issues and opinions

The Pauline Privilege

Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage

1 Corinthians 7: 13-16

            13 And a woman who has a husband who does not believe, if he is willing to live with her, let her not divorce him. 14. For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband; otherwise your children would be unclean, but now they are holy. 15. But if the unbeliever departs, let him depart; a brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases. But God has called us to peace. 16.  For how do you know, O wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, O husband, whether you will save your wife?

            Here we have a case where many religions of all denominations have concluded and determined that the Apostle Paul gave new instructions that went beyond what Jesus said about divorce and remarriage in Matthew 19:9.      

Jesus said; And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries                         another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”

            Now if we didn’t have Jesus’ words on this subject, we might also conclude that Paul has given a new reason for divorce and remarriage other than adultery. But we do have Jesus’ words and unless we are willing to allow the Apostle Paul to override what Jesus said, then we will have to interpret these Scriptures in light of what Jesus, Himself, had to say.

            Jesus told us in Matthew 19:9 that there was only one cause for a person to divorce their mate and marry another and that one cause is adultery. Neither we nor the Apostle Paul would have the authority to contradict that statement. And besides that, these words in 1 Corinthians are not from the Apostle Paul, they are from the Holy Spirit as inspired Scripture.

            So what does it mean when the Scriptures tell us that in a relationship where one spouse is a Christian and the other is a non-believer and the non-believer departs; The brother or sister is not under bondage in those cases? Well, we know what Jesus said. There is only one reason for divorce and remarriage that God allows. And according to Jesus that reason is adultery. Now the separation described with Paul’s statement does not involve adultery. So, how about it? Would Paul’s example qualify in Jesus’ example of an approved divorce? I think we can all see that it does not.

            If you will notice in these verses in 1 Corinthians there is no mention of divorce or remarriage, only separation. Now some will say that this “celibacy” places undue hardship on a person that God did not intend. Many will say that God “expects” a divorced person to have a happy life and not spend the rest of their life unmarried. They reason that God loves us and would not expect us to spend the rest of our life without a loving relationship.

            But what did Jesus say about that?

            If we continue reading past Matthew 19:9 we see that the disciples also questioned Jesus’ strictness in his “new law” on marriage, divorce and remarriage. Look at their question;

Matthew 19:10 -13

10  His disciples said to Him, “If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry.”

11  But He said to them, “All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given:

12  For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother’s womb, and there are eunuchs who             were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the       kingdom of heaven’s sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it.”

            So, There are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. In other words, some men have found themselves in a situation where they cannot remarry without committing adultery. They are in a situation where it would be sinful for them to remarry and so they choose to live a celibate life in order to be saved.

            The problem with obedience to the doctrines of marriage, divorce and remarriage is the fact that it is such an emotional issue. There are many who will just refuse to obey no matter what the Bible has to say. To find a mate and to live with them is such a strong desire in most people’s life that it become unbearable without faith and a commitment to the Word of God.

Carl O. Cooper

The Pauline Privilege

Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage

1 Corinthians 7: 13-16

            13 And a woman who has a husband who does not believe, if he is willing to live with her, let her not divorce him. 14. For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband; otherwise your children would be unclean, but now they are holy. 15. But if the unbeliever departs, let him depart; a brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases. But God has called us to peace. 16.  For how do you know, O wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, O husband, whether you will save your wife?

            Here we have a case where many religions of all denominations have concluded and determined that the Apostle Paul gave new instructions that went beyond what Jesus said about divorce and remarriage in Matthew 19:9.      

Jesus said; And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries                         another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”

            Now if we didn’t have Jesus’ words on this subject, we might also conclude that Paul has given a new reason for divorce and remarriage other than adultery. But we do have Jesus’ words and unless we are willing to allow the Apostle Paul to override what Jesus said, then we will have to interpret these Scriptures in light of what Jesus, Himself, had to say.

            Jesus told us in Matthew 19:9 that there was only one cause for a person to divorce their mate and marry another and that one cause is adultery. Neither we nor the Apostle Paul would have the authority to contradict that statement. And besides that, these words in 1 Corinthians are not from the Apostle Paul, they are from the Holy Spirit as inspired Scripture.

            So what does it mean when the Scriptures tell us that in a relationship where one spouse is a Christian and the other is a non-believer and the non-believer departs; The brother or sister is not under bondage in those cases? Well, we know what Jesus said. There is only one reason for divorce and remarriage that God allows. And according to Jesus that reason is adultery. Now the separation described with Paul’s statement does not involve adultery. So, how about it? Would Paul’s example qualify in Jesus’ example of an approved divorce? I think we can all see that it does not.

            If you will notice in these verses in 1 Corinthians there is no mention of divorce or remarriage, only separation. Now some will say that this “celibacy” places undue hardship on a person that God did not intend. Many will say that God “expects” a divorced person to have a happy life and not spend the rest of their life unmarried. They reason that God loves us and would not expect us to spend the rest of our life without a loving relationship.

            But what did Jesus say about that?

            If we continue reading past Matthew 19:9 we see that the disciples also questioned Jesus’ strictness in his “new law” on marriage, divorce and remarriage. Look at their question;

Matthew 19:10 -13

10  His disciples said to Him, “If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry.”

11  But He said to them, “All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given:

12  For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother’s womb, and there are eunuchs who             were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the       kingdom of heaven’s sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it.”

            So, There are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. In other words, some men have found themselves in a situation where they cannot remarry without committing adultery. They are in a situation where it would be sinful for them to remarry and so they choose to live a celibate life in order to be saved.

            The problem with obedience to the doctrines of marriage, divorce and remarriage is the fact that it is such an emotional issue. There are many who will just refuse to obey no matter what the Bible has to say. To find a mate and to live with them is such a strong desire in most people’s life that it become unbearable without faith and a commitment to the Word of God.

Carl O. Cooper

The Prince of the Power of the Air

Ephesians 2: 2

By Carl O. Cooper 

                   In Ephesians 2:2 we have a phrase that seems simple enough at first when we see it. It reads like this: Ephesians 2:2 KJV

                   Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: 

                   Simple, right? “The prince of the power of the air” is obviously referring to the Devil. And isn’t it easy to see how the Devil rules the air waves? Look at what you see broadcast on the TV and internet air waves today. Is there any doubt that the air waves are ruled by Satan?  

                   But wait! Not so fast!

                   When the Apostle Paul wrote these words there was no such thing as radio waves in the air. It just would not seem reasonable that the meaning of this phrase would have to do with something that would not be invented for 2000 years into the future. Of course God is not hindered with time and He could have known the impact this would have on people today. Nevertheless, it does not seem reasonable to place this explanation on this phrase spoken 2000 years ago to a group of people who would read these verses for 2000 years before radio waves would even exist.

                   So, what could these words mean?

                   Well, I think it is pretty simple to see that the word “prince” is referring to Satan. The context is pretty clear on this point. This “prince” seems to be in charge of the evil influence that sets the sinful “course of this world”. Paul says that “in times past” the Ephesians walked in this evil influence.

                   And it’s pretty clear that this “prince” has power.

                   And it is also pretty clear that “the prince of the power of the air” is a “spirit”. And the text says that this “spirit” works in the “children of disobedience”.

                   Now comes the difficult part, for me.

                   Why does Paul say that this powerful spirit being is “the power of the air”?

                   Well, perhaps the Greek words can help us here.

                   The Greek word use here and translated “air” is ‘ah-ayr’” And according to the Strong’s definition of this word it means; “From the root word aemi which means “to breath unconsciously, i.e. respire; by analogy, to blow”. 

                   OK, so it means “to breath or to blow”. So how does that help us?

                   Well, one clue could be the reference to Strong’s Greek word number 5594.

                   This Greek word is “psucho” and it is found in Matthew 24: 11-12. And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. 12. And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. 

                   The word “cold” in this verse is from the Greek word “psucho”. 

                   This word has 2 root words; “pneo” which denotes forcible respiration. Or to blow.

                   And the second root word is “aer” which denotes “to chill” or “wax cold”.

                   So, the Greek word psucho is from 2 root words “pneo” and “aer”.

                   The Strong’s definition for this Greek word is “to breathe, to blow, to cool by blowing, and to be made to grow cool or cold”. This word is used to indicate “waning love”.

                   So here is a word in Matthew 24 that is referenced as associating with the word in Ephesians 2:2 that perhaps can shed a little light on the phrase “prince of the power of the air”.

                   But how would these Greek words and these verses connect with a meaning for these phrases? Well, it connects like this;

                   Satan has power in the spirit world to influence people in this world to “walk in disobedience”. His influence is like a cold wind blowing on these people to cause “the love of many to grow cold”.

                   Of course, as you can see, this description of Satan as “the prince of the power of the air” is figurative in nature and is a poetic description that shows his evil power. And this style of writing about Satan is common in the Scriptures. Look at Ephesians 6:12 NKJV For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. 

                   Now I think I really should make something clear here. My description of these verses should not be considered as absolute fact. I am considering my explanations as theory only. Frankly, no one seems to have any explanation that we can say is absolutely fact about this and not just theory as well. But if you are like me, anything you read about a complex Scripture has the ability to stimulate your own brain to put together ideas that are of interest to others. Eventually, someone will have a great idea that fully explains the whole thing.

Carl O. Cooper

Instrumental Music in the Church

Instrumental Music in the Church

Use of the word Psallo

By Carl O. Cooper

            It is certainly no secret and it is very well documented as historical fact, musical instruments were not used in church worship until well over a thousand years after the church started in AD 33. In fact, even after the reformation movement and denominations separated from the Catholic Church, almost all of the famous well known reformers of denominational churches were very much against the introduction of musical instruments into the worship of the church. This too, is well documented in history and is not even disputed anywhere as far as I can determine.

            It is interesting to note that the early church had copies of Scripture that told them precisely what type of music God had told them to present to Him in worship. It was clearly understood by the early church that God had instructed the New Testament Church to present worship to Him in the form of music as acapella singing only. This form of music was presented to God during the worship of the church for over 1000 years and was so normal and so understood that the term acapella was coined to describe “church music”. The term acapella means “church music”.

            Today almost all denominational churches use many types of mechanical instruments in their various forms of worship to God. Only members of the mainstream and traditional church of Christ even care what the Bible has to say about the type of music we present to God as worship. We still use acapella music without instruments in our worship, just like the original church used acapella singing without instruments. This is the type of music we find recorded for us to use in the Bible in the New Testament. God’s word is binding on this subject.

            However, it is very hard, and for some people almost impossible, to continue to follow a path that is so counter cultural to the society in which we live. It is just human nature to want to follow the crowd. The average person can be quickly overcome with “peer pressure” and just cannot bear to be or to look different than the rest of the people around them. And so there is a great desire to use musical instruments in the worship of the church of Christ and to be like all the denominations around us. And therein comes into our midst the attempt to redefine words and phrases to try to find some way for the Bible to “authorize” the use of instruments in our worship.

            A common way that this has been done is to take Greek words and look through history to find meanings that can be used and manipulated to appear to make the Bible say the things you want it to say. Now it is commonly known that Greek words, (just like English words) have multiple meanings depending on the context where they are used. One part of the Bible where this is done is in Ephesians 5:19. “Speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord.”  Now for over a thousand years the New Testament church understood what this meant. To “speak to one another” uses the voice and not mechanical instruments. “Psalms and hymns and spiritual songs”, tells us the types of songs we are expected to use in our worship. That rules out rock and roll and dance music and “making melody in your heart to the Lord” tells us that our emotions are involved in our worship to God in song. So it was understood for over 1000 years that the Bible only authorized acapella music in the worship to God.

            But along came the instrument, eventually. But even so, it took several hundred more years for this desire for the instrument to affect the church of Christ. But, alas, eventually it did. Of course there was rebellion over its introduction into the worship of the church. So much so that the church of Christ had a major split. In 1906 “The Christian Church” was recognized as a definite new religious group because of their use of instruments in their worship. Of course there were many other differences but this was the most recognized and notorious differenced in the two groups.

            But the “non-instrumental” church of Christ stood firm and strong for many years after this split. Unfortunately, in recent times a new group has begun to emerge. A group who would consider themselves highly educated and progressive. It has been their mission to introduce the instrument into our worship services and to do it under the cloak of superior education and learning. They love to quote the Greek and they can do it so effectually that the common member of the church just has no defense or counter explanation for their explanations.

            In using the words found in Ephesians 5:19 (which have been so clear for more than the first 1000 years of the church), a search was done and a new definition of the Greek word “psallo” was used to alter the Scripture to make it appear to authorize the use of instruments in the worship of the church. There are several definitions for the Greek word “psallo”. It can mean “make melody” (which is how it is translated in Eph. 5:19) but there are other definitions for the word as well, depending on the context where it is used. One definition can be “pluck strings”. Now we know that would not harmonize with the first part of the verse that says “Speaking to one another”. There are no plucking strings when you are using the voice. And yet the “well educated teachers of false doctrine” have been very successful in convincing the members of the church that the proper use of the Greek word psallo in Ephesians 5:19 means “to pluck strings” that they are trying to find any way they can to make “pluck strings” “fit” this context and still forbid the use of musical instruments. Unfortunately they have fell in to the trap set by the false teachers and they have defined psallo as to pluck the “strings of the heart”. This becomes indefensible since the heart has no strings.

            The following is an example of why this sleight of hand with the definition of words is not proper exegesis of the Scriptures.

            Suppose there was a recipe written in a book that said “This cake is made from scratch”.

We all know what scratch means in this context. But there are many definitions of scratch. It could mean “to scratch off a list”. It could also mean “a sports game without using a handicap”. It could even mean “a scratch on your car’s paint”. There are many other definitions of the word scratch depending on the context where you use it.

            Now, suppose 2000 years went by and someone in another country with a different language tried to translate this recipe. How would they translate this word “scratch”? Suppose they picked the wrong definition. They might say,”This recipe was never used for cooking” because it was “scratched off of the list” and never used.

            This is just a simple example and the consequences of a mistake here does not make much difference in anyone’s life. Not so with the definition of the Greek word psallo. This mistake creates a major problem for many people’s lives. It has the potential of altering the worship of the church which God, Himself, has designed.

            Isn’t it amazing that during the first 1000 years of the church, Christian people had the same words of Scripture we have today and it was written in the original Greek language which they spoke and understood very well. And although the Bible was not written using numbered verses like we see today, the same words were there in Ephesians 5:19 and they were well understood by the church. The Greek word Psallo was there and it was very well understood that the music designed by God to be presented by the worship of the church was to be “make melody” using the voice and acapella vocal singing. The other definitions of the word psallo were never a problem and the church did not translate psallo to mean “pluck strings”. It has taken another 1000 years for men to decide that they were more educated about the Greek language than the original church and to “place the meaning of psallo as plucking strings into the Scriptures of Ephesians 5:19”.

            Don’t let someone deceive you by placing meanings on Greek words that do not fit the context.

Carl O. Cooper

Breast Feeding in Public

By Carl O. Cooper

The new culture of breast feeding in public worship assemblies

            The culture of our land seems to change almost as fast as a runaway freight train.

            Can anyone tell me why these changes are always against and opposite of what our Bible tells us is proper acceptable behaviour? Specifically, I would like to address the changing culture of female nakedness in our world today. Now for a person who believes in God and believes that the Bible is the word of God, proper and acceptable behaviour is explained to us in God’s Word. But new statistics are showing that among the millennium age group in the USA, only 27% are saying that they are confident that God exists. Is it any wonder that the females of that age group are consistently flaunting their nakedness any way they can?  I don’t really think I need to explain this because it is open and notorious for anyone to see, even in church environments. Some of the pants women wear are about as revealing as just having a coat of paint or make up covering the skin. The tops are becoming exceptionally revealing and clothes are designed to attract the sexual attention of men. The styles and culture make nakedness acceptable and approved almost everywhere. And with this behaviour comes other behaviour that is kindled and fueled and fanned into flame because immoral behaviour is becoming publically acceptable.

            For many years and for the most of my lifetime, Christian women did not allow their babies to breast feed in public places. Christian women believed the Bible when it told them about modest behaviour. Even though in the past breast feeding was the natural way babies were fed, women were modest and refused to openly display their nakedness for others to see. Even in the home, the mothers did not openly display their nakedness in front of their other children. Of course there were exceptions. There have always been women who had no regard for moral behaviour, but I am excluding them. These types of women are why our culture started changing in the first place. But as a general rule, American women did not publically and openly breast feed their babies. But that is beginning to change.

            Why did our culture exist with the past modesty as it was?

            In most of the religious history of the world where the religion has some connection with God and the story of creation, women did not expose their breasts in public, even to feed their babies. The Moslems do not and neither do the Jews. Christian religion has long had mothers cover themselves and feed their babies in private. But that has not been so with pagan and uncivilized religions or with cultures who are influenced with either no religion or a false religion. Many primitive cultures even practice scantily clad and fully naked people exposing themselves in public with no understanding or shame. But this pagan style of culture does not justify this practice or make it right.

            The Bible defines “nakedness” in many places but the most common and well known is in Genesis, chapter 3. You will remember the events described. Adam and Eve had eaten from the tree of “The knowledge of good and evil” and their eyes were opened to discern what was good and what was evil and one of the first things they learned was that they were naked. It was obvious to them that public nakedness was evil and sinful. So they sewed fig leaves together to make themselves “aprons”. As God views their clothing He does not accept their style of “aprons” and makes them more appropriate clothes out of animal skins. The Bible refers to this new covering as a “coat”. God’s clothing was designed to cover the breast and the thighs and properly covers their “nakedness”.

                The reason I am pointing out this comment is what I have witnessed in churches in the recent past. It is becoming common place to see modern young women breast feed their babies in the public auditorium during church. They still have some reservations about it for now because they “lightly” cover themselves with a cloth. This is a “beginning’ of a new culture if it is not addressed. It will very likely lead to a new culture if it continues.

            But who among us has the strength and courage to make a public comment to a congregation that would address this “new culture” and point out the problems of public nakedness? Is it you? I sense your fear and I too have a fear of how a sermon like that would be received. Any statement made against modern culture is perceived as “politically incorrect” and immediately draws criticism from some of the people who have accepted the behaviour as normal. It also draws criticism from some who thinks your comments offend a family member or a loved one. Many times these feeling override the importance of sound words found in the Bible.

            I have written this article for anyone to use. This is a somewhat gentle way of spreading this information in the hopes that it will be accepted without offence to anyone.

Carl O. Cooper

            Have you considered this? Where did the very first matter come from? Or you might say where did the very first atom or perhaps the very first and smallest atomic particle originate?

            For years men have understood and proved that matter and energy conform to certain laws and rules that have been studied and accepted by scientists, mathematicians, astronomers, astrophysicists, nuclear physicists and many others.  

            The first law of thermodynamics states that “the total energy of a closed and isolated system is constant. It can be transformed from one form to another, such as matter to energy, but can neither be created or destroyed”.

            The rules by which matter and energy behave are fixed and cannot be altered by any known force that exists in our world. Matter and energy can neither be created or destroyed by any force that exists in our natural world.

            So, once again, where did the very first bit of matter and energy come from?

            Some would answer; the big bang started it all.

            But that’s no good. Matter would have had to exist before the big bang, if we concede that there was a big bang. So that answer just does not satisfy the question of where did the very first bit of matter and energy come from?

            Well, there are only two possible answers to the question that will satisfy the mystery with any logical sense, whatsoever.

            The first answer could be that matter and energy are self existent and have always existed and they had no beginning.

            Now that answer takes quite a leap of faith, wouldn’t you agree?  Would you believe that there are people who give that reasoning as their explanation for the beginning of matter and energy? Those same people will deny that there is a God because they would claim that a belief in an all powerful God requires an illogical faith in something that does not make sense. And yet these people will deny the first law of thermodynamics and cling to an illogical belief that matter and energy have always existed in a closed system without an external force supplying the energy to start the process at the beginning.

            I think everyone will agree that this second explanation makes much more sense than the first one does.

            We know that matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed in a closed system. And due to this law of thermodynamics only an external force can add energy into a closed system. We also know that it is impossible for “something to come from nothing”. So, logic would have to conclude that there is something that is self existent. We also know that matter and energy had a beginning. We can conclude that by the second law of thermodynamics, which states that “the total entropy of a closed system either increases or remains the same”. In other words, energy and matter in a closed system either stay the same or they wind down. Evidence proves that our universe is winding down. Fire burns out and the form of matter and energy changes over time. But remember, matter and energy can change form but they cannot be created or destroyed by any natural force in our natural world.

            So for matter and energy to appear in our world and have a beginning, they would have had to be introduced into our closed system universe. That would take an outside force. Our world includes the depths of space and all parts of the universe where we live.

            So if we include the entire universe as our closed system, what is left?

            The only thing left is something from outside our universe.

            Now where is such a place as this?

            The only logical conclusion would be that this force is something from outside the universe where we exist. And what’s more, this force would have to be a “self existent force”.

            Does this begin to sound like a description of Almighty God?

            Of course the diehard skeptic will say that this requires just too much faith to believe. But hold on here. What about the scientific view that “matter and energy are self existent”? If something is required to be self existent then why is hard to believe that God exists as self existent?

            When you compare the logical reasoning process of these two explanations for the beginning of matter and energy, does the explanation of a self existent God just make more reasonable, logical sense? I think we can all agree that it does. Especially when we can see beyond doubt that our universe is created with a beautiful and complex universal design. Only a designer could have created such a marvelous design.

Carl O. Cooper

An Elder’s Qualifications

Faithful Children

Titus 1:6

 ⁶ If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or        unruly. 

            When we consider the qualifications for an elder concerning his children, we see that they are to be faithful and they are not to be accused of riot or unruly. Seems simple enough, right. But no, men still have a strong desire to soften these requirements in order to appoint men as elders who linger on the edge of these requirements due to the behaviour of their children.

            But how can anyone skirt around these qualifications? They seem self explanatory.

            Well the first and most common way is to try and confuse the issue with the word “faithful”. Faithful is an English word and it has several meanings. But, remember, the word faithful is not in the Bible. The Bible was written in Greek and the Greek word used here is “pistos”. This text says that a man’s children must be “pistos”. The meaning of the word pistos can be Belief, Believe, Believers, Faithful, Faithfully, Faithless, Sure—Strong’s Talking Greek & Hebrew Dictionary

                Now the English word “faithful” carries these English meanings; Loyal, True, devoted, true-blue, unswerving, precise, exact, unerring.

            Now instead of trying to accept the meanings of the Greek word, “pistos”, which may not allow some men to serve as elders, it is easier to select one of the meanings of the English word “faithful” and it softens the requirement for an elder’s qualifications.

            Now if you use the definitions of the word “pistos” an elder’s children will have to be believers. This means that an elder’s children will have to be “Christians”. But if you select a definition of the English word “faithful” they will only need to be “loyal”.

            But even this definition, “loyal” carries with it a problem for elder’s children. When we consider that an elder’s responsibility to the church is to try to make sure that the members remain faithful Christians and their souls are safe and saved, to what could any of his children be “loyal” to that would have any bearing on his qualifications as an elder? It’s pretty simple, isn’t it? It sure doesn’t mean that they are loyal to a political cause, or saving the environment. No, that definition just won’t do when we are describing an elder’s children.

            Without even half trying, anyone can see and come to a logical conclusion that an elder’s children are to be believing Christians.

            But the problem doesn’t end here.

            Suppose everyone accepts this and accepts that an elder’s children must be believing Christians ….. but …. Not every one of them has to be a Christian. Some of his children can be “unfaithful” or perhaps they have never been baptized at all. You see, the text does not specifically say “all of his children”.

            But hold on here just a minute. Here is what the text says; having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.

            Now think about that phrase for a minute. Whatever applies to the “faithful children” also applies to the children about “riot and unruly”. Now let’s apply the same standard to both cases. Can a few of an elder’s children be involved in unruly behaviour? Would it be acceptable for 1 or 2 of his children to be involved in vandalism or immoral behaviour? How about a permissive daughter caught up in drinking and carousing the clubs? Tell me, where is the line in behaviour where his children cannot cross? Suppose they refuse to submit to Christ and have no respect for the church? I think this is all clear enough, don’t you?

            An elder’s children are required to be faithful Christians, every one of them!

Carl O. Cooper

I Was Called By God

            All my life I have heard people make claims that they received special “calls from God” telling them to engage in some “special service” that God has chosen them to do. Some of these claims are said to instruct them to become a preacher or, in some cases, to start up another religious denomination. One man told me he received his call while he was mowing his yard on his riding mower and God told him how to start a new type of church and even the name he was to call it.

            This “fantasy” about people receiving a special message from God has been going on for as long as men have been practicing some kind of religious activity. These calls come in mysteriously reported ways. Some people actually report that they received their call by hearing the actual voice of God. Some claim to hear God’s voice in an audible way and some even claim to see visions or have visits by Angels with special instructions. However, these types of claims are rarer than the common report that God spoke to them through some form of a “Spiritual feeling” or with some form of what they interpreted as a “vision” especially created for them.  In most cases the person contributes his “special feelings” to the influence of the Holy Spirit giving him a special message as a “call to service”.

            Let me say right up front that these “special calls” are “imagined fantasy”, and these ideas are not supported by any such claims by the Bible. The reports of special feelings that someone claims comes from the Holy Spirit and special “calls from God” are produced by a lack of understanding of the Holy Scriptures and a personality highly influenced with superstition and imagination. To many people, religion is a mixture of fantasy, magic, superstition, and imagination.

            Look at what the Bible has to say about being called.

            John 6:43-45

            ⁴³ Jesus therefore answered and said to them, “Do not murmur among yourselves. ⁴⁴ No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day. ⁴⁵ It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught by God.’ Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me.

            Pay close attention to what this says. These are the words of Jesus.

            First, He says; ⁴⁴ No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him;

            Now people read these words with all kinds of preconceived world views.

            Someone who has been fed a diet of the doctrines of “Calvinism” would right away connect this to the false teaching of John Calvin in support of his teaching that “God has selected those who will be saved and those who will be lost long before they are born and those who are the ‘Elect’ will be sent an ‘irresistible” call to develop faith and receive salvation”. In Calvinism this is the doctrine of “predestination” and “irresistible grace”.

            Don’t be misled here by a famous name in religious history. Calvin is no more worthy of your respect for his views than any other false teacher you could name. Perhaps less due to the number of souls he has led astray by his false ideas and doctrines.

            If Calvin was right, then there would be no point in trying to send missionaries to teach the lost because there would be no way that any teaching would help them. After all, if God has already decided their fate and there is nothing anyone can do to alter this decision, why teach anyone?

            But one simple verse that we all know shows Calvin’s ideas to be completely wrong.

            John 3:16

            ¹⁶ For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

            And how about this one?

            Acts 10:34-35

            ³⁴ Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: ³⁵ But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

            Anyone, and that includes you and me and anyone else can read these verses and see clearly that John Calvin is flat out wrong. Anyone can be saved.

            And yet in spite of this, men have been so influenced with Calvin’s false doctrines that many, many other false doctrines and misconceptions have been invented just to try and align them with Calvin’s views.

            One such misconception is the view that men will receive “personal calls” for special service from God and the Holy Spirit. This springs from Calvin’s views that those of the “elect” will receive an irresistible call from God to become saved. Don’t fall for this, it is just not true.

            Look at these verses in John 6 again.

            John 6:43-45

            ⁴³ Jesus therefore answered and said to them, “Do not murmur among yourselves. ⁴⁴ No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day. ⁴⁵ It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught by God.’ Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me.

            Jesus says that “no one can come to Me unless the Father draws him”.

            And then He tells us how this is done.

            1. God gives the message to the prophets and teachers to write down.

            2. God teaches men with these words.

            3. Those who hear and learn come to Jesus.

            So there you have it. The call to come to Jesus and to salvation comes from the words of God written in the Holy Scriptures. This text says that is how it is done and there is no other way.

            This is backed up by the words in 2 Thessalonians 2:14-15;

            ¹⁴ Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. ¹⁵ Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

            So we are called by the Gospel. We are taught the Gospel by word or epistle.

            Now this is what the Bible has to say about being called. There is much more we could list but if this is not enough then I doubt you could be persuaded as to the truth of this misconception. Superstition and fantasy and even personality disorders come into play here and these are hard to unteach. I met a lady once who was convinced that her cat could literally talk to her and have a conversation. This lady was serious about this cat. There was no point in trying to tell her that this was not true.

Carl O. Cooper

The Woman Caught in Adultery #2

            The Scribes and Pharisees came to Jesus with sleight of hand and trickery in an effort to trick Jesus by either destroying His reputation with the Jewish population or having Him transgress the Roman law. The trick they used was ingenious. This was such a well thought out political move that there appeared to be no escape for Jesus no matter what He did. It went like this;

            John 8:3-6

            3 Then the scribes and Pharisees brought to Him a woman caught in adultery. And when they had set her in the midst, 4 they said to Him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in adultery, in the very act. 5 Now Moses, in the law, commanded us that such should be stoned. ⁶ This they said, testing Him, that they might have something of which to accuse Him.

            Now the problem is this; and there seems to be no escape for Jesus to get out of this dilemma.

            Leviticus 20: 9-19 

            ¹⁰ The man who commits adultery with another man’s wife, he who commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress, shall surely be put to death

            Exodus 20:13-16

            ¹³ Thou shalt not kill. ¹⁴ Thou shalt not commit adultery. ¹⁵ Thou shalt not steal. ¹⁶ Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

            What the scribes and Pharisees said was true.

            The Law of Moses did say that someone caught in adultery should be put to death. They had that right and this woman was caught “in the very act”. And for hundreds of years that law would have been carried out without question. Jesus could have said, “Go ahead and stone her and put her to death because this is the correct punishment under the Jewish Law.

            Now this was the trickery part by the scribes and the Pharisees. For you see, the Jews were under captivity by the Romans. Now the Romans were somewhat lenient with the people under their captivity rule, and they allowed the indigenous people to practice their own religions and to keep in place their Priests and religious leaders and even used some of the people to collect Roman taxes and even made some of the Jews governors and rulers over their own people.

            But one thing the Jews could not do was place their own laws over the law of the Romans. The Jews did not have the authority to administer capital punishment.

            It was because of this Roman law that the Jews were stopped from killing Jesus themselves when He was sent to the cross. The Jewish leaders took Jesus to Pilot in order to have Him condemned to death by the Romans and then persuaded the Romans to execute Him.

            If the Jews had been free to kill Jesus themselves He would have been stoned to death for the trumped up and false charge of blaspheme. But to do that would have brought wrath and judgment on them because of the Roman law.

                        Now Jesus understood this Roman law perfectly. And He knew full well what these Scribes and Pharisees were up to. There appeared to be no way out for Jesus because to follow the Law of Moses would have caused the Roman authorities to arrest Him. He could not violate the Roman law. And yet if He should say to the people to follow the Roman law then He would have lost credibility with the average people in the Jewish community. So what could He do? The scribes and the Pharisees thought they had Him this time and it seemed to be a sure thing for them and they were sure they had Him trapped.

            But Jesus had a plan of His own.

            How could anyone get out of this trap? Could you have escaped?

            Jesus was way too smart to be caught with the trickery of the Scribes and Pharisees.

            Jesus understood their sinful hearts and He used this amazingly brilliant plan. The intelligence Jesus used here was remarkable and astonishingly clever. Here’s what He did.

            John 8:8-10

             But Jesus stooped down and wrote on the ground with His finger, as though He did not hear. ⁷ So when they continued asking Him, He raised Himself up and said to them, “He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first.” ⁸ And again He stooped down and wrote on the ground. ⁹ Then those who heard it, being convicted by their conscience, went out one by one, beginning with the oldest even to the last. And Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. ¹⁰ When Jesus had raised Himself up and saw no one but the woman,  

            Jesus turned the table on those who were attempting to trick Him.

            Now it was their turn to squirm and struggle and try to find a way out for themselves. Suddenly they find themselves in the same predicament they tried to place Jesus in. Now it’s their time to make a decision about what to do. Should they follow the Jewish Law and stone her? If so, the Romans would be after them. Should they imply to the Jewish people that even as Jewish religious leaders they would ignore the Law of Moses? They were lost for an answer to this situation they found themselves in, and so, one by one, they just left.

            What a Savior we have in Jesus Christ!

            Who else could have handled this situation with the remarkable ability He used here?

            We serve a highly intelligent God.

            Now for generations our brethren in the church have struggled with this story and these actions by Jesus. Why did Jesus let this woman go?

            At first, the temptation is just to explain this by saying Jesus just forgave this woman purely because of His love for mankind. And in His compassion for her He just forgave her of her sin of adultery. But hold on here, what about the Jewish Law? Should we explain this by having Jesus discard the Law and cast it aside?

            So another explanation has been included by some to overcome this problem of discarding the Law. It is said that the Jewish Law condemned both the man and the woman to death by stoning. It is further explained that because the Scribes and Pharisees did not bring the man as well, then they were in violation of the Law and therefore had no case against this woman.

            And just to add credibility to this explanation, it has also been said that the Scribes and the Pharisees did not bring any witnesses to Jesus to condemn this woman caught in adultery.

            But let’s examine each of these claims and see where a close examination leads us. First let’s consider the intelligence of the Scribes and Pharisees. These were highly intelligent men. Their motive was to trap Jesus with a dilemma that was so well planned out that Jesus had no escape no matter what decision He made. These men also knew the Jewish Law. Would it seem reasonable to you, at all, that these men would bring this woman to Jesus in order to trap Him and be so carelessly prepared and planned that they would make obvious mistakes in their own Law in which they were the experts? The Law required witnesses. Do you think these men would not know that? With a well planned trap like they had set for Jesus, would it really sound reasonable that they would forget the witnesses? No, not likely. This woman was caught “in the very act”. Someone caught her. There are your witnesses. Do you really think the Scribes and Pharisees would forget to bring them along?

            Also it is said by some who explain these verses about the woman caught in adultery that because the Scribes and Pharisees did not bring along the man who was guilty of adultery then this violated the Jewish Law to the point that they themselves were guilty of sin. This is said to explain why Jesus said to them, “let him who is without sin cast the first stone”.

            Now it is true that the Law applied to men and women alike when they were guilty of adultery. There is nothing in the Law, however, that says that a man and a woman have to be stoned at the same time. Consider this scenario; 1. Could this have been a married woman who committed adultery with an unmarried man? 2. Could this have been a married woman who committed adultery with more than one unmarried man or perhaps multiple married men?

            How many men would have had to be stoned and at what intervals would they be convicted of this crime. Would it be likely that this woman would have been locked up in a jail while these other men were tried and convicted? I understand that there were no jails involved in enforcing the Jewish Law about adultery. There does not seem to be an alternate sentence.

            There was no alternant punishment or lesser sentence under the Jewish Law for someone caught in adultery. Even if the person repented of their sin, the punishment was still there to be carried out.

            No, there was no law that required a man and a woman to be stoned together. This woman could have been stoned by herself under the Jewish Law.

            But what about the possibility that Jesus just forgave this woman without regard to the Law? Well, Jesus did have the power to forgive sins if He chose to do so. And in this particular case He did tell the woman to go her way and sin no more. By saying these words Jesus acknowledged that what she had done was a sin.

            Now if Jesus chose to forgive this woman, there is an example and a precedent in the Bible of another case where someone guilty of adultery was pardoned without being stoned. Consider the case of David and Bathsheba. This was a case of blatant adultery committed by David and the married wife of Uriah. And not only were they guilty of adultery but David committed murder to try to cover it up. How did David and Bathsheba escape being stoned under the Law of Moses? Can someone tell me what Law God used to pardon them and prevent them from having to face the penalty of stoning? And if such a law existed, could it have been used by anyone else? We know that David repented of this sin, but what about others who repented. I would venture to say that almost everyone who was faced with the death of stoning repented before they died. But I know of no law that would overturn the penalty of stoning for adulterers. Yet God forgave David and Bathsheba and prevented them from having to endure the penalty of the Law. I can only conclude that God, through His mercy and kindness and His infinite authority over His creation forgave them out of His own good pleasure. And yes, Jesus had the authority to do the same if He chose to do so. But, this would be just the thing that would help the Scribes and Pharisees close the trap they had set for Jesus.

            But, thankfully, Jesus was way too smart to fall into their trap.

            Now the end result was this; Jesus, Himself, was not a witness according to the qualifications of the Law and all the witnesses had left. Jesus did not condemn her as a proper witness under the Law and all the proper witnesses were gone and so no one was left to condemn her properly under the Jewish Law.

            Jesus’ actions were a masterful and marvelous way for Him to preserve the integrity of the Jewish Law and at the same time start the process of issuing in the “New Covenant” which would give all people a way to have their sins forgiven and would provide grace and mercy to the sinner. And at the same time He did not violate the law of the Romans.

            These actions by Jesus turned the tables on the Scribes’ and Pharisees’ diabolical plan design to trap Jesus with a well thought out plan of sleight of hand and trickery. Jesus was way too smart to be trapped with political trickery.

Carl O. Cooper

ALL OF LIFE IS WORSHIP

“A MODERN DOCTRINE BEING TAUGHT IN SOME CHURCHES OF CHRIST”

By Carl O. Cooper

            This doctrine is not new by any means among the denominational world, and it is gaining ground rapidly and being spread throughout the churches of Christ. Many look to Romans 12:1 in the NIV Bible for their text on this subject, and feel it teaches them that all of life is worship. It is true that all of our life is to be spent in a Holy lifestyle that reflects our Holy attitude in our service to God. And we should never lose sight that our life is a mirror to our heart, but everything we do is not worship to God.

            There is a reason that this doctrine is being taught. It is not an accident by those who have invented it. This is a way to teach that there is no correct pattern in the Bible for the worship of the Church. This is very destructive. If there is no correct pattern for worship in the Bible, then any form of worship is correct. If this teaching is correct, then denominational religion carries as much credibility as the Church of Christ. This is the purpose behind this doctrine. It is a way to justify other religious practices and to copy or extend fellowship to other religions.

            This doctrine is being taught and seems to be catching on partly because of a misunderstanding of scripture due to the wording of some modern translations of the bible.

                Rom 12:1    Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God– this is your spiritual act of worship.      (NIV)

                Rom 12:1    I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service.       (NKJ)

                This teaching is rebellious against the very foundation principles of all we read in the Bible. It follows that if all of life is worship then there is really no true pattern of worship designed by God as we have always affirmed in the church of Christ. This teaching brings all denominational practices up to the same level as the true church. That in effect would allow pure fellowship with all denominations and give credibility to their practices. If this were true then the very foundation of the church of Christ crumbles and becomes untrue and so the church of Christ ceases to exist. We become “just another denomination”.

                Consider these verses;

                        Acts 8:27     so he arose and went. And behold, a man of Ethiopia, a eunuch of great authority under Candace the queen of the Ethiopians, who had charge of all her treasury, and had come to Jerusalem to worship,      (NKJ)       (Note that it was a special act…to go somewhere to worship God)

                Gen 22:5    And Abraham said to his young men, “Stay here with the donkey; the lad and I will go yonder and worship, and we will come back to you.”    (NKJ)     (Note that worship was a special act)

            You will notice in these verses that worship was to be a specific act done by the worshipper and done at a specific place and time. And not only was worship to be done at a specific place and time, but it was, and still is, to be done in a specific way and manor. We are told in John 4:24 that we are to worship in “truth” (according to God’s instructions) and “spirit” (sincere worship from the heart). (Carl notes .. However, worship can also be spontaneous and unplanned)

But no matter how you worship God, “all of life” is not worship.

John 4:24     “God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.”    (NKJ)

                (Our worship must be from the heart and be sincere………And in accordance with God’s design)

            Any worship we present to God must be sincere and from the heart and it also must be according to the truth of the Scriptures; according to the way God has designed for us to worship Him. For instance, we cannot create a statue to represent God and bow down to it as though it was God in our mind. We cannot worship God with sacrifices and we cannot worship God with chants and by burning incense. By the same logic we cannot worship God using instrumental music. (See Carl’s book about instrumental music for an explanation for this).

            So it doesn’t matter if you are worshipping God during a planned worship service at a special place and a special time, or if you suddenly and without any plan fall down and worship God, you still must worship God “in truth” according to the instructions He has given us in the Scriptures.

            To worship in spirit is to involve the emotions into your worship. You must be sincere and you must include your conscience and feelings into what you are doing. There are times when you may be overwhelmed by your emotions because of events that can happen in your life. Many times your first thoughts are to turn to God as your ally and your friend. Sometimes you desperately need God’s help. In these desperate times most people seek God through worship. But even in these times you must worship God in spirit and in truth.

            There are many examples in the Bible of “spontaneous worship”. I can furnish a list of these Scriptures for anyone who would like one.

            ccooperapp@aol.com

Carl O. Cooper