Barnes church of Christ

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

The words “silence” and “biblical authority” have been much debated as early as the second century. Tertullian (150-222) wrote of those who claimed that “the thing which is not forbidden is freely permitted.” Tertullian responded with, “I should rather say that what has not been freely allowed is forbidden.” (Tertullian. 1995. Ante-Nicene Fathers. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.) Martin Luther (1483-1546) the great reformer taught that “whatever is without the word of God is, by that very fact, against God.” But Luther, like so many, would see his view change; later he wrote: “Nothing ought to be set up without scriptural authority, or if it is set up, it ought to be esteemed free and not necessary.” (bold added). Still later in life, he became known for, these words: “What is not against Scripture is for Scripture, and Scripture for it” (Newman, A. H. 1902. A Manual of Church History. Vol. 2. Chciago, IL: The American Baptist Publication Society.) Sadly, Luther’s view of “silence” authorizing has been the majority thinking through the years and continues today!
A very clear case of silence forbidding is seen in Jesus being the high priest! In order for Jesus to be anointed high priest, the Law of Moses had to be removed. The text reads: “For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. (13) For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar. (14) For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood. (15) And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest” (Heb. 7:12-15). The Law of Moses “spake nothing” about one becoming priest “out of Juda;” therefore, no one could serve as priest who was of the tribe of Juda, so long as the Law of Moses stood. In order for Jesus to be high priest, “there is made a necessity a change also of the law;” for “it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda!” The law of Moses was silent about all tribes, other than Levi, being priests. Therefore, the silence of the scripture forbids anyone from being a priest who was not of the tribe of Levi and for anyone becoming a high priest who was not of Aaron. The silence is seen in the words, “of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.”
In the Old Testament a riveting case is seen when Nadab and Abihu “offered strange fire before the LORD, which he commanded them not” (Lev. 10). The “strange fire” is fire which the LORD was silent about. Here is the story: “And Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took either of them his censer, and put fire therein, and put incense thereon, and offered strange fire before the LORD, which he commanded them not” (Lev. 10:1-2). Nadab and Abihu were operating in the area of silence, which God had “commanded them not!” The word “strange” implies unauthorized and in this case, it was unauthorized fire. One might reason, isn’t fire, fire; isn’t one fire just as good as another? In our minds, yes; but God is to be obeyed! When the LORD said use a certain fire, it was the only fire authorized! The LORD did not have to say, Nadab and Abihu, there are ten fires over there, you may not use fire number one, two, three, etc.. You see, the LORD did say that all other fires were forbidden to be use, when he said a certain fire is to be used.
So, when one of the “ambassadors” of Christ wrote: “singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord” (Eph. 5:19), his silence about all other kinds of music forbids them! It is totally unnecessary to name every forbidden thing, when the named authorized thing will take care of it. The same thing is true of baptism. When the inspired writers used the Greek word “baptizo,” which means “to immerse,” they forbid sprinkling and pouring; as these words are not in the word “baptize;” therefore, they fall in the area of silence and are forbidden!
Let us be like the noble folks of Berea who “received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so” (Acts 17:11). You see, living in the area of silence is to live in the area of the forbidden!

— Frank R. Williams

In this final article in this series addressing the subject to authority, attention will be called to a number of things for which there is no law stating, it shall not be done! In other words, it might be said, “There is no law against it; therefore, if done, one has not violated the law.” It is so important when studying “the teaching of Christ” (2 John 9), that we understand it is not a teaching of “thou shalt nots,” but a teaching which one must abide within!
Have you ever thought there is no command to use only unleavened bread in the Lord’s Supper? There is no law commanding that only fruit of the vine be used in the Lord’s Supper? Even when Paul writes what he was delivered in First Corinthians chapter eleven, he used the words, “bread” and the word “cup;” therefore, we do not have an explicit command as to unleavened bread, and fruit of the vine! Yet, throughout churches of Christ there is little disagreement on this subject. No, for the night Jesus was betrayed he used unleavened bread and fruit of the vine; thus, through implicit teaching we reach the conclusion that within “the teaching of Christ” we are only authorized to use these items in the Lord’s Supper.
It is this implicit authority that forbids taking the Lord’s Supper on any other day than “the first day of the week.” This has been noted in earlier articles, by implication no other day is authorized within “the teaching of Christ!” Take the subject of instrumental music in worship of God. There is no explicit commandment not to use instrumental music in worship of God in the New Testament. What we have is this: “Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord” (Eph. 5:19). If we are looking for a “Thou shalt not use instrumental music in worship of God;” you are not going to find it! This is not the nature of “the teaching of Christ!” Yet, it is not authorized! It is not within “the teaching of Christ;” therefore, it is not within the fellowship of Christ! By implication, one reaches the conclusion “singing” is authorized in Ephesians, but instrumental music is not authorized as it is not found in “the teaching of Christ!” There is no explicit authority, no implicit authority, neither is it something allowed by any account of action approved by the apostles of Christ for instrumental music in worship of God!
Just before Jesus’ ascent from this earth, he said to eleven men who would be his ambassadors: “All power (authority, frw) is given unto me in heaven and in earth” (Matt. 28:18). That authority is in his teaching, wherein also is fellowship with him! Paul wrote the Corinthians: “Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment “ (1 Cor. 1:10). The only way the churches of Christ can obey Paul’s words, is to abide in “the teaching of Christ!” In the earlier years of the history of the churches of Christ in America, these words were heard: “In faith, unity; in opinion, liberty; in all things, charity!” There is, just as Paul wrote, “one faith,” and that “one faith” is “the teaching of Christ” and the only way we can have unity is to abide within “the teaching of Christ” which is that “one faith!” In order to do so, we must understand both explicit and implicit authority and approved action by the apostles of Christ.
It is Christ who has the authority; he has all authority and he is head of his church; and we are the church who is subject to him. If we do not know how he authorizes what his church may do, we have no hope of unity! Our ability to reach the lost with the gospel is greatly diminished and we have failed him! How can we ever be the church of which Paul wrote we must be: “the fulness of him that filleth all in all?” (Eph. 1:23).
One last thought just here. If I give my son some money and send him the store and tell him to buy bread and milk; is he authorized to buy a bar of candy? I did not tell him not to buy a bar of candy, but he has no authority to buy a bar of candy. By telling him what to buy, I have also told him what not to buy. All things not in the authority are unauthorized! Silence does not authorize in such areas!

— Frank R. Williams

Is there a law against taking the Lord’s Supper on Monday, Tuesday, etc.? Yes, if we correctly understand the authority of Christ. In an earlier article we addressed the items which constitute the Lord’s Supper as revealed by the apostle Paul in First Corinthians chapter eleven; but we did not study the issue of when the authority of Christ authorizes the Lord’s people to take the Lord’s Supper. Therefore, in this article we will do so!
The church being established on the first Pentecost after Jesus’ resurrection, as recorded in Acts chapter two, and knowing that Pentecost always was on the first day of the week; the first worship of the church took place on the first day of the week. Luke wrote: “Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers” (Acts 2:41-42). This is the first worship of the body of Christ. The words “breaking of bread,” is the Lord’s Supper and part of the “apostle’s teaching” which is “the teaching of Christ,” and the saved continued in it. Therefore, the first time the Lord’s Supper was taken; was on the first day of the week, Sunday. Remembering the words of Jesus to the disciples as he introduced his own memorial, he said, “I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom” (Matt. 26:29); and in Acts 2:42, he was doing just that! It must be noted that the authorized day for the saved to take of this memorial, according to “the apostle’s doctrine,” is the first day of the week!
Here attention is called to a statement recently posted: “In the New Testament, however, it is granted by all Bible students that there is never an explicit law stating that every Sunday and only Sunday is the day that the Lord’s Supper must be taken. Unlike the Old Testament, we never read of a mandated day of the week that the Lord’s Supper must be taken.” Please understand, as has been pointed out in earlier articles that an “explicit law” is not required in order for a thing to be part of “the teaching of Christ” (2 John 9). Also, keep in mind, in order to have fellowship with Christ one must “abideth in the doctrine of Christ” (2 John 9). This does not require an “explicit” command, as not all of “the teaching of Christ” is a series of commandments! Within “the teaching of Christ” there are implicit teachings, which in earlier the article have been proven to be just as binding as “explicit” commandments/statements. It is so important that the student of the New Testament, when studying “the teaching of Christ,” not to expect a series of commandments as in the “ten commandments,” for “the teaching of Christ” is not such!
With the above in mind, let us move to Troas, where Luke wrote: “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” (Acts 20:7). So, here is an example of the church once more coming together and “to break bread” “upon the first day of the week.” Within “the teaching of Christ” the Lord’s Supper was taken on the first day of week! Let it be noted that within “the teaching of Christ” there is authority to take the Lord’s Supper “upon the first day of the week,” and there is no authority to take the Lord’s Supper upon any other day. When a day is identified, it is not necessary to say, “thou shalt not take the Lord’s Supper on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, nor Saturday, in order to forbid these days. Therefore, if one desires to have fellowship with Christ, and that fellowship is within “the teaching of Christ,” then, the “Lord’s Supper” must be taken only upon “the first day of the week;” as this is the only day within “the teaching of Christ” thus, the only day authorized.
No “explicit” command is required! By implication “the teaching of Christ” requires the Lord’s Supper be taken upon “the first of the week.” Now, we all understand that Monday, Tuesday, etc. is not “the first of the week;” therefore, there is no authority within “the teaching of Christ” for these days. It is also most important that we understand, that there is no fellowship with Christ when taking the Lord’s Supper on any other day, but “the first day of the week!” This is true as the Lord’s Supper and “the first of the week” abide within “the teaching of Christ!”
Finally, “the teaching of Christ” does explicitly state that “fellowship” with Christ “abideth in the doctrine of Christ!” It also explicitly states that there is no “fellowship” with Christ for those who “abideth not in the doctrine of Christ!” So, we ask, is there a law against taking the Lord’s Supper on Monday? Yes, as it is not within “the teaching of Christ!”

— Frank R. Williams

The subject of authority is at the heart of Christianity; it is the center of the debate as to what the church is authorized to do; thus, all activities, both worship and work, must go through the authority! The authority for the churches of Christ is “the teaching of Christ,” though it may be defined in different ways.
One might say the New Testament is the authority for the body of Christ! However, here one must understand that not everything written in the New Testament is part of the authority of Christ. It must be remembered that Jesus lived and died under the Law of Moses! Therefore, as the four gospel accounts are read, this must be kept in mind. At times Jesus is addressing subjects as they relate to the Law of Moses and at other times he is addressing what will be the New Testament – his teaching.
Even in “The Sermon on the Mount” there are things which were pre-New Testament Law and would not apply today. Though they are not without principle today! Take Jesus’ words as he taught about prayer: “After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven” (Matt. 6:9-10). It was right for those who lived while Jesus lived upon this earth to pray, “Thy kingdom come,” however, why would we today pray for a kingdom to come that has already come? As Paul wrote of the Colossians” “Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son” (Col. 1:13). Clearly the Colossians were in the kingdom; therefore, the kingdom had come. Thus, we should not pray for the kingdom to come, but it is right to pray: “Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.”
Jesus also addressed the subject of fasting, saying: “Moreover when ye fast, be not, as the hypocrites, of a sad countenance: for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou fastest, anoint thine head, and wash thy face; That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret: and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly” ” (Matt. 6:16-18). Clearly he is addressing fasting as it related his time, under the Law of Moses, but as noted in an earlier article, the early church also fasted when appointing elders (Acts 14:23); so it is authorized, as something allowed, in the authority of Christ. In Jesus’ remarks, it is a very personal activity, not to be seen of others. In fact, Jesus said they were to “anoint thine head, and wash thy face; That thou appear not unto men to fast.” However, this was not the case when the church was appointing elders. Due to the seriousness of the event, they prayed and fasted; meaning they did not eat, but they gave themselves to prayer and to the appointing of elders! They understood this is a most solemn event of the local congregation; as the local church is appointing men who will lead them in fulfilling their obligations to Christ! So, is there authority for the church to fast? Yes, but there is no command, no obligation, and no one’s spirituality is to be measured by fasting. What we really need is more praying! If prayer goes through meal time, then, we have also fasted!
However, the vast majority of “the sermon on the mount” may correctly be called “Pentecost Pointers!” Meaning Jesus is teaching things that are to have there beginning on the day of Pentecost in Acts chapter two. Take the words: “Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 5:3). The “poor in spirit” are those who humble themselves, who have a humble disposition, and are expressed in the words of Jeremiah: “O LORD, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps” (Jer. 10:23). It is total surrender to the will of God; as it is an emptying of self-will! No one can enter the kingdom of “God’s dear son” without being “poor in spirit” and those who have such, “theirs is the kingdom of heaven.”
Therefore, it is easy to see that one must use the words, “New Testament,” with care! For all that is within the New Testament, the twenty-nine books, is not part of the New Testament of Christ as Jesus used the words when he said: “For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins” (Matt. 26:28)! And this is true even of some of the teaching that Jesus did himself! In conclusion of this article, is there a law against it? Yes, if it is not within “the teaching of Christ” the churches of Christ have no authority to do it!

— Frank R. Williams