Miracles (Part 1)

Posted on March 21, 2015 by Bryan Hodge

Miracles are a part of the Biblical record. They occur in both the Old Testament and in the New Testament. Jimmy Jividen listed the references to miracles in the Gospel accounts and New Testament record: (1) Matthew – general references to miracles, 10; specific miracles, 20; (2) Mark – general references to miracles, 6; specific miracles, 18. (3) Luke – general references, 6; specific miracles, 21; (4) John – general references to miracles, 7; specific miracles, 8. (5) Acts – general references to miracles, 10; specific miracles, 12. (6) Epistles – general references to miracles, 5 (Jimmy Jividen, Miracles From God or Man?, p. 25-65).

This series will look closely at the subject of miracles. In this part, we will define what a miracle is, and consider its purpose(s).

Definition

A miracle does not simply refer to the amazing. People sometimes speak of “the miracle of child-birth,” or a “miracle play” in sports. However, such is not how the Bible uses the term.

A miracle is God’s working on a plane above natural law. Wayne Jackson states it this way, “A miracle is a divine operation that transcends what is normally perceived as natural law (What Does The Bible Say About Miracles?, christiancourier.com). Stephen Wiggins has written, “A miracle, as used in the Bible, is an act of God wherein He supersedes or suspends His natural laws.   My good friend, Lockwood, is always bold enough to tell the Pentecostals to their face that he does not care how they define a miracle as long as they properly distinguish between the natural and the supernatural. Me thinks the brother is right on target. A miracle is not to be confused with a work of nature… Nor should a miracle be confused with a work of providence, which is an effect produced by a special act of God accomplished through natural means” (What is a Miracle?, Hammer & Tongs, May – June 1996, p. 5).

Let’s make a distinction. (1) Hannah prayed for a child, had marital relations with her husband, Elkanah, “and the LORD remembered her,” and she conceived (1 Samuel 1). This was not a miracle. It was God’s providence. However, Mary’s virgin conception (Matthew 1:23-25), and Sarah’s conception post-menopause (Genesis 18:11) were miracles. (2) Praying for food (Matthew 6:11) and receiving it through work (2 Thessalonians 3:10) is not a miracle. It may involve God’s providence. However, Jesus feeding the 5,000 with five barley loaves and two small fish (John 6) was a miracle. A miracle involves that which is naturally not going to happen, like raising the dead. (For more information on the difference between a miracle and providence see article entitled “The Providence of God”).

Purpose

The purpose of miracles was not purely for physical benefit. This is evident from the fact that Paul left Trophimus in Miletus sick (2 Timothy 4:20). Moreover, miraculous gifts were not used to heal Timothy’s stomach ailment. Instead, Paul advised him to – “No longer drink only water, but use a little wine for your stomach’s sake and your frequent infirmities” (1 Timothy 5:23). Paul requested three times that his “thorn in the flesh” be removed. Yet, no miracle was performed. Instead, he was told by the Lord – “My grace is sufficient for you” (2 Corinthians 12:9).

The purpose of miracles was not primarily about physical relief. This is evident from the Biblical record. The reason Jesus healed a paralytic man is stated – “that you may know that the son of man has power on earth to forgive sins” (Matthew 9:6). The reason Jesus healed the man born blind was – “that the works of God should be revealed in him” (John 9:3-4). These works bore witness that Jesus had been sent by the Father (cf. John 5:31, 33, 36). The reason Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead is stated – “that they may believe that You (the Father, B.H.) sent me” (John 11:41b-42 cf. 11:14-15). Yes, Jesus had compassion on people (Matthew 14:14; 15:32; 20:33-34; Mark 1:40-41; 5:19; 8:1-2; Luke 7:11-13). However, the purpose of miracles was not primarily about physical relief, for if it were, He would have instantly healed all the sick in the world, and emptied every cemetery. This, He did not do.

The purpose of miracles was not material gain. I have heard of those who say they will heal if enough money is paid. However, Jesus told the apostles: “Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out demons. Freely you have received, freely give” (Matthew 10:7-8).

The primary purpose of miracles in both the Old Testament and in the New Testament was revelation and confirmation of this revelation being from God. God told Moses that he would do miracles – “that they may believe that the LORD God… has appeared to you” (Exodus 4:1-5). God told Joshua that the waters of the Jordan would part, “That they may know that, as I was with Moses, so I will be with you” (Joshua 3:7-8 cf. Exodus 14). The widow of Zarephath proclaimed, after Elijah revived her son, “Now by this I know that you are a man of God, and that the word of the LORD in your mouth is the truth” (1 Kings 17:24). The miraculous works of Jesus did, testified that God sent Him (John 5:36 cf. 9:3-4). Nicodemus said to Jesus – “Rabbi, we know that You come from God; for no one can do these signs You do unless God is with him” (John 3:2). The resurrection of Jesus powerfully confirms Him and His message (Romans 1:4; Matthew 12:38-40). Jesus chosen witness had their message confirmed, “God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit” (Hebrews 2:1-4). “They went out and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them and confirming the word through the accompanying signs” (Mark 16:20). The message did not go forth in word alone. It went forth with power and much assurance (1 Thessalonians 1:5 cf. Romans 15:18-19).

Miraculous gifts edified the church (1 Corinthians 14:12). This edification came through revelation and inspired teaching (1 Corinthians 14:3, 6). Misusing the gifts of the tongues did not edify (1 Corinthians 14:17).

Once Confirmed, Always Confirmed

Once new revelation was miraculously confirmed, it stood confirmed. Jeremiah did not, for instance, work miracles to confirm the words of Moses. Once a message had been confirmed God considered the evidence sufficient. The rich man wanted a miracle. He wanted Lazarus to return from the dead to warn his brothers (Luke 16:27-28). He was told, “They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them… If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead” (Luke 16:29-31). In other words, the written message of Moses and the prophets were deemed sufficient warning. Jesus does not need to die and be resurrected in every generation. The evidence of His death, burial, and resurrection is sufficient for every generation subsequent to the cross. His death, burial and resurrection were once and for all (Hebrews 9:24-28; 1 Peter 3:18; Revelation 1:18).

Think of the implication. If revelation is complete (John 16:13; Jude 3), an if this message was confirmed in the first century (Hebrews 2:1-4), and if this messages stands as confirmed – once it has been confirmed, then where is the need for miracles today?

Objection

It is objected that Christians of Corinth possessed miraculous gifts (1 Corinthians 1:7; 12:1-14:40), and yet they had the testimony of Christ confirmed in them (1 Corinthians 1:6). Therefore, the message can be confirmed and miraculous gifts continue. This objection fails to consider that new revelation was still being revealed at this time  (1 Corinthians 13:9-10).

It is objected that miraculous gifts provide edification, exhortation, and comfort to the church (1 Corinthians 14:3, 6, 12). However, it should be kept in mind that these things were provided through revelation and inspired teaching (1 Corinthians 14:3, 6; 2 Timothy 4:2; 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18). The church still receives edification, exhortation, and comfort through the revealed word.

It is pointed out that God used supernatural power in creation (Genesis 1:1). Furthermore, supernatural power will be used in the resurrection to come (John 5:28-29). Therefore, miracles can serve some purpose other than revelation and confirmation. I agree there are special one-time miraculous events which occur without human agency. These include: The creation (Genesis 1:1); the conception of Mary (Isaiah 7:14); and the resurrection to come (John 5:28-29). [Though I would point out that creation does reveal and confirm our God (Psalm 19:1-4; Acts 14:17; Romans 1:20). Mary’s conception no doubt also revealed and confirmed God’s plan to at least some (Luke 1:26-56)]. These exception aside. The normal purpose of miracles in the Bible is revelation and confirmation. This is true whether the miracle was direct from heaven, or by human agency.

Posted in God's Providence, Miracles, Pentecostalism, Signs | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Christ: Our City of Refuge

Posted on March 18, 2015 by Bryan Hodge

The cities of refuge are mentioned several times in the Bible (Exodus 21:12-13; Numbers 35:9-34; Deuteronomy 4:41-43; 19:1-13; and Joshua 20:1-9).  Out of the forty-eight cities given to the Levites, six were designated cities of refuge, and they were: on the west side of Jordan – Kedesh, Shechem, and Kirjath Arba (Hebron); and on the East side of the Jordan – Golan, Ramoth, and Bezar.  These were cities of which those who had caused accidental death could flee for protection.

Today, according to book of Hebrews, Christ is our refuge (Hebrews 6:17-19).  Let us look, therefore, at some parallels that exist between these six cities and Christ.

Parallel #1: These cities were accessible to all who dwelt in the land (Joshua 20:9).  Even so, salvation today is accessible to all (Romans 1:16).

Parallel #2: Human activity (travel) was necessary to obtain physical salvation in these cities (Joshua 20:3).  Even so, human activity is still required for spiritual salvation (Acts 22:16; Philippians 2:12).

Parallel #3: There was salvation in no other cities.  Likewise, there is salvation in no other name (Acts 4:12) and in no other church (Ephesians 5:23 cf. Ephesians 4:4 cf. Ephesians 1:22-23; Acts 2:47).

Parallel #4: There is no mention of proxy running.  Each person had to personally flee for refuge.  Even so, each of us today must personally respond to Christ (Mark 16:15-16).

Parallel #5: The guilty party could not bribe his way out of the situation (Number 35:31-32).  Likewise, we cannot bribe our way out of hell, or into heaven (Matthew 16:26 cf. Proverbs 11:4).  Man cannot, in and of himself, earn salvation (Ephesians 2:8-9).

Parallel #6: Peace could be found within the gates of these cities.  Peace is through Christ Jesus (Romans 5:1; Colossians 1:19-23).

Parallel #7: One had to remain in one of these cities to continue in a saved state as long as the High Priest lived (Joshua 20:6).  In contrast, our High Priest lives forevermore (Hebrews 7:23-25).  We must therefore continue faithfully in Him forevermore (Revelation 2:10; 14:13; 1 John 1:7).

Posted in Jesus, Plan of salvation, Type/Antitype | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Holy Spirit: The Helper

Posted on March 16, 2015 by Bryan Hodge

The Holy Spirit is referred to as the “Comforter” (KJV, ASV), the “Helper” (NASB, NKJV, McCord’s, ESV), the “Advocate” (Estes’ Better Version), or the “Counselor” (NIV, note: I do not recommend this version) four times [(John 14:16; 14:26; 15:26; 16:7).  This same original word is used of Jesus once (1 John 2:1).  It is there translated “Advocate” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NKJV, Estes’, ESV)].  What is intended?  In what way would the Holy Spirit function as the Helper?

Definition

Let’s consider what the original word, parakletos.  Here is what lexicons say: (1) Vine’s, “lit. ‘called to one’s side,’ i.e. to one’s aid… It was used in a court of justice to denote a legal assistant, counsel for the defense, an advocate; then, generally, one who pleads another’s cause… In the widest sense, it signified a ‘succorer, comforter.’ Christ was this to His disciples, by implication of His word ‘another’ (allos, ‘another of the same sort,’ not heteros, ‘different’) ‘Comforter’ when speaking of the Holy Spirit.”  (2) Thayer, “prop. summoned, called to one’s side, esp. called to one’s aid; hence… one who pleads another’s cause before a judge, a pleader, counsel for defense, legal assistant; an advocate… one who pleads another’s cause with one, an intercessor… in the widest sense, a helper, succorer, aider, assistant; so the Holy Spirit destined to take the place of Christ with the apostles (after his ascension to the Father), to lead them to a deeper knowledge of gospel truth…”

Context

The Holy Spirit is only referred to as the “Helper” in John 14 – 16.  The setting of John 14 – 16 is private.  Jesus is privately addressing the apostles.  “These chapters form a unit.  In these three chapters are some special promises to the apostles.  A failure to keep this in mind in the study of these chapter leads to endless confusion and misunderstanding of the Holy Spirit.  When the promises of the Holy Spirit are applied to Christians in general, it is a complete misapplication of the promises” (Franklin Camp, The Work of the Holy Spirit in Redemption, p. 119).

The Helper

The setting: Jesus was soon to return to the Father (John 13:33, 36; 14:3, 5-6).  The apostles were to remain on earth (John 13:36).  They still had work to do (John 14:12).  They were being commissioned to carry the gospel into all the world (Matthew 28:19; Mark 16:15; Luke 24:47).  They would testify of Jesus (John 15:27).

How could they do this?  How would they accurately present what Jesus did and said?  Moreover, Jesus had not taught them all that they needed to know.  There were so many things that they did not know or fully understand. How would they be able to do this work?

Jesus would not leave them as helpless orphans (John 14:18).  Another Helper would be provided.  (1) He would teach them all things (John 14:26), guiding them into all truth (John 16:12-13).  (2) He would cause them to have an accurate memory of Jesus and His teaching (John 14:26; 15:26-27).  The inspiration of the apostles is the context.

The Advocate

The word, parakletos, as we’ve pointed out, was used of a defense attorney (cf. 1 John 2:1).  The Holy Spirit would help the apostles before men.  “Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves.  Therefore be wise a serpents and harmless as doves.  But beware of men, for they will deliver you up to councils and scourge you in their synagogues. You will be brought before governors and kings for My sake, as a testimony to them and to the Gentiles.  But when they deliver you up, do not worry about how or what you should speak.  For it will be given to you in that hour what you should speak; for it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of you Father who speaks in you” (Mathew 10:16-20).

What About Us?

While it is true that we, today, receive “comfort” (though a different word) from the Scriptures (Romans 15:4; 1 Thessalonians 4:18), and while it is true that we get “comfort” (though a different word) through Christian fellowship (2 Corinthians 7:6, 13; 1 Thessalonians 4:18; 5:11, 14), the “Comforter” (KJV) spoken of in John 14-16 refers to the Holy Spirit’s helping of the apostles, inspiring them.  Only in this context is the Holy Spirit said to be the “Comforter” (KJV), or the “Helper” (NKJV).

 

Posted in Holy Spirit, Textual study | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Calling On The Name

Posted on March 12, 2015 by Bryan Hodge

“And it shall come to pass that whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved” (Joel 2:32 cf. Acts 2:21; 22:16; Romans 10:13).

What does it mean to call on the name of the LORD? This is an extremely important question because it concerns salvation. Let’s consider the scriptures –

Acts 2

Peter’s sermon began by quoting Joel (Acts 2:16-21 cf. Joel 2:28-32). Peter included these words, “Whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved” (Acts 2:21 cf. Joel 2:32). Then, the sermon exposed the people’s sin, and the righteousness of Christ (Acts 2:22-33). The people cried out, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” (Acts 2:37). Finally, Peter extended the invitation saying, “Repent and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38). “And with many other words he testified and exhorted them, saying, ‘Be saved from this perverse generation” (Acts 2:40). We are told “then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them” (Acts 2:41).

Watch this:

Acts 2:21          Whoever         calls on the name of the LORD             shall be saved

Acts 2:38         Every one        repent and be baptized                          for the remission of sins                                                       in the name of Jesus Christ

Wayne Jackson has commented, “If calling on the Lord results in salvation (2:21), and yet repentance combined with baptism produces forgiveness of sins (2:38), it logically follows that ‘calling’ is the equivalent to penitent baptism” (The Acts of the Apostles From Jerusalem to Rome, p. 22). When one submits to the Lord, appealing to His authority for forgiveness of sins, he is calling on the name of the Lord.

Acts 22

Saul, on the road to Damascus, was told by Jesus, “Arise and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do” (Acts 9:6). He was led to the city (Acts 9:8). The penitent Saul neither ate nor drank the next three days (Acts 9:9). He continued in prayer (Acts 9:11). Finally, Ananias instructed, “Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16).

He is told: (1) “Arise.” Wayne Jackson wrote, “’Arise’ (probably from his prone position of prayer cf. 9:11). It is a noteworthy observation that if ‘baptism’ could be administered by the sprinkling of water, there would have been no need for Saul to ‘arise’ prior to submitting to the rite. Of course, the verb baptize (to immerse) excludes sprinkling anyhow” (ibid, p. 285). (2) “Be baptized and wash away your sin.” Baptism is necessary for salvation (Mark 16:15-16; Acts 2:37-38; 22:16; 1 Peter 3:21). The wording “be baptized” is in the middle voice, and could be rendered “have yourself baptized.” (3) “Calling on the name of the Lord.” This is a participle phrase. In context, “Calling on the name of the Lord” is the equivalent of what Saul did, when he did “Arise and be baptized.” Consider this sentence: “The children see-sawed on the teeter-totter, spun on the merry-go-round, swung on swings, and slid on the slide, playing in the park. The phrase “playing in the park” does not describe another activity. Instead, the verbs, “see-sawed,” “spun,” “swung,” and “slid” explains what they did “playing in the park” or how they were “playing in the park.”

There are different ways to call on the name of the Lord. It does not always refer to baptism. However, it does here.

Romans 10

“There is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who called upon Him. For ‘whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved’” (Romans 10:12-13). This passage makes clear that Joel’s prophecy included those beyond Jewish origin.

In context, calling comes after faith (Romans 10:14) and before salvation (Romans 10:13). Roy Deaver commented, “If ‘calling’ follows after faith and precedes salvation, and if repentance, confession, and baptism follow after faith and precede salvation – then it is clear that ‘calling on the Lord’ and repentance, confession, and baptism are the same!” (Romans: God’s Plan for Man’s Righteousness, p. 379). Wayne Jackson commented, “The term ‘call’ reveals that salvation is not unconditional. A comparison of Acts 2:21 and 2:38 indicates that ‘calling’ is a generic expression embracing specific conditions of obedience (viz. repentance and immersion). The apostle continues by asserting that one cannot call on whom he has not believed; thus, the calling is an addition to believing, which excludes the notion of salvation by faith alone. There is more. One cannot believe unless he is willing to hear, which adds yet another condition – a disposition willing to listen to and critically examine the gospel message” (A New Testament Commentary, p. 284).

Jesus

Jesus said, “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven” (Matthew 7:21). He also said, “Why do you call Me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and not do the things I say?” (Luke 6:46). Certainly, more than words are demanded.

Old Testament

It seems that at times, even under the Old Testament, “calling on the LORD” included more than prayer. Isaiah 55:6-7 reads, “Seek the LORD while He may be found, call upon Him while He is near. Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts, let him return to the LORD, and He will have mercy on him; and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon.” Does not seeking the LORD and calling upon Him for mercy and pardon include repentance in this passage?

An Illustration

Even in everyday usage the language of calling upon someone can mean more than merely speaking to someone. Eric Lyons used these illustration from Bobby Bates has saying, “When a doctor goes to the hospital to ‘call on’ some of his patients, he does not merely walk into the room and say, ‘I just wanted to come by and say, ‘hello.’ I wish you the best. Now pay me.’ On the contrary, he involves himself in a service. He examines the patient, listens to the patient’s concerns, gives further instructions regarding the patient’s hopeful recovery, and then often times prescribes medication. All of these elements may be involved in a doctor ‘calling upon’ a patient. In the mid-twentieth century, it was common for young men to ‘call on’ young ladies. Again, this expression meant something different than just making a request’” (Eric Lyons, Calling on the Name of the Lord, apologeticspress.org).

Different Usages

Abraham called upon the name of the LORD” (Genesis 12:8) when he worshipped. The early church called on the name of the Lord, or the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, following their conversion (Acts 9:14, 21; 1 Corinthians 1:2). It does not always mean “repent and be baptized.” However, it does always mean approaching God in submissive obedience.

Posted in baptism, Phrase Study, Plan of salvation, Textual study | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Holy Spirit: An Impersonal Force?

Posted on March 11, 2015 by Bryan Hodge

Is the Holy Spirit of the Godhead, or not? Is the Holy Spirit a personality, or an impersonal force? How should we think about the Holy Spirit?

Some teach that the Holy Spirit is not deity, but a thing, a force. The Jehovah Witnesses believe and teach this. A Jehovah Witness tract states, “The Bible’s use of ‘holy spirit’ indicates that it is a controlled force that Jehovah God uses to accomplish a variety of his purpose. To a certain extent, it can be likened to electricity, a force that can be adapted to perform a great variety of operations” (Should You Believe in the Trinity?, The Holy Spirit – God’s Active Force, p. 20). A Jehovah Witness book states, “It is not a person but a force that God causes to emanate from himself to accomplish his holy will” (Reasoning From the Scriptures, p. 381). Islam also denies the deity of the Holy Spirit. The Quran reads, “They put questions to you about the Spirit say, ‘The Spirit is at my Lord’s command. Little indeed is the knowledge vouchsafed to you’” (Sura 17).

A Case For Personality

The Holy Spirit is spoken of as possessing emotions. The Spirit can not only be lied to (Acts 5:3) and resisted (Acts 7:51), but grieved (Ephesians 4:30). This sounds like a personality and not some impersonal force like electricity. God can be grieved (Genesis 6:6). Jesus was grieved on earth (Mark 3:5). The Holy Spirit loves (Romans 15:30). God loves (John 3:16). Jesus loves (Mark 10:12). This does not sound like electricity.

The Spirit is spoken of as having knowledge (1 Corinthians 2:9-11) and speaking (1 Timothy 4:1). The Jehovah Witnesses explain the speaking this way: “While some Bible text says that the Spirit speaks, other text shows that this was actually done through humans or angels… The action of the Spirit in such instances is like that of radio waves transmitting messages from one person to another far away” (Should You Believe in the Trinity?, p. 22). However, the Bible likens the Spirit’s knowledge to the Spirit of man knowing (1 Corinthians 2:9-11). Just as one cannot know the inner thoughts, or plans of another man unless he reveals such. Even so, one cannot know the plans of God unless such is revealed. The Spirit knew and revealed such speaking through inspired apostles and prophets. This does not sound like radio waves.

The Spirit is referred to as “another Helper” (John 14:16-17). Jesus was going away (John 16:5-7). He would not leave them helpless as orphans (John 14:18). He would send them “another Helper.” The term “another” is in the Greek allon meaning another of the same kind. If Jesus was not an impersonal force, why should one conclude that the Spirit is?

A Case for Deity

The Holy Spirit possesses characteristics which one would expect of deity. The Spirit is eternal (Hebrews 9:14), omnipresent (Psalm 139:7-10), and omniscient (Isaiah 40:13-14).

What is said of the Spirit is said of God. When man lies to the Spirit (Acts 5:3), he is lying to God (Acts 5:4). It is possible that such, taken alone, might simply be language of agency (cf. John 13:20). However, consider that what is said about the characteristics of the Spirit (Isaiah 40:13-14), also is said of God (Job 21:22; 36:22-23; Romans 11:34-35; 1 Corinthians 2:6-16).

The Spirit is joined closely with the Father and the Son in the Scriptures: (1) Matthew 28:19, “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in (literally ‘into’ – B.H.) the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” This is language of possession and protection (B-A-G). To sign a piece of land over into the name of someone is to transfer ownership to that someone. To deposit money into the name of someone is to put that money into the account of that someone. To entrust something into the name of someone is to place that something into the protection or trust of that someone. Arndt-Gingrich lexicon says, “through baptism… the one baptized becomes the possession of and under the protection of the one whose name he bears.” “Name” is singular. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are so closely joined that the singular “name” is used. This does not sound like some impersonal force. Moreover, remember that “Paul would not allow people to be baptized into his name (1 Corinthians 1:13).” (Roy Lanier, Sr., The Timeless Trinity, pp. 307). (2) 2 Corinthians 13:14, “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all. Amen.” Roy Lanier, Sr. has written, “How would it sound if you heard this: ‘The grace of Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the communion of Peter be with you’? …Only persons of deity are allowed in the hallowed triumvirate” (ibid, pp. 306-307).

Objections

It is objected that the neuter pronoun “it” is used of the Spirit. “It is true that the neuter pronoun ‘it’ is sometimes used when speaking of the Holy Spirit (e.g. Romans 8:16, B.H.)… The gender of the pronoun is determined by the gender of the noun… the word for Spirit being a neuter noun, the pronoun referring to it has to be neuter gender. However, in several places the writers of the New Testament used the masculine pronoun (e.g. John 14:26; 16:13-14, B.H.)” (ibid, p. 297). Marion Fox warns that we should be careful with our language. He wrote, “When people hear Christians use the word ‘it’ to refer to the Holy Spirit, they immediately think that the Holy Spirit is a force rather than a person” (The Work of the Holy Spirit, Vol. 1, p. 55).

Some have argued that since the Spirit is connected with “water” and “fire” (Matthew 3:11; Mark 1:8), the Spirit must not be a person. Such reasoning would reduce the apostles to being a force without personality (Acts 5:32).

Some have argued that since “water” and “blood” and “the Spirit” are said to be witnesses (1 John 5:8), the Spirit must not be a person. Such reasoning would make John and the Father not persons [(cf. John 5:31-35, 36, 37-39). If the King James rendering of 1 John 5:7 is allowed (I do not think it should be) then the Father, by such reasoning, would not be a person]. In truth, it is possible for both people and things to bear witness, or provide evidence.

Some have pointed out that “wisdom” (e.g. Luke 7:35) “sin” and “death” (Romans 5:14, 21) and other things are personified in the Bible. This is true. However, such does not establish that such is the case for “the Spirit.”

Some have argued that since “the Spirit” is connected with “wine” (Ephesians 5:18),  the Spirit must be a thing and not a person. However, consider this: If I said “Let God influence you and not wine,” am I removing the possibility of personality for God? Certainly not.

Some have argued that one cannot be “filled” with a person (Ephesians 5:18). I would point out that the Bible speaks of God abiding in us (John 14:23; 1 John 4:15) and Jesus abiding in us (Ephesians 3:17; Colossians 1:27) are we to think of them as lacking personality?

Some have wondered how a person can be poured out (Acts 2:16-ff cf. Joel 2). Marion Fox has written, “That which was poured forth in Acts 2:33 was seen and heard… it is evident that they did not see the Holy Spirit. This must be a metonymy where the cause (the Holy Spirit) is put for the effect (the working of miracles)” (ibid, pp. 199-200).

Some have wondered how one can be baptized with a person (Mark 1:8; Acts 1:4-5). It should be remembered that neither the Holy Spirit, nor the Father have bodies like ours (cf. Luke 24:39-40; John 4:24). This needs to be kept in mind. However, this is simply a reference to the Holy Spirit coming immediately upon one, overwhelming, miraculously empowering (Acts 1:8), and filling one (Acts 2:4). This happened to the apostles on Pentecost (Acts 2). It was through this, it appears, that the apostles received their apostolic powers (Galatians 1:1; 2:8 cf. 2 Corinthians 12:12-13).

Some have argued that in some passages there is an absence of the definite article (e.g. Acts 6:3-5). This is true. However, the article is present in other passages (e.g. Matthew 12:32; 28:19). “If the absence of the article in such passages as Acts 6:3, proves that the Spirit is not a person, then the presence of the article in such passages as Matthew 12:32, proves his personality. This poses a contradiction. Therefore, the argument is unsound. Further, if the absence of the Greek article proves a lack of personality, then God the Father is not a person because several passages do not have the Greek article with the word God (cf. Matthew 4:4)” (Marion Fox, The Work of the Holy Spirit, Vol. 1, pp. 51-52).

The objections have been considered. However, the evidence is clear to me. The Holy Spirit is not simply an impersonal force, but a personality, and of the Godhead.

Posted in God, Holy Spirit, Islam, Jehovah Witnesses | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Jesus: The Fish

Posted on March 7, 2015 by Bryan Hodge

You’ve seen the fish symbol.  Sometimes it is on the leather covering of someone’s Bible.  Sometimes it is found affixed to the rear of someone’s automobile.  You’ve seen it; but, what does it mean?  Where did this symbol come from?

The fish symbol is ancient.  This symbol is found inscribed on the walls of the catacombs.  It appears frequently, they tell me.  Sometimes the letters ichthus (the Greek word for ‘fish’) also is found inscribed. Tertullian referred to Jesus as “our fish.” According to one ancient story, when a Christian met a stranger in the road, the Christian sometimes drew one arc of the simple fish outline in the dirt. If the stranger drew the other arc, both believers knew they were in good company” (Wikipedia, referencing Christianity Today).

It is an acronym.  Watch this: (1) “i” (iota) stands for iesous or Jesus.  (2) “ch” (chi) stands for Christos or Christ.  (3) “th” (theta) and “u” (upsilon) stands for theon ‘uios or God’s Son.  (4) “s” (sigma) stands for soter or Savior.

These people, who left this art work, believe that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God, and the Savior.  Such deep faith led them to worship and practice Christianity even under extreme difficulties.

Consider the following Bible passages: 1. “You shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21). 2. “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matthew 16:16). 3. “…our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for us” (Titus 2:13-14).

How is your faith?

Posted in Faith, History, Jesus | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Seven Sins Against the Spirit

Posted on March 5, 2015 by Bryan Hodge

Numerous are the sins mentioned within the pages of the Bible. In a very real way, every sin which we commit is a sin against God (Psalm 51:3-4; Exodus 16:1-2 cf., 16:7-8; Numbers 14: 1-2 cf. 14:27; Numbers 16:11; Acts 5:3-4; Acts 9:1-5, etc.). However, there are seven specific sins mentioned in scripture as being against the Holy Spirit. Let’s notice:

1.  Lie to the Spirit (Acts 5:1-4).

Ananias and his wife, Sapphira, sold a possession. They claimed that they were giving a total sale price into the treasury of the church. However, what they actually did was claim that they sold the possession for less than they did. Their plan was to pocket the difference, while telling others that they gave all (Acts 5:2-3:8). They were not required to give all (Acts 5:2-3, 8). They were not required to give all (Acts 5:4). They simply wanted others to think that they had.

They lied. They lied to man. However, they had lied not only to man, but to the Holy Spirit to God. Every sin is a sin first and foremost against God. It has been said that when man lies, he cares more about what man thinks, than he does what God thinks. He is behaving cowardly toward man, and bravely toward God. God knows our every word (Psalm 139:1-4; Matthew 12:6).

Peter and the other apostles, it seems, were endowed with every spiritual gift. One of these gifts was the discerning of spirits (1 Corinthians 12:10). James Burton Coffman comments, “The apostles of Christ, after their baptism in the Holy Spirit, were inspired men, able to perform miracles and to discern the thoughts of men… if such a fraud as that undertaken by Ananias and Sapphira had been successful, it would have discredited the central authority of God’s church upon earth. The sale of a piece of land, as well as the price paid and received, could not long have been concealed, since such things have been in the public record of every generation; and if the deception had succeeded, the word of the apostles themselves would have been suspect.”

2.  Grieve the Spirit (Ephesians 4:30a).

The word translated “grieve” means “to cause pain” (Vine’s). The Holy Spirit can be pained by us.

How do we grieve the Holy Spirit? The book of Isaiah used this same language. There, rebellion against God grieved the Holy Spirit (Isaiah 63:10). Rebellion grieves God (Psalm 95:7-11).

What about the immediate context of Ephesians? There are behaviors toward others that are to be put off (4:22; 25a, 26-27, 28a, 29a, 31). There are behaviors towards others that are to be put on (4:24, 25b, 28b, 29b, 32). The point seems to be that when we do not treat one another according to God’s word, it grieves the Holy Spirit.

3.  Insult the Spirit (Hebrews 10:24-31).

The context concerns the church assembly. The assembly is not only about honoring God, it is an opportunity “to stir up love and good works” in one another (Hebrews 10:24-25).

Those who willfully forsake the assembly: (1) miss the opportunity “to stir up love and good works” in others (Hebrews 10:24-25 cf. Colossians 3:16); (2) treat the blood of Christ as if it were a common thing, unappreciated, not special (Hebrews 10:29 cf. Acts 20:7 cf. 1 Corinthians 11:23-26); (3) treat insultingly the Spirit of grace (Hebrews 10:29), Who has revealed the gospel and has taught Christians to assemble.

4.  Quench the Spirit (1 Thessalonians 5:19).

It is helpful to understand that the instructions of 1 Thessalonians 5:16-22 are written in parallelism. (1) “Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, in everything give thanks…” (1 Thessalonians 5:16-18) is parallelism. It is expressing a similar thought three ways. (2) “Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise prophesies” (1 Thessalonians 5:19-20). This is parallelism. The power and influence of the Spirit is quenched when revelation is despised. (3) “Test all things; hold fast what is good. Abstain from every form of evil” (1 Thessalonians 5:21-22). This is parallelism. All things should be spiritually tested (cf. Acts 17:11; 1 John 4:1). If it passes the test it can be practiced. If it fails the test, abstain from it.

This likely concerns the use of miraculous gifts. Remember that the use of miraculous gifts could be suppressed by the one who possessed such gifts (cf. 2 Timothy 1:6; 1 Corinthians 14:32). It may be that some were afraid of boldly proclaiming the message because of the opposition in society, and were not using the God-given abilities which they possessed.

The power and influence of the Spirit may also be quenched by rejecting the message. Paul warned, “he who rejects this does not reject man, but God, who has given us His Holy Spirit” (1 Thessalonians 4:8 cf. 2:13).

The power and influence of the Spirit may also be quenched by negative words. I once heard a woman, after a Gospel meeting in which the truth was preached, tell her friend, “not all of us in the church of Christ think that way.” She apologized for the truth. She quenched the Spirit.

The power and influence of the Spirit may be quenched by listening but not practicing. God’s word is to be put into practice (Ezekiel 33:31-32; Matthew 7:24-27; James 1:22).   There is no telling what good could be done if we all would truly put into practice what we know to do.

5.  Defile the temple of God (1 Corinthians 3:16-17).

The temple is the church (1 Corinthians 1:2 cf. 3:16-17). The language is collective of the whole church. “You” is plural “temple” is singular. “The only correct usage of a plural pronoun to refer to a singular noun as its antecedent is if the singular noun is a collective noun. The only collective usage of the word ‘temple’ in the New Testament is when the apostles have the church in mind” (Marion Fox, The Work of the Holy Spirit, Vol. 1, p. 235). It is not uncommon for the church to be pictured as the temple in the New Testament (Ephesians 2:19-22; 1 Timothy 3:15; 1 Peter 2:5; 1 Corinthians 3:16; 6:19-20; 2 Corinthians 6:16).

Let’s consider the Old Testament.  Did God literally dwell in the temple of old?  No! (1 Kings 8:27; 2 Chronicles 2:6; 6:18; Acts 7:47-50; 17:24-25).  However, He did manifest Himself in it (2 Chronicles 7:1-2).  The temple, and the tabernacle before it, represented God and His presence (Exodus 25:8; 29:45-46).  Sometimes there was even visible evidence of His presence (Exodus 40:3-38; Deuteronomy 31:15; Leviticus 16:1-2; 1 Kings 8:10; 2 Chronicles 7:1-3).

Even so, the church represents Him on earth. The church at Corinth had dwelling in it a visible manifestation of His presence through miraculous evidence. How they conducted themselves would influence how others thought of God (cf. 1 Corinthians 5:1; 6:1, 5; 14:23). Christians need to be careful about the message they send in their behavior (Romans 2:21-24; Titus 2:3-5; 2 Samuel 12:13-14a).

The context concerns a man’s “work” in the temple (1 Corinthians 3:12-15), and “work” seems to refer to members which are added (cf. 1 Corinthians 9:1). Marion Fox commented on defiling the temple, “False teachers, who converted by unscriptural means or by teaching false doctrine, were destroying the church by building with faulty building materials. These faulty building materials were unconverted or half-converted persons” (ibid, p. 236).

Note: Everything to this point has primarily had reference to sins that children of God do against the Spirit. However, the next two have reference primarily, but not exclusively, to the non-Christian.

6.  Resist the Spirit (Acts 7:51-52).

Let’s notice the context. Stephen reviews Israelite history. (1) They had rejected the prophets and their message time and again (Acts 7:9, 22-25, 35, 37-39). (2) They had mistreated and killed the prophets of God (Acts 7:51-52). (3) They did not keep the law (Acts 7:53). (4) His point to those to whom he was speaking was that they were of the same character in their rejection of his message and Christianity (Acts 6:8-13; 7:51-52; 7:57-8:2).

Those who oppose and reject the message of the gospel are guilty of resisting the Spirit. The Spirit does not exert an irresistible grace on us. He can be resisted.

7.  Blasphemy against the Spirit (Matthew 12:31-32; Mark 3:28-30; Luke 12:10).

The meaning is evident in context. Jesus had performed a miracle healing a blind, mute, demon possessed man. His opponent could not deny it. However, they suggested that he did it “by Beelzebub,” instead of by the Holy Spirit. Mark’s account explains what it means to blaspheme the Holy Spirit saying, “because they said, ‘He has an unclean Spirit’” (Mark 12:30). J.W. McGarvey commented, “The blasphemy against the Holy Spirit here denounced is the evil speech just made by the Pharisees, in which a work performed by the Holy Spirit was attributed to Satan” (Commentary on Matthew and Mark, p. 109).

Still today, one can speak against the evidence the Holy Spirit has provided. One can possess a heart that is so set against Jesus that no evidence, not even the plainest evidence will change him. The person will not see, because he does not want to see (Matthew 13:14-15). The person will not believe, because he does not want to believe (Romans 1:20-21). The person will not submit, because he does not want to submit (Romans 1:28a; John 3:19-20).

Note: For more information, see article – The Unpardonable Sin by Bryan Hodge

Posted in Holy Spirit, Sin, Textual study, Type/Antitype | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Where is the Stigma?

Posted on March 2, 2015 by Bryan Hodge

“One of illegitimate birth shall not enter the assembly of the LORD; even to the tenth generation none of his descendants shall enter the assembly of the LORD” (Deuteronomy 23:2).

It certainly was not the fault of the illegitimate offspring that he was so born.  “The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son” (Ezekiel 18:20).

Why then this command?  Let me suggest that the command was designed to put a stigma on illegitimacy, and thereby send a message to society that such is not God’s ideal for bringing children into the world.

What about today?  I do realize that we are not under the specifics of the Old Covenant.  However, there are valuable principles to be learned (Romans 15:4; 1 Corinthians 10:11; Jude 5). I am greatly concerned that today all stigma has been removed.  Individuals and churches throw baby showers, even without repentance and confession of sin, welcoming the illegitimate into the world.  Moreover, these showers sometimes go beyond helping with some basic necessities, and celebrate in the coming child.  Families celebrate parenthood, and grandparenthood which comes this way.  There is no longer any apparent shame over such.

This acceptance applies as well to those in other sins.  One can live openly in sin, and still enjoy family gatherings, thanksgiving meals and the like without repentance and confession.  In one case, I recall a group of church members eating a thanksgiving meal together.  One lady invited her drug-addicted son, who had been supposedly withdrawn from by the church, to be a part of the meal and games which followed.

Paul said this, “I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or an drunkard, or an extortioner – not even to eat with such a person” (1 Corinthians 5:11).  The wording “keep company” (sunanamignumi) means “to mix together with, co-mingle… to mingle one’s self with… to associate with, to have familiar intercourse with” (Perschbaucher).  True, not all sins are to be handled in the same manner (see article – Different Type of Sin by B.H.).  However, those who are informed but still engage in open, willful, sin and who refuse to repent are to be so treated.  Such is to be done: (1) to make the sinner ashamed (2 Thessalonians 3:6);  (2) To try to produce repentance and bring salvation (1 Corinthians 5:6); (3) to protect and send a message to others (1 Corinthians 5:6 cf. Deuteronomy 13:11; 17:13; 21:21).  (4) to obey the inspired instructions (1 Corinthians 5:4-5; 2 Thessalonians 3:6).

Yes, it is difficult.  Yes, it hurts us to do this.  However, it also hurts not to do this.  Let us not be guilty of legitimizing sin.  There are three important questions to ask: (1) Are we willing to do what is right?  (2) Are we willing to do what is right, right now?  (3) Are we willing to let God’s word determine what is right?

We should help the one in sin to repent. We can hold the hand and walk down the aisle supportive of the one who is ready to confess sin. We can tell the one who has sin that the consequences of sin may be difficult, but we will stand by them and help them. We can do all of these things and more, but let us not legitimize sinful behavior by passively over looking such, doing this will not help.

 Once repentance has occurred, we are told – “you ought… to forgive and comfort… lest perhaps a one be swallowed up with too much sorrow… I urge you reaffirm your love to him” (2 Corinthians 2:6-8).  Let us remember that all have sinned.

Posted in Fellowship, Forgiveness, Parenting, Repentance, Word Study | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Peer Pressure

Posted on February 27, 2015 by Bryan Hodge

We hear a lot about “peer pressure” today.  Usually, the context of such discussions centers upon our teens.  Some boyfriend, girlfriend or group at school is trying to get “little Johnny” or “little Suzy” to do something that they should not (or not to do something that they should).  Now “little Johnny” or “little Suzy” knows what the right thing to do is… but, they want so very much to fit in, and be accepted by their peers, and thus you have “peer pressure.”

Brethren, two myths need to be dispelled. Myth #1 – “Peer pressure” is a new phenomenon.  My friends, “there is no new thing under the sun” (Ecclesiastes 1:9).  We may not have always used the label “peer pressure,” but the concept is not new.  It was in the garden of Eden.  Adam was not deceived (1 Timothy 2:4). It was “peer pressure” to which he succumbed.  Thus, this concept is not new.  It is, in fact, one of Satan’s oldest ploys.  Myth #2 – “Peer pressure” only affects the young.  No, on the contrary, it affects adults too.   It did in Jesus’ day. Notice the words of John 12:42-43: “Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on Him (Christ – B.H.); but because of the Pharisees they did not confess Him (Christ – B.H.), lest they should be put out of the synagogue: For they love the praise of men more than the praise of God.”  It was due to Pilate’s “wanting to gratify the crowd” that prompted him to release of Barabbas, and deliver Jesus to be crucified (Mark 15:9-15).  Political pressure and the desire to please caused him to this. (Do we call this peer pressure? It could be argued that these Jews were not even his peers.) It was peer pressure which caused Peter to separate himself from gentile Christians (Galatians 2:11-14) “Peer pressure” a very real thing. It is not new; it has existed throughout the history of man-kind.  It affects young and old alike.

What can be done?  (1) We must honestly ask ourselves, “Whose praise and friendship do I want?” (John 5:44; 12:42-43).  (2) We must acquaint ourselves with the fact: To compromise truth for the sake of earthly friends is to love those friends more than God (John 12:43); in fact, it is to make oneself an enemy of God (James 4:4; Matthew 10:37). (3) We should choose friends that will better us and not hinder us in our walks of righteousness (Proverbs 13:20; 22:24; 27:17; 1 Corinthians 15:33). A friend worth having will not seek to influence or pressure us to do evil (1 Corinthians 13:6; Proverbs 27:5-6). (4) We, as God’s people, need to have close fellowship one with another, so that members of the church do not feel that they have to look elsewhere for acceptance and love (Hebrews 3:12-13; 10:24-25; 1 Thessalonians 4:9-10; 5:14; 2 John 5). (5) We should remember that the true Christian never will be popular with the all (Luke 6:26; 2 Timothy 3:12; Matthew 10:25). (6) We should remember that even if all on earth reject us, we still have a friend who has promised “I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee” (Hebrews 13:5; Psalm 27:10).

Posted in Fellowship, friends, Temptation | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Now Is That Rainy Day!

Posted on February 25, 2015 by Bryan Hodge

You have heard the saying: “We are saving it for a rainy day.” This may be prudent in one’s personal life [The Bible warns against: (1) wastefulness (Proverbs 12:27; 19:24; 21:20); (2) the life of luxury, prodigal living of the high life (Proverbs 21:17 cf. Luke 15); (3) abuse of credit (Proverbs 6:1-5; 11:15; 17:18; 22:7); (4) lack of preparation for the future (Proverbs 30:25). Moreover, it teaches that we are to: (1) support self and family (2 Thessalonians 3:10; 1 Timothy 5:4, 8, 16; 2 Corinthians 12:14). (2) Pay financial obligations (Psalm 37:21; Proverbs 6:1-5; James 5:4), including taxes (Matthew 17:24-27; 22:15-21; Romans 13:1-7)]. This may be prudent in business [though, money is a tool for growth. It should not sit idle, but put to work – at least drawing interest when possible (Matthew 25:14-30; Luke 19:12-27)].

What about churches? “Saving for a rainy day” may be prudent. Some reserves are needed. Major expenses do occur (roofs, foundations, plumbing, electrical, parking lots, flooring). Nature can be destructive (hurricanes, tornadoes, hail, wind, termites). Economic downturns do occur (members get laid off from their jobs or lose their jobs). Members disappoint (get disgruntled and leave), etc.

However, I suspect that sometimes the “saving for a rainy day” is just an excuse for not using talent, or even hoarding. Remember, money can be viewed as a tool for growth (Matthew 25:14-30; Luke 19:12-27).

The work of the church is: evangelism (proclaiming the good news, trying to reach the lost); edification (building up, strengthening, fortifying members); benevolence (kindness toward those in need); and worship of God (see article – The Work of the Church by B.H.). The church should use its money to accomplish these works, to the glory of God, and as an attempt to help save man.

Franklin Camp made these pertinent observations: (1) “One of the blessings of my life has been the privilege of working with some elders who believe that opportunities create responsibilities, and that, when they lead the church in accepting responsibilities, God will provide the needs… How many doors are closed by leadership today by simply saying, ‘That is not in our budget?’’(Principles and Perils of Leadership, p. 10). (2) “What is a budget? …it is a means of growing character When elders decide that a budget is raising money instead of developing spiritual lives, they have lost their concentration on the principles of Christianity” (ibid, p. 33).

What about that rainy day? Let me suggest to you that Now Is That Rainy Day! Society is at a moral low. The illegitimate birth rate in 2012 was 40.7% (Roger Clegg, nationalreview.com, October 11, 2013). It was 5.3% in 1960 (William Bennett, The Index of Leading Cultural Indicators, p. 46). The abortion rate is 21% (gutmacher.org, July 2014). “Cohabitation has increased 900% over the last 50 years” (Lauren Fox, theatlantic.com, March 20, 2014). “Two-thirds of couples married in 2012 shared a home together for more than two years before they ever waltzed down an aisle” (ibid). The divorce rate in 2010 was 41% of all first marriages; 60% of second marriages; and 73% of third marriages (divorcestatistics.org). The divorce rate was one in six in 1940 (Tom Brokaw, The Greatest Generation, p. 231). In 2012 there was 386.9 violent crimes per 100,000. The number was 160.9 per 100,000 in 1960 (Wikipedia.org). Property crime in 2012 was 2,859.2 per 100,000. The number was 1,726.3 in 1960 (ibid). Churches are struggling. “Somewhere between 4,000 and 7,000 churches close their doors every year… Between 2010 and 2012, more than half of all churches in America added not one new member. Each year, nearly 3 million previous churchgoers enter the ranks of the ‘religiously unaffiliated’” (Steve McSwain, Why Nobody Wants to go to Church Anymore, Huffpost, October 14, 2013). “More than 40% ‘say’ they go to church weekly. As it turns out, however, less than 20% are actually in church” (ibid). The Disciples of Christ, Evangelical Lutheran church, Lutheran church (Missouri Synod), Episcopal church, American Baptist, United Methodist church, Presbyterian church, and the United Church of Christ all saw declines of adherents between 1990 – 2000. During this same period, the church of Christ grew barely by 2.7% (Flavil Yeakley Jr., Why They Left, p. 30). Do not get too excited. The population of the U.S. increased 13% during this same period (Bloomberg.com). We are losing about 45% of our young people when they leave home, about 12% fall away but return in time, 33% fall away and do not return (Flavil Yeakley Jr., Why They Left, p. 30). My personal observation is that most local churches are graying. If this is not a rainy day, then what is? It seems time for a full-court press, but such is another metaphor.

Posted in Chruch, Money, Soul Winning, Stats, stewardship, Wealth | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment