading prudes.” Couldn’t they find a term, with which to refer to us, without using one that puts a bad value on us? They can have their values, but others cannot!

Don’t let euphemistic terms deceive you! Fornication is still fornication, even though the self-styled intellectuals call it “consensual sex.” Why not call murder “specialized elimination,” or stealing, “personalized acquisition and appropriation”? (After all, the bank robber simply has an “alternate lifestyle” in directing his economics!) Would these “value-free” terms make these sins acceptable? Would cow manure smell better if we called it “bovine excreta”? Whom do they think they are kidding with their call for “value-free” terms? Well, they are kidding untold numbers of people, those who are not thinking for themselves! That’s why the Holy Spirit through the apostle Paul wrote Romans 16:18.

When I was a young preacher, an old-timer told me: “Of what the false teacher accuses you, he himself is guilty.” How true, how true! The “value-free” advocate will try to press his values on you! He will criticize you for “criticizing,” judge you for “judging,” won’t tolerate your “intolerance,” will put you down for not recognizing everyone’s “self-esteem,” and is absolutely sure that there are “no absolutes.” Just remember this, all you crusading prudes!

By Connie W. Adams

When Jesus warned the apostles to “take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees” they reasoned that he said this “because we have taken no bread” (Matt. 16:6-7). He quickly reminded them of the miracles of feeding the five thousand and then the four thousand and how much was taken up in each case. He said their problem was one of “little faith” (v. 8). They could not get past the physical to the spiritual. “How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees? Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees” (vv. 11, 12).

The sect of the Pharisees began in an effort to preserve pure Judaism and to protect it from the compromising influences of Hellenism. These Hasidim could foresee everything that was typically Jewish being swallowed up by the influences of the Greeks. Over time they built a scaffold around the law to be sure it was protected. But in time they could not distinguish between their scaffold and the law itself. Their inventions became the “doctrines and commandments of men” which Jesus condemned. They had considerable influence. The synagogue activities were under their control. Since these doubled as schools, their influence on rising generations was great. That was their leaven — their influence.

The Sadducees were more liberal in their approach. They sought means of compromising with the Greeks during the inter-testament period. Consequently, those who ruled Palestine from the time of Alexander the Great through the Syrian and Egyptian periods (the Seleucids and Ptolemies) looked to the Sadducees as a local link in ruling the people. The function of the high priest fell under the control of the Sadducees. He became a sort of liaison between the ruling power and the Jewish subjects. Doctrinally they were weak. They denied the existence of angels and spirits and rejected any expectation of a resurrection from the dead. They were the modernists of the day. Their “leaven” was deadly.

The Pharisees bound where God did not bind and the Sadducees loosed where God did not loose. Both errors are to be avoided. There was no ground for compromise with either doctrine. It would not have done for the disciples to have written papers opposing the doctrine of either the Pharisees or the Sadducees and then go arm in arm with them while they sowed their seeds of error.

The Leaven of False Teaching

We have a remarkable thing in the land (and in other lands). There are those who preach and write that they do not agree with those who are teaching that it is scriptural for people to divorce and remarry without the exception which Jesus stated in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9. Some are saying that the alien is not subject to the law of Christ and that baptism sanctifies the marriages of those divorced and remarried when fornication was not the cause for the divorce. Then there are those who say Jesus was simply explaining the Mosaic law and setting the record straight. Some say adultery is not sexual at all but is the breaking of the covenant of marriage. These and other erroneous views have caused trouble in congregations, and have generated false hope for those living in open violation of the will of God. Now, if you disagree with all this hodgepodge of error, why do you link arms and work with those who are teaching such things? Why are you so defensive about them? Why are those who not only oppose the doctrine but will not extend the right hand of fellowship to those who teach it the greatest enemies of all? Beware of the leaven — the doctrine.

In the Philippines there are some teaching the doctrine of the one eternal covenant that no law was nailed to the cross, only sin was so nailed. There are some there (both Americans and Filipinos) who say they reject the doctrine but they go arm in arm with those who are teaching it and have declared war on those of us who openly oppose the teaching and who admonish brethren not to “bid Godspeed” to those who bring such error.

When men who speculate that there are eons of time in the days of creation in Genesis 1, or eons between the days of creation, are called on to teach young people or to lecture before invited brethren, it is time for someone to warn of the leaven of theistic evolution or its close cousin. The forum given to men who hold and teach such views offers credibility to them and places any of us who raise questions about it under a cloud of suspicion. Some have turned around what the Lord said. They must think he said, “Beware of those who oppose the leaven.” No, he said “Beware of the leaven” and he defined that as “the doctrine” of the Pharisees and Sadducees.

Leaven permeates whatever it touches. When it is applied to false doctrine the warning is clear. We must not be contaminated by erroneous teaching from either end of the spectrum.

Error is not as good as truth. It never has been. It works like an infectious disease to destroy all in its wake. When it is brought by men of charm, education, sophistication, skill and experience, the danger of the leaven is all the more serious.

I wish those who have found room in Romans 14 for fellowship with all sorts of false teaching (and teachers) would come to terms with the issue of the “leaven” of these views. Beware the leaven!