Truth Magazine

By Mike Willis

In recent months, much has been written about the days of creation as a result of recent teaching that the days of creation are long ages and the teaching that the creation days are separated by long eons of time to allow natural evolutionary processes to develop the earth as we know it. Much has been written to address this issue.

This article is designed to discuss the flood. When men use extra-biblical evidences to reason that creation could not have occurred in six literal consecutive days, they allow extra-biblical sources to have final authority over their faith. Those same extra-biblical sources that deny a six-day creation also deny a universal flood. This article is a preemptive strike against any who might deny the Genesis narrative of a universal flood and who might affirm that Genesis 6-8 describes a local flood. 

The Biblical Flood

Genesis 4 relates the growth of sin that led to fratricide, Cain’s murder of his brother Abel. After listing the eight generations of Adam’s descendants through Cain, the narrative culminates in Lamech’s slaying of a young man and then boastfully defying anyone who attempts to avenge his death (4:23).

Genesis 5:1-6:8 forms the section of Genesis known as “The Book of the Generations (toledoth) of Adam” (5:1). Chapter 5 lists Adam’s descendants through Seth through ten generations, down to Noah’s sons (5:31-32). It climaxes in a description of the wickedness of the world brought on by the intermarriage of the “sons of God” (not a reference to angels, but an ethical description of those descendants of Seth who “call upon the name of the Lord” — 4:26) with the “daughters of men” (an ethical description of wicked women). The whole generation was corrupted.

And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually (6:5).

God determined to execute judgment against the wickedness of the world. He said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them” (6:7). The section concludes with the statement that “Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord” (6:8).
Structure of the Flood Narrative
Genesis 6:9-9:29 forms the section in Genesis known as “The Generations (toledoth) of Noah.” Largely this section narrates the flood. The outline of the section is as follows:

6:9-13 — God tells Noah of his intention to the destroy the world.
6:14-22 — God commands Noah to build an ark, specifying the dimensions. Noah obeyed the Lord’s commandments.
7:1-6 — God commands Noah to enter the ark.
7:7-24 — The Flood waters prevail.
8:1-5 — The Flood waters recede.
8:6-14 — Noah sends out the raven and dove to determine if the ground is dry.
8:15-19 — God commands Noah to depart from the ark.
 8:20-22 — Noah offers sacrifice to God.
 9:1-17 — God makes a covenant never again to destroy the world with a flood.
9:18-29 — Noah’s sin of drunkenness and the judgment on the descendants of Ham.

For a discussion of the structure of the flood narrative see Wenham (Word Biblical Commentary: Genesis 1-18, 155-158). Wenham cites B.W. Anderson’s analysis of the structure of the Flood narrative in its extended chiasmus structure:

Transitional introduction (6:9-10)
1. Violence in creation (6:11-12)
2. First divine speech: resolve to destroy (6:13-22)
3. Second divine speech: “enter ark” (7:1-10)
4. Beginning of flood (7:11-16)
5. The rising flood (7:17-24)
God remembers Noah
6. The receding flood (8:1-5)
7.    Drying of the earth (8:6-14)
8. Third divine speech: “leave ark” (8:15-19)
9. God’s resolve to preserve order (8:20-22)
10. Fourth divine speech: covenant (9:1-17)
Transitional conclusion (9:18-19) (Wenham 156)

Note the correspondence of the sections: 1-10, 2-9, 3-8, 4-7, 5-6. This orderly structure makes the concept of an editor carelessly putting together two or more documents a difficult position to defend.

Another structure in the narrative pertains to the days which may be outlined as below:

7 days until the flood comes (7:4)
40 days and 40 nights of rain (7:12)
150 days of the waters prevailing (7:24)
 God remembered Noah (8:1)
150 days of the waters declining when the ark rested on Ararat (8:3)
40 days of continued drying at the end of which Noah sent out birds (8:6)
7 days after the raven was sent out, Noah sent out the first dove (8:10)
7 days after the first dove, he sent out the second dove (8:12)

One should observe the correspondence in the numbers (with the exception of the last group of seven days).  Both of these structural analyses emphasize the unity of the Genesis narrative in contrast to the composite authorship interpretation suggested by modernist commentaries (see for example, Skinner, Westermann, Gunkel, Von Rad, Brueggemann, etc.).

The narrative of Genesis has God speaking to Noah in these texts:

6:13-22 — God tells Noah of his intention to destroy the world and gives him instructions on building the ark.
7:1-4 — God tells Noah to enter the ark.
8:15-19 — God instructs Noah to leave the ark.
    9:1-17 — God makes a covenant with Noah.

There is not one word recorded as the thoughts of Noah. This will have significance in later comments about the language used in describing the flood.

Widespread Belief in a Universal Flood

Aside from the common belief in creation, there is not another common belief among the races of mankind more extensive than belief in the flood. There are many existing traditions of a universal flood that are told in numerous languages (see Lange 293-296 for a listing of them from West Asiatic, East Asiatic, Grecian, those outside contact with the Old World [Celts, Mexicans from Cuba, Peruvians], Egyptians, and other cultures). Westermann states that there is no Old Testament story that has as many extra-biblical parallels as the flood. “The collection of R. Andree (1891) contains 88 texts; J.G. Frazer (1919; 1923) has assembled 250 texts covering almost 100 pages; J. Riem’s collection (1906; 1925) offers 302 texts” (402). He said, “We can say at once that the flood narrative like the creation narrative is part of the common property of humanity” (395). However, two particular ancient narratives are of interest, both of which come from the region near Babylon, because of their similarities to the biblical narrative:

1. The Gilgamesh Epic. The Gilgamesh epic relates that man was created out of clay. Enkidu lived in perfect harmony with beasts until he had sex with an harlot; he lost his strength and was changed in nature. He developed a fear of death. The flood came from the gods who gave instructions to build a boat with decks; they gave the dimensions of the boat, and instructions for its roof. The seed of all living things were put in it. The boat was pitched with bitumen. Gilgamesh put his family and animals on board. The flood lasted seven days and all mankind was destroyed. As the waters subsided the boat rested on a mountain. Gilgamesh released doves, a swallow, and a raven. At the end of the flood, he made a sacrifice to the gods after leaving the boat. 

2. The Atrahasis Epic. According to this narrative, the flood comes because the gods were irritated by the noise of men. The gods first sent a disease, then a drought, and finally a flood. Atrahasis is warned by Enki beforehand to build a boat. The boat has several decks and is pitched with bitumen. Atrahasis puts animals on the ship. The rain lasts seven days and seven nights. Sacrifices are offered to the gods after the flood is over. Also, the flood may have come because of sin.

The similarities between these accounts are too close to be accidental. The explanations suggested are these: (1) Maximalists: Moses took the Sumerian history and revised it to fit his purposes. (2) Minimalist: Both narratives come from a common history of a universal flood. Various scholars hold positions somewhere in between. My position is minimalist. If a universal flood occurred, all cultures descended from the survivors and transmitted to their posterity a record of that flood, as supported by Frazer’s finding 250 flood stories. The biblical narrative is divinely revealed; those from other cultures contain the errors that would naturally creep in through the re-telling of the flood story through the centuries. As it stands, the common heritage of a flood story from many different cultures lends support to the historicity of the biblical narrative of a universal flood.

Those who explain the flood as a local inundation have no adequate explanation of the common heritage of a universal flood from so many different cultures.

6567 Kings Ct., Avon, Indiana 46123 mikewillis1@compuserve.com

By Kenneth E. Thomas

The husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, being himself the savior of the body   . . . Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself up for it; that he might sanctify it, having cleansed it by the washing of water with the word, that he might present the church to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish . . . For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall be one flesh. This mystery is great: but I speak in regard of Christ and the church (Eph. 5:23-32). 

In an age when the church is often considered as outdated and unnecessary, it is good to go back to the language of the inspired Scriptures to find the value of the church of Christ which Jesus himself placed on it. Most people think in denominational terms and so are unable to recognize the church as it is depicted in the Bible, God’s word. One preacher I know, was I believe “right on,” as the kids often say, when he wrote, “When you think of the church, think people.” That may be an over simplification but it does describes the church, Christ’s kingdom, pretty well. It is the rule of Christ in the hearts of his people whom he has saved by the power of his gospel (Rom. 1:16-17; Acts 2:22-38, 40-41, 47). 

The word “church” is from the Greek word ekklesia which literally means “called out.” Those who are “called out” of sin are in the church which Jesus built: “The Lord added to the church daily such as were being saved” (Acts 2:47). The apostle Paul shows that Christ is “head of the body, the church” which he previously had defined as those who have been “delivered out of the power of darkness and translated into the kingdom” (Col. 1:13, 18). Those who are “sanctified in the truth” (John 17:17) are thus “set apart” for the service of God. That, by definition, is the church. The church isn’t something one “gets into to be saved,” it is that body of people who have been purchased by Christ’s blood when they obeyed from the heart a form of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ when, as penitent believers, they died to sin, were buried in water baptism, and were raised to walk in newness of life. This is when Paul by inspiration said that they “became servants of righteousness” (Rom. 6:3-6, 16-18). 

The inspired apostle Paul, in our text above, refers to the church as “a glorious church.” The word “glorious” is defined as: “Exhibiting attributes, qualities or acts that deserve or receive glory; praiseworthy; splendid” (Webster). What is there about this church the apostle describes that makes it a “glorious church”? That we shall attempt to explain as we progress. 

It Is Glorious Because of the Price Paid For It

As the apostle Paul exhorted the elders of the church in Ephesus, he said, “Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit hath made you bishops, to feed the (church of God, KJV) church of the Lord which he purchased with his own blood” (Acts 20:28). 

Notice again the reading from our text, Jesus Christ “gave himself up for it” (Eph. 5:25). Can you imagine a higher price than this? The church was purchased with the blood of Jesus, the blood of God’s “only begotten Son” (John 3:16; Heb. 2:9). What did the church cost? It cost the life and blood of Jesus.The value of something is determined by the price someone is willing to pay. For example, if you are willing to pay $10,000 for an automobile, that is the value you place on it. What about the church, what is its value? It is “a glorious church” because of the value Jesus placed on it: “He purchased it with His own blood.” 

What is salvation worth? Jesus defines that, also: “For what doth it profit a man, to gain the whole world and lose his own soul? For what should a man give in exchange for his soul?” (Mark 8:36-37). What is your soul worth? The apostle Paul declares that you are “bought with the price” (1 Cor. 6:20). And Peter shows what that price is: “Knowing that ye were redeemed . . . with precious blood, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot, even the blood of Christ” (1 Pet. 1:18-19). We are “justified by his blood” (Rom. 5:9), and in him we have “redemption through his blood, forgiveness of our trespasses” (Eph. 1:7). 

Your possible salvation cost Jesus his blood, and that is the price of the church (Acts 20:28). Thus, when Jesus saves one by applying his blood, that person is “added to the church” (Acts 2:47). The same blood that saves from sin also purchased the church for that is what the church is: those who have been cleansed by the blood of Jesus Christ! It is a glorious church because of the price paid for it. Let me illustrate a little further. This may be a crude illustration and all together too worldly, but perhaps we can get the point. If you have some money and you spend it to purchase some item, the money is gone; if you are to derive any benefit from the money you have spent, it will be by virtue of your association with or your use of that which the money purchased! Just so, if men and women are to derive any benefits from the shed (spent) blood of Jesus Christ, it will be by virtue of their relationship in or with that which his blood purchased. As we have seen his blood purchased this relationship known as his church. 

It Is Glorious Because of Its Builder

The prophets of old foretold the establishment of the church. “It shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord’s house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem” (Isa. 2:2-3). That “house of God” is later identified by the apostle Paul as, “The church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Tim. 3:15). The psalmist laid down the principle, “Except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it” (Ps. 127:1). 

Whose job was it to build the church, the house of God? Many seem to think it makes no difference, but Jesus said: “I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18). Only the Lord Jesus has the right to build it, and he did. No one has the right to “alter the blueprint” for it (Gal. 1:8), even as Moses was charged: “See that thou make all things according to the pattern that was showed thee in the mount” (Heb. 8:5). No one has the right to build the church, except Jesus. He stated forcefully, “All authority hath been given unto me, both in heaven and on earth” (Matt. 28:18). 

Had I built the church, I probably would have made it different from what the Lord did, but the job was not left to you or me! God’s own Son has done the building job. He drew the plans, he gave power to the apostles (Acts 1:8) to carry out those plans. This is one building program that was done right! The plans were “perfect’ (Jas. 1:25). No alterations were needed after that church was built, nor were any alterations permitted. 

It Is Glorious Because of Its Head

Often a nation is considered great because of the head of its government. A business is sometimes great because of the one who heads it. What of the church? Who is the head of it? Paul wrote of Jesus Christ, that God “hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness of him that filleth all in all” (Eph. 1:22-23). The headship of Jesus is further defined in the text with which we began this article: “For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, being himself the savior of the body” (Eph. 5:23). 

Some will argue, “But we need a head here on earth, to direct the affairs of the church.” But, friend, if the church had an earthly head, that would detract from its glory. Paul declares, “Our citizenship is in heaven” (Phil. 3:20), that is where our “head” belongs. To try to give headship to someone else, to have an earthly head, is to take away the pre-eminence from Christ. Notice: “He is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things He might have the pre-eminence” (Col. 1:18). If we would give glory to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, we will honor him as the head of his “glorious church.” 

Please notice, too, that the church is here called “his body.” Those in his church are “members of his body” (Rom. 12:4-5). Many seem to think it makes no difference, but there are “many members, but one body” (1 Cor. 12:20). The inspired apostle also writes plainly, “There is one body” (Eph. 4:4) and declares that Christ is “head of the body, the church” (Col. 1:18). A body with more than one head would be a monstrosity. But a body, designed and built by God’s own Son, and with the perfect head, makes for a glorious church. 

It Is Glorious Because of Its Members

The composition of the “glorious church” is set forth clearly in Acts 2. The apostles, directed by the Holy Spirit, preached Jesus to be the Christ, the Son of God (vv. 21-36). When people were convinced, and asked, “What shall we do?” the Lord answered by the mouth of Peter, “Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins” (v. 38). The result? “They then that received his word were baptized: and there were added unto them in that day about three thousand souls . . . And the Lord added to the church daily such as were being saved” (vv. 41, 47). Who was in the church, and on what terms? It is clear, isn’t it? Those people who believed the gospel, repented and were baptized; when they did that, the Lord saved them and added them to his church. The church of the Lord is a glorious church because it is composed of saved people. To the church at Rome, the apostle Paul wrote, “As many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God” (Rom 8:14). To this same church, Paul wrote, “We were reconciled to God through the death of his Son . . . Are ye ignorant that all we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?” (Rom. 5:10; 6:3). To the churches of Galatia, the inspired apostle wrote, “Ye are all sons of God, through faith, in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ did put on Christ” (Gal. 3:26-27). The “glorious church” is composed of children of God, people who have been cleansed by the blood of Christ when they were “baptized into his death.” 

Some will object that members of the church of Christ still commit sin. And this is true. The church is not made up of perfect people who never commit sin, for all of us sin: “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God         . . . If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us” (Rom. 3:23; 1 John 1:8). The church of the Lord is made up by those who recognize their sinfulness and turn to Christ for forgiveness and guidance. And, while they still make mistakes, they constantly strive to live for God: “If we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanseth us from all sin” (1 John 1:7). It is a glorious church because it is composed of people who are saved by the blood of Jesus. 

It Is Glorious Because of  Its Destiny

Glory is often determined by the purpose, reward, durability or the destiny — whether of people or nations. We are blessed to live in a “glorious nation.” It is a glorious country because of the part it has played, and is playing, in history. It offers freedom, opportunity and success to common people in a way that no other nation in history ever has. Just think, then, how much more glorious is the destiny of the church that Jesus built and saves! Notice again, “That he might present the church to himself a glorious church” (Eph. 5:27). This has reference to a bride’s presentation to her husband (see also Rev. 21:2). The apostle Paul says that we have been “espoused to one husband . . . to Christ” (2 Cor. 11:2). To be married to Christ, to live with Christ, forever, in heaven, in God’s eternal presence: This is the destiny of the “glorious church.” When Paul speaks of the church as the kingdom, he says when the end comes that Christ “shall deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father, when he shall have abolished all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be abolished is death” (1 Cor. 15:2-26). When death is no more, and the graves are opened at the Lord’s return, the church will be delivered up to be forever with God. The “glorious church” has a glorious destiny! 

Jesus said, “Every plant which my heavenly Father planted not, shall be rooted up” (Matt. 15:13). That church which is bought only with man’s tears and sweat, that which has a human head and is built by man, that whose membership is determined by man shall be “rooted up.” But that church which Jesus built, which he purchased with his own blood, of which he is the head and the Savior that is “a glorious church.” Will you study carefully the above Scriptures, and then decide to become a part of that “glorious church” which Jesus will save? 

You are not a member of the church that Jesus’ blood purchased if you haven’t obeyed the gospel (Acts 2:38; 1 Pet. 1:22-25; Rom. 6:3-6; Gal. 3:26-29; Eph. 2:13-17). Paul wrote that those who “obey not the gospel shall be punished with everlasting destruction” at the return of Christ (2 Thess. 1:6-10). “Obeying the gospel” is language rarely heard and more rarely understood in our present generation (especially among Protestantism), but it is the language of the New Testament. Rather than being told to “kneel and pray a certain prayer” as we hear today, folks like Saul of Tarsus who had prayed and fasted for three days as he awaited an answer as to “what he must do” to be saved, was told, “why are you waiting? Arise and be immersed and wash away your sins, calling (or having called, ket) on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16). 

kthomas@ntslink.net

There is an attitude in the hearts of some Christians that regards debating as beneath the dignity of the followers of Christ and as detrimental to the spread of the Kingdom. The world regards debating with suspicion. This almost universal disapproval of religious debating outside the church has had its effect on the members of the church. For this reason it is good to examine the Scriptures to learn the true attitude one should have toward such matters.

Truth is in constant conflict with error. In view of this situation, what should be our disposition and action amid such a conflict?

A Clarification

Some of those who find debating obnoxious remonstrate with us when we try to reason with them by saying that “debating” is condemned in the Bible. They then quote Romans 1:29 and 2 Corinthians 12:20 from the King James Version: “Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness, full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers. . . .” “For I fear, lest, when I come, I shall not find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto such as ye would not: lest there be debates, envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults.” The words “debate” and “debates” in these passages are pounced on to condemn religious discussion.

These words are translated “strife” in the American Standard Version. They are derived from a term which means “a disposition to be quarrelsome and contentious and is an outgrowth of enmity” (W.E. Vine, Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, IV:82). This is strife for its own sake and not discussion to learn the truth. Strife causes division. In fact, those engaged in it are divided and such conduct is inimical to real Christianity. But the idea of bringing truth and error into conflict is not in the word “debate” in the above passages. To condemn debating on the basis of these passages is to pervert the Scriptures.

Contend for the Faith

Jude’s exhortation to contend for the faith once for all delivered is most familiar to Christians. Yet, some brethren have not felt the impact of this passage for they have a distaste for debates. The word “contend” is compounded from two words. One means “about or upon”; the other means “a contest.” One engages in a contest as a combatant. Thus it follows that a Christian must intensely (indicated by earnestly in Jude 3) contest that opposed to the faith or the gospel. Obedience to this commandment makes it impossible for one to be a non-controversialist (emphasis added, sfd). Since error and truth are constantly in conflict, it follows that the Christian is and must be in constant conflict with all those who espouse the cause of error. This conflict of necessity involves controversy.

An Apology

The word “defense” occurs in a number of passages and means a verbal answer made in favor of one or his belief. An examination of some passages in which the word occurs will aid us in arriving at its meaning.

“Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will: the one do it of love, knowing that I am set for the defense of the gospel; but the other proclaim Christ of faction, not sincerely, thinking to raise up affliction for me in my bonds” (Phil. 1:15-17). Paul was set for the defense of the gospel. Whether against Epicurean and Stoic philosophers in intellectual Athens, or in a Jewish Synagogue, or before a heathen king, Paul made answer showing why the gospel should be accepted and the other systems rejected. When they remonstrated with him, he disputed with them. These disputes are studied elsewhere in this article.

On numerous occasions Paul had charges leveled against him. To these he made an answer or a defense. Festus laid the case of Paul before King Agrippa stating that Roman law provided for the accused to face his accusers and to make a defense, an answer (Acts 25:16). Paul made answer to the false teachers who tried to undermine his influence with the Corinthians but he called this answer his defense (1 Cor. 9:3). When attacked by a Jewish mob, Paul stood and made a defense (Acts 22:1). Finally, Paul stood alone in making his defense or answer in Rome (2 Tim. 4:16). These four incidents from the life of Paul should clearly indicate the essential meaning of defense. There is in the term the idea of putting two things side by side in order to determine which is right.

The truth is that no Christian can be loyal to the cause he espoused and fail to defend his position. “But sanctify in your hearts Christ as Lord: being ready always to give answer to every man that asketh you a reason concerning the hope that is in you, yet with meekness and fear” (1 Pet. 3:15). The word “answer” in this passage is the same word “defense” in the passages immediately above and could be translated apology.

The Good Fight

The word “fight” in 1 Timothy 6:12 and 2 Timothy comes from a word that originally meant “to lead, then to an assembly and finally a conflict or a contest” (Vine, ibid, II:94). Timothy, “fight the good fight of the faith.” Here then is a conflict or a contest involving the faith. He was to lead in this conflict in favor of the truth. Christianity is aggressive. The gospel is God’s might or ability to save the soul (Rom. 1:16). It expunges error from the heart and life and instills the wisdom of God. This is a mighty conflict! No true disciple can avoid the fight The life of a Christian is a fight of the faith.

When ready to lay his armor aside, Paul said tersely, “I have fought the good fight.” We shall have denied the Lord if we cannot so comment when we are about to depart. Yes, the Christian’s life is a militant battle with the forces of error whether in the form of false religions, perverted gospels, infidelity, or immorality.

Dispute or Reason

“For three Sabbath days” Paul reasoned from the Scriptures with the Thessalonian Jews (Acts 17:2). Likewise at Corinth he reasoned in the synagogue seeking to persuade both Jews and Greeks (Acts 18:4). Whether in the synagogue with Jews and religious persons, or in the marketplace with any who would talk, Paul reasoned seeking to win people to Christ through his argumentation (Acts 17:17; 19:8, 9; 18:19). Before a ruler of this world he reasoned about righteousness, self-control, and the judgment to come (Acts 24:25).

The word “reason” or “dispute” used in these above passages originally meant “to think differently about a thing with one’s self”; therefore, the idea of arguing or disputing with others was an easy transition in meaning. What Paul did when he reasoned was to argue or dispute with others. There is the interplay of truth and error with the idea being to cause truth to stand out in contrast. Truth is made to shine brightly when set beside error. Error appears in darkness when set against the real light of truth. May no Christian shrink back from this worthy effort of arguing for the truth!

Proving the Point

Confounding the Jews at Damascus, Paul proved that Jesus was the Christ (Acts 9:22). A joining or compacting together is the idea of the word prove in the statement before us. The word “knit” in Ephesians 4:16 and Colossians 2:19 is from the same word. Thus Paul stirred up the Jews by “knitting” or compacting Scripture together to demonstrate to their minds that Jesus was the promised Messiah or Christ. Frequently, some one says that he does not like all this “skipping” from passage to passage. The idea in the passage before us is that Paul took various passages and knit them together and that which he compacted proved his point! The conclusion from such a joining together denies every false conclusion. It is therefore impossible to prove one point without arguing against the false notions on the same point. One cannot help being a controversialist.

Conflict

It was amid “much conflict” that the Thessalonians first heard Paul preach the gospel (1 Thess. 2:2). From the shameful treatment at Philippi, Paul entered Thessalonica to be opposed by the jealous Jews, by vile fellows of the rabble and by an unruly mob who set the city in an uproar against the apostle (Acts 17:1-9). He was in continual conflict with the enemies of the gospel. But, today, in many quarters this kind of conflict would be vulgar and beneath the dignity of the gospel and the “respectability” we have gained of late. May God help us to the end that such warriors as Paul may always be with us and not ashamed to meet error head on.

Confute

“And when he was minded to pass over into Achaia, the brethren encouraged him, and wrote to the disciples to receive him: and when he had come, he helped them much that had believed through grace; for he powerfully confuted the Jews, and that publicly, showing by the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ” (Acts 18:27, 28). This word “confute” in the original is formed by a combination of three words: through, down, and to convict. Hence Paul met their opposing arguments in turn, brought them down to the ground and consequently brought their blame to them. He convicted them by this process of reasoning. He convicted by taking the arguments in turn and showing their falsity. This is a truly classic example of truth routing error and its exponent. Who said debating is sinful?

A Summary

Contend, answer or apology, fight, reason or dispute, prove, conflict and confute are expressions used that demonstrate that debating is not foolish and wrong. A Christian is forced, if faithful to his duty, to debate the exponents of  errors, to throw down his arguments that truth might stand in the eyes of men.

From Truth Magazine October 1956 (Vol. 1, No. 1)

By Phil T. Arnold

For some time now the world has been accustomed to a loose use of the term “Christian” without much regard for anything the Bible or Christ has to say. If a person is religious, he is a “Christian.” If someone expresses any faith in Jesus or the Bible, he is a “Christian.” If a person is a good neighbor, a good parent, a good moral person, he is a “Christian.” According to some we even live in a “Christian” nation. While such is expected from the world at large, this trend also seems to be increasing among members of the Lord’s church. More often than ever in my memory, members of the church will speak of those outside covenant relationship with God through Christ as being “Christians.” And we read more and more about those in pulpits of “churches of Christ” accepting and even encouraging such.

“Are you saying that our denominational friends are not ‘Christians’?” “Who made you their judge?” Well, I’m not applying for the job of judge nor am I usurping that position. I have no desire to “judge” anyone. But I am commanded to “judge with righteous judgment” (John 7:24) which requires that I would accurately understand and apply the word of God. I am also held accountable for informing other people of God’s judgments as expressed in his word (see Ezek. 3:17ff). Therefore, to be pleasing to God my “judgment” of who and what is a “Christian” must simply be the same as the “judgment” of God which he has revealed through his Word. I cannot apply that term to those whom God would not simply to be agreeable and non-judgmental in the eyes of the world.

One might think, feel, and call himself a citizen of the USA, but that does not make him a citizen. Citizenship requires the meeting of certain standards. Likewise, one is not a citizen of the Lord’s kingdom simply because he thinks and feels that he is and claims the name “Christian.” There is a standard revealed within the Word of what it takes to be a citizen of the Lord’s kingdom, to belong to Christ and to be married to him, and thus rightfully wear his name.

According to the Bible, who is a Christian? In Acts 11:26 we read, “So it was that for a whole year they assembled with the church and taught a great many people. And the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch.” Thus, according to the Bible those who are “Christians” are “disciples.” But how can we identify disciples? “Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed him, ‘If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free’” (John 8:31, 32). In order for one to be a disciple of Jesus one must “know the truth” and “abide in His word.” Should I therefore refer to others as “Christians” who do not know the truth nor abide in his word? We certainly do not live in a “Christian” nation! Simply being a good neighbor or a good parent or even a good moral person does not make one a Christian! Even being religious and even calling upon Jesus as “Lord” does not make one a Christian! Jesus said, “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven” (Matt. 7:21). And again, “But why do you call Me ‘Lord, Lord, and do not do the things which I say?” (Luke 6:46).

What about our denominational friends? Are they Christians? Well, do they know and abide in the truth, the words of Christ? Are they doing the will of the Father, the things which Jesus said? Only if such questions could be answered in the affirmative could one rightfully be thought of and referred to as a Christian.

Consider a simple yet vital part of this matter of knowing and abiding in the Father’s will. The truth, the words Christ Jesus said in Mark 16:16, “He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.” The baptism commanded by Jesus is said to be “for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38) and “to wash away one’s sins” (Acts 22:16). With this understanding of the word of God, how could we refer to those who have not believed in Jesus and been baptized for such purposes as “Christians”? Have our denominational friends believed in Christ and been baptized for the forgiveness of their sins? If they have not, they are not “Christians” according to God’s word, according to the judgment of God, and cannot be so regarded by one who desires his judgment to agree with God.

The term “Christian” simply means “of or belonging to Christ.” Only two verses in all of God’s word speak of how one enters “into” Christ — into that relationship where one belongs to Christ. “Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?” (Rom. 6:3). “For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ” (Gal. 3:27). Again, these verses speak of that same act of baptism for the remission of sins based upon one’s faith in Christ. Should we refer to those who have never entered into Christ as belonging to Christ? How can we refer to them as “Christians”?

In our age of tolerance, compromise, and “political correctness” it does not seem fitting to limit the use of the term “Christian” to only those who are defined as such by the Scriptures. But then again, the world has never approved of the will of God, his Son, or his people. More members of the church and more pulpits of churches of Christ may seek the world’s favor. Yet, we simply must determine whether or not we are seeking the approval of man or God and allow that determination to define our use of the term “Christian.”

From The Evangelizer, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73139