OlanHicks.com

PURPOSE STATEMENT

IT GOES WITH THE DOCTRINE

I was 35 years old back in 1963 and was preaching in High Point, North Carolina, when I had an experience that really says something to our present generation.

A local Baptist preacher had been writing in the newspaper “letters to the editor” column, criticizing the Catholic Church. I had written and spoken criticisms of the teachings of the Baptist Church. For that Mr. Robbins, the Baptist pastor, had publicly referred to me as a “bigot.”

A local Catholic priest wrote in saying “I am praying for Mr. Robbins, and am hoping that Saint Patrick and other ‘Roman saints’ will intercede in his behalf.” He added, “As my prayers have gone up for him perhaps he will offer his to Almighty God for the changes he advocates instead of inflaming the good people of High Point.”

I wrote in that I agreed with the criticisms lodged against Catholicism but not with the circumstances in which it was given. I said, “Mr. Robbins is currently engaged in bitter denunciation of me before the area’s preachers for criticizing denominational doctrines. I believe that criticism can serve a good purpose if used rightly and I would like to see us all stop trying to hush it up by labeling our critics ‘bigots.’” I added, “I resent the double standard which makes it right for Mr. Robbins to speak out in sharp criticism of what he opposes but wrong and “ugly” for others to criticize something he believes. If he is going to preach that it is “ugly” to criticize anything religious, then let him be recognized as “ugly” when he does it. If there are ethical rules against it then why is he not in violation of them?”

It seems the denominational doctrine and this double standard go together. When someone embraces the doctrine they also embrace the double standard. Some of our brethren today have turned to Baptist doctrine, i.e. salvation before obedience in baptism, acceptance of man made churches, etc. When they did so they also adopted the strategy of Baptist theologians, i.e. they declare their critics “bigots” while they are themselves engaging in sharp criticism of conservative premises, especially restoration ideals and the basic views of churches of Christ.

Frankly brethren, it would benefit the cause of Christ a great deal if many of us would grow up and stop acting like children. It is foolish to think you can “stack the deck” in favor of your favorite theories. That is a child’s game. What would you gain if you could do it? It would not change the facts. Jesus did not tell His disciples to go into all the world and silence the opposition. That is not the way truth prevails. Jesus addressed that point this way; “Everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light lest his deeds should be exposed. But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen that they have been done in God.”  (John 3:20-21) One of the great needs in the church today is enough maturity to be able to read and study the scriptures objectively. It is utter folly to follow leaders who have a preset agenda and their minds made up. There is not an objective pursuit of truth. Jesus also addressed that. “If the blind lead the blind both will fall into the ditch.”

BECAUSE OF REMISSION OF SINS?

You need to know what is wrong with this argument.

A denominational preacher on TV, Adrian Rogers, in an effort to show that baptism is not UNTO the remission of sins, put forth an argument I have heard others use, including some of my own brethren. He said that in Acts 2:38 Peter commanded the people to be baptized BECAUSE OF the remission of sins, not “in order to” remission. He said that the Greek preposition “eis” means “because of.” What did he offer as proof? He cited Mat. 12:41 where Jesus said that Ninevah repented “at the preaching of Jonah” and the word is “eis” as it is in Acts 2:38. He interpreted Jesus as saying that Ninevah repented because of the preaching of Jonah.

Here is what is wrong with this argument:

(1) It contradicts the definition of the word. Denominational theologians take it upon themselves to arbitrarily redefine this word to mean “because of” or some other meaning. Responsible lexicographers do not concur. No recognized lexicographer ever defined “eis”as meaning “because of.” It is defined in every lexicon, dictionary, or commentary as meaning “into” or “unto” or “in the direction of.” It means that in Acts 2:38 and it means that in Mat. 12:41. If you read the book of Jonah you will find that the Ninevites repented “in the direction of” Jonah’s preaching. That record sets forth the adjustments the Ninevites made in their repenting. They changed from what they had been doing over to what Jonah preached. Thus they repented “UNTO” the preaching of Jonah. What Jesus said about it is correct.

(2) Try reading Mat. 26:28 with the “because of” definition. Jesus said, “This is my blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for (“eis”) the remission of sins.” If “eis” means “because of” then Jesus shed His blood because sins had already been remitted. That, of course, is flagrantly false and so is the perverting of Acts 2:38 to accomodate an anti-baptism theory. What you need to look at, Mr. Rogers, is what else Jesus said in that passage. He said the men of Ninevah will rise up in judgment against men like you, who do not respond to God’s message as they did, but argue with it instead.

MAXEY CORRECTS HEAVEN’S SPOKESMEN

Al Maxey says that his new book, “Immersed by one Spirit” is the account of how he changed his view of the purpose of baptism. The publisher’s announcements say the same thing. And what was that original view that he now calls error and where did it come from?

To track down the origin of that “error” you have to go all the way back to the Holy Spirit. Al’s original view was that the purpose of baptism is the remission of sins and salvation. He got that from the teaching and practice of the apostles. The apostles got it from Jesus who said, “He who believes and is baptized will be saved.” And Jesus got it from the Holy Spirit. The record says that He was taken up “after that He, through the Holy Spirit had given commandments to the apostles whom He has chosen.” (Acts 1:8) So the commandments He gave the apostles came from the Holy Spirit. And what were those commandments? He told them to make disciplses of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things He had commanded them. (Mat. 28:19-20) Note that this is written in participles, meaning that “make disciples” and “baptizing them” occur at the same time. Thus, beginning on Pentecost day, the apostles taught people to be baptized for this purpose. When the people obeyed this Gospel the Lord added them to the number of the saved. Now don’t you know these heavenly messengers have been anxiously awaiting Al’s book so they can find out where they made their mistake?

I am sure they will now rewrite the scriptures. The Holy Spirit will have learned that He was the element in which people were supposed to be baptized, not water, as Jesus and the apostles thought. Acts 2 will have to be revised. Instead of saying that He fell upon the 120 gathered in the upper room it will say that he fell in a nearby lake and filled it with Himself so they could be baptized in Him. In Acts 8 the eunuch will say, “Here is a lake. We can fill it with the Holy Spirit and I can be baptized there.” In the 10th chapter Peter, instead of commanding “water, that these should be baptized” will command the Holy Spirit to come back again and this time get it right, be the element in which they are baptized. In chapter 16 the account of the Phillipian jailor will say, “They took him, the same hour of the night, filled a bath tub with the Holy Spirit, and baptized him and his family there in.

After the corrections are made Revelation 20 will say, “All the dead, small and great, stood before God and the books were opened, and another book was opened which was Al Maxey’s book, and corrections were made in the first books according to what Al had writ- ten. Then all who wanted to go into heaven were sent there and the others were consigned to eternity in a mean old church of Christ, where they will have to hear the original, mistaken version of the Bible preached every Sunday forever. There will be weeping and gnashing of pages.”

“According to their own desires they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears, and will turn away their ears from the truth and be turned to fables.” (2 Tim. 4:2-3)

COLLABORATORS WITH THE ENEMY

C.S.Lewis wrote, “In every church, in every institution, there is something which sooner or later works against the very purpose for which it came into existence.” (Letters to Malcolm, 94) That “something” forms the thinking of those who act in such a way as to betray or undermine the cause to which they are supposed to be committed. Even among the very apostles of Christ there was Judas, one who collaborated with the enemy.

In the late 1930s, when Hitler’s armies attacked Poland, there were some Polish citizens who collaborated with that enemy. The same thing happened in Zechoslovakia. In France there were French citizens who collaborated with the Nazi invaders. Why? Did they think it best for the country? Did they not fully realize what they were doing? Were they thinking only in terms of their own personal advantage? Whatever their reasoning was the fruit was ruination for the country. America and its allies finally had to come and rescue them.

The Bible says repeatedly that this very thing would happen in Christianity. The apostle Paul told the Ephesian elders to be on the watch for those who would collaborate with the enemy. “Also of your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things to draw away disciples after them.” (Acts 20:30) The apostle Peter wrote a similar warning. “But there were false prophets among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who secretly will bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them.” (2 Peter 2:1) Jesus warned about such collaborators, “Beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.” (Mat. 7:15)

The “restoration movement” was and is an attempt to recover the pure way of God as it was “once for all delivered to the saints” by the Holy Spirit inspired apostles, to restore the church of Christ as it was originally constituted under their guidance. C. S. Lewis also wrote concerning this kind of movement, “It is not uncommon that what react and recovery movements recover – or restore – becomes predominantly shaped by what they perceive themselves to be reacting against.” This may be a clue to what the thinking of such men is, what they perceive to be the “target.” I know of many who think that what we should be against is the concept of a “narrow way” or “rigidity.” Most of them think that righteous reaction should be against “laws and commandments” and many of them believe that we should destroy the idea of a need to conform to one way.

The church of Christ of today has those who are collaborating with the enemy and their number seems to be growing. The thinking in each of these individuals may not always be the same in every detail but the target is the same, destruction of basic Biblical premises. The Bible tells us why this is. They have embraced a basic concept that they like, according to “the rudiments of the world.” That concept is so dear to them and they like it so well that any concept that contradicts it, even Bible teachings, will meet with hostility. When Paul said we must “Preach the word,” (2 Tim. 4:2) he added, “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth and be turned aside to fables.” What they hold is fiction because it is a product of their own taste, not God’s prescription. They cast away their only hope, the decrees of God’s word.

When you try to help them, using the Bible in its appointed way, “for doctrine, reproof, correction, for instruction in righteousess,” they reply with, ”What a mean, ugly spirited person you are to say that!” The sad part is that men of this mind set are being featured on several of our lectureship programs, Pepperdine, Tulsa, and even ACU. My hope is that in coming to understand that concept and how it conflicts with God’s word, we can at least recognize it for what it is. It is collaboration with the enemy of souls, Satan. If we care about the saving of souls we must oppose this sabatoge in every way we can.

WHAT IF JESUS BELIEVED WHAT LIBERALS DO

Al Maxey’s most recent “Reflections” #533, as usual, presses the liberal element’s waging of war against the Biblical concept of obedience to God’s decrees. Under the guise of “freedom” he writes, “In this world we are surrounded by tyrants and their tyranny; the same is sadly true in Christendom. Yet, God continues to call us all to freedom from such tyranny, just as He calls a few to stand against the tyrants.”

Question: What if Jesus had held the view of “freedom” that Al does? Would He have seen what he had to do as “tyranny?” Would He have said, “Who  would require me to to go to earth and endure 33 years of life in the flesh and to be put through the physical abuse of that final night and to have to suffer six hours of agony on the cross in the course of dying?” That was a pretty tough assignment. Jesus was certainly no liberal.

What about Paul? He said He was a “free man.” If he had meant by that what Al means by it would he have said, “It is tyranny to require me to endure perils in the sea, perils of robbers, perils in the city, perils among false brethren and finally to die for the cause of Christ? Who would require that I give up everything for His name’s sake?” Jesus “emptied Himself.” Paul counted everything else but refuge. What did they believe that made them do this?

Both Jesus and Paul understood something the liberals do not seem to be aware of, i.e that there are eternal purposes to what God has ordered to be done. John 3:16 says that God “gave His Son” out of love for the world and for the purpose of enabling people not to perish but to be saved through faith in Him. In the garden Jesus asked if it were possible to remove that “cup” of suffering. The scriptures indicate that it could not be done any other way. Paul said that he endured many hardships to preach the Gospel because “It is the power of God unto salvation.” Jesus said that to be His disciple one must “deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.” Those who preach the word exactly as it is written do so because it is God’s appointed way to make redemption available to mankind. Freedom from God’s laws is Satan’s prescription, not God’s. Read what Peter said about it in 2 Peter 2:19. “While they promise them liberty they themselves are the servants of corruption.”

What about those who insist on their “liberty,” freedom from all laws, as a higher priority than carrying out the will of God? Al will deny it, of course, but the fact is in his writings he denies expressly stated elements of the will of God, Bible commands, instructions, principles etc. He demonizes those who believe what Samuel said, i.e. that to “obey the voice of the Lord” is what is important. (1 Sam. 15:22) Jesus expressed His view in John 15:10, “If you keep my commandments you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and abide in His love.” Because Jesus believed this and would not compromise on it, we have the hope of salvation today. Don’t let anyone tell you to throw it away in favor of man’s idea of “freedom.”

A significant fact: There is not one man in all the liberal camp who will debate these issues openly, either orally or in writing. What does that tell you?

Olan Hicks

THE SALVATION BEFORE OBEDIENCE DOCTRINE

The Bible says salvation is “by grace through faith… not of works.” (Eph. 2:8-9) “Grace” means we do not earn it. The text also adds, “lest any man should boast,” again showing that the meaning is we cannot earn salvation. Most of the protestant world reads this to say that salvation is without works. That is not the same thing. It is a serious misreading. The same Bible that says salvation is not “of works” also says that salvation is not “without works.” Galatians 5:6, for example, says that what avails in Christ is “faith workng through love.” James said that “faith without works is dead.” (2:24) It is true that works do not purchase salvation. It is also true that works are becessary. To omit works is to omit salvation, but that is what millions are doing.

Somehow there is a failure to understand the difference between “salvation not of works” and “salvation without works.” These are not the same. Many ask “Does it matter if one reverses the Biblical order and claims to be saved first and baptized later?” According to the scriptures it matters a lot. Think about it. The Bible says several times that we are “baptized into Christ.” (Romans 6:3, Gal. 3:27). God has specifically appointed that procedure for getting into Christ. If one believes he is “in Christ” before he is baptized he vetoes God, sets aside the divine process, and substitutes another one. That, in essence, makes baptism irrelevant. If one believes he is in Christ without obeying this command then it is logical to think that baptism is irrelevant. I have heard many denominational preachers declare, “Baptism has nothing to do with salvation.” This is the exact opposite of what Jesus said in Mark 16:16. Too many do not understand how serious an error this is. Think a minute about why it is so serious.

In Matthew 7 Jesus said that at the judgment He will turn away many who thought they had “done many wonderful things” in His name. They are rejected for what reasons? (1) “I never knew you” and (2) “You practiced lawlessness.” The context shows that false prophets in sheep’s clothing were behind their misconception. At verse 21 He pinpointed what we call “the sinner’s prayer,” “Not everyone who says to me Lord, Lord, will enter the kingdom of God but he who does the will of my Father in heaven.” Evidently they had substituted of the words “Lord, come into my heart and save me” for God’s appointed way, obedience. They did not enter the kingdom.

John wrote, “To those who received Him he gave the power (or right) to become children of God.” (John 1:12) By the grace of God a procedure was given by which one can enter the kingdom. That procedure is to obey Him. “He became the author of eternal salvation to those who obey Him.” (Heb. 5:9) Jesus said, “Preach the Gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized shall be saved. He who does not believe will be condemned.” (Mark 16:15-16) The reversed concept of human theology says instead, “He who believes is saved and will be baptized.”

If the power to save was in the act of baptism then it might well be the case that the sequential order wouldn’t matter. But the power to save is in God, not in baptism. He said He will give salvation to one who believes and is baptized. This man made idea simply vetoes God’s decree and says that we are saved without obeying Christ. If we do not believe what Jesus said then we are in the category “He who does not believe.” Jesus said he who does not believe will be condemned.

The wrong turn at this point also links up with several other erroneous doctrines. One of these is the notion that laws are excluded from the covenant of God. James said, “But he who looks into the perfect law of liberty and continues in it, and is not a forgetful hearer but a doer of the work, this one will be blessed in what he does.” (1:25) God said His covenant would be of this nature, “I will put my laws in their minds and wrote them on their hearts.” (Heb. 8:10)

Thus the reversing of the Bible order, putting salvation before obedience, puts in place the very things Jesus said will get us rejected at the judgment, (1) failure to enter the covenant with Him and (2) practicing lawlessness. Instead let us trust God and trust Jesus enough to simply go with all Biblical instructions. This is the only way to prepare for eternity in the world to come.

IMMERSED BY ONE SPIRIT

For well over a hundred years advocates of the doctrine of salvation before obedience have tried to use 1 Corinthians 12:13 to deny that immersion in water is the baptism Jesus commanded and which puts one into Christ. Actually this is one of their weakest arguments because the Bible is so specific in what it says about the matter. But remarkably some of our own brethren have taken up that argument and now Al Maxey, who preaches for a church of Christ, has published a book with the above title, evidently thinking he has dug out a brilliant new truth to enlighten the church of Christ people. To see how weak it is in comparison with with scripture you only have to look up some expressly stated Bible facts.

The scriptures distinguish clearly between “baptism in the name of Christ” (in water) and baptism in the  Holy Spirit.

Jesus commanded His disciples to preach the Gospel to all the world and said, “He who believes and is baptized shall be saved.” He also told them, “You shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.” (Acts 1:5) It was these apostles who were to be baptized with the Holy Spirit, not the people to whom they preached. The purpose was not to make them disciples but Jesus said it was to enable them to deliver the Gospel to the world. At verse 8 He said they would receive power “and you shall be witnesses to me in Judea, in Samaria, and to the end of the earth.” This is exactly what happened. After the Holy Spirit came on the apostles they carried out this assignment. They never commanded anyone to be baptized with the Holy Spirit.

Look at what happened when this “power” Jesus spoke of came upon them in Acts 2. They did preach and some people were “cut to the heart” and cried out “What shall we do?” Peter said, “Repent and be baptized every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” Notice the sequence. (1) They were baptized in the name of Jesus and then (2) they would receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Obviously being baptized for the remission of sins and receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit are two different things.

Then notice in the 8th chapter when they preached the Gospel in Samaria people were baptized. But the text says specifically they had not received the Holy Spirit, again showing that being baptized and receiving the Holy Spirit are two different things. Verse 14 says when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God they sent Peter and John, who prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, “for as yet he had fallen on none of them. They had only been baptized in the name of the Lord, Jesus.” Notice, they had received the word of God, they had been baptized in the name of Jesus. But they had NOT received the Holy Spirit. How could it be made any clearer that baptism in the name of Jesus is not baptism in the Holy Spirit?

Yes, the scriptures are quite clear as to what the baptism is that Jesus commanded. In that same 8th chapter of Acts Phillip went to the eunuch in the chariot and “preached Jesus to him.” Then the text says  that as they went along they came to some water. Came to what? Water. And the eunuch said, “Here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?” Did Philip say? “No, we’ll have to find a lake that is filled with the Holy Spirit so you can be baptized in that element?” No. He said if you believe with all your heart you may.” Remember, he had “preached Jesus to him.”

Acts 19 demonstrates this truth again. The Ephesians had been baptized according to John’s baptism. Paul taught them correctly and they were baptized in Jesus’ name. Then Paul laid hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit. Note the sequence. (1) They were baptized, (2) Paul laid hands on them, (3) They received the Holy Spirit. Receiving the Holy Spirit is not the baptism of the Gospel. These are two separate things in the scriptures.

They love to argue that the coming of the Holy Spirit on Cornelius meant that he was saved before he was baptized in water. But that case destroys their argument on 1 Cor 12:13 because after the Holy Spirit came Peter said, “Can anyone forbid water that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.” (Acts 10:47-48) Notice.  After they had received the Holy Spirit Peter commanded them to be baptized “in the name of the lord Jesus.” For that he specified  “WATER.” Baptism in the name of Jesus is baptism in water.

Here is the key to their mistake. From whence comes the command to be baptized? How did the apostles know to command baptism and that its purpose was the remission of sins? Jesus promised the Holy Spirit would guide them “into all truth,” (John 16:13) This is the sense in which “by one spirit we are all baptized into one body.” The Holy Spirit directed it. Also in John 16 Jesus said the Holy Spirit would “convince the world of sin.” How would He do that? He directed the apostles in preaching to the people and that produced the conviction that is attributed to the holy Spirit. By reading the accounts of people being convinced of sin we see exactly how it was done. The same thing is true of baptism into Christ. By reading the accounts of this happening we see exactly how it was done. Every time the element in which they were baptized is specified it is water. It was done at the injunction of the Spirit.

Thus Jesus said, “Except a man is born again of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” (John 3:5) This is the one thing Satan does not want you to know and accept. All the good works in the world can not save. But getting into Christ and remaining there does. Paul said repeatedly that we are “baptized into Christ,” “baptized into His death,” that in doing so we “put on Christ.” The promise of Jesus is “He who believes and is baptized shall be saved,” (Mark 16:16) We trust that because we have “faith in the working of God.” (Col. 2:12) Don’t let Al Maxey or anyone else deceive you into placing your faith in what human theory says will bring salvation.

LIBERALISM’S GOD

Several have written me wondering why “church of Christ bashing” has become so popular. Al Maxey’s relentless attacks are a puzzle for many.What several of you said is true. He is drunk with self promotion. He is doing what he has seen pay off for others. He has seen Max Lucado sell out the truth, become popular with denominational people, and literally make millions in publishing materials. He has seen Rubel Shelly and others preach a compromised message and achieve fame, many speaking appointments, and even high positions in the church in the same way. He has seen radical left wingers acquire huge followings and build mega churches and other organizations, by preaching what most people want to hear.

On the other hand the liberals have seen Gospel preachers who remain faithful to the word, barely make it financially, preach pearls of Biblical wisdom to small audiences, and receive ridicule and mockery from the religious elite. I am told that Billy Graham once spoke to a group of Gospel preachers and he said to them, “I know that sins are forgiven at baptism. But if I preached that I would be preaching to small audiences like you are.” What did Jesus say about the “broad way” and where it leads?

In John 13 Jesus expressed sadness about the one who would betray Him for thirty pieces of silver. “He who eats bread with me has lifted up his heel against me.” In that context He said His disciples would experience similar things. “The servant is not greater than his master.” Later, in chapter 15, He reminded them that He had said that and applied it this way: “If they persecuted me they will also persecute you.” (Vs.20) Then He stated why they do such things.  “All these things they will do to you for my name’s sake because they do not know Him who sent me.”

That is the heart of the matter right there. These men do not know the God of the Bible. They know the god of Joel Osteen. The God of the Bible said that He is a covenant keeping God and requires His people to be the same. The God of Joel Osteen says that “God loves you just as you are and he is going to give you great blessings today. You don’t need to be concerned about anything.” The God of the Bible said, “This is the covenant that I will make with them, I will put my laws in their minds and wrote them on their hearts…” (Heb. 8:10) The god of Osteen and Maxey says, “God’s covenant is a covenant of grace, not a covenant of laws. His gifts are not based on obedience to commands.”

Those who go that way are all on the same ground. They are not willing to a “level playing field” as the Bible specifies it: “Prove all things. Hold fast to what is good” (1 Thess. 5:21) That is a contemptious idea in their circles. They demand acceptance of their doctrines without question. They harshly condemn the very act of disagreeing with them. They know they cannot meet the truth of the Bible on equal footing so they will not try. They refuse to discuss or debate, they just tell you what to believe and if you do not quickly accept it they dismiss you as a trouble maker.

To demonstrate that this is the truth here is a debate proposition. I challenge any of  them to debate it. I will affirm that

The views of our current liberal element is not faith according to the Bible definition of faith.

Olan Hicks

ASSEMBLY FOR WORSHIP?

A brother wrote concerning me, “My friend at this year’s TULSA WORKSHOP felt that the purpose for church assemblies is to praise God. I see in apostolic writings that our LIFE must be lived to praise and please our God and in service for Him. But I fail to see in APOSTOLIC writings or in their example that the church was ever called to meet together in order to do their worshipping together. They were encouraged to live every day as praise to God. Isn’t that what the Word teaches?”

Here you have a half truth but some brethren see it as the whole truth and that is very harmful. Al Maxey, for example, in one of his “Reflections” articles entitled, “Superogatory,” argued that the assembly is only horizontal, for purposes havng to do with our relationship with each other.

Jesus specified two things we must do in respect to God, not just one. “You shall worship (proskuneo) the Lord your God and Him only you shall serve. (letreuo)” ((Mat. 4:10) The first word means to prostrate one’s self before God and the second word means to do service to God, though it also is often translated “worship.” Somehow some brethren have gotten the idea that there is only one kind of worship, “letreuo,” the serving kind. Thus they see Romans 12:2, “Present your bodies a living sacrifice, which is your reasonable service,” (letreuo) as indicating that all of life is a worship and no other is required.

That is a mistake. The word says many times that we are to live our lives in a way that glorifies God in all that we do, even in serving other people. But that is only one part of honoring Him as God. The word also says many times that we must worship Him in the sense of “proskuneo,” prostrating ourselves before Him. You say you have not found a passage portraying worship toward God in an assembly. How about Heb. 2:12, “In the midst of the assembly I will sing praise to you.” You say the early Christians sang to each other, not to God.  I invite you to look again at Eph. 5:19 and Col. 3:16. The first passage says, “Speaking to one another in Psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in you heart to the Lord.” Making melody to whom? The second passage says, “singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.” Grace in your hearts to whom? I would say that your conclusion that our assemblies are totally horizontal and not vertical, is contradictory to what God said about it.

Some seem to think that to justify exercizing liberty in some matter such as instrumental music in the assembly it is necessary to say that the assemblies are not directed toward God. That is not so. There is no command from God either way on the choice of music. You don’t need to minimize the importance of the assembly to respect that. But surely you know that the assemblies are a command. The word says, “Do not forsake the assembling of yourselves together, as the manner of some is,” (Heb. 10:25) and then shows how serious it is by adding, “For if we sin wilfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there is no more sacrifice for sins, but an anticipation of judgment and of fiery indgnation, which shall devour the adversary.” I cannot harmonize this with your idea that our assemblies are purely horizontal, not vertical, and are not even necessary.

This brother said, “ They ate together, we can assume, each Lord’s Day, and during the meal they broke bread and drank wine together in honor of Jesus and in His memory. Some sang to the others. Some prophesied to the others. And God was praised and pleased by their assembling.” When you say this you reduce the assemblies to nothing more than a series of pot luck dinners. That is getting close to blasphemy.

Jesus said He would build His church. (ekklesia, assembly) Paul said there was one of these in the house of Priscilla and Aquilla. (1 Cor. 16:19) At this time the church could not own property for they were an illegal entity. So they often assembled in homes. And what did they do there? When Peter was released from prison by an angel he went to the home of Mary, “where many were gathered together praying.” (Acts 12:12)

The scripture says Jesus was given to be “the head over all things to the church, which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all.” (Eph. 1:22-23) As the head of that church what does He direct? In Paul’s letter to the church at Corinth he said, “The things that I write to you are the commandments of the Lord.” (14:37) In that letter he gave many instructions about their assemblies. One of these was about the Lord’s supper. He said, “When you come together in one place, this is not to eat the Lord’s Supper.” (1 Cor. 11:20) But it should have been for he said at Verse 22, “Shall I praise you in this? I praise you not.” It appears they were mixing the sacred reason for assembling, the Lord’s supper, with a common intake of food.  On that basis I would say that you really need to rethink your concept that the reason for assembling was to eat. Paul went ahead and said, “Whoever eats this bread and drinks this cup in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.” (Vs. 27) He added that such a one eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. (Vs. 29)

This is an important issue you bring up. The Bible says, “Upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread,” that Paul preached to them and continued his speech until midnight. (Acts 20:7) When you arbitrarily rule that this was a common meal you fly in the face of the grammar of the passage and set aside the one activity of which Jesus said, “This do in remembrance of me.”  I hope you will reconsider.

FAITH IN THE WORKING OF GOD

Believers have stumbled over this question for centuries. Do works have anything to do with salvation?

After His resurrection Jesus sent His apostles to deliver His message of redemption to the world. He said specifically that “repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.” (Luke 24:47)

A few days later the Holy Spirit came upon them at Jerusalem, as the Lord had promised, and they did speak the message of God “as the Spirit gave them utterance.” (Acts 2:4) Concerning repentance and remission of sins here is what they said about it. “Repent and be baptized every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” (Acts 2:38)

Verse 41 says, “Then they who gladly received his word were baptized and there were added to them that day about 3,000 souls.” Verse 47 says that the Lord continued to add to their number daily those who were being saved. The rest of the book of Acts records that they preached the word everywhere and in every case of conversion the text says they were baptized.

One of these cases was at Ephesus (Acts 19). They were first mistaught and baptized according to John’s baptism. Then Paul taught them correctly and they were baptized again, this time in the name of Jesus.

Later Paul wrote an epistle to the Ephesians in which he said, “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is a gift of God, not of works lest anyone should boast.” (Eph. 2:8-9)

In the 16th century the protestant reformation movement began in opposition to the Roman Catholic concept of works of merit. In opposing that they went to an extreme the other way and concluded that works are not involved in our salvation at all. They lifted this statement by Paul from the context of the preaching done by the apostles, as recorded in Acts, and developed an interpretation of it as meaning they were saved by a “grace” that did not require the doing of anything, specifically baptism. But they did that.

From these two opposite extremes was handed down to future generations an unsolved riddle and a confusing conglomeration of viewpoints. If Jesus spoke the truth when He said that “He who believes and is baptized shall be saved…”(Mark 16:16) then how is it that we are saved “by grace, through faith, not of works”? The Bible says both of these. Can they both be true?

The Bible harmonizes these two statements. We need to recognize that “grace” is a divine concept, not a human concept and therefore we must let God tell us what He meant by it. If we are saved by it, doesn’t that mean it is important to understand it? Look at the Biblical usage of that word and this riddle clears up.

The statement of Eph. 2 is not only that we are saved by “grace” but also that it is “through faith.” So we ask, Faith in what? What must we believe? God’s word tells us we must believe two things. “Without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.” (Heb. 11:6)

Several times Jesus said that He will “reward each one according to his works,” (Mat. 16:27) Did He mean that the works earn our salvation? No. He meant exactly what He said, that He will reward what we do. This is one of the things we must believe, “that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seeks Him.”

This principle is illustrated throughout the Bible. Hebrews 11 is a chapter of examples. Verse 30 says, “By faith the walls of Jericho fell down after they were encircled for seven days.” Does marching around a city have power to make walls fall down? No.  The Bible says it occurred “by faith.” Faith in what? They believed God would do what He promised when they obeyed.

In Col. 2:12 this principle is applied specifically to baptism. “…buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God.” Faith in the power of the water or the power of the act? No. Faith that God will reward our obedience.

Abraham, the “father of the faithful,” is a prime illustration of this. The command to offer his son on an altar was an extreme test of his faith. Why did he do it? Hebrews 11:17-19 says that he did it “concluding that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead…” In reference to this James said that Abraham was “saved by works” in the sense that “faith was working together with his works and  by works faith was made perfect.” (James 2:21-22) Then he said it was here that “the scripture was fulfilled which says ‘Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him for righteousness.’”

Moses had no power to part the Red Sea. But when he stretched forth his rod as God directed, the sea parted. Naaman had no power to heal his leprosy. But when he dipped seven times in the Jordan river as God directed his leprosy was healed. (2 Kings 5)

Man cannot save himself. But the Bible says that “to those who received Him he gave power (or right) to become children of God.” (John 1:12) So, though man cannot save himself, he can choose whether or not to be saved. On Pentecost day 3,000 people used that power and were saved through faith in the operation of God.

The grace of God that brings salvation is a teaching grace. It teaches us that “denying unGodliness and worldly lusts we should live soberly, righteously, and Godly in the present age.” (Titus 2:11-12) The idea that when we trust God enough to obey His required conditions, we are being saved by works, is Satan’s lie. He deceived Eve into believing that obeying God is not necessary. He wants to sell us exactly the same lie.