Christian Monthly Standard » Miscellaneous

These are a few of my Favorite Things

Richard Vandagriff — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 20:53:21 +0000

Aurelius Augustinus (354 – 430) is known as Saint Augustine. I might offer evidence that suggests he was not a saint at all. You may find a hint of that as you read on. He was responsible for solidifying many of the doctrines of Catholicism. Augustine wrote dialogues on the Trinity and Mariolatry and on a wide number of other topics. His complete works measure at least eight full volumes on my shelves, having used up more words than the entire Holy Scriptures by a few hundred times. You might note that he lived during the early part of the period suggested for the start of Catholicism.

Here is just a smattering of his teaching:

He suggested that baptism ought to be withheld until a person was close to death such as with the emperor Constantine, and as was then becoming common in the Romanized churches; so that converts might have the majority of their sins behind them when they repented.

The notion that you have a full knowledge of sin and will not make any changes is monstrously wrong. This is the argument “I cannot control myself” that is so prevalent today; so at least we didn’t invent it. It is sheer escapist nonsense. Does God now accept the sinner carte blanc, or do we need to rid ourselves of as much of the baggage of sin as we can possibly jettison? It also does not accord belief that we can ever give up sinning – we just cannot stop, don’t you see that Jesus? Augustine writes quite a bit about how he did not want to get rid of his mistresses – and so he did not. I wonder? Is the spirit willing, but the flesh weak? Or, is it the other way around?

You might as well believe that you must travel to Mars or to the bottom of the sea to be baptized and become a Christian. You would have equal authority. Such thought and instruction is completely against anything taught in the scriptures; and it will have the end effect of doing absolutely nothing for one’s status before God. Hear, believe, repent, be immersed and remain faithful – that is the prescription offered by the Holy Spirit. And you change for God or suffer the consequences. It is a very difficult but simple equation.

Augustine believed that Adam and Eve never died but ate of the Tree of Life in Eden and lived on and were eventually carried up to heaven.

This indicates he never actually bothered to read the scriptures. That too remains a problem today. Mormons teach this also; so, along with many others, that must mean they never read it either. In any case, it displays an ignorance of the scriptures as the record states exactly how long Adam lived and, that after a life of nine hundred thirty years “he died” (5:5). Someone is wrong, and I believe that it isn’t God or His Word. The scriptures are silent about Eve, but then they are also silent about how long most of the women lived and when they died.

Augustine believed that infant baptism was a matter “rightly held to have been handed down by apostolic authority,” and that even without this, the church could form a “true conjecture of the value of the sacrament of baptism in the case of infants, from the parallel of circumcision…” He later posted this: “Therefore, when others take the vows for them, that the celebration of the sacrament may be complete on their behalf, it is unquestionably of avail for their dedication to God, because they cannot answer for themselves.”

Uh huh! So, let me see if I have this one. The apostles handed down the authority for infant baptism, but the Holy Spirit forgot to record a word about it? Go figure. To paraphrase Elijah, perhaps God was busy that day. Then baptism, rather than being a token of faith and the anti-type to circumcision, became the NT parallel to it. So Peter got it wrong too. And the baby babble is not to be taken as a dedication to God because they, after all, are not able to speak. Who would have ever thought that? Ronald Reagan once posed, babies (which he compared to the federal government) possess “an alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other.” Some might suppose they have no responsibility period. If so, somebody had sure better do the dedication and talking for them. But how will we ever know when we get it right, babble being in need of serious interpretation, and the interpreters of babble but few?

Thank God, we have the right to believe whatever suits us, no matter how screwball and stupid. But in my simpleton’s view, this is certainly a giant leap of faith and a blinding misappropriation of both reason and logic. This is mind control theory at its very best; and thousands have championed it, while millions have been brought under their control. Yet it is a historical and religious lie with no evidence to bolster it and not so much as a shred of scripture behind any corner. As for the logic to the argument: there simply isn’t any.

But, just to be fair, Augustine here identifies original sin long before Jean Calvin ever thought it up. Which can only mean: Calvin did not think of it at all. To head straight down to the bottom of the rabbit hole, Augustine also tells the reader that he had inappropriate thoughts while at his mother’s breast; and thus as an infant he needed redemption. Perhaps these were some of those thoughts? How could we ever know? The more I read of these things, the more it makes me wonder.

There is so much more, it just boggles the mind. I have every intention to move further off in history (as I had said) with some similar records and remarks about what amounted to the universal or Catholic “Christian” religion during the Dark Ages. But the road both here and there is so completely strewn and spread over with heresy, blasphemy, lack of care and the pure rot of godlessness; it is hard to leave this part of religious history without offering some of the worst for us to ponder. It all makes the false teachers of today look like rank amateurs.

Proclaim the message; persist in it whether convenient or not; rebuke, correct, and encourage with great patience and teaching.

(2 Timothy 4:2, HCSB)

Where did all the Denominations come from? (Pt. 3)

Richard Vandagriff — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 19:58:20 +0000

We noted that it cannot be stated authoritatively when true Christianity first became perverted and then vanished for periods of time. But we should know it happened just as Christ said that it would.

Humankind can pervert and disassemble just about anything when left to our own devices. Though the Word lives and abides forever, that does not mean it cannot be roundly and completely ignored by “religious people”.

I suggested that you cannot identify an exact point in time when the first Christians left off scriptural authority and embraced what would in short order become known as Roman Catholicism. We do know, from the scriptures, the seed had been sown while the apostles and the first disciples were yet alive. And we have offered scriptural information and then an opinion or two based upon the leftovers of secular history.

The path of religious history occasionally appears to be sparsely marked; and at times, it seems to have vanished altogether, or to be strewn with the bias of the recorders. It gets worse when you look at the divisions and consolidations that were forged from the fifth through the twelfth century. Out of this period you have so many departures, it becomes difficult to list them all. To name a few, you have the schism between Eastern and Western Catholicism, of pope and anti-pope, the rising German influence, the politics of the aristocracy and the popes, the Crusades and many other heretical departures, some that you may be able to put a name to and some that you cannot. Most of the existing history was recorded by willing participants. It is complex; and I would be doing an injustice to the truth by attempting to put it into a few five hundred word essays.

So, it’s necessary to remember the basics: Salvation is in Jesus Christ; and the only record of all things eternal is The Word of God. As part of this reminder, I would refer you to Brent’s appeal in his most recent posts, and to what the scriptures inform us about holiness. In short: it is God, and God alone who decides what is Holy – what is to bear His Name and what, where and when something is to be identified or known as Holy. We should know the Scriptures tell us this is true whether or not we are talking about popes, archbishops, prophets, pastors, later apostles, temples, angels, names, places, commands, assemblies, worship or its patterns — or anything else that has to do or we think may have to do with God and salvation. All that we know about things eternal is contained in what God has left us. And He said it is finished and complete.

As was suggested, the history of apostasy is the result of a process. The amount of time it took to reach some ungodly milestone was directly proportional to the increasing lack of faith and disinterest in the Word of God. This particular fact needs to be burned into our memory chips and remembered as long as we live — if we claim to serve God and Christ. Remember, it took the Hebrews less than forty days to depart from the truth, and to head off into abominable passions and to end up worshipping a golden idol. Centuries later it took the Northern Kingdom of Israel a single generation to forget Jerusalem and God’s commands completely and to set up two more golden calves in Dan and Bethel. The simple cause was failure to do what they had been told to do, and to pay strict attention to the Word of God.

So, is it surprising what began to infect churches while the Holy Apostles were yet alive? The New Testament is rife with warnings and examples. Have we today been suddenly caught unwarned and unawares?

It ought to be abundantly clear. And we all ought to be able to identify ungodliness and what is unholy, whether it started out centuries ago, or comes through the door tomorrow smiling and calling on the name of Christ. We all, every one of us, have Bibles. There is no mystery to it.

Christ asked those who questioned Him “Have you not read?” What is your answer?

And someone said to him, “Lord, will those who are saved be few?”

And he said to them, “Strive to enter through the narrow door. For many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able. When once the master of the house has risen and shut the door, and you begin to stand outside and to knock at the door, saying, ‘Lord, open to us,’ then he will answer you, ‘I do not know where you come from.’ Then you will begin to say, ‘We ate and drank in your presence, and you taught in our streets.’ But he will say, ‘I tell you, I do not know where you come from. Depart from me, all you workers of evil!’ In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God but you yourselves cast out.

(Luke 13:23-28)

Where did all the Denominations come from? (Roman Catholicism pt. 2)

Richard Vandagriff — Mon, 02 Jan 2012 15:55:56 +0000

The Catholic Rule of Faith,with its “unanimous consent of the Fathers” is stated to be held in solemnity. It first appeared under Pius IV at one of the many sessions of the various Councils of Trent. It also appears in more recent Papal Creeds: “Nor will I take and interpret it (the Sacred Scriptures) otherwise than according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers.” It might as well state that “I will not take and interpret the scriptures unless I possess the Sorcerer’s Stone” or some better fictional conjurers invention. It is after all the Roman Church that anointed everyone of these ancients known as “Church Fathers.” Too bad that, for the most part, they contradict one another and have nothing that might pass as unanimous consent on all except a single topic. So I plan to give credit where credit is due.

“Brethren, look into the Holy Scriptures, where are the true words of the Holy Ghost. You know there is nothing unjust or counterfeit in them.” (Clement from his letter to the Church at Corinth.)

“The blessed and renowned Paul… did with all exactness and soundness, teach the word of truth; and being gone from you did write an epistle to you, into which, if you look, you will be able to edify yourselves in the faith that has been delivered to you… I trust that you are well exercised in the Holy Scriptures, and that nothing is hid from you.” (Polycarp to the Philippian Church.)

“Ignorance of the scriptures is the cause of all evils.” “The knowledge of the Holy Bible is a powerful defense against sin: while an ignorance of them is a deep precipice, a profound gulf. It is a great betraying of salvation to know nothing of the Divine Law, it is this ignorance which has given birth to heresies.” (Chrysostom’s third sermon on Lazarus.)

Then the Romanists came up with this at the Council of Toulouse in Canon 14: “We prohibit the laity from having the books of the Old and New Testaments; unless it be, at most, that any one wishes to have, from devotion, a Psalter, a breviary for the divine offices, or the honor of the blessed Mary; but we forbid them, in the most express manner, to have the books translated into the vulgar tongue.”

And finally this from the same Council of Trent: “It belongs to the Church to judge of the true sense and interpretation of Scripture; and that no person shall dare to interpret it in matters relating to faith and manners, to any sense contrary to that which the Church has held, and does still hold; or contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers.”

You be the judge.

Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him or invite him into your house nor greet him; for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds.

(2 John 9 -11)

“There is one hope of your calling” (2)

Richard Vandagriff — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 20:57:58 +0000

We are told to all teach and hold to the same things. If we must teach and do alike, are we all to be Unitarians, Trinitarians or Universalists? Somewhere in time some folks decided that they must distinguish themselves and should be identified by a different set of instructions and names: some became Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodists, Pentecostals, Catholic, Adventists, and a myriad of others. That was done because they did not all teach and hold to the same things. But then they were not the first. And there is not so much as a thread of unity between all of these groups and disciplines.

Does any one of these broad groups and the rest have it right. Certainly they all cannot. And if there is only one faith and one hope, which one is the right one — which is The Way?

Recently the political question has again been raised: Is a Mormon a Christian? Perhaps we must all become Mormons and hold to their teachings in order to be found faithful? Surely Mormons believe that.

Let me pose some troubling questions. If you call yourself by some other person’s name than Christ’s, or by some name somebody else picked for you; or if you are called after an action or a process, and let’s suppose you post it over a door, in a text, on a marquee, or in your heart – does that make you a better Christian? Does it make you a Christian at all? It does make you different doesn’t it? Even if it is an afterthought, is what you practice under another name of any value to the state of your soul? If it is we had all better find out which one does the trick.

How about this: Does the Word of God date prior to 328, 606, 1312, 1439, 1609, or 1824? Did it appear recently as some addendum or did the new supersede what had originally been given? Did the renewed truth of God show up some place in the remote or not so remote past, in some other century early or in modern times? If it did doesn’t that make Jesus a liar (or was he simply mistaken)? Doesn’t that also say the same for all of the apostles and prophets of the NT?

Perhaps we ought to start by answering this question: Whose name is it that we are commanded to honor and to wear? I might quickly ask another: why do the scriptures call disciples Christians?

We could do the exact same form of dating and ask the very same questions about every name and every Christian religious group known. And we can ask the same things about every other variation we can possibly find with the same result – except that is for a single one: the assembly that Jesus founded and the apostles established and described – the only one found in both form and practice within the pages of a NT.

So how many ways can we have it and still get it right? Is it an open field full of fat game birds just ready to break for the tree line? Or is there just one bird standing alone? Bret Stephens, columnist and author, writing on the existence today of the religion of Zoroaster, noted that all of their sacred texts had been destroyed by Alexander the Great. That of course did not put a stop to things. They are still around. Some of those variations on Christianity are much the same. Some have no link to a thing in either the Old or New Testament. Some focus on a single verse in Mark sixteen and make it a calling card to the exclusion of other things,making snake handling a spiritual sign. Some seem to have made up everything they do. But pointing these things out will not stop the proliferation of doctrines and assemblies. Yet perhaps it may cause someone to have second thoughts and to start reading a bible.

I would suggest you should know this is not a multiple choice exam. And these are not rhetorical questions. Will any of us be saved by aligning ourselves with any one of the hundreds of groups, sects or denominations that exist today? Are these groups about serving God or more about serving men? If about serving God, then which one is IT? Jesus once asked, When the Son of Man returns, will he even find faith upon the earth? Well?

Perhaps we should attempt to join every group, supposing against all reason that every one of them teaches the truth? That would surely keep us busy. Though it sounds silly; aren’t there good people found in each one? Don’t they all believe in what they do and teach, just as the Muslims and Buddhists?

You should know that there are several people alive right now who claim to be the Christ, the Messiah, and some of them head huge organizations with millions of followers. Should we stop what we are doing and go and follow one of them? Which one?

Everybody claims to have some greater knowledge about The Way and The Truth. But Jesus told us that only He, The Word, is that.

Well then, does anybody bother to teach the truth today? If your answer to that is yes, how do you know they teach the truth? And if you said you’re certain and sure because you can find everything they do listed in the New Testament; then do you worship with them to the exclusion of all other distractions? And are you trying with all your might to get your friends and family through the proverbial front door? Does it matter for your soul and for theirs? If not, then please explain what are you doing?

The place I am going with this is obviously populated by many different things. I plan to offer, over the next few weeks, a partial, simple and insubstantial answer to the question: Where did all the denominations come from? I hope to offer a smattering of available information on some of the main groups, and where and how they got started. I may not be politically correct (horrors!); but I will strive for accuracy.

Rest assured, but not comfortably, that not a single one of these groups can ever trace themselves back in some unbroken line to the pages of the New Testament. But there is one assembly in form and worship that can find themself and what they teach and do in there. But then if we find the one that fills the patterns, perhaps we might ask the outlandish rhetorical question (or one like it) — if it looks like a duck, quacks, has feathers and webbed feet, what is it? Hmm, and it makes me wonder.

Hopefully we might all be able to answer the question: is the church of the bible still around today? I have no doubt, what about you?

“There is one hope of your calling”

Richard Vandagriff — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 22:11:18 +0000

Rebellion is based upon a lack of respect for the Word of God. Disobedience is the predecessor or the seed to rebellion, and displays a lack of trust in the given Word – that God can accomplish what he has said. Some might argue that disobedience comes first.

It really doesn’t matter which comes first, the outcome is the same. You lose either way. Both are the products of taking liberties with God’s Will or doing something else in place of doing what God has given us to do.

Will there ever be a time when disciples disavow rebellion and disobedience and seek to unite under a banner of peace and unity? Will they ever again come together as one body, in one Spirit serving one Lord, through one faith and in one baptism? Will we ever worship in common under the structure of the New Testament as the single family of God?

Or is it possible that God has many families and Christ a multitude of brides?

We will see the Lord one day but it won’t be on our terms. And both rebellion and disobedience have their stated reward. Without recognizing that, many who call upon the name of Christ will find themselves pinned up with the rest of the goats. We know God has given everyone the exact same set of scriptures. No matter which version you might enjoy or pick up, doctrinal things have remained unchanged. What God, Christ, and the Apostles gave us to do is no different now than it was when it was first delivered long ago. Do you believe that? It is certainly written today and can be translated out just like it was when handed down. And ungodly revisions, new doctrines and interpretations have come from the likes of those who call upon another god – those in rebellion. It is part of our duty to be able to distinguish that.

God has said that we cannot miss the mark if we will diligently seek him. He also said that he gave clear and complete instructions, warning us that nothing can be added to it and nothing taken away from it (Eccl. 3:14, Matt. 7:21). We had better know that we will surely die if we allow ourselves to be led away by different spirits or different gospels. The Word of God is chock full or warnings and examples about that: “Even as you are called in one hope of our calling.” (Eph. 4:4.). Everything is about one: one Lord, one faith, one immersion, one God. The scriptures tell us the gospel was given once for all time. We are told that when we follow diversions, we end up serving other gods. And in reality we serve Satan, whether we know it, like it much and believe it or not. The end product is what matters; but without the correct process we will not get the desired product.

There is only one plan of salvation found in God’s Word and one set of instructions for worship. Try though you may, you will find no more. That one hope can be located easily within the NT. And although every one of the modern and not-so-modern assemblies claims to teach the truth and to worship God and honor his Word, in reality most are wide of the mark. Rebellion and disobedience have bred every departure and every corrupt offspring.

Does your assembly teach the gospel just exactly as did Peter, James and John? For that matter, do they teach it the same as the other guys right down the street? Or does your assembly have special teachings they hold to and call upon? Do they heed all of the commands? Are they “sound?” Do they, as Paul said, teach sound things or do they teach another gospel? Is there such a thing as a perversion of the gospel? Is the Holy Spirit still delivering or has it been sealed and settled? Is it that the gospel you believe in is the true version, and it’s everybody else that has another one? Isn’t that what we all want to believe?

Do we serve God or are we rebellious and disobedient? Can we call ourselves after whomever or whatever we please, and do whatever we chose, whether or not we can find it in the scriptures? Can we produce our own sacred doctrines if an angel reveals it directly to us and tells us to write it all down on sheets of gold?

Does what is revealed in the scriptures matter? Do names and words really matter? We have asked those questions repeatedly. If you have read any of the blogs here you know we believe words DO mean something – they DO matter. And God’s Word matters more than anything else. Remember: there is one hope of your calling.

Thoughts on being Thankful

Richard Vandagriff — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 15:36:48 +0000

Which Bible version is IT? You know: the one that has it exactly right on every verse; and is the one that is so easily understood you don’t need to scratch your head over things? Why it’s so good you don’t have to think about it! Well, which one is IT? Our late friend Homer Smith used to say (with tongue planted securely in cheek) that “The King James was good enough for Moses, and it’s good enough for me.” He didn’t invent the phrase; you’ve likely heard it before.

I use several versions. And I am grateful that I can cross reference things online to make it easier for comparison sake. Things were not always so simple. And, know what? Part of the puzzle is that many hands have been laid upon the scriptures, and some were attached to brains and some were not. Some were certainly inventive (to be polite on this holiday). But, then some turned out things that were and are most helpful. Yet all in all there is no single version that I could designate as IT.

But, on this Thanksgiving Day, while I am grateful to God for my blessings and my family, I am also grateful that there are scholars that will sometimes spend years working on versions of the scriptures for our use, whether they get it exactly right or not (I still hope and pray for the former over the latter). Some of these folks have even taken time to weigh in with thoughts on this site. I am thankful for the people who took the time to translate and collate and cross reference things for me. I am thankful there is a will for such things and an environment that allows its flowering and production both here and elsewhere. We have all been richly blessed by these efforts.

Lastly I am thankful for the fact that I can have a version of two that I may use to read God’s will for me (so many in history could not make that statement, and even today, many cannot). So I am thankful to be able to hold salvation in my own hands, and to be able to freely study and ponder the myriad riches of the Word of God. I am thankful for a country that still allows me to read and openly worship and to teach and pray. May it be so everywhere, and continue.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone. Take the time to count those many blessings you enjoy: “name them one by one.”

All the Way Back to the Beginning

Richard Vandagriff — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:22:07 +0000

Start with Cain. He murdered his brother. He was envious and contrary and wasn’t going to follow the plain instructions. It was all about him. I’m sure Adam and Eve had trouble getting him to do some of the simplest things.

How about Jacob’s twin Esau? Was there a more course person mentioned in the OT? He just knew he was starving to death and in a split second sold his birthright and his father’s blessing for a bowl of soup. He didn’t care to listen to his family and the Word of God and he stayed that way right up to the end, even though his father was the son of Abraham, Israel, and father of that nation. Esau would have nothing to do with it. Would you want to have him or somebody like him as a neighbor? How do you suppose that would go?

What of Ahab and Jezebel? Are they your kind of folks? Either one would have killed Elijah if they could have caught him. How do you suppose they might get along with you or me? Ahab killed the fellow next door simply because he wanted his property. He offered to buy it and Naboth said no. Once he talked it over with his wife, he concluded murder befit the occasion. After all he was the king. How do you suppose he would get along with everybody else, especially if we had something he wanted? The word fear comes to mind.

Let’s go visit Herod in the NT. He murdered his wife, both sons, and pretty much anyone else that posed a threat or was even perceived to. He killed infants in the hope that one of them might be the Messiah. Do you think you could get along with him for long; and would you want to introduce him to your family and friends?

How about Judas? He was a thief from the start; so said John. We might have to watch him if he was in the building. He betrayed God and never repented. He’ll be waiting.

Let’s move into history with some other well-known names. Do you know anything about Mau Zedong? Would you want to meet him down at the restaurant and pass some time? Would you exchange pleasantries?

How about Joseph Stalin? Stalin is the Russian word for steel; it was an assumed name. “Joe Steel” sent countless millions of his countrymen to the Gulags or simply had them silenced forever by tossing them into shallow graves, alive or dead. What about Adolf Hitler? There have been few who have reached his level of evil. Remember Pol Pot? He and his cadre also sent millions to their deaths in what was called “the killing fields,” many simply because they were educated. They’ll all be there.

How about the Green River killer; remember him? Want to meet the Boston Strangler or Ted Bundy for lunch? Let’s not leave off those not so well known. Countless men and women throughout the ages have murdered families or friends and strangers simply because they let evil overtake them. It would be wrong not to list millions of rapists, thieves, and scoundrels of every stripe and color, those who we may have read of and those that remain unknown or forgotten in time. The list goes on and on.

If you fail to listen to God’s Word, ignore his will, and do not listen to him and honor his Son as the Savior – then you will have the displeasure of spending eternity with all of these and with every other sort of evil that you might be able to imagine, recall or look up in an encyclopedia or online – from the least to the most infamous.

How does that sound? We’ll have plenty of company, but sad to say, none of those folks will ever go home – because they’ll already be there. They’ll hang around forever alongside you and me and all the rest who have ignored or turned away, or have fallen away from the truth.

Just imagine. Spending eternity with all the evil the world has ever produced. The party will never stop.

“…and there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”

Make it plain

Richard Vandagriff — Tue, 01 Nov 2011 19:08:51 +0000

These preparations having thus been made, the priests go regularly into the first section, performing their ritual duties, but into the second only the high priest goes, and he but once a year, and not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the unintentional sins of the people. By this the Holy Spirit indicates that the way into the holy places is not yet opened as long as the first section is still standing (which is symbolic for the present age). According to this arrangement, gifts and sacrifices are offered that cannot perfect the conscience of the worshiper, but deal only with food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation. (Hebrews 9:6-10, ESV)

The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle was still standing. This is an illustration for the present time, indicating that the gifts and sacrifices being offered were not able to clear the conscience of the worshiper. (8–10, NIV 84 and TNIV)

Older versions use the word “signifying” where “indicates” and “showing” appear in v. 8 above. I prefer plain words so that no mistakes are made in understanding things. Little things may amount to big things.

A. T. Robertson (still worth paying some attention to for his scholarship), stated that the word “signifying” as used in verse 8 means “to make plain.” James Strong’s concordance states it the same. This makes some difference in the way I might understand this verse. I note that typically the word for “signify” is defined as “to indicate,” coming from the word that literally means: to make a sign – to identify. That is what that word means in most occurrences in the NT. But that is not this word.

Here it means that the giving of the Holy Spirit has made it plain one covenant has been superseded by the other. This should be clearly understood by the fact that the Holy Spirit had been given to mankind by Christ. It means the way into the presence of God by all (not just by the High Priest) and entrance into the true Most Holy place was not available as long as the Law of Moses remained in force; and as long as the Tent of Meeting or the Temple stood. But the gift of the Spirit coincided with the beginning of the dissolution of the old way, and a new way was being opened up on earth and in heaven.

That may be obvious to some of our readers; but to me it is a remarkable statement. It is evidence that things had to change. Something had to go and something else was to take its place. And it all leads to the promise of salvation in Christ. Old Testament tents, temples, and priests everyone had to be taken away. On that day in Jerusalem long ago, they no longer had any value to serving God, and that is exactly what the writer of Hebrews stated. I know that would remain true even if someone laid claim to Old Jerusalem starting tomorrow and built a new temple. It simply would not matter. A new covenant had taken force.

The Holy Spirit has been given to all flesh just as the Apostles had said; and the Spirit brought the final certified product when he came – the Word of God. Once the removal of the old took place beginning with the death and resurrection of Christ, as verified and sealed in His New Testament, the Way would be clearly distinguished. The wisdom of God would be on prominent display once and for all time.

I had just noted in a recent post that the Spirit never operated on his own, but only with a charge from The Father. The writer states in Acts 2:32 and 33 that God the Father gave to Jesus the promise of the Holy Spirit, and then Christ poured out the Holy Spirit on all flesh that day long ago. So the process began.

In his letter to Titus Paul stated these things similarly:

But when the kindness and the love of God our Savior toward man appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy, He saved us through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life. (3:4–7)

Therefore, the Spirit’s presence and the gift of the Spirit meant, as the veil separating the Most Holy portion of the temple had been torn down upon the death of the testator Christ, that the New Testament, the new and living Way, was being opened to all who would set their sights on entering that Holy of Holies found in the heavenly places. All who come may stand with boldness in the presence of God in the New Jerusalem. Not here, but there with God and Christ at home.

The gift of the Holy Spirit is salvation through Christ our savior.

I have set the LORD always before me;
Because He is at my right hand I shall not be moved.

Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory rejoices;
My flesh also will rest in hope.
For You will not leave my soul in the place of the dead,
Nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption.
You will show me the path of life;
In Your presence is fullness of joy;
At Your right hand are pleasures forevermore.

(Psalms 16:8-11)

Religious Questions (4) re-post

Richard Vandagriff — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 14:32:19 +0000

[This earlier post was requested to have resubmitted. It had not been included during the database updating. RV]

It has been identified that the Western Catholic Church incorporated wholesale departures from the scriptures. What resulted out of that whether dated from 386, 606, 800 or in some other year, granted that this organization has the distinction and dishonor of being the first denomination. It came out of the original church, but it was an impostor and so remains.

This is not to say that truth had disappeared completely beginning in the fourth or fifth century. Those who seek the truth will find it. But there was serious digression starting in the first century. Scholars suggest that the suppression of education wholesale within the general public was the cause of the downturn in things, forcing events in a time which much later became known as the Dark Ages. Certainly it was aptly named. And, as far as those things go, it has been suggested that the first and most important cause within this was a lack of knowledge of the Word of God, or its lack of availability. It started with the control of the churches, those who became the only source of education outside the home for the majority.

In the marriage of church and state the truth of the Word of God was ripped from the hands and then the hearts of common men and women. The church state then proceeded to keep to themselves letters, beginning with the reading of the Holy Scriptures and in public religious discourse. The people were denied access except as it might be parlayed through some disaffected sermon. This was a useful form of control and it obtained the desired effect. Literacy and mathematics were mostly discarded. Feudalism would become the chosen form of enslavement for the soon to be uncivilized world. And things that should not have been left unattended lay forgotten for hundreds of years. For those who postulate about some unknown remnant holding to the truth, I suspect that is rather wishful. We should expect that this period was certainly not much different than at least one that was recorded for us in the OT.

Noah (whose life comprised 950 years), a righteous man, saved only his immediate family after having closed up shop as one of the least successful preachers of all time. Just eight souls were physically saved; and not a word is said about whether any of the other seven had paid much attention to the patriarch or much deserved the Lord’s rescue. I am not suggesting that they did not adhere to truth; we only know of Noah. “Mrs. Noah”, as with the son’s wives, is not mentioned by name. Of the three sons, though named, next to nothing was recorded. There has been an endless flood of conjecture and supposition as to why the record of Noah and his family is so sparse. All of it is pointless. We need to look at what is given and identify what took place. There is a lesson for us there.

The reaction to Noah and his preaching was no different than with what would later take place between the eighth and twelfth centuries. The center of it was that people had wholesale turned their backs to God – not the other way around. They had the truth and they had long before let it slip from their grasp. They turned care of their souls over to the tellers of superstitions and myths – to unscrupulous men who seek advantage. Whether led willingly or simply allowed to stray, the responsibility of maintenance lay first with the leaders, but then also with the rest. So, everyone gets a share of the blame; and there is always plenty to go around. What we do comes with consequences, as does what we allow to be done. The price to be paid is in eternity, and it is hard for us to distinguish that.

As it was in the days of Noah, so it was in the Dark Ages. That the Kingdom of heaven can never be destroyed does not mean that it could not be left unattended, just as worshipping God had been left unattended during Noah’s time. In either case we simply do not know what took place and we do not know who did what. Try though we may, we cannot find the quid pro quo beyond what we can assemble from the sparse records.

By all known historical treatises the true church appears to have ceased to exist by the first days of the Dark Ages. And if true, then it was a very dark age indeed. Truth was supplanted by pretenders who seized upon its authority and stripped it out from within. This is how the knowledge of God ceased to be known and became supplanted by idolatry before the days of Noah.

So what happened to Catholicism during the Dark Ages? It solidified itself as the power base of the newly forming Christian world, aligned with the European city states and their elites. You bowed down to cross and king or you did not fare well. But in time disagreements boiled over from within, and in more time schisms appeared and took hold. Power begets powerful problems; and in between countless millions were lost. Let us pray that we never wittingly act as a party to such things; or that we will ever unwittingly stand by and allow truth to be quickly overthrown.

Be not deceived; for whatsoever a man sows that shall he also reap. For he that sows to the flesh shall of his flesh reap corruption. But he that sows to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.

(Galatians 6: 7, 8)

The Mercy Seat

Richard Vandagriff — Tue, 06 Sep 2011 19:51:00 +0000

Brent’s lesson Sunday night last brought to mind one of the least understood words in our English Bibles. In his lesson on 1 John 2: 2 we read of propitiation. It appears twice in that letter and a single time with the same root form in Romans. The word is a transliteration of the Latin word propitiare - to appease. Too bad for that. Appease is an attempt at translation but has no real attachment to the transliterated Greek word from the text. It also carries with it a modern sense that may be completely accurate but not entirely appropriate for purposes of explanation. This word literally means to expiate or to cover. It is a root form of the Greek translation of the Hebrew word used to describe the Ark of the Covenant’s top: the Mercy Seat.

Hopefully we know that the Mercy Seat was the covering of the Ark; and the rest (as with my last three posts) ought to be obvious from the meaning just offered.

Propitiation rightly means to cover – that is as John noted: And he Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world. (v.2). The Nestle-Aland interlinear offers the phrase “satisfying sacrifice” below the Greek.

I won’t entertain the notion that this is the proof text for universal salvation, as that clearly ignores the Apostle’s intent, and is a serious waste of our time. But oh, the blood of Christ does cover us – when we become Christians and those of us that as Christians when we may sin. This is because Christ is our advocate, or intercessor and helper; and He will cover our sins when in obedience to Him we repent and confess that we have sinned. He is therefore certainly an appeasing and satisfying sacrifice that has been made on our behalf. He intercedes for us, when nothing else will do.

The sacrifice of the Christ, the Lamb of God, acts in a twofold capacity: first, as the sacrifice for the sins of the whole world when and if any should lay hold of it; and second, he acts to cover through intercession on our behalf to account for any sins we as Christians commit when we fail.

How satisfying to know that God will help us up if we will only call upon Him, seek his mercy and rely upon our Lord Jesus Christ, who will stand in our place as our advocate to make an accounting to Our Father for our sin. Is that not exactly as Paul notes things to be?

But now the righteousness of God apart from the Law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being freely justified by His grace through redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as a propitiation by his blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over sins that were previously committed, to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

(Romans 3: 21-26)