Truth Magazine

By Bob Buchanon

Can you remember the first night you spent away from home? Do you remember tossing and turning in bed for a couple of hours and then complaining, AI think I have a tummy-ache. I want to go home.” That is a feeling most of us are familiar with. It is what we call “homesickness.” Many people who ought to have a spiritual homesickness do not. Too many Christians look at this earth as their “home” and have not developed a homesickness for heaven.

The Scriptures teach of this world and the relation that the Christian is to have to it. We must develop the proper attitude which says, I will live in this world, but not be of this world” (John 17:14-16). One’s soul is more precious than the whole world (Mark 8:36-37). It will either conquer the world or will be conquered by it! Paul told us not to be conformed to this world (Romans 12:1-2). We can never serve this world and look at it as “home” and be with God in the eternal world to come.

Most people would like to think that heaven will be their home after death. The subject of heaven is a very pleasant one to most readers, but we would like to postpone our “homecoming” just as long as possible. People have spent many hard hours and much money in building their houses, buying cars, beautiful clothes, etc. There is too much here that we hold dear for us to be willing to leave at this time. The fleeting joys of this world seem to entice more people than the eternal security in the presence of God. This is why many Christians find service and faithful obedience so difficult. They just are not homesick enough to sacrifice self and the present for eternity with God in heaven.

Jesus promised us that “home” with God will be much better than our “home” on this earth. He said, “Let not your heart be troubled: believe in God, believe also in me. In my Father’s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I come again, and will receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also” (John 14:1-3). Our life on this earth is so filled with problems and cares that it is hard for us to think of a home where God “shall wipe away every tear from their eyes; and death shall be no more; neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain, any more. . . ” (Rev. 21:4).

Abraham was a perfect example of one that lived by faith. He lived as an alien in the land of promise, not because he disliked Ur of Chaldees or loved Canaan, but because he was homesick, “. . he was looking for the city which has foundations, whose architect and builder is God” (Hebrews 11: 10). For true believers, to live by faith is to die in faith. The life of faith is a pilgrimage (see Hebrews 11: 13). Heaven is the only home of faithful believers. It is the better country to which those who live by faith are fully committed (Hebrews 11:16).

Paul told the Christians at Philippi that “our citizenship is in heaven” (Phil. 3:20). At one time in his life Paul would have said, “I am willing to go, but I want to stay.” Now he says, “I want to go, but I am willing to stay.” He knew that “to live is Christ” but “to die is gain” (Phil. 1:21).,Paul told Timothy that “. . the time of my departure is come. I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith: henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give to me at that day; and not to me only, but also to all them that have loved his appearing” (2 Tim. 4:6-8). He was telling the young preacher that he was ready to die, but not because he was tired of life; he was just homesick.

About the year A.D. 125 a Greek by the. name of Aristeides was writing to one of his friends about the new religion, Christianity. He was trying to explain the reasons for its extraordinary success. Here is a sentence from one of his letters: “If any righteous man among the Christians passes from this world, they rejoice and offer thanks to God, and they escort his body with songs and thanksgiving as if he were setting out from one place to another nearby.” What a beautiful description of faith in immortality~that a man sets out from one place to another nearby! He is going home! Is it any wonder that a religion like that swept paganism? Those who are gone before are not lost, not separated from us permanently; they are only waiting in another place nearby for us to join them. To the Christians it is going to be a wonderful homecoming. Are you homesick for heaven? Enough that you are working and serving God now so that you can draw as close to heaven in this life as possible? Perhaps it depends on where your “home” is.

Truth Magazine, XVIII:34: p. 2
June 27, 1974

By Johnny Stringer

There are those who maintain that the expression “doctrine of Christ” in 2 John 9 does not mean Christ’s doctrine. They affirm that it means doctrine about Christ. They say that from the standpoint of grammar, the expression could mean either Christ’s doctrine or doctrine about Christ, but contend that the context proves that when John used the expression he meant doctrine about Christ.

It is my conviction, however, that the context does not support their conclusion., I believe that the context indicates that when John used the expression “doctrine of Christ,” he meant Christ’s teaching. It is Christ’s teaching that John stressed from the beginning of the letter.

Note the emphasis placed on truth (Christ’s teaching) in verses 1-2. Then in verse 4 John expressed his joy that the elect lady’s children were “walking in truth” (abiding in Christ’s teaching). Again in verse 6 John stressed the importance of walking after His commandments. Thus, the point that was uppermost in John’s mind when he penned this letter was walking in truth (abiding in Christ’s teaching).

Those who maintain that the expression “doctrine of Christ” in verse 9 means doctrine about Christ point to verse 7. They observe that according to verse 7 the particular error John had in mind was that of the deceivers who denied that Christ had come in the flesh. This error John mentioned in verse 7 was erroneous teaching about Christ; thus, it is concluded that John must have meant doctrine about Christ in verse 9, referring only to the one specific error named in verse 7.

It is true that the error that was a particular threat when John wrote was the error mentioned in verse 7. However, the teaching of this particular error was but one specific instance of not abiding in truth. The general principle of abiding in Christ’s teaching is that which John stressed throughout the letter, and verse 7 simply mentions one particular violation of that principle.

Truth Magazine, XVIII:33, p. 13
June 20, 1974

By Denny A. Diehl

(EDITOR’S NOTE: This is the first in a series of five articles to he carried on instrumental music in worship. These articles were written by five young men, all of whom were students at Florida College last year. The next article in this series is scheduled to appear in the July 11th issue, since next week’s issue will he a special issue prepared by request, and there will be no July 4th issue.)

It will be my purpose in writing this paper to clearly demonstrate. our need to listen to the silence of the Scriptures in our worship to God today, i.e., that we should adhere to the words given to us through the Scriptures and cast out anything not found to be in accordance with God’s word. In regard to instrumental music, it will not be my purpose to show that the use of the musical instrument in worship to God is not to be found in the New Testament Scriptures, but that should it be the case that it is not found therein, that it would be sinful and against God’s will to use it in worship to Him.

Jehovah said to Moses, “I will raise up a prophet from among your countrymen like you, and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. And it shall come about that whoever will not listen to My words which he shall speak in My name, I Myself will require it of him” (Deut 18:18,19). God said that, He was going to send His prophets to His people to speak to the people God’s words, all of them. This prophecy is quoted in Acts 3:22,23 as having its ultimate fulfillment in the Messiah. The Christ was sent from God not to do His own will, but to do the will of God the Father. All the words which Jesus spoke were given to Him by God, for He spoke not on His own accord, but only what the Father had showed Him. “And it shall be that every soul that does not heed that Prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the people” (Acts 3-23). So, if we do not hearken to this Prophet, Christ, we shall be cast out of the realm of God’s people. We are to give heed to all His words.

Not only did Peter claim that Jesus was the Prophet to whom we should give heed, but God the Father also made this, very clear when on the mount of the transfiguration, Moses and Elijah appeared with Jesus in a glorified state. When Peter saw this he said, “Lord, it is good for us to be here; if You wish, I will make three tabernacles here, one for You, and one for Moses, and one for Elijah” (Matt 17:4). God heard this statement made by Peter and stopped things short. God told them, “This is My beloved Son, with whom I as well pleased; hear Him!” (Matt 17:5). This statement should be very plain as to the meaning of what just took place. Moses was God’s lawgiver and Elijah was representative of God’s prophets.’They were the ones whom the people were to look to for direction of God’s desires, but now that God has sent His Son, we are no longer to listen to the Law and the Prophets, but we are to listen to Jesus for our direction in how to please God and to do His will. The writer of the epistle to the Hebrews sums it up nicely when he says, “God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken, to us in Ris Son” (Heb 1: 1,2). So, if we are looking for our source of authority in religion today, it does not come by the Old Testament (Moses and the prophets) but by Jesus Christ; whatever He says we are to do. Jesus Himself claimed that,”all authority had been given to Him in heaven and on earth” (Matt 28:18).

Jesus, having received all authority from the Father, had the right to commission men to carry out His divine mission of making known unto the people the will of God, which Christ was sent to the earth to do. This is seen in the book of Matthew when Jesus told the apostles, “whatever you shall bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven” (Matt 18:18). The apostles had right and obligation to bind or loose all things that had been already bound or loosed in heaven. This they were to do through the help and guidance of the Holy Spirit. Jesus, after leaving the earth, sent the Holy Spirit who taught the apostles all things and brought back to their remembrance”everything that Jesus had told them (Jn. 14:26). So the apostles were to be the representatives of Christ here on earth, with the Holy Spirit to guide them in everything that they taught, and even gave them the words in which to teach the truth 0 Cor. 2:13). If a person is to reject the teaching of the apostles, he rejects Christ, and if he rejects Christ, then he rejects God (Lk. 10:16). Suffice it to say that we have for our authority in religion today the writings of the New Testament.

Let us go back to Deuteronomy 18:18,19. God said that He would raise up a prophet like Moses to guide the people, because God would put His words in the prophets mouth, and the prophet would speak all those words to the people. God had commissioned Moses to lead the nation of Israel out of Egypt. God, through Moses, gave to Israel His law for them to keep. Moses was careful to tell the people that they were to keep the law of God. He explains this explicitly by telling them, “You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you”(Deut. 4:2). And again, “Whatever I command you, you shall be careful to do; you shall not add to nor take away from it” (Deut. 12:32). The principle involved here is that God entrusted His will to the Israelites who were to keep His will; but the only way they could keep His will would be to do exactly as He said. Now if they were to take away from His word, they would not be doing enough, or if they added to His word, they would be doing too much, and, therefore, would not be doing His will, but man’s will, since Moses spoke all of God’s words to the people. This principle was true then and will always be true as long as it is God’s word under consideration.

In like manner, in the New Testament dispensation, we have Christ speaking to us all the words of God. Since we have all of God’s words, then we are not deficient in any way of having what God would have us to know. Let us hear the New Testament on this matter. “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words shall not pass away” (Matt. 24:35). We have Christ’s promise that His words shall endure forever. If that is the case, then today we have everything that God ever intended for us to have. We have all the words of God in the Scriptures. Paul states that “all Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16,17). Through the Scriptures, we have everything, all things, that we need for every good work. If that is the case, then there is not any good work as pertains to religion that is not found in the Scriptures. The same principle holds true in the New. Testament as it did in the Old Testament; that is, if we are going to do God’s will, we can not add to it, nor take away from the words which He has spoken to us.

From I Pet. 4:11, we see the idea behind the authority of the silence of the Scriptures, as it says “Whoever speaks, let him speak, as it were, the utterances of God.” Since we have all of God’s words, then the only way a person should speak religiously is according to the New Testament. Anything spoken religiously that is not in the New Testament would not be according to “the utterances of God,” hence, we see that we need to be silent where the New Testament is silent. This is one of the biggest problems in religion today. People do not give heed to the silence that God has placed in the Scriptures. Let us develo”p this argument more fully.

In the book of Hebrews we find the writer telling of Jesus being a priest after the order of Melchizedek, but not being a priest according to the Old Testament standard. Why couldn’t Jesus be a priest under the old law? Because the old law stated that the priests were to come from the tribe of Levi, even though the law had not said that a priest could not come from the tribe of Judah. “For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, a tribe with reference to which Moses spoke nothing concerning priests” (Heb. 7:14). Moses had not spoken concerning this, therefore, a person from a tribe other than Levi could not officiate at the altar. Moses was silent on the subject, therefore, it was not sanctioned.

Let us examine an Old Testament example to see if they were restrained to that which was spoken in the Old Testament. “Now Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took their respective firepans, and after putting fire in them, placed incense on it and offered strange fire before the Lord, which He had not commanded them” (Lev. 10: 1). God had given the source from whence the fire was to come, Lev. 16:12, but He had not condemned any other source of fire. Was God pleased with these- two men who took it upon themselves to offer to God something that He had not commanded? Not in the least! “And fire came out from the presence of the Lord and consumed them, and they died before the Lord” (Lev. 10:2). Why did God require the lives of Nadab and Abihu? They were worshiping the true and living God; by all evidence in the Scriptures, they were worshiping sincerely; they were burning incense unto the Lord as the Lord God had commanded them; so why was God displeased with these two men? It was because they had not used the fire that God had commanded them. They took it upon themselves to get fire from some other source which the Lord had said nothing about. They had disobeyed God by offering something that He had not commanded them, even a little thing like the fire for which to burn incense.

Even though God had not expressly forbade, any other source of fire, Nadab and Abihu sinned and God required their lives for it. We will find the reason for God’s action farther down in the same chapter in verse 10, “and so as to make a distinction between the holy and the profane, and between the unclean and the clean.” Nadab and Abihu had substituted the profane for the holy and the unclean for the clean; they had substituted that which was not, commanded for that which was commanded; in short and simple words, they had not respected the silence of God’s Scriptures.

It will do us well to keep this example fresh in our minds when we get the urge to introduce or substitute anything into the worship service of our Lord God, for “these things happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction” (I Cor. 10:11). For us to introduce or substitute into the church of our Lord any such thing that has not been commanded by God to worship Him, would he for us to parallel our actions with Nadab and Abihu. But let us hear what the New Testament has to say on the subject of worship to God.

Throughout the ministry of Jesus, He repeatedly exposed the efforts of the Pharisees and the scribes to make the people walk in line with their own commandments and traditions instead of God’s commandments. “And He said to them, ‘Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, this people honors Me with their lips but their heart is far away from Me. But in vain do they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men” (Mk. 7:6,7). By teaching the precepts of men, they had made void their worship unto God. They were not adhering to the silence of the Scriptures. Where the Scriptures were silent, the Pharisees and scribes had not felt restrained in putting in their own wants and desires. Jesus said that this deemed their worship vain.

It is quite evident from the next passage that not everyone who believes himself to be a Christian shall inherit sonship with Jesus Christ and enter heaven in the last day. “Not every one who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father, who is in heaven. Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles.= And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness=@ (Matt. 7:21-23). People who want to follow Christ should guard against self-deception. Sometimes there are those who want something in religion so bad that they overlook what the Bible has to say on a subject. They believe that it has to be right because it makes them feel good or because they want it so much. How could this be wrong? Jesus tells us of disciples who were working in His name, but when it came time for judgment day, Jesus had to say to them that He never knew them and that they were to depart from His presence. Why? Because they were workers of lawlessness! The Greek word translated ‘lawlessness’ is anomia. Thayer renders the meaning of this word as, “l. the condition of one without law, either because ignorant of it, or because violating it. 2. contempt and violation of law, iniquity, wickedness.” So the reason they were not given admission into heaven was because they acted without law, they were not letting themselves be regulated by the law. Jesus has given us His law in the Scriptures. If we refuse to let ourselves be limited by this law, then we are the very same people whom Jesus said were going to be cast out of the kingdom of heaven. “Since this is true, many who claim to be his servants and doing wonders in his name will be driven from the presence of God for doing what they imagine good service to him. We can not be too cautious in doing his commandments and in rejecting from his service everything not commanded by him.2

We shall cite one more author of the Holy Writ and then draw a conclusion from the sources herein presented. In his second epistle, John exhorts his readers to walk in truth. To walk in truth would be to walk according to that which is in the gospel of truth, nothing added and nothing lacking. This can be done because we have all the words that God has chosen to give us. We should not add to nor take away from the word (Deut. 4:2), so that we may walk according to truth. The apostle John gave strict warning to those who would not limit themselves to the words given to us by God. “Any one who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son” (2 Jn. 9). To walk, according to truth would grant us fellowship with both the Father and the Son, but he that “goes ahead” (RSV), “runs too far ahead” (NEB), or “goes beyond” (REV) that which was given us does not abide in the teaching (the words given to us by God), and therefore, does not have fellowship with God. From this Scripture, it is evident that we must give heed to the silence of the Scriptures to be pleasing to God; for if we do not, we do not have God.

In this paper, I have tried to show that we must regard the Scriptures as completely authoritative in everything we do in the name of Jesus. To be pleasing to God, we must observe His commandments and obey them; but we must be careful to cast out, reject, everything that is not to be found in the Holy Scriptures when we are trying to adhere to God’s commands. It is my sincere desire that “whoever speaks, let him speak, as it were, the utterances of God … so that in all things God may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom belongs the glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen” (1 Pet. 4: 11). Dear brethren, allow God to be glorified and not man; allow the Scriptures to speak and man be silent. Moses E. Lard has well stated his view of anyone who would consent in any way to not limit himself to the doctrine of Christ, in that, “as a people we have from the first and continually to the present proclaimed that the New Testament and that alone is our only full and perfect rule of faith and practice. We have declared a thousand times and more that whatever it (the Bible) does not teach we must not hold, and whatever it does not sanction we must not practice. He who ignores or repudiates these principles … has by this become an apostate from our ranks; and the sooner he … goes out from amongst us the better, yes, verily, the better for us.”3

Footnotes

1. Joseph H. Thayer, Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon (Grand Rapids: Associated Publishers and Authors Inc., (n.d.) ) 48.

2. H. Leo Boles, A Commentary on the Gospel according to Matthew (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1936), 183.

3. Moses E. Lard, “Instrumental Music in Churches and Dancing,” Lard’s Quarterly (Rosemead: The Old Paths Book Club, 1952),1,330-331.

Bibliography

Bales, James D. Instrumental Music and New Testament Worship. Searcy: James D. Bales, 1973.

Boles, H. Leo. A Commentary on the Gospel according to Matthew. Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1936.

Girardeau, John L. Instrumental Music in Public Worship of the Church. Richmond: Whittet & Shepperson, Printers, 1888.

Lard, Moses E. “‘Instrumental Music in Churches and Dancing.” Lard’s Quarterly, I, Rosemead: The Old Paths Book Club, 1952.

Lewis, John T. The Voice, of the Pioneers on Instrumental Music and Societies. Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1932.

Roberts, J. W. The Letters of John. Austin: R. B. Sweet Co., Inc., 1968.

Thayer, Joseph H. Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon. Grand Rapids: Associated Publishers and Authors Inc., (n.d.).

Truth Magazine, XVIII:33, pp. 11-13
June 20, 1974

By Harry E. Ozment

Definition

One of the most widely believed, yet destructive, religious doctrines is Calvinism’s “Impossibility of Apostasy.” The Presbyterian Confession of Faith states: “They whom God hath accepted in his beloved, effectually called and sanctified by His Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace, but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved.” In other words, this theory teaches that a child of God cannot so sin as to fall from the grace of God and be lost in eternity. Sometimes referred to as “once in grace, always in grace” or “once saved, always saved,” this doctrine was formulated as a result of Calvinism’s “Predestination.” If God elected certain individuals to be saved, His will cannot be overturned or upset by any man (not even the elected); hence, these people must be saved and can do nothing to change the situation.

On the other hand, to affirm the possibility of apostasy is not to say we mistrust God, for God’s promise of salvation to His children is conditional. If a person fails to reach heaven, he failed to meet the conditions of God’s grace-and God

cannot bear responsibility for the failure. In such a case, God did not fail to fulfill His promise; rather, man failed to fulfill his responsibility.

Errors of the Doctrine

“Impossibility of Apostasy” is a Biblically destructive doctrine because it:

1. Denies plain Bible statements. The New Testament is replete with scriptures attesting to the possibility of apostasy. In 1 Cor. 10: 12, Paul said, “Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.” In verses 1-11, Paul had been using the history of apostatizing Israel to warn the Christians not to do likewise. This Corinthian letter was addressed to “the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints.” (I Cor. 1:2) Calvinism denies that these Corinthians would not and could not “fall@-yet Paul warns them, to take precautions against falling! Calvinism would make Paul as foolish as I would be if I were to say, “Don’t drive a car, lest ye become seasick.”

The same apostle Paul said, “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith.” (I Tim. 4: 1) One cannot depart from any place, unless he was once there. To affirm that some departed from the faith necessarily implies they were once in the faith. Calvinism, however, denies the possibility of apostasy. Will they deny the formation and existence of the apostate Roman Catholic Church? If so, they will be denying the voices of Bible prophecy and secular history.

Notice the powerful words of Paul in Gal. 5:4: “Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.” The inspired writer is not here issuing a warning-he is stating an existing condition, using the present tense “ye are fallen . . . .” Did not Paul (and the Spirit Who guided him) know whereof he spoke? To answer negatively, as the Calvinist must do, is to deny the verbal inspiration of the Bible.

The inspired words of Heb. 6:4-6 deal a death blow to Calvinism. The subjects under discussion are Christians, for they are described as those who: (a) “were once enlightened”,- (b) “have tasted of the heavenly gift”,(c) “were made Partakers of the Holy Ghost` (d) “have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of ;he world to come.” Two questions are in order for the person who denies this is speaking of Christians: Which of the above is not a description of a Christian; and, what must be added to the above to qualify it as a description of a child of God? Certainly, these are Christians and the principle taught regarding these Christians is: “For it is impossible … if they Shallfiall away, to renew them again unto repentance.” All the squirming and theorizing the Calvinist might do will not let him escape the force of this passage.

Peter throws Calvinism into a ridiculous light in 2 Pet. 2:20-21: “For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.” Calvinists argue that a person who has escaped “the pollutions of the world” and “known the way of righteousness” cannot fall from the grace of God. Peter, however, states that it is possible for such a person to be “again entangled” and “turn from the holy commandment” and he describes the tragedy of such a condition. Who are we ‘to believe-Peter or Calvinism?

2. Denies Bible illustrations of apostasy. In examining New Testament examples of apostasy, two ideas stand out: (a) The certainty with which the scripture describes the .1brmer saved state of the apostate. Many times, when directed to an example of apostasy, the Calvinist will deny that the apostate was ever really saved. (b) The certainty with which the scripture describes the completely fallen state of the apostate. The Calvinist will sometimes deny that the apostate has really fallen from the grace of God. No amount of hedging and quibbling by Calvinists, however, can destroy the effect of these Bible illustrations of apostasy:

(a) Parable of the vine and branches. Jesus said, “I am the true vine, and my father is the husbandman. Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.” (Jn. 15:1-2) Notice that the branch is first saved: “. . . branch in me. “Every “branch” in Christ possesses salvation: “In whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace.” (Eph. 1:7) When the branch does not fulfill God’s condition for salvation, God “taketh away” that branch-it is lost because it is fallen from Christ and no longer in Him. The branches “taken away” are “cast into the fire, and they are burned.” (Jn. 15:6) This is a clear case of salvation-apostasy-damnation!

(b) Simon the sorcerer. We read of this controversial figure in Acts 8. Calvinists often deny that this man was saved. But notice Acts 8:13: “Then Simon himself believed also.” “Also” is an adverb meaning “likewise” – (Webster). Simon’s obedience was being compared to the obedience of the Samaritans in v. 12. Whatever the Samaritans did, Simon did “like wise. ” Whatever the Samaritans were (saved or lost), Simon was Alikewise.” If Simon was never saved, neither were the Samaritans. If the Samaritans were saved, so was Simon. Notice again Acts 8:13., “He continued with Philip.” Simon’s obedience was genuine, for he had enough interest and zeal to “continue with Philip.” Simon, however, fell from the grace of God through envying the miraculous gifts of inspired men. There is no denying his fallen state, for Peter said unto him: “Thy money perish with thee . . . .” (v. 20), “thy heart is not right in the sight of God . . . .” (v. 21), “repent therefore of this thy wickedness . . . .” (v. 22), “thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity” (v. 23). Surely, Calvinism cannot muddy the clear water of these scriptures.

3. Denies possibility of a sinning Christian. Calvinism readily affirms that sin will cause a person to be lost-yet readily denies that a Christian can be lost. The only alternative left to Calvinism, therefore, is to affirm that a Christian cannot sin. John, however, would allow no Christian to affirm this, for he, says of Christians: “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” (I Jn. 1:8; cf. v. 10) Can a Christian sin? To ask it is but to answer it! What explanation does Calvinism have for those scriptures which command Christians to abstain from acts of ungodliness? Are the commands useless and senseless? In an effort to escape this difficulty, Calvinists will sometimes reply, “But this is the old fleshly body of the Christian that sins. The heart, or the true part of the Christian, does not sin.” This dodge will not hold water, for Jesus said, “For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts,’ false witness, blasphemies.” (Matt. 15: 19; cf. Jas. 4:5) The heart is the motor for the body’s action; therefore, both body and heart must bear responsibility for the sins of the person (whether a Christian or not).

4. Denies blots in book of life. John said, “And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life.” (Rev. 22:19; cf. Rev. 3:5) Would Calvinism have us believe that God would blot the name of an eternally saved person from the book of life? This conclusion would follow if Calvinism is true. The simple truth is that God puts the names of the saved on the book of life. When they sin so as to fall from His grace, their names are then blotted from that book.

5. Denies necessity for godly life. This is, perhaps, the greatest tragedy ‘of Calvinistic doctrine. Theoretically, the doctrine would have us believe that a Christian could commit all manner of evil without falling from divine grace and being in danger of hell. I thank God that my denominational friends and neighbors do not really believe this false doctrine: If they put into practice what their false doctrine theoretically teaches, no one could live in such a wicked world. In denying the necessity of godly living, this doctrine also:

(a) Discourages study of God’s word. Paul said, “Therefore, we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we, should let them slip.” (Heb. 2:1) Why heed and study, if we cannot slip?

(b) Discourages work for restorations. James said, “Brethren, if any of you do err I from the truth, and one convert him;. let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way, shall save a soul from death.” (Jas. 5:19-20; cf. Gal. 6:1) Why work for the restoration of a brother’s soul if it is impossible for him to err and fall?

(c) Discourages confession of sins. John said, “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” (I Jn. 1:9; cf. 2 Jno. 9-11) Why pray for the forgiveness of sins if the stain of those sins will not cause us to be separated from God finally and eternally in hell?

(d) Discourages brotherly consideration. Paul said, “But judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling block or an occasion to fall in his brother’s way.” (Rom. 14:13; cf. Rom.14:15; 15:1-3; 1 Cor. 13:4-5; Gal. 6:1-2; Phil. 2:14) Why take care how we live before our brethren if our manner of life cannot in any way cause one in Christ to stumble and fall from grace?

(e) Discourages patient endurance. Jesus said, “He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life.” (Rev. 3:5, cf. Acts 11:23; 14:21-22,. Rom. 2:6-7; 1 Cor. 15:1-2, 58; 16:13; Gal. 5: 1; 6:9; Eph. 6.13, 18; Phil. 1:27; 4: 1; Col. 1:22, 23; 2:7; 1 Thess. 3:8; 5:21; 2 Thess. 2:15; 3:13; 2 Tim. 1:12, 13; 13,14; Tit. 1-9; Heb. 2:1; 3:5-6; 4:14; 6:11-12, 15; 10:23, 35-36; 12:1-15; Jas. 1: 12; 5: 1-11; 2 Pet. 3:17; Rev. 2:7, 10-11, 17, 25-28; 3:11-12, 21; 21:7-8). Why should we try to overcome trials and temptations if yielding to these things will not in any way lose for us our salvation?

Calvinism is very closely akin to the doctrine of the Nicolaitans. The Nicolaitans’ basic philosophy was that the salvation of the Christian was secure, and therefore, the Christian was above any moral law of God. Jesus wrote: “But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.” (Rev. 2:6) Every follower of Christ should likewise hate the tenets of Calvinism and oppose them. with all his might. May the words of Peter serve as the guideline for our lives: “Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall.” (2 Pet. 1:10)

(End of Series)

Truth Magazine, XVIII:33, pp. 9-10
June 20, 1974