Barnes church of Christ

The effort to restore Christianity as revealed in the New Testament, and which is limited to “the teaching of Christ;” was such an effort as found in the early “searchers for the ancient order of things,” struggling with every step forward. Denominationalism was on every hand; each having different doctrines, and identifying themselves with different names. Religious division was a plague on young America.
There were more Presbyterian congregations, 55 compared to the next highest number, the Quakers with 39 congregations. With Presbyterians came Calvinism and its teaching of “total depravity,” or inherited sin, and its “Limited Atonement.” Samuel Rogers of the 1800’s had two sons, and believed in Calvinism. Being a humble man, he could not believe that he would be so blessed that both his sons would be among the “elect” of the “Limited Atonement.” So his thought was, if only he could know which one of the two would be saved, then he would give the other all of this world’s goods he could. As this would be the only “good” he would ever know! This is just one of the problems facing the religious people of the new land!
Then, there was, as now, the prevailing thought that governed the religious thinking of Martin Luther: “What is not against Scripture is for Scripture, and Scripture for it.” It was a very negative view of “the teaching of Christ,” but it gave liberties to church leaders as they wrote their various “Creeds” in Europe which came with the settlers of the new land. It was in fact, a license to go beyond “the teaching of Christ;” the very thing which John so strongly warned against: “Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son” (2 John 9). Readers of the New Testament have read Jesus’ words the night in which he was betrayed: “And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” (Matt. 26:26-28). Within Jesus’ words there is a command, but it was personal to the disciples who were with him; as Matthew wrote speaking of the bread: “and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat.” The question facing the churches of early America, who followed in “Luther’s Shoes,” is there scripture against taking the Lord’s Supper on Friday night (Or any other time.)? If not, then, it would not be “against scripture,” thus, it “is for scripture and scripture is for it.” So churches were free to take the Lord’s Supper on Friday night! They had dusted off “Luther’s Shoes” and put a new shine on them.
It was true that these early Americans had read Luke’s words: “And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, …” (Acts 20:7). But they were fast to notice, this is not a command, as Luke was only reporting what the church did! Therefore, they were free to take the Lord’s Supper on Friday night, or any other time they so choose! Yet, for the truth seeker, the one who desires to abide in “the teaching of Christ,” he understood, taking the Lord’s Supper on Friday is not within “the teaching of Christ; therefore, he cannot abide in “the teaching of Christ” and take the Lord’s Supper on any other day than “the first day of the week.” You see, there is no scripture for taking the Lord’s Supper on any day, but “the first day of the week.” So, the question: How can there be scripture for it? What verse would you read which would convince another that he is free to take the Lord’s Supper on another day? “Luther’s Shoes,” dusted off and shined to look so bright do not help! There just is no scripture for it!
Those who were “searching for the ancient order of things,” were looking for things which would allow them to abide in “the teaching of Christ;” as they desired to have fellowship with God and his Son. It was salvation they were seeking, in this life and that which is to come and they understood, it is in “the teaching of Christ!”
“Luther’s Shoes,” dusted off, spit shined, to use an Army term, will never equal the gospel of Christ, which is God’s power unto salvation (Rom. 1:16). My friends, when you have the truth, don’t settle for “Luther’s Shoes,” as they have been worn out a long time ago!

— Frank R. Williams

It was the intent for this to be a series of three articles, but after thinking a little more, the need was seen for a fourth article. The intent of these articles is to get the reader to think about the question: “How do you ascertain truth?” Of course, the question relates to what the local church of Christ must do in order to truly be one of those “churches of Christ” of which Paul wrote of in Romans the sixteenth chapter, verse sixteen: “The churches of Christ salute you.”
Not long ago it appeared in an article that the early church, meaning in the days of the apostles of Christ, did not assembly on Sunday night. (One might study Acts 20:7, and see that the worship included Sunday night.) This was in a context of congregation having trouble getting brethren to come to worship on Sunday night. This is not a new problem. More than thirty years ago, I did a study of bulletins I received, and the numbers of those who were in the assembly on Sunday morning and night. It was about half who came back to worship on Sunday night. The numbers may be somewhat worse these days, but the problem is the same. It is largely a spiritual problem! Having said this, let us go back to our subject! Is there a commandment for the local churches of Christ to assemble for worship on the first day of the week?
The phrase, “the first day of the week,” appears eight times in the New Testament, six of these relate to Jesus’ resurrection and his appearances after being resurrected (Matt. 28:1; Mark 16:2 and 9; Luke 24:1; and John 20:1 and 19. The seventh time is in Acts 20:7, where Luke records this historical event: “And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.” This clearly is an assembly of worship, but there is no commandment anywhere in the context. The final place the phrase appears in First Corinthians, where Paul is writing about “the collection for the saints,” and he does give a commandment: “as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye” (1 Cor. 16:1), but the commandment is about the collection and not about the assembly of worship. It might be argued, and correctly so, that the “collection” is an act of worship; thus, part of the assembly of worship. It should be noticed that the “collection” was to be done, “Upon the first day of the week.” There is evidence that the Greek should read: “every first day of the week.” Do you realize that this is the closest we can get to a commandment for “first day of the week” assembly of worship?
Yet, the churches of Christ in America, indeed, most denominational churches, assemble for worship on the first day of the week! Have you ever thought, before reading this article, that there is no commandment for the churches of Christ to assemble to worship upon the first day of the week? The same thing is true when it comes to the Lord’s Supper, as has been pointed out in earlier articles in this series. So many times brethren quote these words: “Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching” (Heb. 10:25). But read these words as many times as you want to, but you will never find the words, assemble on the first day of the week! We know the churches of Christ assembled to worship during the days of the apostles; we know the saints assembled to worship upon “the first day of the week;” and we know that as part of this worship they came together to “break bread,” upon the first of the week;” but we also know there is no commandment for these actions!
It is for these reasons that we must understand “How we ascertain truth!” When we read that the local churches did certain things under the watchful eyes of the apostles of Christ, “the ambassadors for Christ,” (2 Cor. 5:20), those who spoke with the authority of Christ; they were abiding “in the teaching of Christ” (2 John 9). If not, the apostles rebuked them; just as they did when these churches stepped outside “the teaching of Christ!”
When the local church of Christ assembles to worship God “in spirit and in truth” upon “the first day of the week,” she is abiding within “the teaching of Christ,” just as those early local churches of Christ did under the oversight of the apostles of Christ.
There are yet other questions which have not been addressed in this series of articles, but if these have caused you to think, and to study, then the effort has been worthwhile. A final word of caution as we conclude, there have always been some who assert that “silence” authorizes. How do you abide in silence? Does silence go to the left, or to the right? Or, does it stand still? One thing for sure, those who advocate for the authority of “silence,” never intend to stand still! No, they intend to do things the churches of Christ under the oversight of the “ambassadors for Christ” never did! Nevertheless, let us remember John wrote: “Whosoever transgresseth (to overstep, frw), and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God….”

— Frank R. Williams

If it is not a command, how do you know the church of the 21st century must do it? Another thought, just here, is there a true relationship between the church of the 1st century and the 21st century? Is it one church in two different centuries, or two churches in two different centuries? When the apostle Paul wrote there is “one body,” in Ephesians chapter four, verse four, then wrote: “the church, which is his body” (Eph. 1:22-23); which teaches the “one body” is the one church. So, here is the question: “Does this “one body” which is “the church” exist today?
As we look at ascertaining truth, how does this subject relate to the “one body” “which is the church?” What are the identifying marks of the 1st century church which Jesus said, “I will build” (Matt. 16:18) and which he purchased with his own blood (Acts 20:28)? We learn that the church in Jerusalem had elders in Acts 11:30 as the church in Antioch sent relief to them due to the “great dearth.” However, is this a necessary mark of identity, as we ascertain truth, or just something written by Luke as history? Paul wrote Titus these words: “For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee” (Titus 1:5). Though this appears to be a command to Titus, it is not an order to the church. However, in First Timothy chapter three, Paul gives the qualifications for elders and those who are to serve as “overseers” “must” have these qualifications! Yet, there is no command for the local church that she must have elders! So, is having elders an identifying mark of the 1st century church, is it necessary; or is it just incidental? Is it a necessary identifying mark for the church of the 21st century, if she is to be like the church of the 1st century; as there is no command for the church to have elders? Only if the church of the 21st century is to be like the church of the 1st century! We have ascertained a truth about the church of the 1st century, but is it necessary for the church of the 21st century?
What about deacons? Paul gave the qualifications for deacons in First Timothy chapter three (8-11), then, he wrote to the church in Philippi, “with the bishops and deacons” (Phil. 1:1). Therefore, we know the church of the 1st century had deacons, but the questions remains; must the church of the 21st century have deacons? There is no command for such? So the question, is having deacons a necessary mark of identification of the church of the 1st century, which must also be of the church in the 21st century? Noticing there is no commandment for the church to have deacons, is it necessary for the church of the 21st century to have deacons? We have ascertained truth, but what does it mean to the church of the 21st century? Does truth give us any answers?
Reading through the New Testament it is seen the church of the 1st century never used instrumental music in worship, but there is no commandment not to use such! We are given information on worship in a number of places in the letters to the churches, and we have the historical record of what the church did in “The Acts of the Apostles” in a number of congregations; and all without instrumental music! Yet, it remains there is no commandment not to use such! So, it is said, “If there is no law against it, therefore, there is no violation when doing it.” Just by way of reminder, there is no law against using “cornbread and buttermilk” in the Lord’s Supper either!
True, we know what the church of the 1st century used and did, but this is our question: “Are these necessary identifying marks which must be identifying marks of the church of the 21st century?” Must we, the church of the 21st century have elders, or may be have one elder, or no elders at all? Must we, the church of the 21st century have deacons, or one deacon, or no deacons at all? May we, the church of the 21st century use instrumental music, even though the church of the 1st century did not and still claim to be the same church?
You see, in ascertaining truth, it is not just looking for commands, but searching out what the church of the 1st century did, under the watchful eyes of the apostles, “the ambassadors for Christ,” (2 Cor. 5:21) with their approval! There are three churches upon the pages of the New Testament: 1) the perfect church designed by God; 2) the imperfect church as Christians tried to live up into that perfect design; and 3) the deliberate efforts of false teachers to lead the church out of the teaching of Christ. It is from these that the truth seekers must ascertain the truth; he must identify the marks of the 1st century church as designed by God and implement them into the church of the 21st century! It has been said, and correctly so, “If the church of the 1st century did not do it, there is no authority for it!” If so, where do you find it!

—Frank R. Williams

It is the obligation of every person to ascertain truth as revealed in the Bible! In the time of Moses, God said through him: “And ye shall teach them (words of God, frw) your children, speaking of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, when thou liest down, and when thou risest up”(Deut. 11:19). The old law being the lesser law, It should go without saying, but it shall be said anyway; how much more do you suppose the need to study and learn the New Testament? Speaking of Jesus it is said: “he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises” (Heb. 8:6). So it should go without saying, but it shall be said anyway; if the lesser law demanded that it be taught, when the children “sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, when thou liest down, and when thou risest up,” how much more so the better law?
But, the question remains, how do we ascertain truth? Do we just look for commandments? After all Jesus did say: “If ye love me, keep my commandments” (John 14:16). John also wrote: “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous” (1 John 5:3). The importance of keeping; to continue to keep on keeping on, as obeying the commandments is a demonstration, the proof, of our love for God. This cannot be over stated! Yet, it does not answer our question, in ascertaining truth; do we just look for commandments? The answer is no! Think about the words of Jesus to the Samaritan woman: “God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth” (John 4:24). These words are not in a command form, yet, the word “must” expresses a definite requirement in worship acceptable to God. No worship is acceptable to God that is not “in spirit and in truth!” Thus, we have ascertained part of the truth on the subject of worship!
John 4:24 does not reveal all there is in worshipping God “in spirit and in truth,” however; therefore, we have not ascertained all truth on the subject as revealed in the New Testament. A complete reading and study of the New Testament is required to ascertain all truth on the subject of worship acceptable to God. Yet, we must keep in mind; it may not be in the form of commandments! Jesus introduced us to what Paul calls “Lord’s Supper” in First Corinthians chapter eleven, on the night he was betrayed (Matt. 26:26-28). The Corinthians had so corrupted it that Paul had to rebuke them in the following words: “When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord’s Supper” (1 Cor. 11:20). Paul then wrote what he had received, which is the Lord’s Supper: “that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come” (1 Cor. 11:24-26). Here we have the Lord’s Supper, the only two physical elements in it are “bread” and what here Paul calls the “cup.” Have we ascertained any truth? Yes, but it was not by means of a commandment! It still remains that we have not ascertained all truth on the subject of the Lord’s Supper!
The questions remain: 1) what kind of “bread”; and 2) to what does the word “cup” refer? My friends, in all honesty, we all know you cannot drink a cup, but you can drink what is in the cup; therefore, let us look at what Jesus did on the night he was betrayed. It was the Jewish Passover, as it is said: “And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves: For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine,…” (Luke 22:17-28). Did you notice it? Jesus said as he gave them the “cup,” “and divide it among yourselves?” Just how do you divide a cup? You do not, but you can divide “the fruit of the vine” which was in the cup. In order to ascertain truth about the “bread,” as to what kind it was, a brief study of the Passover is required, but space will not allow it just here. However, it would be learned that it was unleavened bread; therefore, in the Lord’s Supper we have learned, without a commandment, all the physical items, and the kind of items which are authorized, and may be rightfully called the Lord’s Supper!
It must be understood that truth is ascertained by a study of all the New Testament has to say on the subject. Of course, this cannot be done in one article; thus, a series is needed, even then it is confessed by this humble writer, that more will need to be written. However, as you read these articles, it is hoped that the reader will learn more about how to ascertain truth.

— Frank R. Williams

Jesus said: “And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:32). Then, he prayed: “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth” (John 17:17). And Peter wrote: “Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth …” (1 Pet. 1:22). It does not take a “rocket scientist” to determine that “truth” is a most important subject in the New Testament.
The Greek word translated “truth” is “Aletheia” and is found at least ninety-nine times in the New Testament. It is understood that the New Testament does not reveal all of a subject in one place; therefore, the student must get a little of the subject here, there, and elsewhere, as he studies the inspired writings. This requires a little understanding in itself! Paul wrote: “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15). Just what do the words “rightly dividing” mean? These two English words come from one Greek word, which is “orthotomeo.” This word means: “to cut straight;” but it also means: “to make straight and smooth, to handle aright, to teach the truth directly and correctly.” Here is a good place to give the meaning of the word, “ascertain;” it means: “to find out or learn with certainty.” There is one other word that needs attention just here; the word “interpret”, which means: “to bring out the meaning.” All three of these words are very closely related and mean that it is the reader’s obligation to learn with certainty, to bring out the meaning, by handling aright the word of truth!
There are some who believe that the way people read the Bible in 1st century Judea, 5th century Rome, 10th century France, or 18th century China, would not speak to contemporary Americans as to our interpretation of the word of truth. On the other hand, if our souls are “purified” by “obeying the truth,” and they are, then ascertaining truth as it is revealed in the New Testament is vital to our eternal salvation! Culture and time do not change God’s truth! Jesus promised the apostles, the Holy Spirit would guide them into all truth (John 16:13). Truth by its nature is unchangeable! There is a major difference between the works of men and God; what men have regarded as truth at one time, has been learned years later not to be true; however, God’s revealed truth has never been proven to be untrue. Yes, it is true, some men have taught certain things about some subjects in the Bible, which have been proven at a later date to be untrue. But it was man who was in error as to what he thought the Bible taught and not what the inspired word when correctly interpreted taught! This just points out how important it is to ascertain the truth!
In order to ascertain the truth on any Bible subject, we must gather up all it says on the subject. Sometimes when this is done, we are forced to change our minds about what we believe; therefore, ascertaining truth becomes a real challenge to our personal integrity! Many people, who would not cheat you out of a penny in a business deal, will read one verse and put their eternal salvation on it. For instance, some read: “And believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women” (Acts 5:14), and conclude that all a person has to do in order to be saved is believe. However, one verse does not negate another verse which addresses the same subject. When those on Pentecost asked the apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” (Acts 2:27); Peter answered: “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (verse 38). Was Peter wrong in his answer? Should he have said to these already believing Jews, there is nothing you have to do, as you are already saved? What about Philip as he and the eunuch were traveling along in the chariot and the eunuch ask, “See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?” (Acts 8:36). Why didn’t Philip just say to him, you are already saved and there is no need for you to be baptized? Or was Philip wrong when he said: “If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest” (verse 37). Doesn’t this sound just like the words of Jesus, when he said: “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned” (Mark 16:16)?
Here is the way we ascertain truth! We must get the whole of what the inspired writers said on the subject! Yes, it may challenge our honesty, our integrity, but isn’t the salvation of soul worth such the challenge? Then, obeying the truth we have learned?

— Frank R. Williams

In this last article under the heading, “For God so loved,” the first words of the “golden text” of the Bible, we will look at the ultimate evidence of God’s love. Of course, the text reads: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16).
When the text says, God “gave his only begotten Son,” it is pointing directly to one event, which is both the lowest and the highest event in human history. In the rejection of Jesus, when the Jews cried out, “Crucify him, crucify him” (Luke 23:21), and Pilate uttered the words, “see ye to it.” (Matt. 27:24), the voice of man had reached its lowest point in history. When the nails were finally driven into the hands and feet of Jesus, humanity had reached its lowest act. Yet, in the blood that was shed from this body of Jesus, the Son which God gave, we have the greatest act of love in the history of mankind! So, look at the cross and see Jesus nailed upon it and understand the event; in one act, the lowest act in human history and the greatest love mankind has ever witnessed.
How many sermons, how many articles, how many books, yet, even though we look upon it with love, we fail to understand it fully. If only we could visit heaven and hear as the Godhead formulated the plan of sending one of their own to be clothed in humanity; flesh and blood and all the desires as he would be tempted in all points as we; but even at its beginning, how do we mere humans fathom the thought, of God dwelling among us? Nevertheless, John wrote: “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth” (John 1:14). Yes, there it is, God began to dwell in flesh and among us! Join to this the thoughts expressed in Paul’s words: “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross” (Phil. 2:6-8). Do we really understand the words, “thought it not robbery to be equal with God?” The Greek word is “harpagmos” and means: “to be held fast, retained.” So, just what was this member of the Godhead giving up? But, let us keep in mind, the context of Philippians chapter two is about “unreserved self-sacrifice,” “unselfish giving.” Just what did the second member of the Godhead give up in making “himself of no reputation,” and taking “upon him the form of a servant,” and being “made in the likeness of men?” We know the final result, the context of Philippians chapter two is about “unreserved self-sacrifice,” “unselfish giving,” and this is something Deity could not do as flesh and blood were required! As this would end as he: “became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross!” Whatever parts we do not understand; we do understand, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
Look at the cross, as this is where Philippians chapter two takes us: “became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.” There is the greatest act of love! But, what does this love awaken in us, what does it produce in us? If God’s love does not create love in us for God, then, we have failed. Get this now, God has not failed, we have failed! John wrote these words: “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous” (1 John 5:3). Keeping of the commandments of God is the evidence of our love of God! Just how else would a person show his love for God? Love, like faith, is an invisible thing; it is an internal quality that can only be evidenced that it exists by external action! Hear James on this: “Even so faith (love, frw), if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith (love, frw), and I have works: shew me thy faith (love, frw) without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith (love, frw) by my works” (James 2:17-18).
So, as we conclude this series of articles, at least for now; a sense of failure hovers over this humble writer. How can an uninspired writer ever do justice to such a subject? Maybe the woman taken in adultery will help us just here. Do you remember what Jesus said to her? Hear his words and think of yourself: “Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more” (John 8:11). Do you think this woman ever forgot these words? Do you think these words changed her life? Well, this is what the words: “For God so loved” says to each of us, “Go and sin no more!” Go and keep my commandments! If we don’t get this, we just do not understand: “For God so loved!”

— Frank R. Williams

How much can one write about, “For God so loved?” The inspired writers wrote twenty-seven books; some very short and others much longer, but all of them reveal the love of God. A preacher friend of mine of years gone by was asked to preach on love and he preached over a hundred sermons. If memory serves me correctly, he was finally asked to preach on another subject. You can rest assured I will not write a hundred articles on the subject, “For God so loved.”
Can you write about “redemption” and not write about “For God so loved?” Not if you have “redemption” as it is revealed in the New Testament in mind. The very words which follow our subject spell “redemption:” “For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son.” Just what does the word “redemption” mean? When Peter writes of our “redemption,” he says it was “with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot” (1 Pet. 1:18-19). The Greek word used here is “lutroo” and it means: “to release on receipt of ransom.” The “ransom” paid was “the precious blood of Christ.” We were held captive to sin, in that we were in bondage to sin; we were a servant to sin as we had yielded ourselves freely to obey it. Of course, to get the full picture, we must understand that we came into the world as an innocent baby, having no sin, and we stayed this way until we reached a time in life when we understood the difference between right and wrong and we chose sin. Then, we were separated from God; thus, we were in need of “redemption!” We needed to be brought back; a “ransom” needed to be paid so we could be released from the wages of our sins, and what are the wages of our sins? Let Paul answer this question: “For the wages of sin is death; … “ (Rom. 3:26) and that is eternal death! Eternal death is eternal separation from God! Hear Paul once more: “In whom (Christ, frw) we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace” (Eph. 1:7). However, the Greek word Paul used here is not the one Peter used. Paul used the Greek, “apolutrosis,” which means: “a releasing effected by payment of ransom.” However, if you look closely you can see the word used by Peter within the word used by Paul. “Redemption” is the releasing effected by the payment of ransom and the ransom paid is the Son given in the words: “For God so loved!”
When we think of the cross, the death of Jesus upon the cross, we must see “For God so loved, that he gave his only begotten Son.” The death of Jesus is proof of God’s love! It is proof of God’s love while we were yet sinners, enemies of God; without hope and separated from God. The only thing in front of us was eternal death! If we were able to look here, there, and everywhere, we would have seen no answer for our state of being lost! There was nothing, there was no one; there was no ransom to be paid no matter where we looked. But thanks to God, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son.” There is our redemption; there is the ransom which affected our release from the bondage of sin.
How many times have you read Philippians chapter two? However many times it is, it is not enough! “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.” (2:6-8). It is doubtful that we fully understand these words, but here is God’s love revealed in its greatest, in its most powerful words! How do we understand God in human flesh? Yet, in that human fleshly body flowed that “precious blood,” which was “as of a lamb without blemish and without spot!” Yes, our redemption is seen in the one who was “in the form of God… but made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross!”
What is our answer to such love? Is it indifference? Is it luke-warmness? Is it half-heartedness? Do these words sound like: “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them” (Eph. 2:10)?

— Frank R. Williams

How beautiful are the words under which we write: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son…” Not only do we have the greatest “love,” but we also have the greatest “gift:” “he gave his only begotten Son.” Countless multitudes have thrilled at the reading of these words. They express the greatest being’s loves of lowly mankind, so much that “he gave his only begotten Son!”
As one reads Hebrews, the writer addresses the subject in these words: “Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he (the Son God gave, frw) also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham” (Heb. 2:14-16). The Son God gave was the incarnate Word, which was made flesh (John 1:1, 14). To help us understand the subject even more, read the words of Paul as he wrote to the Philippians: “But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross” (Phil. 2:7-8). This is what the “golden text” means when it reads, “he gave his only begotten Son!”
Now, let us look at this one who “humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.” Go with me to Gethsemane, when Jesus “began to be sorrowful and very heavy” and he speaks to Peter, James, and John: “My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death.” He then goes “about a stone’s cast” beyond them, there falling to his face, he prays: “O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.” (Matt. 26:39). Keep in mind, these are the words of the Son, the “Son” which the God gave: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son…” Just how agonizing was this? It helps our understanding to know, that Jesus prayed the same thing three times! Yet, this is only part of it! Luke will help our understanding, as he wrote: “And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground” (Luke 22:44). It is safe to say, never did flesh and blood ever pray in more “agony” and more “earnestly!” A few words are in order to help us see into the “agony.” It is the Greek, “agonia,” and means: “of severe mental struggles and emotions, agony, anguish.” Physically, it expresses “gymnastic exercise, wrestling.” Adding it all up, this word reveals Jesus’ inner “struggle for victory!” Yes, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son…” And in his victory, God has given us the opportunity to be victorious!
If I might just here, without being offensive, say just a few words about the word “chance?” Sometimes we hear one say, we have the “chance” of salvation. The word “chance” means: 1) the absence of any cause of events that can be predicted, understood, or controlled; 2) luck or fortune; 3) a possibility or probability of anything happening; and 4) an opportune or favorable time; opportunity. Let us all understand our salvation can be predicted, understood, and controlled! It started with the words: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son…” Then, it is your responsibility! How do you respond to the love of God? How do you handle the fact that you have sinned and come short of the glory of God? (Rom. 3:23). How do you handle God’s requirements in order to be saved: believe (Heb. 11:6), repent (Acts 17:30), confess (Rom. 10:9-10), and be baptized (1 Pet. 3:21)? You see, it is not a chance, but opportunity; predicted, understood, and controlled; as it is all revealed in the inspired gospel of Christ, God’s power unto salvation (Rom. 1:16).
Yes, the greatest words in the Bible, “For God so loved!” In this love God made salvation possible through the death of his Son upon the cross! There is “the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot;” the price of redemption! (1 Pet. 1:18-19).
So, what does God’s love mean to you? Is it in vain? What about the “precious blood of Christ,” is it in vain? Jesus still says: “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest” (Matt. 11:28).

— Frank R. Williams

The above words are the greatest words in the Bible! Of course, all Bible readers know where they are found in the New Testament and they are the opening words in what is called, “The golden text of the Bible.” There may be someone who would debate the claim made here, but just what words would be greater?
The full text reads: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). We have in these words the greatest being, “God;” we have the greatest positive force, “love;” we have the greatest number of people, “the world;” we have the greatest gift, “his only begotten Son;” we have the greatest opportunity, “he that believeth:” we have the greatest eternal punishment, “perish;” and the greatest eternal reward, “everlasting life.” No wonder this verse has been called the “golden text of the Bible!”
As great as this text is, there are some who abuse and misuse it! Like any other verse, it is generally wrong to take one verse as though it reveals the whole subject. The words, “whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life,” are often preached as if “believing” is all that is necessary to salvation. It must be understood that no one verse gives all that is required of the lost in order to be saved. When reading the New Testament, like when reading other things, the writers use what is a form of speech called synecdoche, where a part of something is used for the whole, or where the whole is used to stand for all the parts. Here are two examples: first, “Their feet are swift to shed blood,” the word “feet” is used for the whole person in Romans 3:15; second, “Hath not my hand made all these things?” where the word “hand” is used for the power of God in Acts 7:50. So it is with the word “believeth” in John 3:16, it is a part for all that is required in order to be saved. “Believeth” does not exclude “repentance,” (Acts 17:30), “confession” (Rom. 10:9-10, Acts 8:37), and baptism (Acts 2:38, 1 Pet. 2:21), but would in fact, include all that is required on the part of the one who is lost to be saved.
Now, let us return to the opening words of the text: “For God so loved the world.” God “so loved” us when we were lost; as Paul wrote: “But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:8). But, this does not tell the whole story either, as Paul continued: “For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life” (Rom. 5:10). Therefore, God “so loved” us when we were lost and enemies of God! Yet, there is more! We had no hope, no expectation of ever being saved without the love of God! Thus, the greatness of the words, “For God so loved!”
This love which God demonstrated and which is expressed in the words, “For God so loved,” is often called unconditional love. There is a certain truth in this, yet, man has greatly misunderstood and even abuses the subject. It is common to hear these todays, “I love my children unconditionally.” This may be spoken after expressing the idea that God loves us unconditionally; and we should have the same kind of love for our children. Well now, just what is this “unconditional love?” God loved us when we were lost, and when we were his enemies, and certainly this is unconditional love! However, it is not approving love! God never approved our sins! God will never save us in our sins! Thus, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life,” was to save us from our sins; but after we repented of our sins! Therefore, unconditional love is a love which never approves of sin, but love the person who sins!
No, God “so loved” us that he provided the means whereby he could forgive our sins; not that we could continue in our sins! There is the greatness of his love.

— Frank R. Williams