PROCLAIMING THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST TO A LOST AND DYING WORLD
Edited and Published by Jack Critchfield
|
Volume 6 Issue 6 |
June, 2002 |
Three Types of Sins in the Church
Jack Critchfield
Though all sin is detrimental to the cause of Christ, there are three types that are many times associated one with another and are most harmful when they interact. Unfortunately, sometimes brethren fall into one or more of these categories of error. While this is alarming, it is especially troublesome where the welfare of the church is concerned. Let us take special note of the three.
Malicious Sins
In the third chapter of 2 Timothy, Paul tells us "in the last days perilous times will come." Among those listed that will cause these times because of their malicious sins are listed "slanderers" and "despisers of good". It's interesting to note, that the Greek word translated "slanderers" (false accusers, KJV) is the exact same word translated "Devil" many times in the New Testament. In fact, Satan himself is identified as "the accuser of our brethren" (Rev. 12:10). The Devil and his agents do whatever they can to undermine the efforts of the righteous. However, the wisdom of the Lord tells us that those who would attack the church unjustly need to be rebuked and corrected without hesitation (Tit. 1:10-13).
Standing Idle
At times when obvious sin is present "in the camp", there are some that will simply neglect to oppose and stand against it. The attitude of God towards those who refuse to aid in the good fight against evil is revealed in Judges 5:23, "Curse Meroz, said the angel of the Lord, curse its inhabitants bitterly, because they came not to the help of the Lord, to the help of the Lord against the mighty." Those who know to do good but fail to do so are in sin themselves (Jas. 4:17). When the church at Corinth had sinners in their midst (1 Cor. 5 & 15), they were guilty of indifference. Like the ostrich (who reportedly hides his head in the sand when danger is present) is mocked, so are those who see no evil when it is all around them. Who among us wouldn't expect another Christian standing by to come to the aid of our wives, if they were being assaulted? In the same way, Christ expects us to come to the aid of His bride (the church) when she is being attacked. Anything less than active participation in her protection is abominable and inexcusable. Too often, we excuse ourselves from this task, convincing ourselves that another will handle the situation and there is no need for our participation. But there is no scripture that would support such an attitude. Obadiah 11 states that "In the day that you stood on the other side, in the day that the strangers carried captive his forces, when foreigners entered into his gates, and cast lots for Jerusalem, even you were as one of them." If we fail to stand on the side of the Lord, we place ourselves on the side of the unrighteous by default. In Matt. 12:30, Jesus said, "He who is not with Me is against Me; and he who does not gather with Me scatters abroad." There can be no middle ground. We cannot stand on the sidelines and claim that we are not on either side, for Christ revealed that by neglect, we have actually placed ourselves on the side of darkness.
Defending Error
Some brethren actually defend those who are unjustly attacking the church, and are thereby disregarding the "brotherly covenant," (1 Jn. 2:3-4). Inspiration exposes this ungodliness in Amos 1:9 where scripture says, "Thus says the Lord: For three transgressions of Tyre, and for four, I will not turn away its punishment, because they delivered up the whole captivity to Edom, and did not remember the covenant of the brotherhood." Those who violate the law of God and support the wicked, rather than contend with them are charged with sin (Prov. 28:4; 17:15). In an effort to justify sin in the church, the objections of some aren't always against WHAT the righteous are doing to correct the matter, but HOW they are proceeding. Even though their methods of dealing with sin cannot be shown to be unscriptural in any way, defenders of error always seem to be there (attempting to use the wisdom of men) to malign those who will seek to resist error. There is no scriptural authority for reasoning (as in civil or criminal courts) that even those who are guilty of sin should have a "representative" in their defense. Those who defend sinners are themselves in sin (Prov. 18:5).
The point is obvious! The bride of Christ has been, and will continue to be defiled by "certain men crept in unnoticed". The question is should we defend and support those in sin, or further their cause by standing idle? God forbid! Eph. 6:10-18 makes clear what needs to be done.
(Editors Note: I first published this article in 1997, but thought in light of much that we hear
today that it needed to be reprinted.)
Top
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"I really appreciated and enjoyed that sermon." Why do I say this to a preacher? Was it because I heard what I all ready believe? This is good, for truth needs re-enforcement. When the lesson challenges my thinking and, if accepted, would require changes in my thinking and conduct, what do I say? Maybe nothing? If so, I may miss an opportunity for edification.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
by Ron Lloyd
When the expression, "A matter of faith," is used it is "the faith" that is under consideration. The faith is the systematic revelation of the gospel as found in the Bible. The faith is found in several passages but Jude 3 will suffice for discovering the meaning of the term, "Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints." The common faith and the faith are emphasized in the passage to impress upon us that these expressions are closely related. Briefly stated, the faith is believed and practiced by those who will be saved. Peter refers to the "like precious faith" of those to whom he wrote in 2 Peter 1:1.
When disagreement arises among brethren some may label it as something clearly taught in the gospel or the faith. Others may say it is a matter of judgment, of personal faith which is, in itself, neutral so far as sin or transgression is concerned. Saints must decide between good and evil by rightly dividing and applying the word.
In Romans 14 both the faith, as discussed above and personal faith are mentioned. Paul wrote in verse 1, "Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations. " In verses 22 and 23 he begins to conclude his teachings to the Romans speaking of their individual faith or conviction, "Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth. And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin."
Paul writes concerning some who were weak in the faith. This weakness is due to strong feelings that they have related to religious observance of certain days and of eating, or not eating, certain foods. The faith does not address those matters. Those in the church are not obligated follow those practices. Verse 5 addresses the question of observing days, "One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind." What one person does is not required of the other. Verses 17 and 18 address the matter of ritual or religious diet, "For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men." The faith, that is, the gospel revelation speaks concerning, "-righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost," but diet is not a concern of the scriptures. Those who are not weak in the faith in this matter are instructed to do that which is best even to foregoing eating certain foods if this would cause harm to the weak brother or sister. Speaking of a similar situation in I Corinthians 8:13 Paul gives his decision on the matter and says, "Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend."
Romans 14 seems straight forward enough but, historically, there has been more than a little discussion over proper application of the teachings found here. That personal feelings is a subject of discussion here evinces the fact that it was, in Paul's day, a matter of concern. And so it continues today.
Romans 14 has no application to disagreement where matters of the faith are concerned. For example a congregation may choose to have the Lord's Supper before or after preaching, this is purely judgment. The time of day for partaking of the Lord's Supper is not indicated in the scriptures which comprise the faith. If a congregation should decide to have the Lord's Supper on a day other than the first day this would not be a matter than is resolved by Romans 14. Acts 20:7 is emphatic as to the day of the week upon which the Lord's Supper is to be eaten. This is no "doubtful disputation." This is a matter clearly taught. A saint could not engage in eating the Lord's Supper on some other day and claim to be in fellowship with God.
Marital relationships are not a matter of judgment. The scriptures state that the death of a spouse allows the survivor to marry again. See Romans 7:1-3. If a mate commits adultery by having sexual relations with another, that mate may be put away or divorced and the innocent victim may marry again. See Matthew 5:31~32, 19:9. This is not a matter which can be resolved by appealing to Romans 14.
There are some who do not teach the above concerning marriage and marrying second time. Yet, based on Romans 14, some teach that the person teaching the false doctrine should be received, encouraged and supported by brethren.
How can that be? Why would that point of doctrine be any less important than any other truth of the gospel? If one taught that the contributions of saints may be used for entertainment, contributions to colleges and other human institutions they would not be encouraged or supported in that teaching. Romans 14 does not resolve this unhappy situation. Preaching the truth will.
Many other things are clumped together as matters of personal faith and it is imagined that they are made acceptable by Paul's council to avoid "doubtful disputations." Modest dress has become less defined in the eyes of many. God's purposes in giving clothing and the covering of the body as taught in Genesis 3 is dismissed as exemplary by some. Their personal standard will usually be consistent with the garden instructions, but they do not feel that this standard is supported by the scriptures. Thus, in the mind of some in the church, dress is a matter of judgment in regard to modesty. Drinking alcoholic beverages occasionally or at regular, but widely spaced intervals, is considered to be within the realm of judgment by some. Other matters, considered by some, to be within the realm of judgment are: social dancing, instrumental music in the worship, mixed swimming, attendance in assemblies of the local church, other than first day, women participating in the public worship, and elders' authority.
Saints want peace. Peace comes of spiritual warfare and is maintained by vigilance. See Ecclesiastes
3:8. Peace must first be made with God, based on his word. "The peace of God which
passes understanding" is from applying the word. Sanctified
people are set apart from the worldly and remain so by adhering to and walking by the word. See John 17:17 and
1 Thessalonians 5:22.
Top
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"Legalism" or Obedience - Which?
Moses E. Lard
Now to insist on obedience to these commandments is legalism. Against it, of late, not a little has been said, and nothing wisely. The term legalism I do not like. It is an offensive term, with a bad sense, as popularly used, and should therefore, not be employed. Obedience to the commands of Christ is its exact equivalent, and should always be used in its stead. But few men, however, could be found bold enough to speak against obeying the commandments of Christ. The result here would be too glaring. None could fail to see it, and few would hesitate to pronounce it infidelity. A more insidious method is adopted. Legalism and obedience to Christ's commands are the same. Hence to speak against that is to speak against this. Nor have I any more respect for the man who masks the law of Christ, and then speaks against it, than I have for him who insults it directly.
via Search For The Ancient Order, 1890
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"Be more concerned with your character than with your reputation. Your character is what you really are while your reputation is merely what others think you are."
John Wooden
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bob W. Lovelace
Matthew recorded this event in the life of Jesus: "And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments" (Matthew 19:16-17 ). We note that Jesus did not hesitate to tell this young man to keep the commandments! His reply to Jesus: "He saith unto him, Which?" (vs. 18). To this Jesus said, "Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself " (vs. 18-19). In return the young man said, "All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet?" (vs. 20). The man is contemplating the matter of insufficiency in what he has done thus far.
Jesus replied, "If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me" (vs. 21). But he did not accept what Jesus said in such a way as to apply it to himself. Matthew says, "But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions" (verse 22).
Jesus did not call him back. Dear reader will you agree that there is indeed a distinction to be made between man's idea that being "good" is good enough, when compared with the necessity of keeping Christ's commandments in order that one might gain eternal life?
Joseph of Arimathea was a good man. Luke says, "And, behold, there was a man named Joseph, a counsellor; and he was a good man, and a just" (Lk. 23:50). The word "good" is the Gk. word agathos meaning "good :- generous(m) (NASB Dict. Help). The word "just" is translated "righteous" in NASB. Prior to this he had shown impeccable conduct among his peers by not accepting their condemnation of Jesus before hearing him out. He did not go along with their plots to kill Jesus. Matthew tells us of course that this "righteous" man had become Jesus' disciple by this time (Matt. 27:57-58). Thus we learn that this "good" man became a disciple of Christ. Moreover he displayed courage when going in and asking for the body of Jesus at the time of His burial.
People are often mistaken as to whether or not one is a good person. Such was certainly true with regard to Jesus. John says, "And there was much murmuring among the people concerning him: for some said, He is a good man: others said, Nay; but he deceiveth the people" (John 7:12).
Among those in the scripture enjoying this distinction is Barnabas (Acts 4:36-37; 11:24). Luke's description is, "For he was a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and of faith" (Acts 11:24. Moreover we are told there that "as a result of his efforts much people was added unto the Lord." We learn that as a result of this "good" man's efforts many people were added to the Lord!
Paul distinguishes between the affection some might have for a good man versus a righteous man. He says, "For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die" (Rom. 5:7). Some might be bold enough to die for a good man, Paul said. However it is abundantly clear from the context that no one is excluded from the next statement he makes. Hear Paul, "But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinner, Christ died for us" (Rom. 5:8). And this connects in the context with Romans 3:23, "For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God." Moreover he said this in a context explaining the need that all men have for justification by Christ's blood in order to be saved from wrath through Him (Rom. 5:9; cp. 2 Cor. 5:11).
Give some thought to this point that Jesus made on doing good. He said, "And if you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same" (Luke 6:33). He also said, "If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?" (Lk. 11:13) Even the worst of mankind can be known for doing something good (See Lk. 18:2-5, the unjust judge).
Dear reader the ordinary general distinction that people make between the bad and the good is not a canonical distinction. This "general" distinction in no way means that the "good" are all saved!
What God says about the good person,
To the young man whom we have read about Jesus said, "Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments" (Matt. 19:17). Do you know anyone who is as good as God? Certainly not! Moreover man's unrighteousness only demonstrates the righteousness of God, Paul said (Rom. 3:5) Hear Paul, "Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God" (Rom. 3:19). Since all have sinned and are accountable to
God Paul declares, "What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin" (Rom. 3:9). For this very reason Paul explains that there is a righteousness of God that comes by faith in Christ. He says, "Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference" (Rom. 3:22).
What Paul said concerning Jews and Gentiles is still true today. No man will be saved just because he has a particular quality of "goodness" about him. All have sinned and Paul says the wages of sin is death, Rom. 6:23. The apostle John confirms what Paul said stating that Jesus "is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world" (I John 2:2). There is a perspective, then, wherein as one considers man's relationship with God thus comparing man's actions with God's righteousness, and His righteous requirements, that all good men must hear and obey in order to be saved. For that very reason Jesus said, "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned" (Mark 16:15-16). None are excluded based upon them just being a "good" person.
Two more points from Jesus,
In the parable of the sower Jesus described the seed (the Word) sown upon "good" ground. Luke records, " And other fell on good ground, and sprang up, and bare fruit an hundredfold. And when he had said these things, he cried, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear" (Luke 8:8). Jesus' explanation of those represented by the "good" ground then follows. Hear Jesus, "But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience" (Lk. 8:15). The conjunction "and" joins both "honest" and "good" together! Both are descriptive of the heart that heard and obeyed.
Likewise in the parable of the talents Jesus taught about the good and faithful steward. That servant will hear these words when He comes again, "Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord" (Matt. 25:21, 23). Notice the conjunction "and" joins "good" and "faithful" together. Both are descriptive of the servant who is faithful to and pleases God.
Dear reader the fact is that far too many, both young and old, have heard this gospel and and let the opportunity to obey slip by.
Are you too among those who think that being good is good enough? Well it's not!
Via THE TRUTH IN PRINT
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are naked and open to the eyes of Him to whom we must give an account."
Hebrews 4:13
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Jack Critchfield, Editor & Publisher
403 Coit Way, Salinas, Ca. 93907
(831) 772-9557
jcritch@a1above.net
Back issues may be viewed online at:
http://www.jlef.com/~jcritch/proclaimer.htm