That question of “what must we deny ourselves” is a valid one. First of all we must deny ourselves of “sinful pleasures.” We must not be lovers or servants of these pleasures (2Tim 3:4; Titus 3:3). In the parable of the sower, one of the hearts is described as a heart that chokes the Word of God out with, among others things, “pleasures of life” (Lk 8:14). Moses is a good example of self-denial. We read in Heb 11:24-26, “By faith Moses, when he became of age, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter, choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God than to enjoy the passing pleasures of sin, esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt; for he looked to the reward.” So Moses, when he was attained the years of manhood and responsibility, refused to be associated with the upper crust of society, the royal family of Egypt, but chose rather to be a part of the people of God. Moses gave up all the influence, power, money of the one of the most learned and great nations of the time. He gave up all the luxuries and honors of a royal court. He gave up being Pharaoh himself, someday. Why, because he looked to the future. Notice verse 25, he knew it was for a season. He knew it was for a finite period of time. If we are to "esteem the reproach of Christ" above the pleasures of this earth like Moses did, it will only occur when we deny self.

We must also deny “ungodliness.” Paul writes to Titus and states, “For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age” (Titus 2:11-12). Ungodliness leads to destruction: 1 Pet 4:18; 2 Pet 3:7 which is why we are admonished to shun things that lead to ungodliness: 2 Tim 2:16. Everything not commanded by God in the Scriptures may safely be placed under this head. It refers to the questions brought in that diverted from the word of God, caused division and strife. The things were to be shunned---because they would simply lead to further ungodliness. We also have the catchall verse that tells us to “Abstain from every form of evil” (1 Thess 5:22). What part of denial do you not understand!

Among those things we are to deny ourselves of, we can add to the list “worldly lusts” (Titus 2:11, 12; Cf. 1John 2:15-17). Paul writes, “For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age” (Titus 2:11-12). If we compare this we 1 Jn 2:15-17 which states, “Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world-- the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life-- is not of the Father but is of the world. And the world is passing away, and the lust of it; but he who does the will of God abides forever.” we find more and more guidance for godly living. We are to make no provision for the flesh (Rom 13:14), we are to walk in the spirit as opposed to the flesh (Gal 5:16), we must crucify the lust of the flesh (Gal 5:24) and we are to put to death the members, which are on the earth (Col 3:5).

Among these we are also to occupy a low station in life in other words, we are to deny “self-exaltation” Don't think yourself better than others (Rom 12:3; Phil 2:3; 2 Cor 10:18). The apostle Paul was a great example of this (1 Cor 15:9; Eph 3:8).

Basically we are to deny ourselves “anything that hinders” us from eternal life.

We must be willing to forsake all things: Lk 14:33. Even “life itself” To save our life is to lose it---to lose it is to save it (Mt 16:25-27). “For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it. For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul? For the Son of Man will come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He will reward each according to his works.” Whoever desires to attain spiritual eternal life, will lose his physical temporal life. Jesus then calls to their minds the figure of a balance, or scales, and puts the life or soul on one side and temporal things on the other; by this figure he shows that the soul or spirit of man is worth more than all things else. This point is forcfully made by the two questions he asks, Vs 26. “For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?” It would be foolish to give the whole world in exchange for a soul; a soul is worth more than all temporal things.

One legacy of the Protestant Reformation has been an ever-increasing proliferation of religious sects with their widely divergent and contradictory beliefs and practices. This is immensely disturbing to anyone who appreciates the New Testament injunction to Christ's disciples to be united (Jn. 17:20-23; I Cor. 1:10-13; Eph. 4:1-6). This was true also of various denominational preachers and other individuals around the end of the Eighteenth Century and the beginning of the Nineteenth Century. Their initial protests were primarily against denominational organizations and creeds which they viewed as contrary to the New Testament order and religious unity. Once this spirit of reform seized them and they tasted of the freedom, peace, and unity it brought they pressed forward in the elimination of other religious doctrines and practices which they found to be false in the light of newly-discovered principles. Indeed, they aspired to a "restoration of the ancient order" of the apostolic church of the New Testament, which they saw as not only desirable but also possible. For this reason the movement they inaugurated has been historically known as "the Restoration Movement."

At first unbeknownst to one another, these Restoration pioneers spearheaded prongs of a movement whose phenomenal growth and similarity of doctrine inevitably brought its various elements into contact and eventual union. It must not be thought that these pioneers arrived at a complete restoration of the ancient order or that all developed to an understanding of that ancient order at the same rate. They did not. However, their principles were right even if they were sometimes imperfectly applied. Under adverse circumstances they triumphed to the extent that by 1850 (less than fifty years since the beginning of the movement) they had succeeded in winning enough people to their cause to have the fourth largest church in the United States. They were courageous and conscientious men. Their story is interesting, informative, and inspiring. It is worth telling because it is so worth emulating.

As a result of the authoritarian control exercised by the hierarchy of the Methodist Episcopal Church certain preachers withdrew from its ranks. One of these was James O'Kelley (1735?-1826) who with others of kindred spirit in 1793 formed a confederation known as "Republican Methodists." One particular complaint which had led to their revolt was the power of the superintendent to assign preachers to their appointments without right of appeal (by the preachers) to the General Conference. The next year the Republican Methodists met in Surry County, Virginia and drew up an agreement, three points of which are particularly noteworthy: (1) to recognize Christ as the only head of the church, (2) to call themselves simply "Christians," and (3) to regard the Bible as their only creed and the sufficient rule of faith and practice. Though O'Kelley continued to cling to false religious practices, such as sprinkling, in some respects he was definitely faced in the direction of restoration.

In Vermont and New Hampshire just after the turn of the century two Baptist preachers, Elias Smith and Abner Jones, followed suit. They worked to establish "free" churches in New England, rejecting human creeds and all religious designations except that of "Christian." Like O'Kelley, they had far to go, but had also gone far.

About the time that Smith and Jones established their movement a Presbyterian preacher in Kentucky by the name of Barton W. Stone (1772-1844) began to have misgivings about the doctrines of his church. Presbyterian doctrine taught that men were totally depraved and unable to believe. If this were true, Stone asked himself, what good did it do to preach and persuade men to believe? He and others of similar sentiment began to preach the universality of the gospel and faith produced by the word of God as a condition of salvation. Withdrawing themselves from their Presbyterian presbytery, they formed the Springfield Presbytery in 1804. However, they soon concluded that there was no authority for such an arrangement and announced its self-dissolution in "The Last Will and Testament of the Springfield Presbytery." In it they also rejected creeds and the title, "Reverend," and supported congregational autonomy. Some years later Stone became convinced, and began to preach, that baptism was to be administered to the penitent believer for the remission of sins. Stone’s movement began to grow rapidly. In 1824 Stone and Alexander Campbell met for the first time and found that they stood on the same ground in rejecting human creeds, sectarianism, and unscriptural names and in accepting the universality of the gospel and baptism for the remission of sins. Groups from the Stone and Campbell movements began to meet together, and in 1831 a general meeting of leaders of both movements produced a recognition of fellowship between the two. Although his son is a more illustrious figure in Restoration history, Thomas Campbell preceded his son in spearheading the Restoration. Shortly after his arrival from Ireland, Campbell found himself in trouble with his Presbyterian superiors over his alleged false teaching. He withdrew from the Presbyterian Church and formed the "Christian Association of Washington" (Pennsylvania). Campbell had become convinced that human creeds were the cause of religious division and took as his guiding principal: "where the Bible speaks, we speak; where the Bible is silent, we are silent." In the light of this principle infant baptism was rejected. In 1809 Campbell wrote his famous "Declaration and Address" which set forth the views and aims of the Association.

Meanwhile, his family back in Ireland was making plans to join him in America. Alexander, his son, had broken away from the Presbyterian Church shortly before leaving school in Scotland for reunion with his father. However, after perusing his father's Declaration and Address, he happily found himself in substantial agreement with him. After a study of baptism, Alexander Campbell and others were immersed. Thereafter the Campbell's became associated with the Baptists, but the association proved to be too uncomfortable. In forthcoming years he achieved wide recognition for his remarkable abilities as a preacher, debater, writer, and college president. He edited the Christian Baptist and the Millennial Harbinger for many years. He is recognized as the outstanding figure in the Restoration movement.

Unto the church of my Lord in every locality, I am under solemn obligation to the extent of my ability: but unto my home congregation I am under special obligation.

1. I want my home congregation to radiate a wholesome influence in the community. Therefore I owe it the example of a good life. I must "live soberly, righteously and godly [Titus 1:12]." Matt. 5:13-16.

2. I want the strangers who enter the door of the meeting house to feel at home, to learn to love us, to return from time to time. They are our guests. I must entertain [that is, “receive with hospitality,” ] them. I owe it to them, and to the church to show myself friendly. I must not stand back and wait for others to greet them. This I must do, Heb. 13:2.

3. No congregation can make progress without faithful and efficient leaders. To a certain extent, the members of the church make or break their leaders. To the end that our leaders may be stronger and more efficient, I must give them my support. I must pray for them. As long as they are true men, I must not embarrass them in their work, 1 Tim. 5:19.

4. My home congregation has financial obligations which are due at regular intervals. Whether I give or do not give, these obligations must be paid. If it is right for my congregation to pay its obligations each week, it is right for me to give each week. Though circumstances may force me to be absent at times, my contributions should find their way to the treasury of the church, 1 Cor. 16:1-2.

5. I know that the very existence of my congregation depends upon the attendance of its members. In fact, the attendance is the life of the church. For this reason, I must attend the services -- all services I can. For all that I have, I would not have it said that my congregation perished because I would not attend the meetings, Heb. 10:25.

6. I want my home congregation to grow, to multiply in members. Therefore, I must set myself to the noble work of winning souls for Christ. This I can do by preaching and persuading; this I can do by persistent effort; this I can do by bringing them to our meetings.

7. My home congregation cannot thrive in a frigid atmosphere. I must not by my carelessness allow the church to become a place where hearts are chilled. I must make it a place where hearts are warmed. Therefore, I owe it my heart, the warmth of my life. I must forgive and forget.

8. Wishing to be honest, I must meet my obligations to the best of my ability. I must with the help that God gives, play my part in the incomparable work of building up the body of Christ.