“The Church of God Among the Nations” by David Lipscomb

On January 17, 2024 By Tyler BoydIn Christian's Relationship to Government, Restoration

The Gospel Advocate; February 27, 1866

Has the separation that was established and perpetuated by God through a period of four thousand years, between God’s institutions and subjects and the human institutions of earth and their subjects, been obliterated in the dispensation for which all dispensations were given—the dispensation or reign of the Lord Jesus Christ? It is a universally received idea, we believe, among the students of the Bible, that there is not a lesson taught in God’s dealings with his people under His fleshly dispensations, not a principle vindicated, that was not intended more, for effect upon the perfect, spiritual kingdom of the “fullness of the times” than for immediate effect upon the temporal kingdoms to which they were given. The prime object of all those lessons of separation was to have their permanent effect upon the eternal kingdom of Jesus Christ. Is God less jealous of the sanctity of his eternal kingdom, established and reigned over through his anointed Son, than he was for the mere preparatory ones established and ruled through his frail, weak, sinning, human subjects? Our work, certainly, is sufficient, after having shown this separation, unless authority can be produced for uniting that which God hath sundered. But we again call attention to the positive teachings of the Holy Spirit directly upon the relationship they sustain toward each other.

For the Lord hath a controversy with the nations, he will plead with all flesh; he will give them that are wicked to the sword, saith the Lord.
Jeremiah 25:31

In which the fact is presented of a “controversy between God and the nations.” This controversy is undoubtedly with reference to the question: Who shall govern the world? Who shall rule man? God or the governments of the world? The result of this controversy is, “he will give the wicked,” those who maintain the government of the nations instead of the government of God, “to the sword.”

We next call attention to the teachings of the Holy Spirit through Daniel to Nebuchadnezzar. In Nebuchadnezzar’s dream or vision, the workings of human governments, their history and destiny, and the connection of the Church of Christ with them is plainly foretold by God and revealed by Daniel. In the vision of the image of the man, with a golden head, a chest of silver, belly and thighs of brass, legs of iron and feet of iron and clay, is presented the four kingdoms of earth, that were to attain to universal sway, and rule the world. The head of gold typifies the kingdom of Babylon, of which Nebuchadnezzar was the most powerful and illustrious ruler. It, with all its power, must be destroyed and its golden treasures and exalted honors become the prey of its despoilers. It is succeeded by the Medo-Persian empire, that rises on the ruins of its predecessor, attains universal sway, subjugates the world, and in turn, itself is broken and destroyed, to be succeeded by the third or brazen empire of Greece, whose mighty, conquering head, weeps that other worlds are not within the reach of its destroying and bloody sword. But with all of its mighty power it must soon be stripped of its powers and honors, a lifeless corpse, weltering in the blood of its own children. For the Roman empire strong as iron which “breaketh in pieces and consumeth all things,” commences its work of ruin and destruction. With it the vision of earthly, human empire closes. It indeed is broken in the pride of its strength and the glory of its power.

What human government, then, will be able to stand? No other human government can ever attain to universal dominion. All the governments of earth, to-day, are but the broken, discordant fragments of this once mighty empire. In their iron strength they linger out a lengthened existence even when dissevered, oftentimes exhibiting a mighty prowess that bespeaks them true to their origin, but by continual conflicts and ever worrying strife, are wearing themselves away, wasting their strength and making room for the kingdom which the “God of Heaven set up in the days of these kings.” Their mission, from the prophetic history, was to destroy one another, and under the rulings of God’s providence to give those who upheld them “to the sword.” Their destiny was to be destroyed. The end of the vision was:

A stone cut out of the mountain without hands, smote the image upon the feet, that were of iron and clay, and broke it to pieces. Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff or the summer’s threshing floors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them, and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.
Daniel 2:34-35

The interpretation of this was, that:

In the days of these kings [the Roman] shall the God of Heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed, and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.
Daniel 2:44

Here again the mission of these nations is distinctly set forth and their connection with the Church of Christ well defined. They were to be destroyed by the working of this kingdom, which the God of Heaven should set up, and the broken fragments as the chaff of the summer’s threshing floor to be blown away, so that no place for them should be found.

In contrast with the lesson that has been taught with reference to the destruction of the earthly kingdoms, the Kingdom of Heaven, “shall never be destroyed.” “‘The kingdom shall not be left to other people.” Another point of contrast. It has been taught that these earthly kingdoms, with all their riches and honors, should become the prey of their despoilers. Not a kingdom or government of earthly mold but in its overthrow or conquest, has been, with all its powers, possessions and honors, regarded and appropriated as the prey of the despoilers. But not so with the God-ordained kingdom. It was not to be left as a prey to other people, but with all its riches, honors, and priceless treasures, it is to be the perpetual heritage of its own meek and lowly children. No despoiler’s hand can deprive them or their rightful heritage in this kingdom, for God, its founder, is the guardian and protector of all its possessions. But the true omission of the Kingdom of God, with reference to the earthly kingdoms, is expressed in the next clause. “But it shall break in pieces and consume all these,” Its mission then, as distinctly set forth in this prophecy, is to break in pieces, consume and destroy all the kingdoms of earth. A spirit of perpetual antagonism is here developed, between God’s Kingdom and every form of human government. “God has a controversy with the nations.” An irrepressible conflict rages between the Government of God and all the human institutions of earth, which can only cease by the complete triumph of the one and the utter annihilation of the other. God will and can accept no doubtful fealty—no divided allegiance. He reserved to Himself the right to govern man. “To Him every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess.”

The object of God then in establishing his Church or Government was to destroy all the governments and institutions of man, and through his Church, and only through it, rule and control the world. The church’s relationship to the world-powers and institutions of man must be in harmony with this—its chiefest mission. It cannot be one of alliance with and support to any of these institutions. It cannot, at one and the same time, both uphold and destroy an institution. Its first mission is to destroy all authority and power, and rule and bring the world in subjection to its great King. It is only to be remembered in this contest that the “weapons of its warfare are not carnal, but mighty, through God, to the pulling down of strongholds.” The little stone cut out of the mountain without hands was to fill the whole earth, so that no pace could be found for the image or any part of it. The Kingdom of Heaven will destroy all these earthly kingdoms and so engross the feelings, affections, time and labors of the denizens of earth, that no room or place will be found for the service of the earthly kingdoms. They are perishing. “It shall stand forever.”

The obligations and duties of the members of the Church of Christ, can in no manner conflict with this prime work and mission of the church itself. They cannot uphold what it must destroy. In doing this they war against the church, for it is through its members that the church accomplishes her work. If we thwart the workings of God’s church, we fight against God himself. But says one, “This antagonism was predicated only with reference to the kingdoms then in existence, not with reference to those which should afterwards arise.” The four kingdoms of Nebuchadnezzar’s vision are the only human kingdoms that have ever attained to universal sway. They are placed in contrast with the fifth universal kingdom—the Church of God. Evidently these strongest of all earthly kingdoms are made choice of as embracing and typifying all the institutions of human mold in their principles, workings and destiny. We doubt whether there has been brought into existence a single form or principle of government that did not find its first development and application in one of these four universal kingdoms. Indeed all the governments of earth are but the fragments and off-shoots or this last empire. What was true of the nature and destiny of this as a whole, is equally true of each of its different, dissevered parts. It is noteworthy that no two of these universal empires could exist at once in their fully developed power. As the one arose the other gradually decayed, wore away, disappeared and made room for its successor. Since the establishment of the Church of Christ, no human institution has ever made even a respectable effort to attain to universal dominion. The tendency has been to weaken the bonds that bind nations together, to disintegrate and separate. The attrition and friction of perpetual conflict and war will continue to weaken and wear out their strength and vigor, so that as the Church of Christ advances they will vanish away, and when it shall have accomplished its perfect work and attained to its full proportions, they will have been entirely destroyed. So that man owing allegiance only to God’s government, will render no divided service. His Kingdom will fill the whole earth. God will rule in and through it, and thus be all and in all.

But the prophecies of Daniel are even yet more replete with instruction upon these subjects. The dealings of these empires with Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, and their deliverance from the furnace, the trials of Daniel, and the closing of the Lion’s mouth, the banishing of Nebuchadnezzar from the throne, his seven years of beastly life, and the final complete destruction at once of his kingdom and all were intended to teach one clear, specific truth, that all these human kingdoms were in their very nature opposed to the rule and dominion of God, but that their highest exaltation wrought their deepest humiliation, with all their might they must come to naught. The very divisions that were to take place in this mighty iron empire—the last and strongest of earth, under the types of the heads and horns, are pointed out, their nature and work designated and the destruction of each one plainly foretold. The disposition of those was, to “speak great words against the Most High; to wear out the Saints of the Most High; to think to change times and laws;” but the end, notwithstanding, for a time this power was to be granted to them, was to be “the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion to consume and to destroy it unto the end” or to a complete destruction.

And the kingdom and dominion and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heavens shall be given to the people of the Saints of the Most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom and all dominions shall serve and obey him.
Daniel 7:27

“The Old Testament Kings and God’s Justice” by David Lipscomb

On December 29, 2023 By Tyler BoydIn Christian's Relationship to Government, Kingdom Life, Restoration

The Gospel Advocate; February 20, 1866

In our investigations we have found that God, at all times, kept a wide gulf of separation between his Jewish kingdom and subjects, and the world-institutions by which they were surrounded. No alliances—no affiliations—no courtesies as equals with the man-governments or their subjects, were never engaged in without receiving a signal mark of God’s displeasure. May his subjects not have adopted some government of their own, and have harmonized it in spirit with his laws, and have thus received his approbation? In the beginning, as we have found, God gave the law, perfect and complete, in the most minute particulars. He left no room for human legislation—for the exercise of human discretion.

The law was, ye shall not do after all the things that we do here this day, every man whatsoever is right in his own eyes… Whatsoever things I command you, observe to do it; thou shalt not add thereto nor diminish from it.
Deuteronomy 12:8, 32

Yet we find in later ages a changed government, altered institutions among the Jews. How did these changes come about?

It came to pass when Samuel was old, he made his sons judges in Israel. His sons walked not in his ways, but turned aside after lucre, and took bribes and perverted judgment. Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together and came to Samuel unto Ramah, and said unto him, behold thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us, like all the nations. But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said give us a king to judge us: and Samuel prayed unto the Lord. And the Lord said unto Samuel, “Hearken unto the voice of the people, in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.”
1 Samuel 8:1

He tells them the consequences of this course. But still ordains they shall have a government of their own to punish them for their folly in becoming dissatisfied with God’s government and desiring a human one. If the Jews would ever have been justified in interpolating human laws and human expedients into the Divine government, it certainly was when those institutions of God were perverted to base and unlawful purposes, and his officers failed to do their duties. We see that the desire of a man-government even then amounted to a rejection of God as their king and ruler.

The introduction of this human polity was the main cause of Israel’s many sins and rebellions in her history, of the long bloody family feuds between Israel and Judah, brought upon her, her sorrows and woes, her sad overthrow and long and cruel dispersions as fugitives and outcasts among the nations of the earth. This king, as their head, was the chief cause of turning them from the law of God. We find Saul, David, Solomon, Hezekiah all approved of God in their private walk, so elated with pride at their wonderful exaltation, that they violated God’s law themselves and led their subjects into sin.

If the best among these kings caused their subjects to sin, and weaned their affections from God, divided their allegiance, diverted their sense of responsibility from the law of God to the law of the king, what must have been the fatal effects of her more corrupt and wicked princes. We find them continually leading them away from God’s law into sin. At their return from captivity in Babylon, under Ezra and Nehemiah, it was said in Ezra 9:2, “The band of the princes and rulers have been chief in this trespass,” that had brought them into captivity. It was Hezekiah’s forgetfulness of God’s law in his anxiety to be courteous and friendly with the King of Babylon, that produced the second captivity. Hosea speaking of this same rejection of God and choosing an earthly king, says:

O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself; but in me is thy help. I will be thy king: where is any other that may save thee in all the cities? and thy judges of whom thou saidst, Give me a king and princes. I gave thee a king in mine anger, and took him away in my wrath.
Hosea 13:9

Your dissatisfaction with my appointments as I gave them was your ruin. To punish you for this, I gave you a king who oppressed you, who involved you in difficulties, brought upon you war, trouble, famine, and slaughter, but when under this punishment, you failed to humble yourself and repent, but waxed worse and worse in your sin and rebellion, in my wrath I took from you your king and left you desolate, without either a Divine or human head, a prey to all your enemies, to be scattered over the face of the earth, a by-word and a hissing among all the nations, as a perpetual warning to all families, kindred, tribes and tongues, of the folly and sin of becoming dissatisfied with Heaven’s appointments.

God, to some extent at least, recognizes this earthly king as a rival of himself, and indicates the impossibility of man’s having both, a Heavenly and an earthly king. He clearly indicates that the Jew could not have another king, and at the same time be regarded as the subjects of Heaven. We find that the Jew was prohibited of God from either making alliances with human governments formed by nations not of God’s people, or of adopting into the government he had made for them, institutions of their own devising. He was God, and He their only King, ruler, law-maker—they could have none other. To have another was to reject God.

What thing soever I command you, observe to do it. Thou shall not add thereto, nor diminish from it.
Deuteronomy 12:32

We thus find that God kept his subjects aloof from all connection with the world, or human governments. He considered his alliances with these institutions as adulteries in his espoused wife. In Ezekiel 23, under the type of the two sisters, Aholah and Aholibah, in their whoredoms, he represents Judah and Israel in their alliances with the world-governments. In their punishment by their lovers he typifies their punishment inflicted by those nations with whom they formed alliances.

But in process of time this nation of God is so corrupted by these earthly, human institutions and alliances, that God will no longer forbear with them. He abolishes this national institution, and in its place establishes his universal and eternal spiritual kingdom. “What relationship does this new and eternal kingdom sustain to the world-institutions by which it is surrounded and with which it comes in contact?” is the question of prime importance in our investigation, and one which, in importance to the well being of the church is not transcended by any known to the Christian world. The Jewish dispensation was the type of the Christian kingdom. The Christian kingdom or church superseded the Jewish and occupied the same position with reference both to God and the world that refused submission to Him, that the Jewish did.

Paul in his letter to his Roman brethren, says the Jews, through unbelief, were broken off, and the Gentiles, through faith, were grafted in. Without determining what is the special position from which the Jews was broken or cast, and into which the Gentile was grafted, it suffices our present purpose to note that just the position with reference to God and the world, from which the unbelieving Jew was broken, the believing Gentile was grafted in. The Jewish institution was the type of the spiritual, teaching through God’s dealings with it, how He would deal with the church, this could not be so unless they occupied the same relationship to God and the world. God’s dealing with the Jew in one relationship, could not teach us how he would deal with the Christian in a dissimilar one. The treatment of the outward nations by the Jews could be no lesson to us as to how we should act towards the unbelieving unless we occupied a like position with reference to them.

These things being so, and God having, through a period of four thousand years, kept a deep and wide gulf of separation between his people, his nation, his kingdom and the human kingdoms of earth with their subjects, having, under every possible form and on every occasion, besought and warned his children against such associations or affiliations; against alliances, individual or national; against relying upon the human institutions for aid or help in any of their difficulties, having shown that the help of the human institutions was weakness, confusion and ruin to them—in a word, God having separated them in every possible manner, and on every possible occasion, he did it all, not for them, but to teach us that Christians must be a separate and distinct people.

With all these teachings, through so long a period, so repeatedly, emphatically and distinctly set forth, it certainly is true, that without some positive net or declaration of God connecting or uniting them, the government of God with its subjects, must forever remain separated from the world-institutions with their subjects, with no alliance or affiliation, no participation of the one in the affairs of the other. Upon him that would connect them, the responsibility of showing when and how God united them, and what that union is, certainly devolves. We shall, in our next, examine the Scriptures to see if they have been so united.

The Problem with Man Made Creeds

On June 24, 2023February 14, 2024 By Tyler BoydIn Restoration, Scripture, The Authority of God

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines the word “creed” as:

1: A brief authoritative formula of religious belief
2: A set of fundamental beliefs; a guiding principle

Christians should have no problems with “creeds” per se. The New Testament is filled with “authoritative formulas of religious belief” and statements of “fundamental beliefs” and “guiding principles.” (Rom. 10:9; 1 Cor. 12:3; 1 Cor. 15:3-10; Phil. 2:6-11; 1 Tim. 2:5; 1 Tim. 3:16, etc.)

Yet throughout Christian history, many have struggled to separate truth from error, and have often surrendered fundamental Christian truths for all kinds of cultural whims. For this reason there is continual need for Christians to stand firm on the authority of Jesus Christ and continually look to the inspired Scriptures to guide their faith and practice.

But rather than looking to the Scriptures themselves to define the truth, correct error, and provide the rules and standards by which faithful Christians can maintain unity, many have sought to protect the Christian faith through the practice of writing and upholding additional creeds. It is argued that through the writing of creeds, the church can determine which beliefs and practices are non-negotiable, and can protect the church against over-emphasizing the importance of less fundamental issues.

Although the motives behind writing and upholding extra-biblical creeds are often praiseworthy, Christians must avoid exalting any uninspired statements of faith to the authority of a creed. Not only does the practice of developing creeds fail to protect the church against doctrinal error and division, it actually furthers those problems as turns the church away from looking to the authority of the inspired Scriptures.

How Creeds Create Division

One danger of uninspired creeds is that those creeds may require too much, resulting in unnecessary division. In the books of Romans and Galatians, Paul opposed the practice of the Jewish Christians who were adding requirements to the gospel, and consequently compromising the sufficiency of the cross. Those of the circumcision party had laid the charge against Gentile Christians that their faithfulness to Christ was insufficient, and that they must also keep the “works of the law” to be welcomed into Abraham’s family.

Rather than establishing their lines of fellowship upon union in Christ, the Jewish Christians sought to define the boundaries of fellowship by their sectarian identity markers, such as the practice of circumcision. But Paul reminded them that Christ has set us free from the works of the law.

For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit to a yoke of slavery.
Galatian 5:1

The problem was not that they had a written creed, but that they had certain issues which they had elevated as “essential” that were not at all “essential” for someone to be faithful to Christ. Even if their creed was not written down, they still had a creed, and they were dividing the body of Christ because of it.

Although we may feel the need for a written creed to pump the brakes on progressives who would drive the church to embrace all kinds of unhealthy cultural values, we are simply not permitted to “pump the brakes” with any requirements that extend beyond what faithfulness to Christ demands. To do so would unnecessarily divide the body of Christ.

How Creeds Open the Door to Error

Another danger of man-made creeds is that they may require too little. The whole idea of trying to determine which doctrines are “essential” and “non-negotiable” from those that are “non-essential” and thus “negotiable” strikes me as silly – if not outright arrogant. Yes, some doctrines may be “weightier” than others, but even so, we must hold to those weightier matters without neglecting the others (cf. Mt. 23:23). After all, it does not matter what you or I or any other human being thinks is an “non-negotiable” issue. All that matters is what God has revealed. Are we willing to embrace a posture that categorizes certain commands of God as being either “important” or “non-important”? Even if there are such things as “essential” and “non-essential doctrines” who gets to decide?

What issues can we really deem as “non-essential”? We cannot march up to God’s throne and ask Him to give us a seat. If I disobey God regarding any issue He has addressed in His word (whether ignorantly or not), I am guilty of sin. Sin is the violation of God’s will on any given issue (Rom. 14:23; Jas. 4:17; 1 John 3:4; 5:17).

It is not merely important for the church be faithful in a few key doctrines. Even an issue as minor as eating the right foods can lead to condemnation if the eating is not from faith (Rom. 14:23). All issues, regardless of whether we deem them to be important or not, have the power to break our fellowship with God (Rom. 6:23; Is. 59:1-2).

Of course, God often grants a period of grace. For example, to the church at Ephesus, Jesus said,

Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent, and do the works you did at first. If not, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place, unless you repent.
Revelation 2:5

Since Jesus warned he would remove their lampstand, we can conclude that, at least for the time being, their lampstand was not yet removed. But still, He was warning them that their period of grace would not extend forever. They were guilty of sin, but God continued to extend them fellowship, at least for the time being.

But to the church in Thyatira he said,

I have this against you, that you tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and seducing my servants to practice sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols. I gave her time to repent, but she refused to repent of her sexual immorality. Behold, I will throw her onto a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her I will throw into great tribulation unless they repent of her works.
Revelation 2:20-22

Did the church at Thyatira get to decide when Jezebel’s period of grace would end? Perhaps her elders had tried to comfort her by saying, “We don’t approve of your sexual immorality, but it’s not what we would consider an “essential issue” so we will continue to tolerate it.”

Only God gets to decide how far He will continue to extend His grace and fellowship. But when we refuse to obey God on any issue, it can deem us unworthy of the Kingdom of God (2 Thess. 1:5, 8).

Although many will call for man made creeds in order to prevent the church from arguing over matters of lesser importance, the very practice of categorizing certain errors as being more “tolerable” opens the door for Christians to continue to fellowship those who faithlessly and continuously practice sin.

How Creeds Misconstrue Christian Fellowship

But what if creeds are written by wise and pious Christians, so that they neither say too much, nor too little, but faithfully reflect what is revealed in Scripture?

In such as case, the creed would be completely redundant and unnecessary. If the creed teaches the same thing at Scripture, why would we choose to point to a man-made creed instead of pointing back to the God-given Scriptures which teach the same thing? Doing so would imply that Scripture itself is somehow insufficient for teaching, for reproof, for correction, or for training in righteousness (2 Tim. 3:15-16). We cannot invest uninspired writings with authority without simultaneously divesting the inspired writings of their authority.

Moreover, the practice of upholding creeds (even “good” ones) changes Christian fellowship into something which can be defined by a checklist. Yet our salvation has never been based on works, but rather on the grace we are given as we are faithful to Christ (Eph. 2:8-9). Perfect commandment keeping is not essential for Christian fellowship. Having our sins washed in the blood of Christ is essential (Eph. 2:13-15).

All Christians are on a learning curve. Once someone becomes a Christian, they begin a lifetime of growth. The very fact that there are “babes” in Christ (Heb. 6:1), implies that Christians do not immediately have the understanding necessary to be called “mature.” We are commanded to be patient with Christians who have not yet attained a mature understanding of the truth (Rom. 14:1; 15:1; 1 Cor. 8:9). Some may hold onto several wrong beliefs for the time being, but are still faithful, and still striving to learn the truth more perfectly. Not only are we commanded to teach the truth, but we are commanded to teach it with “all patience” (2 Tim. 4:2).

It is understandable that faithful Christians will have theological baggage they must continually strive to overcome as they grow in their maturity. This is especially true of those who grew up in liberal, conservative, denominational, or non-Christian backgrounds. Even mature Christians continually grow in their knowledge.

This means there may be certain “issues” that we judge as “essential” that God is willing to forgive in some situations. There also may be some “issues” that we judge as “non-essential,” but they become essential due to the faithless and rebellious attitude behind them (cf. Rom. 14:23).

One of the beautiful things about being in Christ is that we don’t have to get everything perfect. We simply must “walk in the light” (1 John 1:7). We are not saved by a creedal checklist, and so we must avoid the creedal checklist approach to fellowship.

One “advantage” of man made creeds is that we may be able to define the lines of fellowship in a simpler and more precise manner than what we experience when we simply fellowship with those who are in Christ, who live faithfully before him (Gal. 3:26-27). But “simpler” and “neater” is not better if leads to unnecessary division of the body of Christ, leads to the toleration of sinful practices, or reduces Christian fellowship to a checklist mentality.

Some will argue that we already have “unwritten” creeds, so we might as well put them into writing so as to make them clear. A better solution would be to stop investing man’s ideas with authority, regardless of whether those creeds are written or unwritten.

But what if some try to lead the church into error? What if some argue and divide over foolish controversies? Both problems are the result, not of looking to Scripture alone for our authority, but of the failure to respect the authority of God’s word to define our faith and practice.

Whenever someone wants to know what we believe, the best answer will always be “let’s look at the Bible together” (cf. Acts 17:11). Let’s demand nothing more. Let’s demand nothing less.

“Shall Christians Go to War” by J. W. McGarvey (1861)

On September 29, 2021 By Tyler BoydIn Christian Non-Violence, Love for Enemies, Restoration

The August 1861 edition of the British Millennial Harbinger was themed “The American Civil War”, and contains the following article, as well as a very interesting reply from Alexander Campbell. The entire edition is available online here.

Our Heavenly Father has ever governed the world according to this maxim, “He that humbleth himself shall be exalted; and he that exalteth himself shall be abased.” A few months ago, the citizens of the American Republic were the proudest people under heaven. They boasted of a present grandeur, a historic renown, and a future glory, such as had not fallen to the lot of any nation. Christians shared in this pride, forgetting that a love of country is but a refinement upon self-love. The God of heaven has never been pleased with such pride, and when it has swelled itself too high, he determined to abase it. It was while King Nebuchadnezzar was in the very act of looking from his palace upon the lofty walls, the splendid buildings, and hanging gardens of Babylon, and saying to himself, “Is not this great Babylon, that I have built for the house of my kingdom, by the might of my power and for the honor of my majesty?” that the hand of the Lord smote him with an insanity that made him think himself a beast, so that he herded with cattle, and ate grass like an ox, thill his hair was like eagles’ feathers, and his nails like birds’ claws. So it was in the midst of our national pride and glory, that the Lord has smitten the people with a similar madness, and like ferocious beasts, they have fallen into butchering one another. God grant that when their understanding is returned to them, they may be able to adopt the language of that unfortunate monarch, at the close of his dreadful aberration:

I blessed the Most High and I praised and honored him that liveth for ever and ever; whose dominion is an everlasting dominion, and his kingdom from generation to generation… I praise and extol, and honour the King of heaven, all whose ways are truth, and his works judgment; and those that walk in pride, he is able to abase.
Daniel 4:34, 37

I think I will never feel proud of my country again. If so, I shall be better able to sympathize with Paul when he exclaims: “God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world is crucified to me, and I unto the world.”

He who uses famine, and pestilence, and war, to scourge the nations, is now scourging us. The call for soldiers is sounding through the land, and Christians are urged, like others, to join the red ranks of war. The pulpits, presses, and prayers of sectarian churches are strangely mingling with the strains of martial music, and the turbulent eloquence of partisan leaders and recruiting officers, to heat up the blood of the people and drive them to the battlefield. The din of preparation and the whirl of passion are surging so wildly around us, that the coolest head grows dizzy, and we scarcely know where we stand. In such an hour the heart of the true disciple instinctively turns back to the Great Teacher, and seeks repose under the yoke of his authority. Shall no we, who have discarded all human traditions, and assumed before heaven and earth that the New Testament is our only and all-sufficient guide, be true to it in this trying hour? If we do not, then we deny the Lord who has bought us, and he will certainly deny us.

When we ask the question, “Shall Christians from either of the contending sections go into this war?” remember the question is not, “Which section is in the right?” With that question, as religious teachers, we have nothing to do. Neither do we ask whether it would be justifiable, according to the honor and the law of nations. Nations and mere men of honor are governed by this code, but Christians by one far different. It is not even a question as to whether a Christian may, under extreme circumstances – such as the immediate protection of the lives of his wife and children – use deadly weapons. But the question is the one right before us, “Shall Christians take part in the war that is now raging? Will we be justifiable in so doing by that Book which is to judge us in the day of eternity?”

One thing is absolutely certain, and that is, that nothing short of a precept or precedent from Christ or the Apostles, can give us the warrant which the case demands. If we go into this war contrary to the will and word of Christ, the blood of the slain will cry out against us, and the curse of heaven will fall upon us. Do the will and word of Christ, then, justify it? I presume that there is no more decisive method of determining what Christ would have us do under given circumstances, than to inquire what he himself would do if he occupied our place. If he were alive and among us now, as he was in Judea, and teaching in either section of the country, what would be his conduct and advice? To ask this question is to answer it. No man who knows his history – who knows that at his birth exulting angels shouted, “Peace on earth, good will among men” – that his name is the Prince of Peace – that “when he was reviled, he reviled not again – when he suffered, he threatened not” – can for a moment doubt that, if here now, he would once more say, “Put up thy sword, for they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.” It were not less that blasphemous to suppose that he who taught us to love our enemies, and to forgive as we would hope to be forgiven, would now tell us to butcher our kindred, or urge us to battle with his prayers. But he is our example, and if we take not up our cross and follow him, we cannot be his disciples.

But the inspired Apostles are also our example, for they followed the footsteps of their Master. Suppose, then, that the twelve were all alive today, and here in our country – six of them in the South, and six in the North. Would they, like the hosts of sectarian preachers on both sides, be urging their brethren to the war? How degrading is the thought! And yet the men who claim to be the successors of the Apostles, are openly, before heaven and earth, exulting in this impiety. The soul of one who has been taught by Paul and Peter sickens at such a scene, and well does he know that he who wrote to the Christians in the city of Rome, who were groaning under the cruelty of Nero, “Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath. If thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink” – would now say to us, “Be not overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.” He knows that, unless Peter has greatly changed for the worse since he left the body, he would still urge us to:

Be pitiful, be courteous – not rendering evil for evil, nor railing for railing, but contrariwise blessing, knowing that you are thereunto called that you might inherit a blessing. For he that would love life, and see good days, let him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no guile. Let him eschew evil and do good; let him seek peace and pursue it. For the eyes of the Lord are over the righteous, and his ears are open to their cries; but the face of the Lord is against them that do evil.
1 Peter 3:8-12

May the “very God of peace” be with us all, and the “peace of God, that passeth all understanding, keep our minds and hearts through Jesus Christ.”

“God’s Provisions of Authority” by David Lipscomb

On July 15, 2021July 15, 2021 By The Christian ExileIn Christian's Relationship to Government, Restoration, The Authority of God

The Gospel Advocate; January 23, 1866

We propose investigating, at this time, the relationship of the church to the political institutions of earth. In the investigation of this subject, we shall use certain terms, very common in themselves, but hardly with a sufficient definiteness of meaning to permit a use of them in this investigation, without first defining them. We shall use the adjectives, civil and political, when connected with the institutions of earth, as indicating those of human origin, in contradiction to those of divine origin. Civil government then, is a government founded by man for the well-being of the human family, in contradiction from a government founded of God for man’s well-being. With this definition, it will at a glance be seen that no civil or human institutions can exist in a government exclusively of God. Hence we never hear of a civil policy in the Church of God. God alone is the law-giver to his church. It also behooves us in determining definitely what relationship now exists between the Church of Christ and the political governments of the world, to inquire into the origin of each, whence did they originate, how stood they with reference to each other in the beginning, too, the successive changes that have taken place in each, with reference to the other, and how these changes have been regarded by God, the great arbiter of right and wrong. By pursuing this course we feel sure that a definite and clear appreciation of the relationship of church and state, may be arrived at, which will be of benefit to both, if acted upon.

Commencing then with the first creation of man the subject of both the human and divine governments, we find that God, in proposing to create him in his own image, declared that,

he shall have dominion over the fish of the sea, the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping think that creepeth upon the face of the earth.
Genesis 1:26

Man, having been created, receives his commission to live and act. In that he is empowered to,

subdue the earth, and to have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
Genesis 1:28

All authority is of God and from God. He, the maker of all things, alone had the right to assign to every created thing its position, functions, and powers.

There is no person or thing then in the universe that can rightfully occupy any particular position or exercise any especial authority or power, save by appointment directly from God. All other exercise of authority must be in rebellion against the Creator. God here directly delegates to man the right to subdue and control the whole lower creation. He is assigned the position of head of this under creation, and has the unquestioned right to hold it subservient to his own will and to command it to the accomplishment of his own purposes.

But who governs and directs man? Has God empowered him to control and direct himself? We find no such power delegated to him, but on the contrary He says, “that it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps aright.” But in contrast with his delegating this authority to man to control the brute creation, the inspired historian says in Genesis 11:16, “The Lord God commanded the man.” In other words, I have given you, man, the right and power to control and use under creation, but I reserve to myself the right, the sole right to govern and control you.

It is noteworthy, that when God once delegated authority to an under agent, he never himself interfered with the exercise of that authority, or reassumed it to himself. Hence, having once delegated to man the right to control the under creation, he never interfered with the exercise of that right. So we find him nowhere issuing commands to the under portion of creation. Still less, we may safely conclude, will he tolerate interference upon the part of man, with what he has reserved to himself as his peculiar prerogative. Then God reserved to himself the sole right to govern and control man, the assumption to govern himself or to govern his fellow man was an interference with God’s prerogative.

In accordance with this reserved right or prerogative of God, we find that he has always made provision for its exercise, by keeping continually a government of his own, in which he proposes to direct man. In the Garden of Eden he governed Adam, to provided for his government, by commands given directly to him in person. When he chose to try his own capacity to direct his steps aright, death, with its untold horrors, resulted. When Adam refused to obey his Maker’s law, as thus given, was driven from the garden of Eden, God still provided a government for all who were disposed to submit to his authority, though the patriarchal institution. In this the father was law-giver and law executor of God to his family.

When the family, that recognized God’s authority, had grown in numbers and proportions to the strength of a nation, God changed his institution from a family to a national government. Under this establishment Moses was not the law-maker, but the law-giver to the Jewish nation. God, himself alone, was the law-maker. We wish it observed that there was no human or civil polity in the Jewish government as it came from its maker. God gave the law through Moses. Through the Prophets and Judges, God applied his own law to the difficulties and differences that arose among his people, and himself through his Urim and Thummim decided every dispute that was brought to His judgment seat. There was here no human legislative, judicial, or executive authority, save as it was under the direct guidance of God.

This institution having superceded and supplanted the Patriarchal dispensation, continued until perverted by the introduction of a human polity, it corrupted the people it had been established to keep pure. When this people, as a whole, had rejected God’s government, and had substituted instead thereof, a human one, God rejected them as his people. Howbeit a few of that nation had, in spite of the influence of the perverted government, maintained their integrity to God. Under the providential workings of God with the other nations of the earth, the minds of some individuals of other nations had also been prepared for the reception of God’s government. He then introduced a new dispensation suited to embrace individuals, many or few, under any and all the nationalities of earth and for all time. This new dispensation, universal in its nature, superceded and supplanted the Jewish national dispensation, as it had done the patriarchal, but this is to stand forever.

God then, in accordance with his design of governing man, has at no time left himself without a government. These governments have been at all times complete and perfect in themselves, needing no interpolation or addition from human hands. To the Jews he said,

What thing soever I command you, observe to do it, you shall not add thereto nor diminish from it.
Deuteronomy 12:32

In the universal or Christian dispensation, he said,

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect thoroughly furnished unto every good work.
2 Timothy 3:16

For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book, and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and out of the things that are written in this book.
Revelation 22:18-19

So God has always provided an institution for man’s government, free from the defilement of human hands. In his government then there can be no civil or human polity.

“The Cholera and the Christian Religion” by David Lipscomb

On March 11, 2020March 11, 2020 By Tyler BoydIn Restoration

David Lipscomb, “The Cholera and the Christian Religion,” Gospel Advocate 15.28 (17 July 1873) 649-653

The object of giving to man the Christian religion is to educate him up to the full observance of the will of God, as Christ observed it. Christ came to do his will even unto death that we might live according to the will of God. The great object of all God’s dealings with man is to induce him to give himself up unreservedly to do the will of God, to submit to his laws. Christ’s life was a perfect submission to the will of his Father in Heaven. The religion of Jesus Christ, then, proposes to reproduce in our lives the life of Christ, both in spirit and active labor. The reproduction in our lives of the life of Christ is the end before us, for our attainment. To this work, we pledge ourselves when we profess to become his followers. We say, we will, with the help of God, strive to live according to his precepts. His life was the practical exemplification of his precepts. He practiced the precepts he gave for the government of the world. He gave in percept for the government of his followers the rules of his own life.

To the extent that we follow his example, and thus practice his precepts, we form within us the living Christ. Paul to the Galatians, 4, 15, says,

My little children of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you.

Again Colos. 1, 27,

To whom God would make know what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles, which is Christ in you the hope of glory, whom we preach, warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus.

We are not only brought into Christ, but Christ is also formed in us by a learning and compliance with his will. The unification between Christ and the disciples progresses from two different directions. The attainment of that unity with Christ is the Christian’s work in life.

Man is baptized out of himself, out of the world and its institutions, and is baptized into Christ that he may walk in him, obey him, enter into his spirit and that Christ may be formed in him. He thus becomes one with Christ, he is in him, he acts through him. The pledge that we solemnly make in our profession of faith in Christ and of our baptism into him is, that we will strive to reproduce his life before the world in our own lives. Hence we are epistles of Christ to the world, to be read of all men.

To reproduce the life of Christ in our own lives is to act as Christ would act, were he in our places. We thus become Christ’s representatives to the world. The solemn pledge of our lives is to act to the best of our ability in the various relationships that we occupy in the world, and in the exigencies and circumstances in which we are placed as Christ would act, were he here situated as we are.

A man with talent and social position confesses Christ, puts him on in baptism. He pledges to God most sacredly, before the world, he will use that talent or ability as Christ would use it. A man with one, two, ten or a hundred thousand dollars, as baptized out of himself into Christ, he pledges as a servant of Christ to try to act as Christ would, were he here on earth situated as this individual is, with his one, ten, or one hundred thousand dollars. That is the obligation, nothing less. (I have no utopian idea that Christ in such circumstances would divide his ten or one hundred thousand dollars among a set of lazy thriftless vagrants or spendthrifts, that would be no better off with it, than without it. But he would so use it as to relieve the pressing necessities of the suffering and to help the helpless, and teach all the way of industry, righteousness, goodness and thrift).

We came into the church with this pledge. We speak and act for Christ, to the world, in the place or stead of Christ. How do we act for him? We stand as Christ to the world. We are the body of Christ. In us he dwells. How do we represent him?

Recently the Cholera made a fearful visitation upon our people. It fell with especial severity upon the poor. It often first attacked the strong arm, the stay and reliance of the family. If not his, it struck down other members of his family so that he must needs cease to labor, in order to nurse them. Again all business ceased, and he could not get work, to support his family. In one family of industrious people, consisting of a father, mother and six industrious boys and girls, every one died save the mother, and she was prostrated. Another, a family—a nice, well-refined, well-raised family—consisted of a father, a carpenter by trade, a mother feeble with consumption, two daughters about grown, who sewed in a millinery establishment, a daughter and niece, about 12 each.

The father was taken ill and died within a few hours. The eldest daughter followed soon. The youngest daughter and niece lingered days between life and death. Only one daughter, a delicate girl was up, and she continually threatened with an attack; they too at times without a morsel of food, for sick or well. Another case, among the colored people. The family in one house consisted of a father, mother, a married son with wife and infant, and two small children. The father, mother, son and son’s wife were all taken ill. The two males were buried. The son’s wife died on Friday night. The mother in bed sick, with the infant grandchild and one of her own small children sick. The body remained uncoffined in that house until Monday morning about ten o’clock. No one was present, able to go and report the death to the proper authorities. What think you of a cholera corpse, lying in a small room with three other sick persons in the sultry, hot weather from Friday June 20^th to Monday, June 23^rd?

This occurred a little out of the corporation, but in a thickly populated negro village. We mention these as specimen cases. They are extreme cases, but there were many approximations to them.

Now in view of these things and the wild panic that seized the population, what would Christ have done in the emergency? Had he been a resident of Nashville with ten, twenty or a hundred thousand dollars, what would he have done? What did he do in the person of his representatives here?

Would he have become panic stricken with fear—fear of death, and have used his means to get himself and family, with their fashionable and luxurious appendages out of danger, to some place of fashionable resort and pleasure, and left his poor brethren and neighbors to suffer and perish from neglect and want?

That is just what he did do in the person of many of his professed representatives. In the person of others he retired to the cool shades of his own luxurious and spacious city mansion elevated above the noxious miasms that destroyed the poor and unfortunate and left them to die, in want and neglect, without attention from him. Did you who so acted bear true testimony to the world for him for whom you profess to act? Was not your course a libel upon him and his character? How can those who so acted again profess to be his children?

The religion of our Savior was intended to make us like Christ, not only in our labor of love—of our self sacrifice for the good of others, but also in raising us above a timid, quaking fear of death. If it does not make us willing to brave death and spend out time and money for the good of our suffering fellow-creatures, offcast and sinners though they be, it does not raise us above a mere empty profession that leaves us scarcely less than hypocrites. The religion that does not induce us to do this essential work of a true Christian cannot save us. The rich often think that they cannot condescend to do the work of nursing and caring for the poor. It is degrading. It is hard I know, just precisely as hard as it is to enter the kingdom of heaven, not a whit more difficult to do the one than the other.

These fatal scourges, under God, become opportunities to show the superior excellence of the Christian religion, in giving true courage, love and self-sacrifice to its votaries. Alas what is it judged by the course of a majority of its professors? What do we better than others, in these days of sorrowful visitation?

Christian men and women should be prudent, and cautious in such surroundings. It is proper, we think, to send women and children, who are incapable of service to the sick, and are liable to the disease beyond its reach, when possible. Bur for able bodied Christian men and women to be flying from the city when their brethren and neighbors and fellow-creatures are suffering and dying for lack of attention and help, is such a contradiction in ideas, we know of no means of reconciling them. We think true Christians would come from the surrounding country and towns to the smitten community to aid the needy. I believe they would bear charmed lives in such a course. God would protect them. We heard Dr. Bowling remark during the greatest fatality, that men doing such a work never took disease and died. But if they did, the feeling and spirit out to be that of the three Hebrew children, when threatened with the fiery furnace, if they did not disobey God. The response was, If God will he can deliver. But whether he will or not, we will not disobey God.

Those who did quietly and calmly do their duty although in the midst of pestilence, want, suffering and death, found these the happiest days of their life. Days to which they can always look back with a feeling of true satisfaction. We trust we may all learn that Christian men and women must be possessed of true and calm courage—that they must be able to face death and find true happiness here, as well as a crown of joy hereafter, in doing their duty in all circumstances.

Barton W. Stone’s Lecture on Matthew 5:38-48

On February 26, 2020February 26, 2020 By The Christian ExileIn Christian Non-Violence, Church History, Love for Enemies, Restoration

The Christian Messenger; July 1844

Ye have heard that it hath been said, an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth. But I say unto you, that ye resist not evil; but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
– Matthew 5.38

The law of Moses admitted of, yea, enjoined strict retaliation on its subjects; the reverse of which our great Lawgiver Christ Jesus enjoins on his subjects with equal strictness. “But I say unto you, that ye resist not evil.” The word evil is an adjective, and doubtless agrees with person understood, resist not an evil or injurious person – if he smite thee on thy right cheek, retaliate not by smiting him also, rather meekly offer the other cheek. By doing thus you may overcome the injurious person, and bring him to submission to the truth. Christ himself, set the example. When he was reviled he reviled not again, when he suffered (more than a stroke on the cheek) he neither retaliated, nor threatened the injurious, but counted himself to him that judgeth righteously. If this precept of Jesus be binding on one of his followers, it is binding on all, and his example sanctions the obligation. “Surely these people will learn war no more,” neither the art nor the practice of it. If genuine Christianity were to overspread the earth, wars would cease, and the world would be bound together in the bonds of peace. This is Christ’s kingdom – the kingdom of peace. A nation professing Christianity, yet teaching, learning and practicing the arts of war cannot be of the kingdom of Christ, nor do they live in obedience to the laws of Christ – the government is anti-Christian, and must reap the fruits of her infidelity at some future day.

But what shall be said of the nation which seeks to injure another, and in face make a trade of it? Yet professing Christianity? The answer is easy. They are leagued with the powers of darkness, and shall share of all their pains.

So far has the Christian world fallen from Christianity, and so long lost sight of it, that its professed advocates have in many instances amalgamated with paganism, and push Christianity into the back grounds. War, so contrary to the kingdom of peace, is taught as a science at military academies, and that too at the expense of the nation. Legislators condemn dueling, and impose severe penalties, and yet these same legislators will justify the same principle on a larger scale – a war between two nations. Their principle is to resist the injurious – but our legislator says, resist not the injurious. Whom shall we obey? God or man?

And if any man sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.
– Matthew 5.40

This man who sues you is an injurious person. If he takes away your coat resist not the injurious, rather let him take thy cloak also. Show what a low estimate you place on worldly possession, that your treasure is above. This course may save your enemy. The same principle is continued. Rather than resist the other person,

And whosoever shall compel you to go a mile, go with him twain. Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee, turn not away.
– Matthew 5.41-42

These precepts are in as plain language as can be expressed. I pretend not to make them plainer. This will, or should satisfy those who say the scriptures mean what they say, and say what they mean. They are certainly against avarice, selfishness and unkindness, and plainly express the contrary. We must make God our example. If we admit one exception to the rules laid down, we may admit others for a similar reason, and know not where to stop; one may explain them away, and act as is generally done, as if such a law was not in existence, and yet profess the Bible to be the sole rule of our practice.

Ye hath heard that it hath been said, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy: but I say unto you, love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them who despitefully use you, and persecute you.
– Matthew 5.43-44

The rule of conduct, by which the ancients were regulated, was to love their neighbor and hate their enemy. – It is necessary to inquire with one of old, “And who is my neighbor?” Jesus gave the inquirer a practical definition in the Samaritan, doing good to an unknown man in great distress, who had been abandoned by the priest and the Levite of his own nation. The Jews were martial enemies to the Samaritans, yet this Samaritan shewed mercy to a Jew in great distress, when he well knew he was his enemy. He was the neighbor, not the enemy. They are set in contrast. An enemy is described in the next verse, as one that curses you – hates you – and despitefully uses and persecutes you. A neighbor is described as one that loves, blesses and does good to them that curse and hate him, and prays for them who despitefully use and persecute him. This definition of a neighbor, is the same as that given above in the case of the Samaritan. How lovely – how divine is the portrait! If all who confess Jesus were of this character, what a body of light and glory would shine upon our world! They, the world, would have to shut their eyes against the light or yield to its power and become neighbors too! This character, drawn in miniature, is the very character of the Father of the universe, and manifested in his son, and in providence to the fallen world. Christians are thus enjoined to act towards their enemies – to all mankind, for the purpose stated in the next.

That ye may be the children of your father who is in heaven; for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sendeth rain on the just and the unjust.
– Matthew 5.45

Now, who are the children of our heavenly Father? Those who labor to be, and to do, like him – those who are neighbors in heart and practice. None else will acknowledge by the Savior of sinners – none else will be admitted into heaven. Such a society on earth would resemble heaven itself. “In such a society as this my weary soul would rest.” Such a society as this can only profit the world, and without it the world would be lost. The wrangling of the carnal bands of nominal Christians in hostile array against each other, spending their strength in vain disputing about opinions, do they profit the world? Are they not a stumbling block to them? Keep your heavenly father always before your eyes as your pattern. This you will do by keeping in constant view Jesus, the image – the express image of his person, for in seeing him you see the Father, – the mercy, grace, and love of the Father flowing from the lips, the hands, the eyes, and wounds of Jesus for a rebel world. Such a compassionate, tender spirit should we possess, and such a love in deed and in truth, should we exhibit to the world, not only to our neighbors, or those that love us, but also to our enemies that hate us.

For if ye love them that love you, what reward have ye? Do not even the Publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? Do not even the Publicans so?
– Matthew 5:46

By cultivating and cherishing such a spirit as recommended above, and by such conduct towards our enemies, is the pain line drawn by the divine hand between the Christian an the world – it is in fact the discrimination between them. If the present generation of professed Christians were judged according to these rules, who could stand?

Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father who is in heaven is perfect.
– Matthew 5:48

O let us labor after this perfection! Let the preachers set the example to their flocks, that they may present them spotless and blameless to their Lord. Their reward shall be great, not in this world’s goods, but in heaven. They that go forth weeping, bearing precious seed, shall doubtless return again, bearing their sheaves with them. O Christians, be diligent to make your calling and election sure. Look up, help is at hand, your redemption is nigh.

B. W. S.

Love Your Enemies

On December 8, 2019December 10, 2019 By Tyler BoydIn Christian Non-Violence, Love for Enemies, Restoration

If we are to call ourselves Christ-ians, we must love our enemies like Christ does. For the early church, loving enemies was not just a minor feature of their faith – it was one of the most distinguishing features of the early church.

Jesus’s command to love enemies must never be reduced to simply “be nice to your grumpy neighbors.” It must be a love that is as radical as Jesus’s love on the cross, and it must be at the very heart of who we are as Christians. If we are serious about our commitment to restoring New Testament Christianity in our own day, we must wrestle with the teachings and examples of Jesus and His apostles, even when it challenges us to step outside our comfort zones.

This is not to suggest that we can’t raise tough questions about the implications Jesus’s teachings. We are allowed to ask questions like “did Jesus really mean what I think he means?” and “did Jesus really intend for his teachings to be applied in this particular way in this particular situation?” And Christians may not always draw the same conclusions from their studies. We are allowed to wrestle with Jesus’ teachings.

But we must never simply ignore or dismiss Jesus’ teachings simply because we think of them as impractical or nonsensical. If we have given Jesus our faithful allegiance, we cannot and must not decide to disagree with his teachings.

But I Say To You…

You have heard that it was said, “An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.” But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your coat also. Whoever forces you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to him who asks of you, and do not turn away from him who wants to borrow from you.

You have heard that it was said, “You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.” But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? Therefore you are to be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect. – Matthew 5.38-48

Jesus quotes from Exodus 21:24, “eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth.” Jesus read this law not as God’s endorsement for just violence, but as a text designed to limit violence. Jesus teaches the fulfillment of this law by saying “But I say to you, do not resist an evil person.”

“Do not resist an evil person”? On the surface, such a command sounds very strange. Wasn’t the entire life and mission of Jesus one of resisting evil? Aren’t Christians supposed to resist evil and worldly ways?

What did Jesus mean when he said “do not resist an evil person”? The best explanation is the one Jesus gives with four examples.

“Whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also”
“If anyone wants to sue you and take away your shirt, let him have your coat also”
“Whoever forces you to go one mile, go with him two”
“Give to him who asks of you, and do not turn away from him who wants to borrow from you”

This is a form of resisting evil. Instead of responding with the “slap for slap, punch for punch, bullet for bullet” same kind of evil, Jesus commanded his disciples to resist the urge to respond in kind, thus putting an end to the cycle of violence. Jesus didn’t simply forbid unjust retaliation. The law did that. Jesus took it a step further by commanding his disciples not even to resist in kind.

How do Jesus’s disciples resist evil? By letting evil people win. That almost feels strange to put it that way. It’s backwards. It’s counterintuitive. But go back and read the four examples. In all four examples, Jesus instructs us to let the bad guy gain the upper hand.

What’s more, this is what Jesus showed us to do when he practiced what he preached. Jesus allowed his enemies to “win” by nailing him to the cross.

It should be noted that following this command is not weakness. Jesus was not “weak” when he hung on the cross. He could have easily commanded an army to ten thousand angels to judge the world and set him free. He was commanding us to let the bad guys win, even when we have the strength and power to defeat them.

Radical Enemy Love

Jesus commands us to love our enemies. He didn’t just command us to love some of our enemies. He didn’t just command us to love our enemies when it makes sense to so. He commanded us to love our enemies the way God, “who sends rain on the just and unjust”, loves them. We are to love the way God does by refusing to make a distinction between which enemies we are to love. He commanded us to love our enemies even in those times when it wouldn’t make sense to your average Gentile or tax collector.

Consider also this parallel passage from Luke:

But I say to you who hear, love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. Whoever hits you on the cheek, offer him the other also; and whoever takes away your coat, do not withhold your shirt from him either. Give to everyone who asks of you, and whoever takes away what is yours, do not demand it back. Treat others the same way you want them to treat you. If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. If you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. If you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners in order to receive back the same amount. But love you enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High; for He Himself is kind to ungrateful and evil men. Be merciful, just as your Father is Merciful.” – Luke 6:27-36

Could Jesus have been any clearer? The type of love Christians are to have is supposed to be more than the “common sense” love shown by the world around us. Also note that Jesus commands us to do good to our enemies, lest we think that we can somehow “love” our enemies while doing harm to them.

Not Just a Minor Feature of Christianity

Lest we think that this is just a somewhat strange, one-off command of Jesus, when we read our New Testament, it doesn’t take long to see this teaching repeated time and time again.

When Jesus was arrested in the garden, he commanded Peter to “Put your sword back into its place” (Mt. 26:52). Here Peter was drawing his sword against an enemy in defense of an innocent person, yet Jesus rebuked Peter.

Jesus cites the fact that his disciples were not fighting in his self-defense as proof that his kingdom was not of this world.

My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, then my servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this world. – John 18.36

When Jesus was hanging on the cross, he prayed, “Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing” (Lk. 23.34). Without a doubt, Jesus loved his enemies.

“Yeah, but Jesus had to do that…”

“Sure, but Jesus’s death was different. He was the Messiah. That was the sacrifice for sins. Jesus had to let himself be killed. It had to happen as part of God’s plan.”

Without a doubt, Jesus was unique and His death was unique.

But even so, when Peter looked to the cross, he viewed Jesus’s response to evil as an example given for all of us to follow.

For you have been called for this purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps, who committed no sin, nor was any deceit found in his mouth, and while being reviled, He did not revile in return; while suffering, He uttered no threats, but kept entrusting Himself to Him who judges righteously. – 1 Peter 2.21-23

In Romans 12, Paul instructs the disciples to “Never take your own revenge, beloved, but leave room for the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay” says the Lord” (v. 19) Rather than judging them, Christians are to love and serve their enemies, attending to their needs (vs. 20-21).

In Hebrews 10:34 we read about how the early disciples joyfully accepted the plundering of their possessions, knowing that they possessed a better and more lasting possession.

In Acts we read about the disciple Stephen, who with his dying breath, prayed for his enemies as they were stoning him (Acts 7.60).

And then there’s the book of Revelation. Not only does Revelation ascribe our victory to the “slain lamb” (Rev. 5.6-14), but apparently Jesus was not the only one to gain victory through death.

Revelation 12 is filled with encouraging words, describing the victory of the saints:

Then I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying, “Now the salvation , and the power, and the kingdom of our God and the authority of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren has been thrown down, he who accuses them before our God day and night. – Revelation 12:10

Salvation! Power! Kingdom! Authority! The enemy is destroyed! This is all great news!

But then in the very next verse, we are told how Jesus’ disciples gained this great victory.

And they overcame him because of the blood of the Lamb and because of the word of their testimony, and they did not love their life even when faced with death. – Revelation 12:11

Yes, we must overcome evil. But the way we overcome evil is by resisting the strong urge to gain the upper hand when our enemies mistreat us. Or as Paul puts it,

Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. – Romans 12:21

Are We Really Expected To Believe Such Nonsense?

The idea of “letting others win” will always be mocked at by some. It will always be dismissed by others in exchange for resisting evil with a little more “common sense.”

But the earliest Christians believed Jesus actually meant what he said. They believed that they were supposed to love their enemies, even to the point of death. They actually believed that their death was a more powerful proof of the gospel than their life. The 2^nd century Christian, Tertullian, is famously quoted as saying:

The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church. As often as we are mown down by you, the more we grow in numbers; the blood of Christians is the seed.

For the first couple of centuries immediately following the close of the New Testament, “Love your enemies” (Mt. 5.44) was quoted by 10 different authors in 26 places, making it the most cited verse from the New Testament. “Love your enemies” was to the early church what verses like “Acts 2:38” or “John 3:16” are for the church today. It was the very heartbeat of early Christianity. It is the teaching for which they were most known. It is what separated them from everyone else.

Those Hard Questions

“But what if someone attacks my family in the middle of the night?”

“But what if a Christian is a policeman or in the military?”

“But what about Hitler? Surely Christians shouldn’t have just let him win?”

Questions like these aren’t easy. They need to be wrestled with (with lots of love for one another in the process). If after wrestling with all the teachings of Jesus, you are convinced that you would be justified in killing an enemy as a very last resort, fine. Buy a gun if you want. Join the military if your conscience compels you. Maybe you’re right. Maybe there is an argument that can be made to justify violence in some extreme situations.

But that’s not the point.

The point is, when it’s all said and done, and those questions have been asked, and those discussions have been had, “loving your enemies” must still be at the very heart of who we are as Christians. When other people hear “Oh, you’re a Christian”, do they think “You’re one of those crazy people who loves their enemies no matter what”? If we’re not known for loving enemies in a way that seems strange to the world around us, we’re not following the teachings and example of Jesus.

Beloved, Jesus expects us to love our enemies. We must love our enemies.

What Is the “Church of Christ”?

On July 12, 2019May 17, 2020 By Tyler BoydIn Restoration

Whenever someone asks me “Are you a member of the church of Christ?” I almost always hesitate before I answer. This has nothing to do with me being ashamed of Christ or His church. Quite the opposite! I hesitate because I love the church, and I want to communicate clearly and biblically. I’ve found that the phrase “church of Christ” has come to mean different things to different people. I hesitate because a simple “yes” or “no” answer often leads to confusion or even encourages unbiblical ideas about the church.

As an illustration, consider three different ways the phrase “Church of Christ” is understood.

The Denominational Understanding

For many, the phrase “Church of Christ” is understood to refer to those churches which wear the name “Church of Christ” and associate with one another as a branch of the American Restoration Movement. Together, these “Churches of Christ” represent one branch, or one denomination of the universal body of Christ.

This is perhaps the most common understanding of the phrase in our culture. Whether we like it or not, we live in a denominational world. We have Catholics, Baptists, Methodist, Presbyterians and so on. According to this understanding, the “Church of Christ” fits right in this list of denominations. Among those who think of themselves as belonging to one denomination or another, it is natural for them to assume that when we use the phrase “Church of Christ” we are talking about our denomination.

Even many who attend Churches of Christ (i.e. those congregations with the name “Church of Christ”) use the phrase in this way. “Church of Christ” is viewed as the name of our group. We have “Church of Christ” schools, “Church of Christ” preachers, and “Church of Christ” traditions. If you ever hear someone say “I grew up Church of Christ, but then I switched to _______” , they are using the phrase as a denominational title.

Sometimes you will hear Christian scholars or preachers speak of “our heritage”, “our tribe” or “our little corner of the kingdom”. These are ways of describing the “Church of Christ” as one group among many. This is especially common among those who have been highly exposed to the “sectarian” view of the church (see below). This usage confronts the arrogance and closed mindedness of the sectarian view and challenges it with a much needed dose of humility to recognize that we are not uniquely smarter or more capable of discerning truth than anyone else.

In a religious environment where denominationalism is the default position for almost everyone, many have given up on using the phrase to describe anything other than another denomination.

The Sectarian Understanding

In my opinion, the best definition of sectarianism was given by David Lipscomb in his 1907 article “A Sectarian and a Truth Seeker”. (It would be worth your time to read this excellent article here).

A sectarian is one who defends everything his party holds or that will help his party, and opposes all that his party does not hold or that will injure the strength and popularity of his party. The partisan takes for granted everything his party holds is right, and everything the other part holds is wrong and to be opposed. Hence the party lines define his faith and teaching. He sees no good in the other party. He sees no wrong in his own party, unless someone in his party should love truth and oppose an error of his party or defend a truth of the other party.

Sectarians understand that biblically speaking, there is only one church, the church of Christ (Eph. 1.22-23; Eph. 4.4). They know and use all the same scriptures about the “church of Christ” as those who use the phrase biblically (see below). Yet despite sounding like those who use the phrase “church of Christ” biblically, their understanding of the church is actually much more closely aligned with the denominational understanding of the church.

Similar to the denominational understanding, sectarians understand the phrase “Church of Christ” to refer to those churches which wear the name “Church of Christ” and associate with one another as a branch of the American Restoration Movement. But rather than thinking of themselves as one denomination of the universal church, they think that their party, the “Church of Christ”, constitutes the entirety of the body of Christ. In their minds, people in other parties cannot possibly be members of the one true church.

This view is not to be confused with the scriptural view. They do share the scriptural concept of “only one church” which was built by and belongs to Christ. But rather than understanding the boundaries of Christ’s church as “those who have been baptized and are faithful to Christ” (Gal. 3.26-27), they identify the church as “those who are faithful to my party”. In other words, they identify the body of Christ as synonymous with the modern day association of churches which wear the name “Church of Christ.”

This view is common among those who have been fed a steady diet of proof texts about the “one church”, but have not studied enough to grasp a distinction between how the phrase “churches of Christ” is used in scripture (Rom. 16.16) and how denominational titles are used in our culture.

A sectarian understanding is often present when:

The phrase “Church of Christ” is used as the official name for the church, and as the exclusive phrase used to describe the church
Party lines and traditions are more important than scripture (or worse, when adherence to written “statements of faith” are made the test of fellowship rather than adherence to Scripture)
Someone who has obeyed the gospel is forced to submit to “rebaptism” if they did not learn the gospel directly from a Church of Christ member
Someone refuses to question any traditions, practices, or beliefs of the Church of Christ, even when Scriptural objections are raised

This view is often held by those who recognize the problem of denominationalism, but instead of seeking to destroy denominationalism with unity in Christ, they seek to build up and strengthen their distinct sect.

The Biblical Understanding

I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hades will not overpower it. – Matthew 16.18

Jesus built His church. There is one church (cf .Eph. 1.22-23; Eph. 4.4) which belongs to Christ. This one church is the universal body of Christ which is made up of all those who are saved (Heb. 12.22-24).

Congregations of these believers can rightly be described as “churches of Christ” (Rom. 16.16). However, it should be noted that we could just as rightly refer to the church as the church of God, the body, the kingdom, etc. (1 Cor. 10.32; Eph. 1.22-23; Col. 1.13).

When we use the phrase “church of Christ” in this biblical sense, we are not referring to any sect or denomination you could choose to join. Biblically speaking, only the Lord can add you to His church, and He does this when you are saved (Acts 2.41, 47). There are no saved people outside His one church (Heb. 12.22-24). Regardless of how many sects or denominations that may come and go throughout the years, there is and always will be only “one body” of Christ (Eph. 4.4).

Ultimately, it is the Lord who knows who is “in” and who is “out” of His church (Heb. 12.23; 2 Tim. 2.19). If we have clothed ourselves with Christ in baptism and give our faithful allegiance to Jesus, we can know that we are numbered among His children (Gal. 3.26-27).

There are still many who strive to use the phrase in the same way it was used in Romans 16.16, to simply refer to a congregation of Christians. There are still those who desire use the phrase to call for nondenominational and nonsectarian Christianity.

The Importance of Speaking Clearly

Please remember that not everyone who uses the phrase “church of Christ” to refer to Christ’s one church is a sectarian.

When you hear things like “Christ only established one church, and if you aren’t a part of that church you can’t go to heaven” this is not necessarily sectarianism. It could be, but it depends on what body they have in mind when they speak of the one church. They might simply be upholding a sect, but they could simply be trying to encourage someone to become a Christian. If you aren’t sure what they mean, ask them. Give them a chance to explain themselves more clearly before drawing your conclusion.

If you are going to use the phrase “church of Christ” in the biblical sense, make sure you are using the phrase properly.

“Church of Christ” is not the official name of the church. It is not the exclusive (or even the primary) description of the church. When we use it as such, we are encouraging an unbiblical understanding of the church. I am not “Church of Christ”. And I am certainly not a “CofC’er”. I am a Christian.

If you are committed to using the phrase “Church of Christ” as a sectarian or denominational title, please don’t give that sect or denomination your loyalty.

It drives me crazy whenever I hear someone refer to the “Church of Christ” as simply “our heritage” or “our tribe” or “our little corner of the kingdom”, and then proceed to express how much they love the Churches of Christ and want to see them succeed. If what we have in mind is a sect or a denomination, why would we give it one ounce of our loyalty? Let the Church of Christ denomination die! Let the Church of Christ sect die! But let Christ’s church live eternally! Let’s give our loyalty to Christ, not to any denomination or sect.

If you are going to use the phrase “church of Christ”, please take extra care to make sure your listeners know what you are talking about.

When terms are understood differently by different people it only breeds confusion. If you are going to use the phrase in a denominational or sectarian sense, please make sure others know that you are not using it to refer to the one body of Christ. If you are going to use the phrase to refer to the one universal body of Christ, please make sure others understand that you are not referring to a sect or a denomination.

Our aim is to simply be Christians. We want to be faithful, loyal, disciples of Christ. We want to give our allegiance to Him as part of His one church, without encouraging denominationalism or sectarianism. Let’s not use the name of Christ in vain by misusing His name.

Let’s be careful how we talk about the “church of Christ.”

Restoration: A Biblical Principle

On March 24, 2016August 4, 2017 By Lance MosherIn Restoration1 Comment

There was only one time in the history of the universe that restoration was not needed. That time was between Genesis 1:31 and Genesis 3:6, when sin was nonexistent.

God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day. Genesis 1:31.

When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate. Genesis 3:6

All of creation was affected by the sin of Eve and Adam. Of course, that does not mean that all of creation was guilty of the sin. But even we, though not guilty of Adam’s sin, are affected by it.

Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned. Romans 5:12

For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. 1 Corinthians 15:21

Death reigns over this world, so long as sin is in it. The serpent’s goal was to deceive the woman, and through her disobedience, introduce death into the world. The beauty is this: God had a plan all along. To the serpent, God said,

And I will put enmity
Between you and the woman,
And between your seed and her seed;
He shall bruise you on the head,
And you shall bruise him on the heel. Genesis 3:15.

Though Satan’s goal is to reign over mankind through death, God’s plan is hostile toward death. The key words in this passage are “I will…” Before turning to the woman and the man and detailing their individual punishments, before they had a chance and beg on their knees for redemption, God revealed His will to redeem, to restore, mankind.

Since that moment in the Garden, mankind has known God as the God of Restoration. When creation is separated from its Creator, it is God’s mission to restore. In that moment in the Garden, God revealed that His instrument of restoration would be the “seed” of the woman (i.e., Christ).

Many centuries passed between that moment in in the Garden and Jesus’ atoning sacrifice. But even while creation waited for the “fullness of time” (Gal. 4:4), God continued to reveal Himself as the God of Restoration. When mankind had tainted all of creation with continual sinfulness, God restored the world through a flood and the salvation of one family. When God’s people were held captive by pagan Egyptians, God restored their place of prominence in His plans. When the nation of Israel was corrupted by bad kings and false gods, the true God sent prophets to restore the nation to their first love. When the city of God was in ruins, God sent Nehemiah to begin the long process of restoration. Nehemiah is best known for his work to restore the wall in Jerusalem (Neh. 3; 6:15-19). In addition, however, Nehemiah (and Ezra), speaking for God, also called for the restoration of:

Confidence in the Lord (Neh. 4:11-23)
Fairness in trade and care for the poor (Neh. 5:1-13)
Understanding of the Law (Neh. 8:1-8)
Holy days and feasts (Neh. 8:9-18)
Repentance and forgiveness (Neh. 9:1-4)
Acceptable worship (Neh. 9:5-37)
National purity (Neh. 13:1-3)
Tithes (Neh. 13:10-14)
Sabbath-keeping (Neh. 13:15-22)
Family purity (Neh. 13:23-29)

A reading through the book of Nehemiah quickly demonstrates that God is the God of Restoration. God sets out a plan, and when His people forget it or are otherwise unable to live out that plan, He provides the admonishment and means necessary for restoration. What is the lesson for us today? God continues to provide a way for and demand restoration when His plans are forsaken.

To build is difficult. To destroy is simple. To rebuild is often the most difficult. In all of the cases that God’s servants called for restoration, pain and sacrifice were required. Money, selfishness, time, personal possessions, friends, and even marriages had to be surrendered. Was it easy? No. Was it painful? Yes. Was it worth it? Absolutely.

Today, many of God’s plans have been forsaken. Marriages are treated as disposable. Godly parenting is replaced by worldly philosophies and the workplace. The question of salvation is the most confusing question in the religious world. The body of Christ has been chopped, sliced, distorted, and forgotten. Worship has turned inward, where the heart and mind of people are most important. Allegiance has been placed into the establishments of men. Restoration is needed just as badly today as it was in Nehemiah’s time. Is there hope?

We might be tempted to look at Nehemiah and Ezra as privileged, since it seems they were commissioned specifically to the task of restoration. They had “direction” from God. Do we not? What did Nehemiah and Ezra use to call the people to restoration? They brought no new revelation. Instead, they used the Law of Moses, which had already been revealed centuries before.

We have acted very corruptly against You and have not kept the commandments, nor the statutes, nor the ordinances which You commanded Your servant Moses. Nehemiah 1:7.

They found written in the law how the Lord had commanded through Moses that the sons of Israel should live in booths during the feast of the seventh month. So they proclaimed and circulated a proclamation in all their cities and in Jerusalem… Nehemiah 8:14-15.

Now the rest of the people… are taking on themselves a curse and an oath to walk in God’s law, which was given through Moses, God’s servant, and to keep and to observe all the commandments of God our Lord, and His ordinances and His statutes. Nehemiah 10:28-29

It did not take long after Jesus established His church for selfishness to creep into the body of Christ (Acts 5:1-4). As time went on, the influence of false teachers increased. Many of the epistles of the New Testament were written to Christians who were either already under the influence of falsehood or were at risk. Over and over, the Lord’s disciples were called to go back to what they had first received.

I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! Galatians 1:6-8.

Just as in the Garden, where falsehood has influence, restoration is required. People need to return to the original blueprints.

For marriage, let us return to God’s plan from the beginning (Matt. 19:1-9)
For parenting, let us return to the simplicity of love and admonition (Eph. 6:4)
For salvation, let us return to the “pattern of teaching” (Rom. 6:17)
For unity, let us return to the one body (Eph. 4:4-6)
For worship, let us return to what God seeks (John 4:23-24)
For allegiance, let us return to the sovereignty of Christ (1 Tim. 6:13-16)

All of this will require sacrifice. But isn’t that the call of discipleship?

And He was saying to them all, “If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross daily and follow Me. For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake, he is the one who will save it. For what is a man profited if he gains the whole world, and loses or forfeits himself? For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when He comes in His glory, and the glory of the Father and of the holy angels.” Luke 9:23-26.

When people of the 21st century destroy the home, forsake the Lordship of Christ, and denominate the church, God’s word remains the same. The opportunity for restoration is now. Hear the call, heed the call, and then begin to call others.

But I have this against you, that you have left your first love. Therefore remember from where you have fallen, and repent and do the deeds you did at first; or else I am coming to you and will remove your lampstand out of its place—unless you repent. Revelation 2:4-5.