March 3, 2002 Volume 3 Number 9
|
The New Way 2 Let us continue to bring to light the differences between the Old and New Covenants as God has made the distinction and declared the Old to be obsolete. A New Name "Israel" was the name of God's people under the Old Law. In 2Kings 17:34 we read, “…the LORD had commanded the children of Jacob, whom He named Israel.” But the prophets spoke of a new name. The prophet Isaiah said, “The Gentiles shall see your righteousness, and all kings your glory. You shall be called by a new name, which the mouth of the LORD will name…” (Isa 62:2, 3). Peter tells us in the NT that we, “…do well to heed…” the prophetic word (1Pet 1:19). This new name of course is “Christian.” In the latter part of Acts 11:26 we read, “And the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch.” The apostle Paul and Peter endorsed this new name. In Acts 26:28-29 we find this conversation. “Then Agrippa said to Paul, "You almost persuade me to become a Christian." And Paul said, "I would to God that not only you, but also all who hear me today…” And Peter says, “Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in this matter” (1 Pet 4:16). Both men approved of the new name. A New System of Worship There are a number of changes in this new system of worship. A new day is to be observed. Under the Old Law Israel was to observe the Sabbath. In Deut 5:15 we read, “And remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and that the LORD your God brought you out from there by a mighty hand and by an outstretched arm; therefore the LORD your God commanded you to keep the Sabbath day.” However this was abolished (Col 2:14-17). The new day of worship is designed to remember Christ, it is referred to as the Lord’s Day (Rev 1:10) it is on the first day of the week-Sunday (1Cor 16:1,2; Acts 20:7). As part of the worship a new supper is to be observed as established by our Lord (Mt 26:26-28) and new sacrifices are to be offered. Peter writes, “you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” (1Peter 2:5). There will also be a new praise offering given. Compare the two. First, in Lev 7:12 we read, “If he offers it for a thanksgiving, then he shall offer, with the sacrifice of thanksgiving, unleavened cakes mixed with oil, unleavened wafers anointed with oil, or cakes of blended flour mixed with oil.” Than, Heb 13:15, “Therefore by Him let us continually offer the sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to His name.” This is accomplished by prayer (Phil 4:6) and by making melody in our hearts (Eph 5:19; Col 3:16). New Promises And finally, there are new promises. While the Old Law had a purpose: “Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith.” (Gal 3:24) “…we are no longer under a tutor” (Gal 3:25). It was not perfect (Heb 7:19). Note Heb 8:6, “But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises.” The New Covenant is founded on better promises (Heb 11:39, 40; 12:24). Abel's sacrifice while approved for His day did not provide for salvation. Man can now partake of greater blessings. Some of these include the remission of our sins (Heb 8:12; 10:4) and eternal life beyond death (1Jn 2:25). CONCLUSION: This new way is a living way. The writer of Hebrews states, “Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way which He consecrated for us, through the veil, that is, His flesh, and having a High Priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water” (Heb 10:19-22); consecrated by a life giving spirit (1Cor 15:45). With the evidence before we cannot afford to miss it. Matthew writes, “Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it” (Matt 7:13-14). We must look in the right place in order to find it. Read your Bibles and make application of God’s entire council.
Attending worship services faithfully is of the utmost importance. Many strong Christians have become weak, and many weak Christians have totally fallen away, because at some point they began to miss worship services and Bible study on a regular basis. A Christian’s attendance of services has been rightfully declared by many, as a thermometer indicating one’s fervor for the Lord. One cannot truthfully say he is a faithful child of God if he does not attend worship services regularly. Consider now the following reasons why we must attend worship services faithfully. The Hebrew writer penned the following passage giving us several reasons for not forsaking the assembly of the saints. "Let us consider one another to provoke unto love and good works; not forsaking our own assembling together, as the custom of some is, but exhorting one another; and so much the more, as ye see the day drawing nigh" (Hebrews 10:24-25). Our assembling together for worship services stimulates the brethren to love and good works, and exhorts and encourages us to greater Christian enthusiasm. It is important, because of the trials, temptation and heartaches we face each week as Christians, to assemble together at each opportunity so that we might be stimulated and encouraged, and to do the same for others. It is reassuring to be around those of "like precious faith" (2 Pet. 1:1). We all need encouragement, but we must attend worship services and Bible study to receive this precious privilege. Another reason we should attend worship services and Bible study faithfully is seen in Hebrews 10:25 – it is a command of God. Jesus said, "If ye love me, ye will keep my commandments" (John 14:15). Furthermore, we also need to remember, "For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous" (1 John 5:3). The Lord informs us that we must assemble at every opportunity with the saints. If this were the only reason for attending worship regularly – it would be enough. If you really love the Lord you will keep His commandments. Still another reason we should attend worship services regularly is that we must be a good example to others. Peter declared, "For hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, that ye should follow his steps" (1 Pet. 2:21). Jesus left us innumerable examples of how we should live. One of these examples is that He kept the Law of Moses perfectly, which included attending all of the different feasts and special days of the Jewish religion. We, too, learning from the example of Jesus, should regularly attend all of the worship services as well as all other gathering for the purpose of study and edification. We should do this to please God, but also to set good examples for others. Paul said that we are to be "an example of the believers, in word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity" (1 Tim. 4:12). What kind of example do you think we set for the non-believer by out apathetic attendance, or for the weak Christian? Not a good one I assure you. Would one consider a car faithful if it only starts every other time? Would you consider your spouse faithful if she cheated on your marriage once a month? Of course not! Then what makes us think that we can be faithful Christians if we are not attending worship services regularly? It is vital that we are faithful in attendance – our eternal destiny is hanging in the balances. We are not condemning those who are ill at home, or having to care for a sick loved one – we speak to those who have no reason for not coming other than being deficient in concern for spiritual matters. We love you and hope to see you in our next scheduled meeting time. CHEAP CHRISTIANITY If I were a non-Christian and dropped into the average church during a so-called revival and saw a fraction of the membership trying to get more recruits for the army of the Lord when most of the outfit had already gone AWOL I would conclude that Christianity is not what it is supposed to be or else we have been sold a cheap and easy brand -- inoculated with a mild form until we are almost immune to the real thing. CHURCH HISTORY: A
BIBLICAL VIEW The Ante-Nicene Age: Monarchianism I. Introduction Probably no controversy among so-called "Christians" has been waged so long, so bitterly, and so seemingly irresolvably as the controversy pertaining to the person, nature, and work of Christ. These issues have led to the recognition of a branch of theology known as Christology — which addresses itself to the relationship of the divine and human natures in Christ and His relationship to the Father and the Holy Spirit within the Trinity. Volumes have been written on this one aspect of the gospel alone, and a wide variety of Christological views have been adopted and advocated through the centuries. At the very core of the Christian's faith is his conception of the person, nature, and work of Christ. Therefore it behooves him to know what the Scriptures teach on these subjects and form his convictions accordingly. II. Three Christologies Logos" Christology "Logos" is the Greek term, translated "word," which John uses to refer to Christ who was God manifested in the flesh (Jn. 1:1,14; I Jn. l:1; Rev. 19:13). "Logos" Christology asserts that the one God is a trinity ("three in one") which consists of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Since the Son and the Holy Spirit emanate from the Father, they are subordinate to Him. Jesus had a two-fold nature — human and divine. However, Christ existed as part of the Godhead before, during, and after His incarnation. Tertullian (c. 150-225), who championed these views, had been a Carthaginian lawyer but was converted 190-195. About 200 he broke with the "Catholic" church and embraced Montanism. He was the first ecclesiastical writer of prominence to use Latin and thus became known as the "father of Latin theology." Dynamic Monarchianism Undoubtedly, Gnosticism's attacks upon the Christians' conceptions of the nature of Christ stimulated a more studious attention to this subject. However, the common believers had great difficulty in distinguishing between the concept of a Trinity and outright polytheism. Many of them found an alternative in Monarchianism, or Unitarianism, which asserted that God was only one being. The Monarchians were divided into two, quite different classes. The Dynamic Monarchians held that Jesus became the Son of God by adoption — that at His baptism the Christ, or the holy Spirit, or some divine power (Greek "dumanis"), descended upon Him. Some Dynamic Monarchians were unwilling to give Jesus any title to deity, while others said He became divine in some sense at His resurrection. Modalistic Monarchianism This second class of Monarchians held that the one God manifested Himself in three different modes, of which Christ was but one temporary manifestation . A main promoter of this type of thinking was a certain Sabellius who taught in Rome in the early Third Century. He taught that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one and the same. Father, "Son," and "Holy Spirit" are simply different names of the one God who manifested Himself in three different ways — the Father-lawgiver of the Old Testament, the incarnate Son, and the Holy Spirit who inspired the apostles. Sabellius was excommunicated in Rome but found large followings in North Africa and the East. After much controversy the West began to settle upon the Logos Christology, but the East continued in a divided state on these matters. Christological controversy would continue and would eventually prompt the emperor Constantine to summon the council of Nicea in 325. If you don't want the fruits of sin, stay out of the devil's garden. THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN HOMICIDE AND THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE Recent news accounts have related the story of a young unmarried couple charged with killing their newborn child before putting it into a trash bin. The prosecution is seeking the death penalty, reflecting society’s outrage at such acts. What news accounts fail to point out is that for all their lives, this young couple has been part of a society in which millions of women have killed their children whenever their children would have been an inconvenience to them. This couple simply waited a few minutes too long for the killing of their baby to be acceptable. If they had hired a hit man with a medical degree to kill the child before he left the womb, the young lady would simply have been exercising her precious "right to choose." In fact, the child could have been virtually born, having only his head remaining within the mother, and killing him would have been acceptable. To criminalize such a "partial birth" abortion would be an infringement on the mother’s "reproductive rights." But after the baby had moved a few inches farther, killing him became a heinous crime. Those few inches made the difference between a homicide and the woman’s right to choose. It is amazing what a premium pro-abortionists place on location. Whether or not one has the right to kill a child depends on where the child is located -- whether inside the womb or outside it. Those who wonder how parents could kill their newborn should ponder the social climate in which that young couple’s morals and values were formed. A society that has condoned the legalized killing of millions of babies should not be shocked when some develop a callousness toward the lives of infants. Anti-abortionists have long warned that the killing of children before birth would lead to an acceptance of killing children after birth, and that is virtually what is occurring in partial-birth abortions. It is a short step from devaluating the lives of babies in the womb to devaluating the lives of babies who have just left the womb. Those who have learned to accept the practice of killing the unborn for the mother’s convenience will have fewer qualms about killing their newborn for the mother’s convenience, for there is no logical difference between killing a child in one location and killing him after he has moved to a different location. We
hope you find this bulletin useful in your Bible study. 2
Sam 22:31
|
