OlanHicks.com

PURPOSE STATEMENT

THE SHEEP’S CLOTHING JESUS WARNED ABOUT

“Beware of false prophets that come to you in sheep’s clothing…” (Matthew 7:15) This is about disguise and deception. We need to know that Satan will not come dressed in a red suit and carrying a pitchfork. He will not only look like one of us he will sound like one of us. He will be dressed in a typical suit and will carry a Bible and will quote from it.

Why does he look and sound like one of us? Because he is one of us, at least he has been. In Acts 20 Paul told the Ephesian elders, “Also from among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things to draw away disciples after themselves.” (V. 30) Personally I think such a person  might believe that what he is saying is the truth, may not realize he is speaking falsely. But Paul urged them to be watchful and said that for three years he had “warned everyone night and day with tears.” I would say Paul took the Lord’s warning very seriously.

This does not justify undue suspicion and criticism, being anxious to convict everyone as a false prophet who disagrees with you. But it does mandate something. What is that?

It is a mandate to watch out for perverse doctrines that are covered with slick, good sounding words such as “love, grace, unity” etc. Paul said that Satan deceived Eve with craftiness and he feared that we might fall victim to the same thing. That is what we need to be careful about. To do that we have to look beyond the avalanche of pious sounding words, the crafty subterfuge, and see what is actually being said. The “sheep’s clothing” disguise means its errors are not on the surface and immediately obvious.

When a man tells an audience, “There is nothing you can do to be saved,” he is speaking a perverse doctrine. When he explains, only after being pressed, that he meant you can’t earn it, and then goes ahead and says, “My relationship to Christ does not depend on keeping commandments,” He further underscores the perverse “faith only” doctrine.

When a man says, “I no longer claim to be ‘church of Christ.’ I am a Christian independent of any church group,” he is speaking the perverse doctrine that Christianity exists apart from the church Jesus built. He explains, “I want to be just a Christian.” In this context it suggests that the movement to restore the undenominational “church of Christ,” into which the apostles were set, is a sectarian idea.

When a man says, “There are many out there who love the Lord and they are my brothers and sisters in Christ,” he advances the perverse notion that the denominations whose plan of salvation is “the sinner’s prayer,” got into the kingdom that way. When he says further that he himself “knelt and asked Jesus to come into my heart and life,” he further underscores the idea that what Jesus said about those who only say, “Lord, Lord, and do not obey the will of the Father, do not enter the kingdom,” is incorrect.

It is not a question of WHO is right. It is a question of WHAT is right. All the pious platitudes in the world cannot make wrong doctrines right. They can only disguise what they really are. Saying over and over “I love the Lord and I obey His word,” and “I love my brethren,” does not agree with the facts. According to Jesus, if you loved Him you would keep His commandments and if you loved your brethren you would not want to mislead them.

God is the only judge and the only lawgiver. We will all stand before Him when this life ends. In the meantime we all have the responsibility to what both Jesus and Paul said, don’t be fooled by false doctrines wearing “sheep’s clothing.” I believe that if a man is truly a receiver of Biblical truth he will be willing to speak that truth plainly and will not need to mask what he says with an avalanche of words. The idea that obedience to Christ’s commands is done, not to be saved but because we are already saved, is wrong and covering it with sheep’s clothing cannot make it right. The truth is, “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.” This is a fact.

TRUE HISTORY ABOUT BEN FRANKLIN AND OTHERS

Facts as opposed to propaganda:

In the summer of 1787 representatives met in Philadelphia for the purpose of writing the United States constitution. They struggled over it for weeks and had made little progress until 81 year old Benjamin Franklin rose and addressed a convention that was about to adjourn in frustration. Franklin, once an avowed agnostic, said this: “In the beginning of the contest with Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayers in this room for Divine protection. Our prayers, sir, were heard and they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a superintending providence in our favor. . . .

Have we now forgotten this powerful friend? Or do we imagine we no longer need His assistance? . . . God governs in the affairs of man, and if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings that except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that built it. I firmly believe this. . . .  I therefore beg leave to move that  henceforth, prayers imploring the assistance of heaven and its blessing on our deliberation be held in this assembly every morning.”

Prayer to open congressional sessions became the practice and continued for nearly two centuries. The ACLU came into existence in 1925, founded by Roger Baldwin, a man who said, “I am for socialism…” and added, “communism is the goal.” It took the ACLU about 50 years to get prayer or religion in American public life declared unconstitutional by the supreme court but they did it. They continue to file law suits against any Christian activity that can be seen by the public.

Their primary weapon has been propaganda. It centers on denying America’s Christian heritage and the faith of the founding fathers. They have a staff of lawyers in every state who constantly argue socialist-communist principles before the courts. Justice Hugo Black, in the early 60s, was the first supreme court chief justice to buy into their unGodly premises. Since then others have come on board and those falsehoods are now believed by many among the populace.

Using the lie that the constitution mandates separation of church and state, (it says the opposite) they focus on their main target, which is to reverse the idea that the founding fathers were men of faith and picture them as deists and agnostics, whose intention was to establish a society without God, essentially socialist-communism. The fact is several of the founding fathers were evangelists. What these founders actually said is displayed in documents at the museum in Washington so any honest person can know.

History books changed to accomodate them.

Marxist socialism is an enemy of God because of the nature of what it is. Its basic thesis is that man is sufficient within himself to chart his own way and does not need God. The government can supply everything. So in every country where it has prevailed they had to evict God. They are in process now of “cleansing” America from all vestiges of faith and the religious concepts that go with it. They call themselves a “liberties union.” It is remarkable how many of our freedoms are denied in the name of “civil liberty.”

They have succeeded in changing what students now study in school as “history.” We used to read about the Christian foundations that produced our great country. We read about the “New England Charter,” which confirmed the purpose of the first pilgrims as being to advance the enlargement of the Christian religion, to the glory of God. But no more. We don’t hear about the statements of individual colonies, such as the Rhode Island Charter, which begins, “We submit our persons, lives, and estates unto our Lord Jesus Christ, the king of kings and lord of lords and to all those perfect and most absolute laws of His given us in His holy word.” Now hidden is the fact that those Biblical laws were the foundation for the United States constitution.

George Washington said it would be impossible to govern this nation without God and the Ten Commandments. President John Adams said, “Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.” Because of the ACLU not only is the faith of the founding fathers deleted from history but they are said to have been immoral men, without faith or patriotism. They have searched everywhere to find something dirty to discredit each of these men because they want to replace Americanism with socialism.

TV stations join in promoting this perverted propaganda. The “History channel” presented a “documentary” on John Adams and did not even mention his faith. Recently they did one on Benjamin Franklin. They reported his earlier stance as an agnostic and gave that as who he was, along with saying that he fathered a child out of wedlock, as though that was his life long moral and ethical character. We never hear them report the fact that the first Bible translated into English in America was published by the United States congress!

On the TV news channels there are many confusing discussions, often disputes, about the economy. This is because they are trying to figure out how to make socialism work, how to enable the government to take care of all our individual needs. They are into the socialist theory, without realizing it, and have no clue as to why it is not working.

It is not working because it is an idea that is not in touch with reality. The only money the government has is what it gets from us, by taxation or other means. There is no way to pour money into the economy from the government without getting that money from us, the tax payers. So when they promise they will cut taxes and increase government handouts at the same time, they are not thinking. The “Utopia” the politicians envision is a Marxist pipe dream. People who elect them are also living in a world of fantasy. America was founded on reality, especially including God. That is the only America that can retain its identity as the land of the free and the home of the brave.

WHAT IS HAPPENING TO AMERICA?

This has to do with reality, not racism, bigotry, hatred, or prejudice of any kind

FACT: Socialist-communism fails because it is unrealistic. A government has no money except what it gets from the people by taxes or other means. Anything the government gives you will be offset by the fact that it must take it back from you by increasing taxes. As illogical as it is, this notion has been pushed forward in America to an alarming degree, as politicians promise blessings from the government.

FACT: American capitalism is an opposite concept. It is based on reality. Its foundation is the free enterprise system, the idea that industriousness and hard work by people in the private sector makes an economy that gives everyone the opportunity to succeed.

FACT: Socialism, instead of producing the Utopian dream of Marxism, has led to dictatorships and suppression of human rights in every country. Again Russia is an example. China is also a case in point. A bizarre example in recent history was the rise of Hitler to power in Germany and the attempted extermination of Jews. First comes socialism and when it fails, as it always does, dictators can grab power.

FACT: In every country where socialist communism has taken over, God was evicted. Russia was a prime example. Germany was another. America is fast becoming yet another example. God is already evicted from schools and government buildings here and probably will soon be disallowed even in private.

FACT: Most of our news media speaks the language of socialism. Much of their “reporting” is propaganda, adjusted to the socialist concept. It contains anti-American and anti-Christan opinions. NBC is the worst. Folks who get their “news” from that source are misled as to what is going on around them.

FACT: Somehow the unrealistic basis of the socialist theory gets over looked, the fact that governments do not have money except what they take from the people. When politicians campaign on promises to increase government handouts and at the same time cut taxes, they are not adding 2 and 2. Whatever the government gives, such as a “stimulus,” has to be funded by money from us.

FACT: The anti-God aspect is natural to socialism. Karl Marx had been a religious man. But when he developed the premises of socialism he laid that aside. The Bible says the way of man is not in himself. Marxism says it is, that he does not need God. Every nation that has embraced the Marxist theory has become anti-God.

FACT: Even though our constitution was designed to prevent it, this is happening in America. The first amendment to the constitution says, “Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion nor to prohibit the free exercize thereof.” The word “separation” is not there. The word “state” is not there. The word “church” is not there. “Separation of church and state” is not in the constitution anywhere. But the ACLU has convinced our supreme court justices that it is. What is there is that the government is not to “prohibit the free exercize” of religion. But the principles of socialism make it necessary to prohibit that free exercize, so they do it.

FACT: Free exercizes of religion already prohibited. 1. Bible reading in schools or government owned facility. 2. Prayer in schools or publicly owned facility. 3. Posting the ten commandments on the wall of any public facility. 4. Christmas scenes, nativity scenes in public parks. The ACLU regularly sues in court to disallow this. They are moving now to regulate what the church can teach. Socialists want to make it a “hate crime” to say what the Bible says about homosexuality, that it is an abomination to God. The government approves abortion and disapproves church opposition. Unless we change our course it will become a crime to teach the Bible anywhere.

FACT: The German people before Hitler were ordinary civilized people, like most of us. So were the Russian people before the dictators and so were the Chinese people. They did not think such a thing “could ever happen here.” The reason it could happen was that very thing, they thought it couldn’t. They did not see that it was happening until it was too late. Unless we the people wake up soon it can and will happen here. The fact is it already has to a great extent. Americanism and socialist-communism lead in opposite directions. One is realistic and includes God. The other is unrealistic and excludes God. If we are blind to what is happening, as the Germans were, our grandkids will not know the America of our heritage.

TO A SPEAKER AT TULSA

The 2010 Tulsa Workshop continued the denouncing of the basic ideals of the restoration movement as begun in previous workshops. Several speakers urged “church of Christ people” to be more receptive to doctrinal ideas that differ with us. Here is a letter I wrote to one of them who has been a friend of mine for many years, Al Maxey.

“Please tell me whether I understood you correctly or not. Here is what I understood you to say and my comments.”

1. You said: “God gave His Son to purchase a relationship with man, not to establish a religion.”

My comment: I think this is a fundamental mistake that underlies your entire thesis. John 3:16 says that the purpose in giving His Son was salvation. “God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.” Yes, a relationship is created and is important, but a relationship would not require the death of Jesus to purchase it. God had a relationship with Abraham, with Moses, with David etc. before and without the death of Jesus. It was salvation from our sins that made the cross necessary. I say again, we’re talking about explicit Bible statements, not opinions. I am not being tedious. Making fellowship the primary aim of the Gospel is a serious mistake.

In the dictionary the first definition of “religion” is “belief in and reverence for a supernatural power accepted as the creator and governor of the universe.” This is what we believe. In James 1:27 God’s word refers to “Pure and undefiled religion before God.” It is a grave mistake to think that Jesus bought only a relationship, not a religion.

2. “Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together” is an exhortation to fellowship, not a command.”

Here again the priorities are inverted. Fellowship is involved, yes. But this is first of all a command of God. (Heb. 10:25) The next verse says that to forsake it is to “sin wilfully.” The verse following that says the result of that is “a fearful looking for of judgment and of fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries.” I would say assembling together is something more than a choice based on taste or personal preference.

3. “Faith response is required. Repentance and baptism are faith responses.”

This is Biblically correct. You illustrated it with the $20 bill scenario. But it does not seem to fit with your over all thesis and with what you have been saying in your “Reflections” articles, i.e. that people who sincerely call on the Lord in words and invite Him to come into their hearts, are in the kingdom and we should recognize them as our brothers and sisters. Here you seem to say that these commands are essential to being saved. I agree. But your premises on other points belie this.

4. “Religion is sectarianism. Jesus did not come to earth to establish a religion.

You seem to always be taking non-essentials such as communion procedures, and making of them an illustration of sectarianism. You seem to make dividing over such things as that a parallel to dividing because you refuse to compromise on a clearly stated truth. For instance, in your first speech you said that a Catholic priest was your partner in baptizing the man on death row. Jesus expressly said, “Call no man your father on the earth,” and the context makes it clear He was talking about a religious title, not a father in a natural family. But this man wears that title. In this and many other things he teaches and practices flagrantly the opposite of what the Bible says. Yet you give this as an example of toleration on incidental matters.

5. “Its all about unity in diversity, fellowship. That’s all God wants, just to put His arm around His child…”

You illustrated with the body parts of 1 Cor. 12. But those body parts are not different in the sense you were talking about, i.e. marching to the beat of a different drummer. The eyes, the ears, the hands, etc. are all directed by the one head. You mentioned this but continued to say that “we are all different.” In what way are we different, in whom we obey? In what doctrine we believe? To be workable the parts have to function under the same head.

6. In the Lord’s supper we reflect our unity…”

Inaccurate again. Paul said that what we reflect in the Supper is “we show forth His death til He comes again.” Here you said that to have unity “We must defer to one another.” But the Bible says, “The wisdom that is from above is first pure and then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated.” (James 3:17) Inverted priorities again.

7. “In the church of Christ they are good people but they have simply lost sight of the goal.”

It appears that someone has indeed lost sight of the goal, yes. But comparing what is being said on the lectureships with the scriptures it looks to me like you have changed the goal. The original goal, commanded by Jesus, is “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things I have said to you.” (Mat. 28:19-20) But you are making the goal to be “unity” and acceptance of everyone.

My beloved friend, Paul said he feared that Satan might be able, by craftiness, to corrupt our minds from the simplicity that is in Christ, (2 Cor. 11:3) particularly if we are too influenced by our own desires, what we want. (2 Tim. 4) I suggest that the only way to prevent that is to measure everything by what the Bible says exactly as written, and reject human theories. “In doing this you will save yourself and those who hear you.” (1 Tim. 4:16) These words of scripture  will meet you at the judgment. I sincerely hope that before that time you will realize they are true.

With brotherly love;

Olan

ORIGIN OF SATAN

There is a theory, widely held in Christendom, that Satan was once a chief angel of God in heaven and, as one writer put it, “Led the angels in singing praises to God.” (Hal Lindsey) The first thing wrong with that is that Jesus said it is not so. “He was a murderer from the beginning and abode not in the truth.” (John 8:44) Some versions read it “did not stand in the truth.” In the Greek text the word is “esteken,” a negative perfect tense verb. This means that he did not ever stand in the truth.

The theory that says the opposite to this is drawn from a careless misuse of some scriptures. In the Bible we first encounter Satan in Genesis 3:1, as a serpent. Note that this is at the very start of creation. The world was not yet populated, only two people existed on earth, but he is already Satan, the devil. Thus it is not right to think of him as becoming the devil at another time, centuries later in human history. Jesus was right in saying that he was totally evil from the beginning. Throughout the Bible he is never pictured any other way. Every appearance he makes is in pursuit of evil purposes.

Notice further that in Revelation 12 when there is “war in heaven” and Satan is cast out, the earth is full of people at the time. So it was many hundreds of years after he tempted Eve in the garden. The text says in verse 12, “Woe to the inhabitants of the earth for the devil has come down to you, having great wrath because he knows that he has a short time.” This was not Satan’s origin nor was it his first evil act.

Thus many questions occur. When was Satan “in heaven” and what does that phrase mean? Did Satan start out good and later become totally evil or was he always that way? From whence comes the idea that he was once an angel of God in heaven itself?

The two sections of scripture that get mishandled in the course of drawing that idea are Isaiah chapter 14 and Ezekiel chapter 28. In Isaiah 14 verse 12 says, “How are you fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning? How are you cut down to the ground?” But back at verse 4 we find stated exactly who is in view in this section of scripture. “that you will take up this proverb against the king of Babylon and say…” Then follows the description of the fall of a great and mighty empire. This prophecy is specifically about Babylon, not about Satan. A sinilar thing is said in Revelation 14:8 where an angel says with a loud voice, “Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city. . .”  I do not know why the name “Lucifer” is included here but I do know that nowhere in this chapter is there any indication that it refers to Satan. That is purely human conjecture. In verse 16 this king is referred to as a “man who made the earth tremble, who shook kingdoms.” Again here, the world was populated. There were kingdoms. So this is way forward in time from the garden of Eden, when Satan is already the devil. It certainly is not the time of his origin.

In Ezekiel 28:2 The word of the Lord said to Ezekiel, “Son of man, say to the prince of Tyre. ‘Thus says the Lord God. . .’” Here again the message is specifically addressed to  a human ruler concerning an earthly kingdom that will be thrown down. In the same verse the Lord says of him, “Yet you are a man and not a god.” At verse 12 Ezekiel is told to “Take up a lamentation for the king of Tyre” and then follows the words that men tend to apply to Satan. “You were the seal of perfection, (Verse 12) You were in Eden, the garden of God, (Verse 13) “You were prefect in your ways til iniquity was found in you.” (Verse 15) This does not mean it is applied to Satan. The context shows this one was a commercial trader.

Theologians recognize that Isaiah 14 was spoken to the king of Babylon and that Ezekiel 28 was spoken to the king of Tyre. But they assume that these have a secondary application to Satan. But this does not fit with the facts of scripture. Many Bible statements show that is not possible.

First, Jesus said that Satan was always evil and never abode in the truth. Second, his appearance in the tempting of Eve is a fact, showing that he was the devil before the earth was populated. Third, every action referred to in Ezekiel and Isaiah are done to humans, with an earthly population. Fourth, when Satan was “cast out of heaven,” (Rev. 12) he was cast down to a populated earth. Fifth, in heaven where the throne of God is there can be no sin, no evil. (Rev. 21:27) Satan, evil personified, was never there.

The fact is the Bible does not tell us about Satan’s origin. Personally I believe he is another god. Paul referred to him as “the god of this world.” (2 Cor. 4:4) I do not believe God would create something totally void of any good, which is how Jesus described Satan. But this is admittedly a guess.

What the Bible does reveal about Satan is exactly what we need to know, that he is evil, that he is a threat to our souls, and that he is very shrewd and constantly seeks to deceive us. When Jesus said, “I saw Satan, as lightening, fall from heaven,” I believe He was talking about his defeat when Jesus over came death. (Heb. 2:14-15) He was “in heaven” in the sense of what power he had, that he could possess a person without that person’s consent. But now Jesus has defeated him and thrown him out of that position. This is why James could say, “Resist the devil and he will flee from you.” (James 4:7) Satan now has to depend on being able to deceive you. He cannot take you by force. If we know that Satan is totally evil, if we are aware of his efforts to deceive us, and if we know that by faith we can win against him, then we know what we need to know. This is what God’s word clearly tells us. All else is speculation.

IS GOD’S LOVE UNCONDITIONAL?

IS GOD’S LOVE UNCONDITIONAL?

To this question the Bible answers “Yes” and “No.” On the one hand Jesus said, “God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son…” (John 3:16) and Paul said this love was before we became obedient. “But God demonstrates His love toward us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” (Romans 5:8) So God loved the world unconditionally before they gave Him a reason to love them but the world was not saved at that point.

 On the other hand, concerning acceptance with God Jesus said, “He who has my commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father and I will love him and manifest myself to him.” (John 14:21) Here the Lord states that keeping the commandments is a condition of this love relationship. At verse 23 He said that if anyone loves Him and keeps His word, both the Father and the Son will love him and will come and “make our home with him.” So according to Jesus this relationship with God is conditioned on the kind of love that keeps His commandments. So which is it? Does God love us unconditionally or not?

 In a court of law a witness must swear to tell “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”? Why is that? Why not just “the truth”? It is because something might be true but not the whole truth. A half truth can be misleading and a truth imbellished with speculation can be a distortion. So they want the facts to be stated, presented in full, and they want speculation and opinion omitted, so that the conclusions reached, or judgments, will be correct. These same facts are true as concerns Biblical truth. Half truths are a most often used method of Satan to lead people to wrong conclusions, and Biblical facts when imbellished with speculation and theory can lead to mistaken ideas.

 The matter of the nature of God’s love is a classic example of something Satan, “the lawless one” misuses. His aim is to get us to accept and practice an ideology that does not see obedience to God’s commands as essential. He uses half truths about the nature of God’s love to induce some faulty reasoning, or speculation, to lead us to the conclusion that a love relationship with God is separate and apart from commandment keeping.

 While working on my book on “Calvinism” I wondered how it was that many notable preachers of past years reached the conclusion that God loves us unconditionally and that salvation is received as a separate matter from obeying commands. What was their thought pattern? So I researched the writings of several of them, Charles Spurgeon, John Calvin, Adam Clark, etc. in pursuit of this question.

 I found out that their reasoning always started at the same place. Premise #1 was “We cannot save ourselves.” They all started here, and this is certainly a truth. Their next step was to ask, “What can save us?” The answer was, “Only the blood of Jesus can save.” This also is a Biblical fact. Up to this point they were getting a Bible answer to a biblical question. But from that spot their reasoning went awry. The conclusion drawn from these facts is where the error was made. They concluded that “therefore nothing man can do can affect his salvation.” 

 That is a mistake in reasoning.They are switching questions and not realizing it. Their original question was not “How is the blood of Jesus applied?” Their question was “What can merit, or purchase salvation?” Then they took the answer to that question and applied it to a different question, “What can affect our salvation?” In spite of the fact that the Bible specifies baptism as how we get into His death, (Romans 6:4) and repeatedly states that salvation is given in response to obedience, (Hebrews 5:9) and the details of that obedience are spelled out, they still held the conclusion that salvation is given apart from obedience to commands, and that conclusion prevails throughout evangelicalism today. Even in churches of Christ some brethren are leaning that way.

 A more thorough consideration of Biblical facts would dispel that notion. For example, the Biblical fact that all the people outside Noah’s ark were lost while Noah and his family were saved? Why? The Bible says it was because Noah had a faith that obeyed what God said. (Hebrews 11:7) Verse 30 says that the walls of Jericho fell down “after they were encircled for seven days.” Looking back at the account in Joshua 6 we find that God said to Joshua, “See I have given Jericho into your hands.” Then He told him what to do to get this gift, which was encircling the city for seven days, followed by trumpet blasts and a shout by the people. As Hebrews 11:30 says, they got the gift when they met the conditions. These acts of obedience did not have the power in themselves to make these things happen. God made them happen. The acts were the conditions on which the gifts were given. They got the promised gift by obedient faith.

So men have been asking the wrong question. They have been asking, “What can I do to purchase my salvation?” The Bible has answered that clearly. Nothing can purchase salvation except the blood of Jesus. We should be asking, “On what conditions does God offer the gift of salvation?” The Bible also answers this clearly. “Men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said to them, Repent and be baptised, 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) “Do not touch the unclean thing and I will receive you.” (2 Cor. 6:17) “Be faithful unto death and I will give you the crown of life.” (Rev.2:10)

The chief reason this particular kind of deception is dangerous is what Jesus said will happen when folks who buy into this deception come before Him at the judgment.   “I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you. Depart from me you who practice lawlessness.’” (Matthew 7:23) Two verses earlier He said, “Not every one who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of the Father in heaven.” Satan wants us to arrive at and hold a concept of lawlessness. Half truths and human speculation are the means of getting us there. The half truth is that God loves us regardless of what we do. The rest of the truth is that this does not mean He will receive us into a saved relationship with Him unconditionally. He offers that relationship, based on conditions. We will not be lost because God did not love us. We will be lost because we let Satan sell us the counterfeit doctrine of lawlessness. Nothing is more clearly stated in the Bible than the fact that the dividing line between the saved and the lost is obedience. It has always been so from the very first of creation. It is not mistake free perfection that is required, but commitment to obedience. Let’s appreciate what God has done for us and let’s love Him for it. Don’t let Satan pervert that into lawlessness. 

Check your Bible as to whether this is legalism or the whole truth of what the Bible says.

WHAT STRATEGY FOR FIXING THE CHURCH OF CHRIST?

Recently I was sitting in a hospital waiting room. A man came and sat down beside me who was quite talkative. He said his view is that most of what is in the Bible is optional, “You can take it or leave it.” He said he was raised a Baptist but he did not like their practice of people telling other people what to believe. So he went to a Presbyteran church and there the preacher told him he was right and encouraged him to think that way. To him, preaching the word and standing by your convictions amounts to humans telling other humans what to believe. That is offensive to him. If you think that way you can find preachers in many churches who will re-enforce that attitude and stand with you on it. Does that mean it is right?

The alarming part is that today many preachers in the church of Christ preach a concept that amounts to about this same thing. Several of them are featured speakers on our largest lectureships. They have come to believe that their “restoration” heritage was wrong and now they intend to change it. Their efforts have generated a movement over the country toward removing some of the structural beams of the church. They know that churches of Christ have been known for  strong convictions and these men don’t like that. They know these churches have not hesitated to speak out against what they perceive as doctrinal errors and they have decided it is not acceptable to do that. They know that these folks believe that Christ’s church is exclusive, that He built only one, and the way to eternal life is strait and narrow. That is a concept they are not willing to have be the case.

Consider the thought process behind this. The man in the waiting room was not thinking about our responsibility to deliver God’s message accurately. He was focused on what he liked personally. Even so, the men who are rebuking the church for rejecting man made denominational doctrines and for believing there is but one way of salvation, are not thinking in terms of what God has said but in terms of what is pleasing to themselves and what will please the most people. Popular opinion has it that if we make the way broad and flexible we will be acting as nice persons. The statement of Jesus that the way is strait and narrow is disregarded, along with the fact that making the way broad and flexible is not ours to give. They resent the idea of exclusiveness but God’s word says there is “one body and one Spirit even as you are called in one hope of your calling.” (Eph. 4:4) Christ’s church was not built as a multi-headed monstrosity,” as suggested in today’s Christendom. He did not leave His church with no specific message nor did He expect it to formulate doctrines that would be most popular.

In the 1960s the UPI reported that churches of Christ were the fastest growing religious body in America. What were we preaching then? We were teaching people that “the real thing” is what you find in the bible. We told them, “Jesus built a church and He meant for you to be a part of it.” We urged them, “Just obey the Gospel as it is written, and He will add you to His church. You will be nether Catholic, protestant, nor Jew, but just a Christian.” People by the thousands were finding security with God and unity with each other in Christ. 

Many people now are searching for that, as evidenced in the many groups called, “Community church” “Bible church” “apostolic church” etc. They are searching for the nonsectarian real thing, what we used to preach, and not finding it because we are no longer preaching it. Instead we are now embedded with the idea of competing in the religious market place. “Whose leaders have made the best church?” “Which church is most popular?” “Who has the most entertaining type of worship assembly?” Yes, we still put the name of Christ out front, as most groups do. But we are calling attention to ourselves more than to Christ.  Now our numbers are about half what they were in the 1960s. The most tragic part is that now the real Gospel, the “message preached,” by which God said He would save the world, is not what the people are getting. They are getting their ears tickled with a “feel good” sales routine by which “fables” are made to sound like reality.

Satan has always wanted to dismantle the church, or counter its effectiveness, because it means salvation. Jesus purchased it with His blood. It seems that now we have many within the church who are collaborators with the evil designs against it, without realizing it. God intends the church to be the pillar and ground of the truth. The command, “Preach the word, in season, out of season, reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine,” is not an order issued by fanatical leaders of some man made cult. It is what God’s word commands. The apostle’s rebuke of the Corinthians for creating those religious factions was not written just to fill space. The warning Jesus gave, “Beware of false prophets that come to you in sheep’s clothing,” was not given because Jesus was ugly spirited or did not want peace and unity. Deleting these is opposing God.

Yes, we do need to correct our ways. But not  by the concepts of popular opinion, the rudiments of the world. The measuring standard needs to be the wisdom of God, what He gave to us in His word the Bible. That word points to salvation. Human opinion points to “ways that seem right to a man but the end of it is a way of death.” What the Bible says is unchangeable truth. It is not optional. We do not do anyone a favor by encouraging them to believe it is optional, least of all ourselves. “Take heed to yourself and to the doctrine. Continue in them, for in doing this you will save both yourself and those who hear you.” (1 Tim. 4:16)

WHAT IS BIBLICAL UNITY?

Evidently many of us need to learn what this word means in Biblical usage. Too many among us think that in deciding whether to unite with certain persons or groups we are decidng who to let in the kingdom and who to shut out. But the Bible says that is God’s business. “The foundation of God stands sure having this seal, the Lord knows those who are His.” (2 Tim. 2:19) If I think a brother is faithful and I accept him as such, but he isn’t, that mistake on my part will not change anything about his spiritual condition. Or if I think one is not faithful and he really is, that mistake will not make him unacceptable to God. In other words God decides who is acceptable to Him. But whether one is acceptable to us is something we must decide. This is a serious responsibility, not of passing judgment on who is right but of taking a stand on what is right. God will know WHO is WHO without our help. But the Bible assigns obligations to us in the matter of unity and we need to understand them. 

Some clever cliches have developed among us such as, “Wherever God has a child I have a brother or sister.” Or “Any person who has been born again into Christ is my brother or sister.” It sounds good and makes me look like a nice, kind person, but does it accurately represent what the Bible says? When God has condemned something and I pronounce it acceptable, I am being “kind” with something that is not mine to give. The choices we make concerning unity are gravely serious. For example there was a brother in the church at Corinth of whom Paul said, “Put away from yourselves the evil person.” (1 Cor. 5:13). God had a child there and he had been born again. But Paul said don’t even eat with such a person. (vs. 11) Diotrephes was a church leader. But he was so wrong in his conduct that John said God’s gonna get him for that. (3rd John 10) The matter of God’s judgment on him is one thing. Our fellowship with him is another.

Another cliche is, “He was born into God’s family and therefore he is our sibling.” This sounds good in a sermon and it might make one popular with many folks, but it is a misleading bit of human “logic.” Unity and genetic origin are not the same thing. Peter speaks of persons who were once in Christ but turned back into sin and said that in such a case he is worse than one who was never in Christ at all. (2 Peter2:20-21)  

There are two Greek words for “one.” The usual word for one in number is “mias” and the word for one in kind or similarities is “hen.” In Eph. 4:3 the word “unity” is translated from “hen,” which is the neuter of “heis.” (henotata is the form) The meaning is oneness, not in number but in kind.

A saying that is common among us is, “The Holy Spirit has given unity. All we have to do is keep it.” This idea confuses UNITY and PEACE. It is true that God has given us a way of peace and harmony. But that harmony can be disrupted , by wrong doctrines and other things. Paul wrote, “But we command you brethren, by the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother who walks disorderly and not according to the tradition which he received from us.” (2 Thess. 3:6) Peter said that just as there were false prophets who corrupted the truth in OT times, “even so there shall be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies. . .” (2 Pet. 2:1) Among the last things Paul said to the Romans was “Note those who cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which you learned and avoid them.” (16:17) We are not to fellowship everything that claims to be “Christian.”

Some liken brotherhood unity to a marriage. That is a good illustration. Jesus said it is God’s intention that two people become “one flesh” and that they must not put that oneness asunder. Concerning a married couple Paul said, “God has called us to peace.” But that peace is often destroyed. A man and his wife may have different opinions about some things and yet continue united in the marriage. But we know that they can have a one flesh relationship only if they are in substantial agreement on basic things. In a case where that oneness is disrupted Paul said “Be reconciled.” (1 Cor. 7:11) Jesus said the same thing about disruption of peace between brethren. “Go and tell him his fault… If he hears you, you have gained your brother.”(Mat. 18)

Satan is “the lawless one.” (2 Thess. 2:9) His efforts to cloud the teachings of God’s word are not without purpose. Every effort he makes to distort the truth is aimed at this central issue between him and God, “lawlessness.” He wants us to lay aside God’s laws or commandments and remove the divine standard for measuring doctrines. But God says, “Beware of false prophets.” Let’s remember our obligation to “judge not.” We must not judge persons. But we have to judge doctrines. “Test everything. Hold fast to what is good.” (1 Thess. 5:21) Lawlessness is wrong. Lawfulness is right.

Unity is a high priority for Christians. But truth is an even higher priority. We must not sell out the truth, not even for unity. No one has authority from God to command His people to fellowship what God has condemned. That is not a spirit of good will and Biblical unity, it is unfaithfulness. To whom we yield ourselves servants to obey, his servants we are. (Romans 6:16) Lawlessness is of Satan. Obedience is of God. We cannot be neutral and be faithful.

BOOKS & MATERIALS AVAILABLE FROM US

FLORENCE DEBATE ON MDR: NOW AVAILABLE ON DVD. This was a two night debate, Oct. 12 & 13, 2009. Four hours of debating, 12 twenty minute speeches, on one disc. Order from us.  The price is $15 plus $2 first class shipping.

Unusually low prices:  Because we do our own type setting and publish our own books, you will find our prices much lower than the average. This does not reflect any inferiority in writing or binding but simply that we do not set prices any higher than necessary. Our prices are in round figures, no “99s” here. We want no one deceived about what he is paying for a book. We have n0 credit card connections. Place your order at our e-mail address and we will invoice you.  E-mail: gospelen@arkansas.net   Or mail address: PO box 1253, Searcy, AR  72145-1253     Or phone 501-268-6835

Regular DVDs available. We have the three lesson MDR seminar on DVD. This is the complete three session study presented at El Paso, Texas in 2004.  All three lessons are on one disc. 1. What the text actually says.  2. How Paul understood Jesus.  3. How Grace applies. Price: $15 plus $2 first class shipping.

BOOKS ON DIVORCE AND REMARRIAGE

1. We now have a few copies of this book unexpectedly. “What the Bible Says about marriage divorce, and remarriage.” Our most thorough indepth study of this entire subject. Published by College Press originally in hard back, now available only in paperback.  288 pages — $10 plus shipping.

2. Two books in one, Divorce & Remarriage the Issues made clear, and Divorce, repentance, and the Gospel of Christ. Two of our most popular books together in one volume. Includes two chapters on the history of the controversy in the restoration movement and what respected leaders of the past have said about it. Explains many points that have been misunderstood and misrepresented. Many have found this book very helpful. Total of 157 pages. $5 plus shipping.

3. Divorce & Remarriage, the bible Vs. tradition. First published in 1978 with the title “What the Bible Says about marriage, divorce, & remarriage.” Now expanded to 112 pages. Appendix deals with 10 opposition arguments and has been updated to include the latest information brought to light on those points. Easy reading, starting with a story book format. $3 plus shipping.

4. God’s Land of Beginning Again. A small but effective book to help marriages in trouble and to help people who have experienced the trauma of divorce and must now chart a future course. Co-authored by Olan & Barbara, this book sets forth a woman’s perspective as well as a man’s on some crucial issues. If you are trying to help someone who has this probem, this little book can help.     64 pages –  $3 plus shipping.

BOOKS ON OTHER SUBJECTS

5. Church of Christ let’s examine ourselves. The restoration movement was begun by men of considerable intelligence and was anchored in solid Biblical ideals. But in later generations the movement fell into the hands of men with less than perfect understanding of its original principles. As is the case with most great religious movements, the time has come when it needs a “thousand mile checkup.” This book is designed to help us see the real flaws and call us back to the original anchor, comparison with the scripture text.   Includes a chapter on translations.  96 pages–$5 plus S & H.

6. The restoration movement side tracked. Documents how Daniel Sommer’s legalistic views turned the church of Christ to a more divisive stance in the late 1800s and resulted in the division over instruments and many other divisions that occured in the 20th century. We suggest that a return to the fundamentals of the original movement would solve many of our problems. It also chronicles my own pilgrimage out of the anti-instrument position and the Bible reasons for that change. 64 pages–$4 plus S & H

TWO CONTROVERSIAL DISCUSSIONS IN PEACEFUL DIALOGUE: 7. Apostate church – authentic church. Buff Scott affirmed that the word “church” does not translate the Greek word “ekklesia,” that the whole idea of church is an apostasy and that building and using church buildings is idolatry. Olan Hicks affirmed that “church” is a correct translation of “ekklesia,” that Jesus did build a church, is the divinely appointed head of it, that God adds the saved to that church, and that it does exist and is locatable in today’s world.   96 pages – $3 plus S & H.

8. HOW TO UNDERSTAND THE BIBLE. Two opposing views on hermeneutics. Chuck Dorsey is a graduate of the very conservative Freed-Hardeman University, and for 12 years worked at planting churches of that kind. But he left that doctrinal position and gravitated to an opposite extreme. He is now a “pastor” in the very liberal “Disciples of Christ” church. In this exchange Chuck affirmed the tenets of a liberal manner of interpreting the Bible and Olan Hicks affirmed that all scripture is God breathed and should be taken exactly as written. Although both men agree that the scriptures are the inspired word of God, there is a big difference in how each believes that word should be handled. This is a dialogue in the right spirit, a very good study of how to use the Bible.   96 pages – $4 plus shipping & handling.

9. THE AD 70 THEORY of last things. A 32 page treatment showing the errors of this theory in the light of scripture and natural facts. $2 plus $1 shipping.

10. WHAT IF WE DISAGREE? Emphasizing Biblical procedures for maintaining unity. The proposition here is that God cares very much about what we do in case of disagreement. The Bible gives many more  specific instructions on this point than most Christians realize or have ever studied. Suitable for class or group studies, with questions at the end of each chapter. This book has been very helpful to many churches.  80 pages – $4 plus shipping.

11. THREE NIGHT DEBATE ON DIVORCE & REMARRIAGE: Olan Hicks – Mac Deaver Held in middle Tennessee in 1995. In this one the real issues were more clearly understood and treated than in any previous debates. In answer to a question Mac said he does not believe that a man who puts away an innocent wife and marries another commits adultery because adultery is a sex act and therefore occurs in the sex practices of the next marriage. I affirmed that Jesus spoke the truth when He said that adultery is committed in ding those two things, and Paul spoke the truth when he said that every man should have a wife and every woman a husband, to avoid immorality, and further said that a man who has been put away by his wife does not sin if he marries.  188 pages.  $5 + $2 S & H

CHANGE CAN BE GOOD OR NOT GOOD

When we do not like the present state of things we want change, of course. In spiritual matters that change needs to be toward the original divine prescription, not away from it. In fact in all areas of life we want the change to be for the better, not for the worse. Change for the sake of change is not necessarily good, especially if it is directed only by human tastes and ingenuity, not by Biblical decree.

Most of us know that during the 20th century many churches of Christ came to be known for some undesirable characteristics. One of these was a judgmental attitude. Another was too much commitment to our traditions, including some that were man made theories. Another was a loss of objectivity in handling the scriptures. For several years now, many in the church and out have recognized that some flaws have developed and are calling loudly for change. Let’s think about the idea of change realistically.

In American society it has often come about, especially in recent years, that change is called for. In the last election the ground swell outcry was for change. Most of the campaign promises by the candidates were focused on what they were going to change. The people were demanding that. Now I think we may have to learn by experience that the mere fact of change may not be the answer. It has to be the right kind of change.

America has often seen movements calling for change. In the 1960s the “hippie” culture was a revolution against “the establishment,” the traditional American way of life. They demanded change, but not toward a higher form of civilization but toward a lowering of behavior standards. Ironically, they often clashed violently with another revolution which was going on at the same time. The “civil rights” movement was demanding more justice for black folks. That situation did need changing but in the right way. Among both of these groups people were disatisfied with the circumstances in which they lived and were insisting loudly that change had to occur. But both were much less than accurate in the kind of change needed. The hippie group needed to learn that “freedom” does not mean the right to lay aside personal responsibility. That is not a workable concept. The civil rights group needed to learn that you cannot make laws especially favoring one race of people and not have them be applied to other races also. Laws governing a whole nation have to be balanced in their application. Changes just for the sake of change may not improve the situation at all.

Both John the Baptist and Jesus came preaching repentance, which is a call for change. Both came to a nation which had back slidden from God. The change they needed was to return to the original divine directives. In our case today the problem is also a departure in some ways from the original way that God prescribed. Our need is not change to something new, motivated by personal preferences or a desire to be popular, but change driven by the realization that we are off course and need to return to God’s way. This is what too many change advocates now being heard most are not seeing. They are not wrong because they call for change but because the kind of change they call for would replace one error with another error, just as bad or worse.

We need to fix what is broken, not what is not broken. Several things they call “mistakes” and want to change are Biblical decrees. For instance, the idea that “strait is the gate and narrow is the way that leads to life and few there are who find it,” is viewed as judgmental and intolerant. They prefer to see “the way” as broad  enough to include just about all systems which claim to be Christian. They say our emphasis on correct doctrine was a mistake and we should change that. They believe we should not preach the doctrine of Christ “in season, out of season,” (a Biblical decree) but we should preach love and fellowship and unite with virtually all religious groups. The Bible says, “Let God be true but every man a liar,” but they seem to regard popular opinion as a higher authority than the divine voice. 

 So we agree that remedial change is needed. Let’s join together in a call for change. But let it be a change of improvement, not further deterioration. Any of the things we do which the Bible says to do are not wrong, such as refusal to compromise with error, recognizing that the way to life is narrow, diligently trying to handle the word rightly and get the doctrine of Christ correct, and boldly preaching the word whether popular opinion approves or not. Our mistakes are in things not in harmony with scripture, such as an attitude of judgmentalism, binding laws beyond what is mandated in scripture, dividing and drawing lines of fellowship where God has not drawn them, and not being careful enough to compare every suggested teaching with the entire Bible. Let’s fix these wrongs, not the things that are right. The scriptures are profitable for “doctrine, reproof, correction, instruction in righteousness, that the man of God might be complete, fully furnished unto every good work.” (2 Ti. 3:16) This is exactly what we need right now. Making course corrections by that standard will bring about changes that are right.