Truth Magazine

For many years, brethren have opposed the error of the so called “Jehovah’s Witnesses” who deny the deity of Christ. As brethren responded by affirming Christ’s deity, they have consistently made the same arguments which will comprise the bulk of this article. Brethren did not find it necessary to redefine the concept of deity to affirm that Jesus possessed and exhibited his divinity while on earth. Neither did they find it necessary to ex- plain how Jesus was both deity and humanity while on earth. Generally, brethren merely affirmed his co-existent deity and humanity and left the how to God as a matter unrevealed (Deut. 29:29).

In recent years, however, strange sounds have come from some brethren who seem alternately to reject and then confess the deity of Christ while on earth and as he presently exists in heaven. The smoothness of those variations has left a question about which view is actually held by such brethren. The pursuit of that question is not the purpose of this article. However, the need to speak “right things” in answer to the “smooth” error of the following statements should be apparent to all who love the truth:

Jesus performed miracles as a man and through the assistance of the Holy Spirit. He did not perform miracles through his own innate power as the Son of God for this would have been to deny his humanity.

Jesus Christ did not give up divinity for just 33 years. He gave it up for all time — all time. It wasn’t just temporarily as Superman stepped out of the phone booth. He gave it up for all time.

These statements manifest an abandonment of the truth regarding the deity of Christ as set forth in the word of God. What does the Bible have to say about the past and present divine nature of Christ?

1. Jesus possessed divine nature upon the earth. While upon the earth, Jesus affirmed his knowledge of his eternal existence (John 8:14). In the same context, he claimed to be the same “I AM” as present in the time of Abraham (John 8:51-58). The knowledge possessed by Jesus of his eternal nature and previous place with the Father was not the knowledge of a mere man, but an evidence of knowledge which predated his earthly existence (John 13:1-3; 16:25- 28). He remembered the heavenly glory which he shared with the Father in the eternal realm and sought it again after completion of his redemptive work (John 17:4-5).

Jesus further claimed, “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30). Upon hearing this claim, the Jews sought to kill Jesus for blasphemy because he made himself God (John 10:31-33). If such was a misunderstanding, Jesus failed to correct it. Every indication from the text is that the Jews rightly interpreted Jesus’ claim to be divine, but they wrongly rejected his claim to divinity. A similar circumstance led the Jews of his time to persecute Jesus because he “called God His own Father, making Himself equal with God” (John 5:16-18).

Jesus’ description as the “Son of God” evidences the truth of this claim because a son shares the nature of his father. If the Father is divine, the Son’s divine nature logically follows. Remember that Jesus claimed to be and was recognized as the “Son of God” while on the earth (John 10:36; Luke 1:35). That is why he could rightly be called Immanuel, “God with us,” in fulfillment of prophecy (Isa. 7:14; 9:6; Matt. 1:22-23).

2. Jesus possessed and demonstrated divine power upon the earth. When Jesus healed the man sick of the palsy, it was to prove that he had “authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mark 2:1-12). This was not a power shared by the apostles, but one unique to Christ and his divine power to forgive even as he later did upon the cross (Luke 23:39-43). When Jesus rebuked the winds and the sea to produce an immediate calm in the midst of a great storm, the disciples asked, “What manner of man is this, that even the winds and the sea obey Him?” (Matt. 8:26-27). Later under similar circumstances, Jesus’ power over the natural forces caused his disciples to worship him and exclaim, “Of a truth thou art the Son of God” (Matt. 14:22-33). Thus, they saw his divine nature as the Son of God confirmed by a manifestation of Jesus’ divine power causing them to give to Jesus that which belongs only to God — worship.

Jesus also affirmed his divine power to bring about his own resurrection saying, “I lay down my life, that I may take it again . . . I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again” (John 10:17-18). He made the same claim earlier in stating, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up . . . He spake of the temple of His body” (John 2:13-21). Paul affirmed that Jesus “was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead” (Rom. 1:4). How could Jesus be proven “the Son of God with power” if he never used his own divine power and was divested of such power when he came to earth? In commenting on Romans 1:4, Moses Lard wrote:

Moreover, when we reflect on all the facts in the life of Christ, not one strikes the mind as so overwhelming a proof of the presence in him of divine power, underived or undelegated, as his raising the dead (Commentary on Romans 30).

This principle is true not only of Jesus’ own resurrection, but also of the other resurrections performed by his power — “underived or undelegated.” He clearly said, “I am the resurrection and the life” (John 11:25).

Jesus also demonstrated his possession of divine knowledge upon the earth. As previously noted, he manifested a the Father (John 13:3; 16:28). Jesus also demonstrated a full knowledge of that which was going to happen unto him in the future (John 13:1, 11; 18:4). He also had a knowledge of the hearts of men (John 6:64; 1:47-51; 4:16-19, 39). Such knowledge is not within the power of a mere man (1 Cor. 2:11).

3. Jesus presently possesses and demonstrates divine nature and power as he rules in heaven. Jesus has now returned to the glory shared in the eternal realm before man ever came into existence (John 17:4-5). The same power of Jesus that produced the creation of all things is now being used to “uphold all things by the word of His power” (Col. 1:15-18; Heb. 1:3). If Jesus gave up his divinity for “all time,” how could he presently have all power in heaven and on earth? Yet, that is what the Bible presently claims for Jesus (Matt. 28:18).

4. Jesus’ acceptance of worship on earth and in the heavenly realm affirms his possession of the divine nature on earth and his continued possession of that divine nature in heaven. While on earth, Jesus was worshiped at his birth (Matt 2:11). He was worshiped by his disciples (Matt. 14:33). He was even to be worshiped by angels while in his earthly ministry (Heb. 1:6). While still on earth after his resurrection, Jesus received worship (Matt. 28:9; John 20:28). At his ascension, Jesus was worshiped (Luke 24:50- 52). In his present reign from heaven, Jesus now receives worship from those before the throne (Rev. 5). Jesus never refused worship directed towards him. When coupled together with scriptural teaching about whom we are to rightfully worship, the implication regarding the present possession of Jesus’ divine nature and his exercise of the divine prerogative of accepting worship is obvious (Rev. 19:10; 22:9; Matt. 4:10).

Conclusion

As Paul extolls Jesus towards the end of his first epistle to Timothy, Paul affirms that the same Jesus “who before Pilate witnessed the good confession” is the “blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords” (1 Tim. 6:13-16). Jesus did not leave his divine nature behind for all time or for any time when he came to this earth. The Bible clearly teaches that a part of Jesus’ existence included the “days of His flesh” (Heb. 5:7). However, that very affirmation suggests that the same “He” had an existence both before and after that time which was not characterized by “flesh,” a mortal nature. That “He” was the same divine spirit known as the Word who came into the world in a body prepared for him (Heb. 10:5). After that fleshly existence, the same “He” re-entered his heavenly glory (John 17:4-5; Rev. 5). “Unto Him that sitteth on the throne, and unto the Lamb, be the blessing, and the honor, and the glory, and the dominion, for ever and ever” (Rev. 5:13).

By Johnie Paul Edwards

God’s people of old requested that the prophets speak smooth things (Isa. 30:10). The reason they wanted to hear smooth things was because they were rebellious children (30:1), they would not take counsel of God (30:1), they did not put their trust in God (30:2), they would not hear the law of the Lord (30:9), and they despised God’s word (30:12). Truly, those who despise God’s word had rather hear smooth things than the truth of God’s word. But, for those interested in truth, what is the truth about sin? The Bible teaches that . . .

Sin Is Against God

When Potiphar’s wife cast her eyes upon Joseph and said, “Lie with me” (Gen. 39:7), Joseph refused and said, “There is none greater in this house than I; neither hath he kept back anything from me but thee, because thou art his wife: how then can I do this great wickedness, and sin against God?” (Gen. 39:9). Joseph knew that to lie with another man’s wife would be a great wickedness and would constitute sin against God. All men should know what Joseph knew about sin!

Sin Is The Transgression of God’s Law

The Apostle John revealed, “Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law” (1 John 3:4). Ask people today what is sin and you’ll get about as many answers as people you ask. The Bible teaches that sin is the transgression of the law. “Every one that doeth sin doeth also lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness” (1 John 3:4, ASV). Anytime we violate God’s law, by either going beyond or falling short of it, we sin!

All Unrighteousness Is Sin

In 1 John 5:17 we learn, “All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.” The Scriptures are careful to teach us that all unrighteousness is sin! Too many want to pick and choose when it comes to sin. But, what kind of things are included in Scripture as unrighteousness? Paul, as he wrote about the Gentiles, said, “Being filled with all unrighteous- ness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, without understanding, covenant breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them” (Rom. 1:29-32).

Whatsoever Is Not of Faith Is Sin

The fourteenth chapter of the book of Romans ends with the words, “for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.” Clearly, when we act apart from faith we sin. This was the reason that the man that doubted regarding the eating of meat was damned when he ate, “because he eateth not of faith.” Obviously, God requires that all things religiously be done in faith and according to the faith. When we do things according to the faith we do that which is authorized or taught in God’s word. While to eat or not to eat meat was an authorized liberty, for “let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not . . .” (Rom. 14:3), not all things fall into authorized liberties. The context of Romans 14 must be understood. It has to do with “nothing unclean of itself” (14:14), and things that “are pure” (14:20). Some things are outright matters of sin. John taught, “Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son” (2 John 1:9).

It is clear as one reads and studies God’s word that some things are good and some things are evil. There is no middle ground! We are taught to do that which is good (Heb. 13:16). We do such or become guilty of sin.

To Know To Do Good And Not To Do It Is Sin

“Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin” (Jas. 4:17). This principle is important and is being contrasted with rejoicing in boasting and the statement that “. . . all such rejoicing is evil” (4:16). It is clear as one reads and studies God’s word that some things are good and some things are evil. There is no middle ground! We are taught to do that which is good (Heb. 13:16). We do such or become guilty of sin. There are many things identified by God as good, but when we fail to do them we sin.

To Say We Have No Sin Is To Lie

“If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us” (1 John 1:8). The reason that none can say that they have no sin is because “. . . all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23). Some refuse to admit sin. Such is to be guilty of lying.

Man Can Be Made Free From Sin

Since sin leads to eternal death (Rom. 6:23), we need to be made free from sin. How does this happen? Romans 6 teaches, “Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness” (6:18) and “But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life” (6:22). Romans 6 reveals several things involved in being made free from sin. Being made free from sin involves, being baptized into Jesus Christ (6:3), walking in newness of life (6:4), no longer serving sin (6:6), not yielding our members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin (6:13), and obeying from the heart (6:16). This is God’s plan for man being made free from sin. “But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life” (Rom. 6:22).

The Blood of Jesus Christ Cleanseth Us From All Sin

The plan for such cleansing is revealed, “But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin” (1 John 1:7). In John 8:12 Jesus equated walking in the light with following him. “Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life” (John 8:12). In following Christ the child of God confesses his sins and “. . . he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:9).

The Wages of Sin Is Death

“For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom. 6:23). We all need to know that the end of serving sin is death, eternal death! Paul in Romans 6 deals with living in sin and explains that the walk of a Christian is not one of sin, but in newness of life (6:6). We are to be dead to sin (6:11), not let sin reign in our mortal bodies (6:12), and we are not to yield our members as instruments unto sin (6:13). The end of living in sin is eternal death and the end of serving God will be everlasting life through Jesus Christ our Lord. James taught, “Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death” (Jas. 1:15).

Sin Should Be Laid Aside

The apostle to the Hebrew Christians wrote, “Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us” (Heb. 12:1). To successfully run the race that ends in eternal life, we must: lay aside every weight, lay aside sin, run with patience, and look unto Jesus (Heb. 12:1-2). As Paul wrote to the Colossians, we read, “But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth. Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him” (Col. 3:8-10).

Man Can Die In His Sins

Jesus said, “. . . that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins” (John 8:24). God planned for repentance and remission of sins to be preached (Luke 24:47). It was preached and we need to continue preaching it! Christ was sent into the world to be a propitation for sin (1 John 4:10), that is he was “manifested to take away our sins” (1 John 3:5). The blood of bulls and goats could not take away sin (Heb. 10:4). Christ’s blood can take away sin in that in him “. . . we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins” (Col. 1:14). “Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool” (Isa. 1:18). Rather than dying in our sins, we should choose to die in the Lord, for “. . . blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them” (Rev. 14:13).

May we ask not for the “smooth things” (Isa. 30:10), but for the “old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls” (Jer. 6:16).

The times we live in give rise to many problems that must be addressed in the Lord’s church. In every age the sins prevalent in the world affect the church to some degree and we must be on guard against these sins and warn others lest they be adversely affected by them. This special issue of Truth Magazine focuses on a number of these topics. This article will address the subject of the woman’s role in the church and the speaking of smooth things by some among us on this subject.

As with most Bible subjects, the Bible’s teaching on the role of the woman in the church is misunderstood, perverted, or just plain ignored by the vast majority of religious denominations. Denominational churches have women serving in many leadership capacities. Women lead in prayers, lead singing, sing solos, and preach. They serve as priests, pastors, ministers, counselors, and various other offices within their denominational churches. This is partly due to the fact that denominations of men no longer respect the Word of God. A retired pastor for the Presbyterian church arguing for broader acceptance of homosexuality stated, “The Bible is not an infallible book, it is not error free” (Courier Journal, Louisville, Kentucky, March 8, 1998, A-1). With this kind of mentality it’s no wonder that women in denominational churches have taken leadership roles in direct rebellion to God’s word.

Women are as active in making decisions for their particular denomination as any man. This has been a common practice for a number of years, but with the advent of the modern feminist movement it has become more pronounced.

What has this to do with the Lord’s church? Exactly this: things that take place in denominational churches have a way of worming their way into the true church, creating division and apostasy. Instrumental music was borrowed from the denominations and this innovation caused division among God’s people. The social gospel was invented by the churches of men and eventually introduced into the Lord’s body, bringing more division. The sponsoring church embraced by liberal members of the church of Christ is a copy of the denominational concept of centralization and has caused much harm and schism within the body of Christ.

So it is with the “women’s movement” within the churches of Christ. The more liberal, institutional churches have women serving the Lord’s supper, leading singing via “praise teams,” serving as deaconesses, teaching mixed classes of adults, leading in prayer, and occasion- ally preaching from the pulpit (for examples, see Peggy Sanford, “Cookies To Communion: The Changing Roles of Women in the Church of Christ,” Integrity, Issue 5, 1997, 82-87). The pressure of the feminist movement and the desire to be like the “nations” roundabout have aided in this perversion of the woman’s role in the church.

What is the woman’s role in the church? What can she do? Can she serve in a leadership capacity over men? These questions must be answered in the light of God’s word and not with the prevailing attitudes of society, the practice of denominational churches, or the apostate churches of Christ. “To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them” (Isa. 8:20). The speaking of smooth things to God’s children lulls them into complacency and opens the door to unscriptural innovations. It was so in Isaiah’s day and continues to be so some 2700 years later (Isa. 30:9-10).

God is the One who dictates the role of women in his church and he specifically states, “Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence ” (1 Tim. 2:11-12). This command prohibits a woman from leading in the assembly over men. Man is not at liberty to void this command. Also, man should not place the woman in a position that would tempt her to violate this command or allow a woman to take a leading position herself.

One argument for allowing a woman to lead the assembly is that if a man asks a woman to address the assembly, then she is acting under the authority of the man who called upon her. However, he has asked her to do something that violates God’s will and no man has the authority to do such (1 Tim. 2:11-12; Col. 3:17).

Another argument is that some women are more capable of leading than some men. Who leads in the assembly is not a matter of ability, but one of authority. Women have no authority from God to lead the assembly. God does not permit it (1 Tim. 2:11-12)! The fact that some women are more articulate or better singers than some men does not change God’s word on the matter. Men are charged with leading in the assemblies of the saints and women are commanded to submit quietly to their leadership.

The argument could be made that a particular woman has more knowledge of a given situation than any of the men, so it is easier or better for her to make some announcement than the less knowledgeable men. Why are the elders or men less knowledgeable? Can the men not acquire the knowledge they need and then pass it on to the congregation? The presence of ignorant men still does not give the woman the authority to address the assembly in a leadership capacity (1 Tim. 2:11-12). Only unlearned or weak men would allow such to take place.

The presence of women in business meetings is becoming more prevalent. This has been likened to Bible classes where men lead and women participate. Actually, the business meeting by its very nature is a decision-making process, an exercise of leadership, and God has excluded women from such leadership roles. While some advocate women’s active participation, others claim the women are to sit silently while the men transact the necessary business. However, are we not placing women in a position where they will be tempted to break their silence and speak up when they believe the men are making a mistake? Why introduce a practice for which we can give no affirmative authority from Scripture? Godly men can consider the needs of women without involving them in leadership roles. The men have a responsibility to lead in such a way as not to lord it over the congregation (1 Pet. 5:1-3). Elders or men are not to be tyrants, ruling with no concern for those they are leading. The fact that some men have lorded it over the congregation and abused their position of leadership does not give the woman the right to rule (1 Tim. 2:11-12). Two wrongs do not make a right.

Women leading prayer in prayer groups with men present, women attending business meetings, women waiting on the Lord’s table, and women making announcements to the assembly are some examples of women easing into leadership roles in the church. These practices are not authorized by God and churches which allow any or all of these practices are paving the way for further departures from God’s word on the role of women. Places where one or more of these errors are practiced are conditioning the congregation to accept women in leadership roles. The place to stop it is at the beginning. Do not let the sinful practices get a foothold.

Women exerting pressure to take a leading part in the assembly, or men who encourage women to take such a part, are sinning and need to repent. Our liberal society does not want to hear sin condemned and sinners called to repentance, but we must obey God and do those things which he has commanded in the way he has commanded. “Hold fast the pattern of sound words which you have heard from me, in faith and love which are in Christ Jesus” (2 Tim. 1:13).

By Lewis Willis                    

Music is divinely authorized in the worship of the church. The question is: What kind? This issue has long been divisive between the Lord’s church and denominationalism. Perhaps the most distinctive thing about our worship, compared to that of denominational churches, is our use of acappella music. There are several other differences but the use of vocal music is most noticeable to our visitors.

How important is the issue of music in the church? Music is no more important than prayer, the Lord’s supper, giving, or teaching which is true to the Scriptures. However, it is every bit as important as any of these other authorized and required practices.

The “smooth things” and “deceits” which brethren are now preaching all over the country will produce a generation which will conclude that it is all right to disagree over the use of the instrument in worship.

One need not spend much time in examination of what the New Testament says about instruments of music in worship. As a matter of fact, no time is needed since the New Testament says absolutely nothing about instruments of music and their use in the worship of the church. Does that thought send any message to us at all? We have an on-going major dispute in modern religion over a subject that is not so much as mentioned in describing the music we are to offer unto God. On the surface, one would think people would pause and reflect upon the significance of that fact. Through the years, this point has been emphasized to denominationalists, but it has received a rather cool reception, to say the least.

The Music Authorized For Worship

Allow me to list the passages which address our subject. This will not require much space, because there are only nine passages in the New Testament which address the music of the church. Read the following passages: Matthew 26:30; Mark14:26; Acts 16:25; 1 Corinthians 14:15; Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16; Hebrews 2:12; 13:15; James 5:13. They all use either sing, sang, sung, or singing to describe the music of our worship; there are no exceptions!

One needs help to misunderstand the teaching of God’s Word on this subject. And guess what? That is exactly what he gets! On every hand there are preachers who readily speak “smooth things” and “deceit” to all who will listen. We hear them say things like, “I think . . . I believe   . . . I feel . . . It seems to me . . . I don’t see anything wrong with  . . .” in reference to the use of mechanical instruments. Actually, who cares what they think, believe, or feel? If we were worshiping them, that would be important information to have. However, since we worship God, we must discover what he thinks on the subject by reading and following the passages cited earlier.

Nonetheless, just as ancient Israel liked the words of the false prophets; people today like the “smooth things” and “deceits” which they hear. As long as this spirit prevails, there will always be a dispute between them, and those who follow the guide of the Scriptures in their practice.

A Battle At Our Doorstep

A division over institutionalism and sponsoring churches produced a division in the church in the 1950s. As a result, most brethren have little knowledge of what is going on among liberal churches today. These liberal churches are in the process of dividing today, and one of the issues dividing them is instrumental music in worship. Some of their most prominent preachers regularly participate in worship with denominations in which instrumental music is used.1

As these new apostates move further to make themselves just another denomination, they are beginning the process of softening up their followers to accept the instrument in their worship. They have already begun to speak “smooth things” and “deceits” to their members, and many, if not most, of their members are falling for the deceit.

They speak “smooth things” in referring to the worship of the church. Rubel Shelly writes of our worship “tradition,” with the obvious point being that if vocal music is nothing but a “tradition,” it can be changed. We have several “traditions” (two songs, a prayer, and another song) that we readily change, so the thought is, we can change the “tradition” of vocal music as well. “The problem is,” Shelly says, “those traditions become so fixed that they are seen by many to inhibit true worship . . .”2 He further suggests that those using vocal music “. . . be a bit more under- standing and incorporating toward the Baby Boomers and Generation Xers who want some things more in sync with their pulses and those of their searching contemporaries.”3

Shelly advises that we stop fighting one another over the “externals” of our worship. Larry Bridgesmith writes of our “worship styles,” adding that “we probably need to be more concerned about the idolatry in our theology than finding a worship style we like . . . we must remain vigilant to use worship forms consistent with biblical freedoms which connect with God seekers who are not familiar with ‘the way we have always done it.’”4 You see, folks, it’s just a question of style, externals, traditions, and biblical freedom in deciding if we will use instrumental music, at least, ac- cording to these men. These expressions are the “smooth things” which are spoken to deceive.

What do these pseudo-intellectual infidels think of our position that there are five acts of worship? Listen to Shelly: “This is the result of a penchant for systematizing rather than good theology. The very language misleads — leads away from a significant biblical truth. It is more precise to say that worship is always an attitude of reverence before God that is exhibited by appropriate actions. Fundamentally, there are three types of actions that are appropriate to the corporate worship of the church: praise, prayer, and preaching.5 This little “deceit” will open the door to any action, including the use of instrumental music, so long as your attitude of reverence is maintained. You can also easily guess who is going to decide what actions are appropriate.

Dave Miller itemized some of the changes this modern theology has already brought to the worship in liberal churches. Special music (including solos and choirs) is common; drama (using costumed actors) is used; the Lord’s supper is observed on any day; babies are dedicated in the assembly; hand clapping and lifting up of hands, Pentecostal-style, are common; women are used to lead songs and prayers; and religious holidays, like Christmas and Easter, are observed with the appropriate actions gleaned from denominationalism.6

With ample space, this list could easily be expanded upon. The battle rages in liberal churches over these questions. Having years ago abandoned divine principles regarding scriptural authority in order to get church sup- port for human institutions, these brethren who oppose this next generation of apostasy (such as Buster Dobbs, editor of Firm Foundation and Alan E. Highers, editor of The Spiritual Sword) are left virtually powerless to stop the march of heresy. The division among them has already happened. The only thing to be determined is how many of their churches will adopt the “smooth things” and “deceits” which they are being taught. “Professing themselves to be wise . . .” they have foolishly fallen further from the Lord than before (Rom. 1:22).

Conclusion

The message to us is, we must continue to preach the truth, even on “old” subjects like instrumental music. Al- ready seed has been sown, through the controversy over the application of Romans 14 to matters of “doctrinal differences,” which can lead us down the same, sad path institutional brethren have traveled. The “smooth things” and “deceits” which brethren are now preaching all over the country will produce a generation which will conclude that it is all right to disagree over the use of the instrument in worship, without it affecting the fellowship of brethren. Folks, if Romans 14 tolerates false teaching and practice on marriage, divorce, and remarriage, why does it not do the same on the use of instrumental music? We know our duty in regard to things like this. “Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple” (Rom. 16:17-18).

1  Max Lucado exchanged pulpits with Trinity Baptist Church, 4/2/95, The Spiritual Sword, 10/96, 4.

2 Wineskins, Vol. 3, No. 5, 5.

3 Ibid.

4 Ibid., 9-10.

5 Ibid., 5.

6 Spiritual Sword, 10/96, 25-28.