Category Archives: BIBLE QUESTIONS

BIBLE QUESTIONS, SALVATION

SHOULD BABIES BE BAPTIZED? — BOB PRICHARD

The practice of baptizing babies, widely accepted today, was completely unknown in the early church. The first explicit mention of the practice in history is in the writings of Tertullian of Carthage, an early church leader, who lived in the third century (some two hundred years after the beginning of the church). Tertullian wrote about the baptism of children as a then new practice, reserved for children who were very sick. Tertullian opposed the practice, saying it was not biblical, but many other church leaders accepted it, and the practice became firmly established in religious tradition. It became the almost universally accepted practice until challenged by the Anabaptists in the sixteenth century, who taught that baptism was reserved for believers.

There is absolutely no mention of baptizing babies in the Bible. Some teach that the “household” conversions of Lydia (Acts 16), Cornelius (Acts 10), or the Philippian jailer (Acts 16) show that infants must have been baptized. The reasoning is that since whole households were converted, there must have been infants included. None of these accounts, however, mention any infants, and the presence of infants cannot be assumed. Every account of conversion in the book of Acts mentions at least one thing, such as believing, which an infant cannot do. There is no reason to assume that infants were present and baptized. 

It is sometimes taught that infants must be baptized because of “original sin.” “Original sin” is supposedly the sin that all humanity inherits from Adam, because we were all involved in his original sin in Eden. Although we choose to sin, we are not responsible for Adam’s sin. Every person is responsible for his own sins, and the child is sinless until he reaches the proper mental maturity to be responsible for his own sins. The prophet Ezekiel declared, “The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him” (Ezekiel 18:20). When Paul said, “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive” (1 Corinthians 15:22), He was talking about physical death and the resurrection. If he was saying that we inherit sin from Adam, simply by being humans, then he would also be saying that we inherit eternal life in Christ, simply by being humans. Jesus said, “Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 19:14). He held up their sinless purity as an example for all.

Infant baptism simply cannot be right, because there is no biblical authority for it. It is an ancient tradition of men, no doubt begun with good intentions, but nevertheless contrary to the Bible. Baptism is for the penitent believer (Acts 2:38). Babies cannot repent, and have no sins to repent of. The Bible picture of baptism is a burial of believers. “Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection” (Romans 6:3-5). Infant baptism changes God’s plan, and may prevent the adult believer from obeying the gospel, thinking he or she has already been baptized, even though he has not followed the biblical pattern.

BIBLE QUESTIONS, CHRISTIAN LIVING

IF WE ARE SUPPOSED TO FORGIVE AND FORGET,  HOW CAN WE REALLY FORGET WRONGS DONE TO US? — BOB PRICHARD

There is no doubt that if we are to be pleasing to God, we must forgive. As Jesus gave the model prayer to the disciples, he told them to pray, “Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.” He then explained, “For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses” (Matthew 6:12, 14-15). We cannot expect God to forgive us unless we are willing to forgive others. The question is, however, do we have to forgive and forget?

We cannot find the exact phrase “forgive and forget” in scripture, but the principle of forgiving and forgetting is certainly there, because this is the way God forgives. Speaking of the coming Christian age, the prophet Jeremiah gave the Lord’s promise, “I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more” (Jeremiah 31:34). David described God’s forgiveness of sin: “As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us” (Psalm 103:12). God forgives penitent sinners completely and absolutely, and “will remember their sin no more.” But is “remember no more” the same as to “forget absolutely”? When God says he will “remember no more,” He is not saying that He cannot have any knowledge of forgiven sins, but that He has willed to no longer call to mind, or recall those sins. Where those sins are recorded in the great book of the works of men (Revelation 20:12), God has written “forgiven.” 

If we are to “forgive and forget” as God does, then we will determine that we will no longer bring to mind those wrongs that we have forgiven. The nineteenth century preacher Henry Ward Beecher said, “To say ‘I can forgive, but I can’t forget,’ is really to say, ‘I cannot forgive.’” Painful memories of what others have done to us often linger, because of the consequences of sin. When a painful memory of a forgiven wrong surfaces in one’s mind, however, if he has really “forgiven and forgotten,” he will not allow himself to bring it to mind. It is much easier to carry a grudge, or wallow in self-pity, rather than forgiving and forgetting, but we cannot do this and be pleasing to God.

Many have discovered that a good “forgettery” may be as valuable as a good memory. Forgiving as God wants us to is an act of the will. It is not easy, but time heals many injuries when we have forgiven and forgotten as God wants us to. One of the greatest tragedies of life is to see people who hold a grudge against one another, and will not forgive. Some even forget what they disagreed over, but will not forgive. Those who will not forgive will find that God cannot forgive them.

  As Jesus hung on the cross, the words “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do” (Luke 23:34), were continually on His lips. If he could forgive even those who crucified Him, surely His followers today can be forgiving people.

BIBLE, BIBLE QUESTIONS

IS THE BIBLE FILLED WITH CONTRADICTIONS? — BOB PRICHARD

No! Some are quick to claim, “The Bible is filled with contradictions!” This claim, however, has never been proved to be true, and it is a claim that is most often made by those who have little or no knowledge of the Bible. The Bible, as the inspired Word of God, cannot contain any contradictions. What it does contain, however, as might be expected of any literary work, are apparent contradictions, that is, passages that seem to be contradictory, but which are not contradictory at all when properly understood.

There are sometimes differences among Bible passages, but a difference is not the same thing as a contradiction. The Greek philosopher Aristotle defined contradiction: “That the same thing should at the same time both be and not be for the same person and in the same respect is impossible.” A difference would not be a contradiction if the same person was not under consideration, or if the same time period was not used for both, or if the language was not employed in the same sense.

Proverbs 26:4-5 demonstrates the principle. It gives the advice, “Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.” Is this a contradiction, since one verse says not to answer a fool, and the very next verse says to answer a fool? Not at all. What Solomon was saying with these verses, in the midst of a series of verses dealing with fools, was that sometimes it is better not to even answer a fool, lest one appear to be just as big a fool for answering. But sometimes the fool must be answered so that he will not think he is so wise that he cannot be answered. Whatever the situation, Solomon was saying it will be difficult to deal with a fool!

Because Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John all wrote about the events of the life of Christ, there are differences among their accounts. Differences, not contradictions! For example, Mark says that Jesus was crucified at the “third hour” (Mark 15:25); while John says that Jesus was on trial before Pilate at “the sixth hour” (John 19:14). Thus it would appear that either John or Mark is wrong, because John has Jesus on trial three hours after Mark says He was on the cross! But when one understands that John must have used Roman time, with the “sixth hour” being 6:00 a.m., while Mark used Jewish time, with the “third hour” being 9:00 a.m., then the apparent contradiction disappears.

Many other “alleged discrepancies” can be found, but as long as there is a logical way to explain the differences, then the truthfulness of the Bible stands. If we approach the Bible with an open mind and a willingness to accept its truth, we can understand. Many find “errors” in it because they do not approach it openly and honestly. God has communicated His will to us through the Bible. He expects us to understand and obey what it teaches. We can find the answer to apparent contradictions, if we are just diligent enough in our study. “For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints” (1 Corinthians 14:33).

BIBLE, BIBLE QUESTIONS, JESUS CHRIST, MATTHEW

DID THE PROPHETS SAY CHRIST WOULD BE “CALLED A NAZARENE”? — BOB PRICHARD

After describing the birth and early years of the life of Jesus, Matthew tells us that Joseph, having obeyed God by going down to Egypt, returned to Galilee, to Galilee, “and he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene” (Matthew 2:23). There seems to be a problem, however, in that there is no Old Testament prophet who said, “He shall be called a Nazarene,” and the city of Nazareth is never mentioned in the Old Testament.

Some have suggested that Matthew meant a Nazarite, rather than a Nazarene. A Nazarite took vows of holiness, never cutting his hair, avoiding any contact with dead bodies, and generally living a very austere life. Some of the prophets did refer to the holiness of the Messiah, but none said He would be a Nazarite. John the Baptist may well have taken a Nazarite vow, but Jesus, who was called a glutton and a winebibber, and who touched the dead to bring them back to life, would not have been a Nazarite. Surely Matthew understood the difference between a Nazarite, one who had taken a Nazarite vow, and a Nazarene, one who was from the city of Nazareth.

A more likely explanation for Matthew’s statement that “He shall be called a Nazarene” lies in a play on words, specifically the Hebrew word “branch,” that would have been very obvious to the Jewish readers who were the target of his gospel account. Matthew stressed that Jesus was “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (Matthew 1:1), as he showed that Jesus was the fulfillment of the words of the prophets as the One who was the promised Messiah-King. The Hebrew word for “branch,” neser is very similar to the root word of Nazareth. Isaiah had prophesied of the Messiah, “And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots” (Isaiah 11:1). Of this Branch, he said, “the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD” (Isaiah 11:2). The prophet Zechariah said, “Hear now, O Joshua the high priest, thou, and thy fellows that sit before thee: for they are men wondered at: for, behold, I will bring forth my servant the BRANCH” (Zechariah 3:8).

Matthew’s statement, “that which was spoken by the prophets” (2:23), is a general statement, not necessarily indicating that any of the prophets specifically said, “He shall be called a Nazarene.” Elsewhere, when Matthew speaks of fulfilled prophecy, and he has a specific quotation in mind, he names the prophet, or says “the prophet,” rather than “the prophets.” His general statement indicates that a general teaching of the prophets was that the Messiah would be called a Nazarene.

There is significance in being called a Nazarene. To be a called a Nazarene was to be called “from the backwoods,” to be unsophisticated. When Philip told Nathanael, “We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth,” Nathanael commented, “Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?” (John 1:45-46).  Many of the prophets said the Branch, coming from humble beginnings, would be despised and rejected by men. Jesus was treated as a “Nazarene” by the religious authorities of His day.

BIBLE, BIBLE QUESTIONS, JESUS CHRIST, MATTHEW

WAS JESUS BORN IN A HOUSE, AS MATTHEW SAYS, OR IN A STABLE, AS LUKE SAYS? — BOB PRICHARD

Critics of the historical accuracy of the Bible often find what they believe are contradictions among the writers of the gospel accounts because there are some differences between accounts. Remember however, that a difference is not necessarily a contradiction. The differing accounts of Matthew and Luke concerning the Christ child are a good case in point. 

Luke describes the birth of Christ: “Joseph also went up from Galilee … unto Bethlehem to be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child. And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn” (Luke 2:4-7). Matthew described the arrival of the wise men from the East: “When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceeding great joy. And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; gold, and frankincense, and myrrh” (Matthew 2:10-11). Mark and John do not discuss the birth of Christ. They surely knew the details, but chose to write about other things.

The apparent contradiction between Luke and Matthew comes about from the preconceptions of the readers. There are many things “everybody knows” about the birth of Christ, which are not so. One of those Bible facts that everyone seems to “know” is that the wise men came on the night that Jesus was born. In fact, the differences between the accounts of Matthew and Luke indicate that it is highly unlikely that the wise men came on the night Christ was born, because Matthew’s account indicates that Joseph, being a good husband and father, had arranged for his family to move from the stable into a house by the time the wise men arrived. While this might have happened the night Christ was born, more than likely they were not able to move into the house for a few days, if not weeks after the birth of Christ. The fact is, Matthew does not give any details of any particular place where Christ was born, except that it was in Bethlehem, in fulfillment of the prophecy of Micah 5:2.  “For thus it is written by the prophet, and thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel” (Matthew 2:5-6).  

The wise men [not kings, despite “We Three Kings”] brought three gifts: gold, frankincense, and myrrh, which were all very precious. It is unlikely that just three men would have traveled this great distance to carry such a costly gift. Most people assume that there were three wise men because there were three gifts, but Matthew does not give any indication of how many wise men there were. It is important in studying the Bible to read what is there, not what we think is there! The Bible is God’s revealed Will to mankind. It is not contradictory. “For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints” (1 Corinthians 14:33).

BIBLE QUESTIONS, CHRISTIAN LIVING

IS IT A LACK OF FAITH TO PRAY MORE THAN ONCE FOR THE SAME THING? — BOB PRICHARD

Concerning a “thorn in the flesh,” Paul wrote, “For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me. And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness” (2 Corinthians 12:7-9). He asked the Lord at least three times to remove this problem. Jesus told a parable about an unjust judge who would not properly avenge a widow, until she begged  him repeatedly. He asked, “Shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them? I tell you that he will avenge them speedily” (Luke 18:7-8).

In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus emphasized that God wants His children to bring their needs to Him. “Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:  For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened. Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone? Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent? If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?” (Matthew 7:7-11). Asking, seeking, and knocking all suggest being persistent in giving our requests to God. If even sinful human parents know how to meet the needs of their children, how much more can God do what He has promised?

Another parable told of a man seeking help from a friend so that he could feed a late night guest by borrowing three loaves of bread. Jesus said, “Though he will not rise and give him, because he is his friend, yet because of his importunity he will rise and give him as many as he needeth” (Luke 11:8). Friendship was not enough to get the bread from the man, but his importunity (persistence to the point of annoyance) got results. Prayer needs to be persistent, and through our importunity God knows we are serious about our prayer requests.

It is key that we understand that God is sovereign in prayer. He may sometimes answer our prayers with a “Yes,” sometimes with a “No,” and sometimes with a “Not now,” or “Wait awhile.” Even though Paul “besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from” him, the Lord’s answer was, “My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness.” Paul wanted his “thorn” removed, but had to learn to rely on the strength of the Lord, rather than his own strength. His response was, “Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me” (2 Corinthians 12:8-9). When God’s answer is not what we want, we must still trust and obey him.

Many needs in our lives, such as health, safety for our children, and our daily bread continue, and are constant needs. Surely we should be persistent in our prayers for these things. Prayers for God’s forgiveness are different, however. If we have obeyed the gospel of Christ and become Christians, then God has forgiven us of our sins. We need not continue to ask His forgiveness for those sins. When those sins come to mind, we should thank Him for his forgiveness, rather than asking again for the forgiveness that He has already granted because of the sacrifice of Christ for our sins.

BIBLE QUESTIONS, CHRISTIAN LIVING

SHOULD WE KNEEL IN PRAYER? — BOB PRICHARD

Worship that is acceptable to God has always involved the inner and the outer man. Jesus told the Samaritan woman at the well, “the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). The word translated worship means “to bow down to the earth, to do obeisance before another.” The idea is to show reverence and humility before another. It can refer to bowing before men, such as when Abraham “bowed himself to the people of the land” (Genesis 23:7), but it usually refers to bowing before deity. Mordecai refused to bow before Haman (Esther 3:2). God warned Israel, “Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them” (Exodus 20:3-5 a). God alone deserves worship today.

The Psalmist says in Psalm 95:6, “O come, let us worship and bow down: let us kneel before the LORD our maker.” This is only direct mention of kneeling for worship in the King James Version, here used synonymously with “bow down” in the parallelism that marked Hebrew poetry. Ephesians 3:14 is a similar passage, where Paul says, “For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,” asking God’s blessings on the Ephesian Christians. Certainly it would be right and proper to kneel for prayer, but it is not the only acceptable posture for prayer.

The usual posture for the Jews to offer prayers to God was to be standing, with uplifted hands. Paul told Timothy, “I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting” (1 Timothy 2:8). Jesus told a parable about a Pharisee and a publican (tax collector), who both went to the temple to pray. “The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.  And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted”  (Luke 18:9-14). Both men stood, but the posture of their hearts was different. Only the publican, who prayed in humility, pleased God.

The outward posture of prayer may reflect something of the inward devotion of the worshiper. Kneeling may help the worshiper feel his need to humbly approach God. Whether a prayer is offered kneeling, standing, or lying down, however, the important issue is the attitude of the heart. “Pray without ceasing. In every thing give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you” (1 Thessalonians 5:17-18).

BIBLE QUESTIONS, CHRISTIAN LIVING

WHAT IS THE PROVIDENCE OF GOD — BOB PRICHARD

God is active in our world today. It is unreasonable to think that He would create a world such as ours and then take no interest in it. Paul’s statement, “We know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose” (Romans 8:28), demonstrates His interest in our world. Since this promise must be true, then the real question lies in how God will act to carry this out.

Many believe that the only way God can act in our world is through miracles (acts of direct intervention, above and beyond nature). He does not act through miracles today, however, because with the full revelation of His written word, there is no longer a need for miracles. Paul said miraculous gifts would cease when the perfect revelation of God’s will occurred (see 1 Corinthians 13:8-10; James 1:25). The age of miracles has passed, but God still intervenes through His providence. “Providence” comes from the Latin providentia, meaning foresight. God’s providence is His indirect, non-miraculous support and care of His creation, from its very beginning through eternity. His providence includes not only a general providence over all creation, but also a special providence over His children, such as is demonstrated in the power of prayer (James 5:16).

  We see the difference between miracles, God’s direct intervention, and providence, God’s indirect intervention, by comparing parallel events such as the conception of Christ and the conception of Samuel. The virgin Mary, even before she and Joseph her espoused husband came together, was found “with child of the Holy Ghost,” as Isaiah had prophesied (Matthew 1:18-25). The conception of Christ was thus unique, a miracle, God’s direct intervention in time and history to send the Messiah. On the other hand, Hannah, a righteous woman was barren (unable to have children), so she prayed to God to send her a son. She promised to dedicate the son to His service. Returning home, “Elkanah knew Hannah his wife; and the LORD remembered her. Wherefore it came to pass, when the time was come about after Hannah had conceived, that she bare a son, and called his name Samuel, saying, Because I have asked him of the LORD” (1 Samuel 1:19-20). The conception of Samuel was not a miracle. God, through His providential care, worked through the laws of nature to bring Samuel to Hannah.

In providence, God works “behind the scenes.” We may not realize His providential care until much later. Joseph went from favor in his father’s house to slavery in Potiphar’s house, and from prison to authority in Pharaoh’s palace. Each step of the way he was in God’s providence, although neither he nor his family understood. With the exception of his interpretation of dreams, there was nothing miraculous in the whole chain of events as God providentially preserved His people. As he returned the slave Onesimus to Philemon, Paul said, “perhaps he therefore departed for a season, that thou shouldest receive him for ever” (Philemon 1:15). Paul realized that “perhaps” it was God’s providence. God continues his providential care of His children.

BIBLE QUESTIONS, CHRISTIAN LIVING

WHAT IS RELIGIOUS PREJUDICE? — BOB PRICHARD

Prejudice is one of the great problems of mankind. War in Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Israel and Gaza, and many other places is primarily over religious prejudice. The root idea of prejudice is to “pre-judge” someone or something, without considering all the evidence. Prejudice results when someone decides “all” are “like this” because a “few” are. Prejudice comes because someone has the attitude, “my mind is made up, don’t confuse me with the facts.” Race, gender, size, religion, or just about any other distinguishing characteristic may be the basis for prejudice. The basic idea is that “we” are better, and “they” are not as good.

The Jews of Christ’s time had an attitude of racial and religious prejudice toward the Samaritans. It was almost beyond the belief of  Christ’s Jewish listeners that there could possibly be a “good Samaritan.” The Samaritan woman at the well acknowledged the division, “for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans” (John 4:9). Jesus offered her “living water” that would bring unity to the Jew, the Samaritan, and the Gentile as well. “The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him” (John 4:23).  

Jesus came to unite all “true worshippers” who would “worship the Father in spirit and in truth.” By seeking true worshippers, He frequently challenged the religious authorities. “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows’ houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation” (Matthew 23:13-14). He called the Pharisees “hypocrites” so often that “Pharisee” and “hypocrite” are almost synonymous to us. The Pharisees were the most religious of all the sects of the Jews, but they had lost sight of God’s will. Was Jesus “prejudiced” against the Pharisees because he criticized them? No! He had not “pre-judged” them, but He knew what they were teaching and doing, so he condemned them.

In our religious world, some think that any criticism of what any religious group teaches or practices is “religious prejudice.” It seems that we have reached the point that people can do anything in the name of religion, and because of cries of “religious prejudice,” we should never compare their religious practices to what the Bible says. Criticism that is “pre-judged,” not based on a right consideration of all the evidence is wrong, but too often the “standard” is what men like or dislike, rather than what God has said through His written Word. Jesus said, “He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day” (John 12:48). To say, “this religious group teaches or practices such and such a doctrine, but the Bible says this,” is not religious prejudice. We must be sure that our facts are right, and that we do not misapply or mishandle the Word, but we also must make sure that we abide by what it teaches. We risk our souls if we disregard God’s will.

BIBLE QUESTIONS, CHRISTIAN LIVING

 HOW DO WE HATE THE SIN BUT LOVE THE SINNER? — BOB PRICHARD

Sin is the universal tragedy of mankind. Paul reminds us, “all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). Sin’s consequences are severe, for “the wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23). Man would be hopeless if it were not also true that “the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Romans 6:23). Because the sin and the sinner become so closely tied together, and because of the seriousness of sin and its consequences, it is hard to love the sinner while hating the sin. 

The only way to properly hate the sin and love the sinner is to follow the example of Christ. His love for the sinner is unquestioned. He submitted to the Father’s plan by going to the cross, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). Christ was willing to endure the shame and pain of the cross because of His love for sinners. As He cried out, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46), He was feeling the pain of separation from the heavenly Father because of mankind’s sins. He knew though, that His mission was to seek out sinners, “For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost” (Luke 19:10).

The scribes and Pharisees brought a woman taken in the very act of adultery to Jesus, trying to tempt Him. They said, “Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?” As they “continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.” It was not long until only the woman remained, and He asked her, “Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?” When she answered, “No man, Lord,” He said, “Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more” (John 8:3-11). Jesus did not make light of her sin, but called her to a higher standard. “Go, and sin no more” demonstrated His hatred of sin while loving the sinner.

Christ reserved His harshest words for those who willingly rejected His message of truth. He told them, “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.  And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not” (John 8:44-45). They were unwilling to accept the truth He preached, and unwilling to repent of their sins. God’s message to those deceived by Satan is a message of reconciliation. “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation” (2 Corinthians 5:19). That message of reconciliation is a message of love for the sinner, while hating his sinful deeds. The Great Physician has said, “They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick” (Matthew 9:12). We must hate the evil deeds of sinners, but offer reconciliation to those sin sick souls that are willing to return to God in obedience.

BIBLE QUESTIONS, CHURCH

WHAT IS “THE LORD’S DAY”? — BOB PRICHARD

David reminds us that “the earth is the LORD’S, and the fulness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein” (Psalm 24:1). All that we have belongs to the Lord, including the days of the week. But in Revelation 1:10, John speaks of a special day he calls the Lord’s day. “I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet.” Being “in the Spirit on the Lord’s day” allowed John to receive the Revelation from the Lord of those “things which must shortly come to pass” (Revelation 1:1).

The world of the early church was one in which many had to make a conscious and often life threatening decision. Would they say “Caesar is Lord,” or “Christ is Lord”?  Recognizing that there is “one Lord” (Ephesians 4:5), they knew that there was only one choice: to follow Christ and to do all in His name. “Whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him” (Colossians 3:17). Thus Christians partake of the Lord’s supper (1 Corinthians 11:20) in the name of the Lord on the Lord’s day.

While the designation, “the Lord’s day” is found only in Revelation 1:10, the concept of a day set aside for Christian worship is found from the very beginning of the church, as the early disciples met on the first day of the week. Jesus lived and died under the Old Covenant, and kept and obeyed the laws of the Sabbath, or seventh day of the week. Paul and other disciples went into the Jewish synagogues on the Sabbath day to reason with the Jews about the Christ (Acts 13; 17), but the church did not worship on the Sabbath day. Paul was usually expelled from the synagogues as opposition to his teachings grew, so we know that those Sabbath gatherings of Jews (and some Gentiles) were not meetings of the church.

The pattern of first day worship was established with the resurrection of Christ from the dead on the first day of the week (Luke 24:1). Most, if not all of the post-resurrection appearances of Christ were on the first day of the week. Christ appeared in the midst of the disciples on the first day of the week, the resurrection day (John 20:19), and then again “after eight days” (John 20:26), meaning the next first day of the week, when the previously absent Thomas became a believer in the resurrection. Even as Paul hurried to be in Jerusalem by the day of Pentecost (Acts 20:16), he stopped in Troas to meet with the Christians there, “where we abode seven days” (Acts 20:6). Even though a Sabbath day must have passed during those seven days, the next verse says, “And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight” (Acts 20:7). That gathering on the first day of the week was a gathering on the Lord’s day by the Christians of Troas and Paul and the other traveling Christians. The scriptures also speak many times of “the day of the Lord”  referring to a day of judgment by the Lord, but this is an entirely different word than “the Lord’s day.”

BIBLE QUESTIONS, CHURCH, JOHN

ARE THE DENOMINATIONS BRANCHES OF THE TRUE VINE? — BOB PRICHARD

As Jesus prepared His apostles for His departure, He told them the parable of the vine and the branches. He had just instituted the Lord’s Supper, with the elements of the bread and the fruit of the vine, so the picture of the vine and the branches would have been very clear to the disciples. Jesus immediately identified Himself as the vine: “I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman” (John 15:1). Having identified Himself as the vine, He identified the work of the branches as that of bearing fruit, warning that the husbandman takes away unfruitful branches. “Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit” (John 15:2).

Some suggest that this parable is a picture of the contemporary church, with all the various denominations and sects coming together to form the Lord’s church. It is sometimes shown in the form of a tree, with various branches depicting the way in which different religious groups have grown out of one another. The text reveals, however, that the branches are not the different religious sects of “Christendom,” but instead are individual Christians.

Jesus was speaking in John 15 to the apostles, individuals, not religious groups. Notice the emphasis on what the individual disciple must do. “I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned. If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you. Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples” (John 15:5-8). Jesus told the disciples, “ye are the branches,” and “if a man abide not in me.” The branches are people, not churches!

The branches must bear fruit for the husbandman. The fruitfulness that the Lord wants, which is the product of a Christian life, comes only from abiding in Christ. The branch cannot bear fruit of itself, “for without me ye can do nothing” (John 15:4-5). What we can do in Christ, however, is unlimited. “I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me” (Philippians 4:13). The key is to be in Christ, abiding in Him. Paul said, “as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ” (Galatians 3:27).

Christ did not want His followers to be divided among the various religious groups and denominations. As He prepared for the cross, He prayed, “Neither pray I for these alone [the apostles], but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me” (John 17:20-21). He wanted all who believe the testimony of the apostles to be united.

BIBLE, BIBLE QUESTIONS, CHRISTIAN LIVING

SHOULD CHRISTIANS SUPPORT A STATE LOTTERY? — BOB PRICHARD

Christians should not buy lottery tickets or support policies allowing them. Lotteries have a long history in the United States. The Continental Congress authorized a lottery to finance the Revolutionary War, and Harvard, Yale, Dartmouth, and other universities raised money through lotteries. The lesson of history is, however, that lotteries do not raise the revenues they promise, and are breeding grounds of corruption and crime. By 1900, all the states in the United States had outlawed lotteries, and it is only in recent years as states sought more sources of revenue that they have turned to lotteries. Thomas Jefferson described the lottery as “a tax on the willing,” and as lotteries have grown, many have proved unable to avoid this tax. While anyone may play the lottery, the players are more likely to be the less educated, lower income people, least able to afford it.

One problem with state-run lotteries is that this puts the government’s stamp of approval on a very harmful activity. The state should not promote gambling, which is dangerous to both individuals and society. Multitudes gamble for the false hope of the lottery, including millions of compulsive gamblers who absolutely cannot stop. The myth of “something for nothing,” and “hitting the jackpot” entices new converts daily. Paul warned that Christians should not take their liberty (such as an ability to gamble without becoming addicted), to cause others to stumble. “But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak” (1 Corinthians 8:9).

The ethic taught by the Bible is that the Christian should be different from the world. In particular, the Christian works diligently and honestly. “Whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men” (Colossians 3:23). “Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth” (Ephesians 4:28). How can the illusion of “hitting the jackpot” by gambling on the lottery encourage the Christian to work honestly and effectively? The very basis of the lottery is an appeal to mankind’s innate greed, or covetousness. But God says that covetousness is idolatry (Colossians 3:5). “Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man’s life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth” (Luke 12:15).

Lotteries are supposed to raise new revenues for special needs such as education, but they do not generate any new wealth. They just shift money from the gambler to the state, without producing anything of value, while at the same time costing the state because of the increased crime associated with state-run gambling. Should the state encourage this addicting vice just to balance the budget? Would Jesus have played the lottery?

ACTS, BIBLE QUESTIONS, SALVATION

WAS THE PHILIPPIAN JAILER SAVED BEFORE BAPTISM? — BOB PRICHARD

The story of the Philippian jailer is found in Acts 16. The jailer was in charge of Paul and Silas, who had been arrested on false charges by the owners of a slave girl. They had cast a demon out of the girl, depriving her owners of the money they made by exploiting her (Acts 16:20-21). Because of this, Paul and Silas were arrested, beaten, and put into the innermost prison, with their feet in the stocks. The jailer was to keep them safely until the officials could deal with them.

Beaten and bleeding, and locked in the inner prison, Paul and Silas prayed and sang praises to God, even though it was midnight (Acts 16:25). Suddenly an earthquake shook the prison, and the jailer, awakening from sleep was ready to kill himself, because he was sure that the prisoners would have escaped. When Paul calmed him, assuring him that the prisoners were still there, “he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas, and brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” (Acts 16:29- 30). Paul and Silas answered very simply: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house” (Acts 16:31). Since the jailer was not told to be baptized, does this mean that he was saved before baptism? Consider the rest of his story.

Paul and Silas had told the jailer that salvation would come from believing on the Lord Jesus Christ, but what did this jailer know about Jesus Christ? It is unlikely that he had heard any of the sermons that Paul and Silas had preached in Philippi. He probably knew absolutely nothing about Jesus, other than what he had learned from hearing the songs and prayers of Paul and Silas, so they had to teach him. “And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house” (Acts 16:32). Did speaking the “word of the Lord” include the necessity of baptism? Remember that it was midnight when Paul and Silas were singing and praying (Acts 16:25). It was after this that the earthquake came, the jailer sprang in and asked “What must I do to be saved?” and they “spake unto him the word of the Lord.” Without question it was in the wee hours of the morning when the jailer responded to their preaching.

Luke tells us, “he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway. And when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house” (Acts 16:33-34). When were the jailer and his household baptized? It was “the same hour of the night.” Why didn’t they at least wait until morning light before they were baptized, if baptism was not essential? When did he rejoice?  It was after they were baptized, not before. They rejoiced, knowing that their sins were forgiven, and they had truly obeyed the Lord. The jailer had a saving faith, a faith that responded to the sacrifice of Christ by obeying Him. His obedience in baptism demonstrated his faith, and his faith was demonstrated in his baptism. The jailer was like all other Christians we read of in the New Testament. He was saved after baptism.

BIBLE, BIBLE QUESTIONS, SALVATION

WHAT IS THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST? — BOB PRICHARD

The theme of all the New Testament is the gospel of Jesus Christ. Practically every page provides information on this important topic. In its simplest terms, the gospel of Jesus Christ is simply the “good news” concerning Him. The Greek word translated as gospel means “good news.” The word “evangelist,” a “preacher of the gospel,” comes from the same root word. In a day when there is so little good news, it is important to recognize that Jesus came to give the world good news.

The message of the gospel is that although man is a sinner, deserving of death, God loved mankind enough to make provision for salvation. Paul warned the Roman Christians that “all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23) and “the wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23a). Comfort comes, however, in knowing the good news that “the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Romans 6:23b). Paul reminded them that because they had become Christians, they were “justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” (Romans 3:24). The “amazing grace” of God is truly good news. 

At the heart of the gospel message are the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. As Peter preached the first “gospel sermon” on the day of Pentecost, he spoke of “Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs” (Acts 2:22). Although He was put to death, death could not hold Him. “This Jesus hath God raised up” (Acts 2:32). Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:36). The people responded properly: “Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?” (Acts 2:37). Peter answered by telling them how to accept the good news of Christ: “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost” (Acts 2:38).

The gospel is especially good news, because its message is universal. Peter continued by telling his Jewish audience, “For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call” (Acts 2:39). The “all that are afar off” meant that the message was to go to a worldwide audience—the church would include the Gentiles as well as the Jews. Faith moved many to obey: “Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls” (Acts 2:41). From that day forward, the church grew as more and more people were added to the church (Acts 2:47). Christ commands: “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.  Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen” (Matthew 28:18-20).

BIBLE, BIBLE QUESTIONS, JESUS CHRIST, JOHN, MARK, MATTHEW

WHY DID JESUS REFUSE, AND THEN ACCEPT THE “VINEGAR” OFFERED AT THE CROSS? — BOB PRICHARD

As they took Jesus to Golgotha crucify Him, “They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink” (Matthew 27:34). Mark described the drink given to Christ as “wine mingled with myrrh” (Mark 15:23). What Matthew and Mark were describing was a cheap Roman vinegar wine which had a drug mixed in to dull the senses. It was the Roman custom that they would offer a man undergoing crucifixion this drugged wine so that he might more easily endure his cross. Jesus refused this wine, however, apparently so that he would be able to undergo His suffering with a clear mind.

As Jesus neared death, he said “I thirst” (John 19:28). One of the natural physical effects of crucifixion was great thirst due to the loss of body fluids. David predicted the death of Christ saying, “They gave me also gall for my meat; and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink” (Psalms 69:21). John recognized this fulfillment of prophecy: “After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst” (John 19:28). In the fulfillment of this prophecy, Jesus demonstrated His humanity. One of the heresies at the end of the first century was the idea that Jesus was not really human.  In his description of Jesus, however, John demonstrated that Jesus was both truly man and truly deity.

John described the last moments of the life of Christ, saying, “Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a sponge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth. When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost” (John 19:29-30). Jesus was at the point of death and wished to say His final words. His parched throat and lips needed moisture, so He accepted the vinegar.

It is significant as to how the vinegar was offered to Jesus. “They filled a sponge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth.” Any Jew who saw the hyssop would immediately think of the night of the first Passover when each family was to slay a perfect lamb and put its blood on the door post, so that the death angel would pass over.  Moses had commanded the Israelites, “Ye shall take a bunch of hyssop, and dip it in the blood that is in the basin, and strike the lintel and the two side posts with the blood that is in the basin; and none of you shall go out at the door of his house until the morning” (Exodus 12:22). It was the blood of the Passover lamb that saved the Israelites from death. On the cross, the perfect lamb of God gave His life’s blood so that men could be saved.

His last words from the cross were, “It is finished.” Jesus came to serve and to carry out the will of the Father. In His life, His ministry, and His death, He perfectly fulfilled the will of His heavenly Father, and made the perfect sacrifice for mankind.

BIBLE, BIBLE QUESTIONS, CHRISTIAN LIVING, MATTHEW

IS IT SINFUL TO “JUDGE” SOMEONE ELSE? — BOB PRICHARD

Most people would assume that is is sinful to judge another person. After all, Jesus said, “Judge not, that ye be not judged” (Matthew 7:1). Because of this statement, many have assumed that it is sinful to correct anyone, because this would mean that one is “judging.” But is it even possible to go through life without ever judging, or discerning between what is right, and what is wrong?

Paul wrote, “Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted. Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ” (Galatians 6:1-2). How can one determine that his brother is “overtaken in a fault,” without “judging” him? To say, “You cannot condemn my actions, because that would be judging me,” is to say that nothing can ever be determined to be wrong. This idea promotes a moral indifference that nothing is really sinful, and as long as you condemn no one else’s sin, no one can condemn your sin.

Jesus qualified  his teaching about judging: “And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?” (Matthew 7:3). Jesus commanded, in very “judgmental” terms, “Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye” (Matthew 7:5). When you remove the beam from your own eye, then you will be in a proper position to help your brother remove the speck from his eye.

Paul said for the spiritual to “bear one another’s burdens,” and to restore the man “overtaken in a fault.” He said that this was done “in the spirit of meekness.” Meekness, a part of the fruit of the Spirit, is the key to proper judging  of the works of another. Meekness is closely related to humility and childlikeness. Jesus said that His followers must humble themselves as little children, if they are to enter into the kingdom.  “Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 18:3-4). If we approach the faults of others from the standpoint of meekness and humility, we can properly “judge” them. That is, when we act out of humility and weakness, we will have no thought for our own pride, but will with childlike sincerity correct one another.

In talking about how each member of the body of Christ, the church, is to work together, Paul said that we are to be “speaking the truth in love” (Ephesians 4:15). Is it more loving to leave a person in his sin by saying nothing, or is it more loving to “judge” him, and try to help him leave his sin? If we are truly “speaking the truth in love,” correcting one another in a spirit of meekness, we will please God.

BIBLE, BIBLE QUESTIONS, CHRISTIAN LIVING

IS ANGER ALWAYS WRONG? CAN IT BE CONTROLLED? — BOB PRICHARD

Anger is a destructive emotion that has led to every kind of sin, including murder, as when Cain killed his brother Abel (Genesis 4:4-8). The elder brother of the “prodigal son” refused to go to the party for his brother because “he was angry, and would not go in” (Luke 15:28). Paul wrote “Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath” (Ephesians 4:26). It is possible to be angry without sinning, but very difficult.

As Jesus saw the moneychangers cheating His people in the temple, He made a scourge of small cords, and drove them out of the temple, saying, “Take these things hence; make not my Father’s house an house of merchandise” (John 2:16). Undoubtedly Jesus was angry. He acted out of  “righteous indignation.” He was angry, but He did not sin because He was zealous for the glory of God. The child of God ought to be angry when the glory of God is challenged, and it is a great tragedy for Christians to be so tolerant that nothing makes them angry.  

James gives a simple prescription for dealing with anger: “Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath: For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God” (James 1:19-20).

To be “swift to hear” means to be a ready listener. All too often we become easily angered because we do no have enough information. When a person really listens to another person, sometimes even “reading between the lines,” he may find that what would have otherwise provoked a reaction of anger may instead provoke a reaction of concern or pity. A reaction of anger is often simply a reaction out of emotion. If one listens to discern all the facts, he can deal with the problem rationally.

To be “slow to speak” means to control the tongue, which is a very difficult task. James himself said, “every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of mankind: But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison” (James 3:7-8). Solomon said, “Seest thou a man that is hasty in his words? there is more hope of a fool than of him” (Proverbs 29:20). Hasty words spoken in anger will almost always be regretted.

To be “slow to wrath” is also difficult. The old adage of counting to ten works on this principle. If one realizes that he is becoming angry, he can slow the process. Prayer is helpful in this area, as well as the realization that each person controls his own reaction to a problem. A person can choose to be angry in dealing with a problem, or he can choose to cope with the problem without anger.

The “new man” in Christ lays aside worldly anger. “Put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth. Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him: … but Christ is all, and in all” (Colossians 3:8-11).

BIBLE QUESTIONS, NEW TESTAMENT, SALVATION

DID THE LORD SAVE PAUL ON THE ROAD TO DAMASCUS? — BOB PRICHARD

No. The conversion of Saul of Tarsus (later known as the apostle Paul) is the most thoroughly documented conversion in all the Bible, but it is still widely misunderstood. As Saul was making his way to Damascus to persecute Christians, Jesus appeared to him, but Saul was not saved simply because the Lord appeared to him. Luke records, “And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do” (Acts 9:6). The Lord did not save Saul until he completed what he “must do.”

The first mention in scripture of Saul of Tarsus is in Acts 7, where those stoning Stephen, the first Christian martyr, lay their clothes at his feet. Luke reported, “Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles” (Acts 8:1). Saul was in the middle of all this persecution: “As for Saul, he made havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them to prison” (Acts 8:3). Because of his zeal for persecuting the church, Saul went to the high priest and asked for letters to the Damascus synagogues, so that he could arrest the Christians in Damascus and bring them back to Jerusalem for punishment.

As Saul journeyed to Damascus, a bright light blinded him, and he heard Jesus say to him, “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?” (Acts 9:4). After Jesus identified Himself to Saul, He sent Saul into Damascus with the words, “Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do” (Acts 9:6). Saul then spent the next three days in prayer and fasting. This showed that he was serious about following Christ, but his three days of prayer and fasting did not save him or show that he was saved. His penitent behavior was preparing him for the necessary obedience.

The Lord then directed Ananias, a Christian of Damascus, to go to Saul to tell him what he “must do.” Although it must have been a daunting assignment, Ananias, “a devout man according to the law” came to Saul, a fellow Jew, and said, “Brother Saul, receive thy sight” (Acts 22:12-13). Saul was no longer blind, and Ananias warned him of what was ahead of him if he chose to follow Christ. “The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth.  For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard” (Acts 22:14-15). Having warned him what lay ahead of him in Christ’s service, Ananias then told Saul what he “must do.” “Why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16). Why was Saul not saved before?  Because he was still in his sins.  That is why he needed to call on the name of the Lord by by washing away his sins. As he obeyed the Lord’s command through the messenger Ananias, he received the forgiveness of his sins and the salvation he had spent three days praying for in his blindness.

BIBLE QUESTIONS, CHRISTIAN LIVING

MUST OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS EXCEED THAT OF THE PHARISEES? — BOB PRICHARD

The words of Christ in Matthew 5-7, the “Sermon on the Mount,” are often considered a summary of all Christian living. If all the best of modern psychology were gathered, it would not compare in beauty and simplicity with the Sermon on the Mount. Early in that sermon, Jesus made a strong statement: “For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:20). To understand the impact of His statement, we must understand who the scribes and Pharisees were.

Scribes were men who devoted their lives to studying and copying the law. The Pharisees, a Jewish religious sect, devoted their lives to keeping the law in every detail. Although there were probably never more than 6,000 Pharisees, they play a large part in the New Testament story. The name “Pharisee” has almost become synonymous with “hypocrite,” but we should first think of them as men who were zealous to keep the law. Each had to swear an oath to keep every last detail of the law. No one has ever been more “religious” than the Pharisees, but at the same time no one ever has been further from the kingdom of God. They knew the law and kept the letter of the law, but ignored entirely the spirit of the law. They were righteous men, but their righteousness was entirely self-righteousness.

Jesus said, “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. … Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:17-19). In obeying God, however, men could not follow the example of the Pharisees. They were so busy being “religious” that they had no time for really obeying God. Jesus condemned them, saying, “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone” (Matthew 23:23). So concerned for the smaller matters of the law, even tithing small spices, they disregarded what was really important. The Lord expected them to do both the minor matters of the law, and the weightier matters.

It is always easier to be “religious” than to be righteous. The response of the Pharisees to the will of God was a response of duty only. Our response to God must be one of love. Jesus said that love for Him meant even loving our enemies, as we seek to be perfect, even as our Heavenly Father is perfect (Matthew 5:43-48). The story of the “Good Samaritan” illustrates that we must love others, as Christ has loved us. A righteousness that exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees is derived from a life of service and obedience to God. Our reliance must be on Him, and His righteousness, and not our own self-righteousness.