Barnes church of Christ

In this final article, a study of the word “church,” the Greek “ekklesia,” attention is called to the Greek scholar Erasmus (1466-1536) and how he translated the Greek “ekklesia” into Latin. In his translation of the Greek New Testament into Latin, he sometimes translated the word “ekklesia” into the Latin words, “concio,” “congregatio,” and “ecclesia.” So, what do these Latin words means?
First, the Latin word “concio” is from “con” + “cieo” and means to summon. The verb means to: bring, assemble, or urge together, collect, muster. Clearly, it does not refer to a physical structure, or authoritative body. It does not relate to the words “Catholic Church,” which is a physical authoritative body.
Second, the Latin word “congregatio” is from “con” + “greg,” (flock) and means “to gather together.” The point being this word is not limited to a “religious” usage. It might refer to a gathering of a flock of ducks. Therefore, it is unlike the modern word “church,” which is limited to a “religious” use. However, this Latin word does not relate to the words, “Catholic Church.”
Third, the word “ecclesia.” There is a real question about this word. Is it Latin, or is it Greek? It is easy to see that the only difference is the two letters, “kk” and “cc” following the first letter “e.” It does appear that all Jerome did, when he translated the Greek word “ekklesia,” was to simply change the letter “k” to “c.” This means, in our efforts to learn the meaning, we must fall back to the Greek word, “ekklesia.” This word means, a gathering of citizens called out from their homes into some public place, an assembly. This word does not give itself to the idea of authority; as do the words “Catholic Church.”
The reader may be wondering, what is all this about, and rightfully so. Let us go back to the basics here. The Greek word “ekklesia” appears 115 times in the New Testament. It is translated into our English word “church,” but in the following verses, it is translated as “assembly:”
Acts 19:32 – “Some therefore cried one thing, and some another: for the assembly (ekklesia) was confused; and the more part knew not wherefore they were come together;
Acts 19:39 But if ye enquire any thing concerning other matters, it shall be determined in a lawful assembly (ekklesia).
Acts 19:41 And when he had thus spoken, he dismissed the assembly (ekklesia).
Clearly in these three cases the word “ekklesia” has no reference to what is today known as the “church.” This means this word is translated into the English “church” 112 times. Yet, one time it has nothing to do with what is today called the “church.” It is as follows:
“This is he, that was in the church (ekklesia) in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us” (Acts 7:38).
As in the other three cases, it is easy to see the word “ekklesia” is not used in any way referring to what Jesus meant in his words: “I will build my ekklesia.” (Matt. 16:18). As Stephen was referring to the children of Israel having departed from Egypt. Therefore, the word “ekklesia” is used in reference to God’s people in the New Testament 111 times.
Yet, it must be noted, if we are to get the best understanding of the word “ekklesia,” that it is also used in the New Testament, in a few cases where it should be translated into the English word “assembly.” So, where do we find such? The following will answer our question:
1 Cor. 14:4 – He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church (ekklesia – assembly).
1 Cor. 14:12 – Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church (ekklesia – assembly)
1 Cor. 14:33 – For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches (ekklesia – assembly) of the saints.
1 Cor. 14:34 – Let your women keep silence in the churches (ekklesia – assembly): for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
1 Cor. 14:35 – And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church (ekklesia – assembly).
It should also be noted that the word “congregation” would not be the best translation of the “ekklesia” in a few verses. For instance,
1 Cor. 14: 34 – “Let your women keep silence in the churches (assemblies).”
First, Paul cannot mean that women are not allowed to speak, once they are part of the “ekklesia;” as this word is used to refer to the universal body of the saved, the “ekklesia.”
If this were the case, women would never be allowed to speak again after obeying the gospel! Therefore, Paul cannot be using the word “ekklesia” to refer to the universal “ekklesia.” Second, the word is plural, and even the English word “congregations” might not express the word clearly. For example, the Barnes congregation is the Barnes congregation on Monday, when not assembled and on Sunday when assembled together for worship. Therefore, the word “congregation” may refer to local Christians unassembled, or local Christians assembled. However, the English word “assembly,” for the most part, identifies a gathering. Though this is not always the case! Nevertheless, the word “ekklesia” is best understood in the above verses by the word assembly, or assemblies. Therefore, when translating the word “Ekklesia,” care must be given to get the best English word, be it “congregation,” or “assembly.”
The point of these articles has been to help with a better understanding of the Greek word “ekklesia,” and the English word “church.” The word “church” has been separated from other words and is used in a religious sense; whereas this was not the case with the word which was the Holy Spirit’s choice when putting inspiration in the writers of the New Testament. It was never the Holy Spirit’s intention to convey any universal “ekklesia” authority! The “church,” the “ekklesia” never establishes authority; no one on earth today speaks for Christ. The “church” is under and submits to the authority of Christ, as written in the New Testament!
The “church,” the “ekklesia,” is built upon the authority of Christ; the New Testament being the foundation of the “church,” the “ekklesia;” and she only works through local autonomous bodies!

— Frank R. Williams

The word “church” is not a word used by the inspired writers of the New Testament! It is not a true translation of the Greek word “ekklesia.” Of course, you are saying, the writers of the New Testament wrote in Greek and the word “church” is an English word. However, there is more to the story than this simple thought. This English word conveys thoughts and brings to mind what the inspired writers never intended when they wrote the word “ekklesia” in the inspired text! This is also true when Jesus said: “I will build my ekklesia” (Matt. 16:18); he was not talking about building what is now known as a “church.”
The Greek word “ekklesia,” and what it really means was not acceptable as early as the time of Jerome (340-420). Jerome translated the Greek New Testament and what is known as the “Old Latin,” into Latin, near the end of the third and start of the fourth centuries A.D. His translation became known as the Latin Vulgate. It needs to be remembered, the language of the Roman Empire, was changing from Greek to Latin during the time Jesus was crucified. Recall that a superscription was written and place over the head of Jesus: “in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew, THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS” (Luke 23:38). This reveals the change in language in the Roman Empire. Over time, the Vulgate would become the accepted version, and equal to the Old Latin Version. In fact, Pope Gregory the Great did just this in the 6th century and by the 12th century the Vulgate was the common version in the Catholic Church. The point here, which made necessary the brief history, is what Jerome did when coming to the Greek word “ekklisia.” Did he translate it into Latin? It appears he did not! He just used the Latin spelling, “ecclesia.” For Example in Acts 8:1, the Latin says “facta est autem in illa die persecutio magna in ecclesia quae erat Hierosolymis et omnes dispersi sunt per regiones Iudaeae et Samariae praeter apostolos.” Here only the spelling is slightly changed, from “ekklesia” to “ecclesia.” But, the question: Why not translate the Greek word into Latin?
It was not due to a scarcity of Latin words for assembly, or congregation, as “contio” and “comitia” were often translated into Greek by ekklesia, when translating from Latin to Greek; and when the Latin is translated into English, the translator would have used the words “assembly” or “congregation” for the Latin “conito.” These Latin words were commonly used when referring to an assembly. It would not do for Jerome to translate the word “ekklesia” into the Latin, “contio, or “comitia” for these words mean, assembly. Remember, the word “ekklesia” is not used in the New Testament only a religious term (Acts 19:32, 39). But, the word “ekklseia” had taken on just such a use by the time of Jerome; as in the “Catholic Ekklseia” – the Catholic Church! However, the word “ekklesia” was never used in the Greek world as a title, for anything, let alone a religious group, as it was during the time of Jerome; such as the “Catholic Ekklesia.” Therefore, it would not do for Jerome to translate the word “ekklesia” into the Latin, “contio, or “comitia” for these words mean, assembly. It would never do to have the “Catholic Assembly.” You see, the word “ekklesia” had taken on a religious title, and stood for an origination of authority, by the time of Jerome (347 – 420 A.D.)!
It should also be kept in mind, even by the end of the first century, the great apostasy (2 Thess. 2:3-10) of which Paul wrote was in the works! The title, “Catholic Ekklesia,” was used as early as the second century. It was done to emphasize the universal scope. The word “catholic” coming from the Greek “katholikos” and means “universal.” Now understand, there is nothing wrong with talking, or writing, about the universal “ekklesia.”. When Paul wrote to Timothy, he did just this, but did so without using the word “universal.” He wrote: “But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the ekkllesia (church) of the living God,…” (1 Tim. 3:15). The singular “house of God, which is the ekklesia of the living God,” is referring to all children of God; thus, the one universal “house of God,” the “one body” (Eph. 4:4).
In conclusion, let us recall William Tyndale and his translation of the Greek New Testament into English. He consistently translated the Greek “ekklesia” into the English “congregation” or “assembly.” Now, do you remember what happened to him? He was convicted of heresy by the Catholics, executed by strangulation (1536), and later his body was burnt at the stake. Why? Because he dared translate the Greek “ekklesia” into the English “congregation;” thus, cutting all ties of the Catholic Church with the New Testament! The challenge is sent out to each reader, go on the internet and search the Greek word “ekklesia.”

— Frank R. Williams

It is interesting to learn that the first English translation of the Greek New Testament, did not translate the Greek word “ekklesia” into the English word “church.” This makes a student of the New Testament to question, why was this is the case? Then, into what English word was the Greek word “ekklesia” translated before it came to be translated “church?” Next question, why is this important to a student of the New Testament?
The first translation of the Greek New Testament into English was done by William Tyndale and he did not translate the Greek “ekklesia” into the English word “church.” So, into what English word did Tyndale translate “ekklesia?” Tyndale did his translation in 1525 A.D. He translated the Greek word into the English word, “congregation.” Tyndale was arrested, jailed, then convicted of heresy and executed by strangulation. Then, his body was burnt at the stake. Though Catholics deny it, it is believed he was put to death because he translated the Bible into English without the approval of the Catholic Church. After his death, his friend, John Rogers, completed the work of translating the Old Testament into English, but used the pen name, “Thomas Matthew,” and this translation became known as the Matthew’s Bible in 1537. He also translated the word “ekklesia” into the English “congregation. It is also important to note, as the subject is studied, the next English translation was in 1539 and is known as the Great Bible, and it also used the word “congregation” and not the English word “church” in translating the Greek “ekklesia.”
This makes us wonder, when was the first time the Greek word “ekklesia” was translated into the English word “church?” More than likely it was Theodore Beza in 1556 who used the English word “church,” when translating the Greek word “ekklesia.” Then, William Whittingham, in 1557, used the word “church” in translating the Greek word “ekklesia.”
Of course, you are asking, what difference does it made? Let us look at the English Dictionary; as it gives the meaning of the word “church.” You may find the first meaning of the word “church” is “a building for public worship.” If the Greek word, “ekklesia” is correctly translated, this meaning would never be found in our dictionaries. Have you ever heard the following: “A church burned in Oklahoma City?” You see, these words would never be used in such statements as: “A congregation was burned in Oklahoma City.” “An assembly was burned in Oklahoma City.” Unless, the people meeting in a building were actually burned to death! With a correct understanding of what the Greek word “ekklesia” means, you would never hear such! So, we are left with the question: “How should the Greek word “ekklesia” be translated?
A good test for any change in wording, is to put the word(s) into the text, and read it. So, let us do just that!
1. Matthew 16:18 – “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my congregation; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
2. Acts 2:47 – “Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the congregation daily such as should be saved.
3. 1 Cor. 1:2 – “Unto the congregation of God which is at Corinth, them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints,…”
4. 1 Tim. 3:15 – “But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the congregation of the living God, …”
These verses were chosen because two of them (Matt. 16:18 and 1 Tim. 3:15) refer to the universal congregation, the house of the living God; while the other two (Acts 2:17 and 1 Cor. 1:2) refer to a local congregations. True, reading these verses with the word “congregation” in them, is a bit awkward, but the more you do so, the less awkward it becomes. However, it is truth we are seeking!
A correct translation of the Greek word “ekklesia,” is the English words, congregation, or assembly. In a third article verses will be studied where the word “assembly” is best used and more history about the word.

— Frank R. Williams

What is the church? Before answering this seemingly simple question question, a few things need to be understood. Did you know our English word “church” comes from the Greek word “ekklesia?” If not, you may not understand the word “church.” More than likely, most people know our English New Testament has been translated from a Greek text. This means, those who translate it, have the obligation to find an English word that best translates the Greek word. At times, this may require two or even three English words to fully express the Greek word.
Take the words, “given by inspiration of God,” found in 2 Timothy 3:16, these words comes from one Greek word, “theopneustos.” This is a compound Greek word having two parts; the two parts are: first, “theo,” which is the Greek word for God; second, “pneustos,” which means “breathed.” Thus, the word “theopneustos” means “God breathed all scripture; therefore, it is important to understand that what Paul was writing at this moment is part of the God breathed scripture. Remember that Peter acknowledged that what Paul wrote was scripture (2 Pet. 3:15-16). It is worth noting that this word does not appear anywhere else the Bible, neither is there any conclusive evidence that this word was ever used before Paul used it here. It is believed by many that Paul, through the Holy Spirit, coined this word.
Now the same thing is true of the Greek word “ekklesia,” as it is a compound word; the first part, “ek,” meaning “out of” and the second part, “klesia,” meaning, “called.” Therefore, the word means, “called out of.” Keep in mind, the word is a noun! However, the word standing by itself has no identity. As it does not reveal from where one is “called out of,” neither does it show what did the “calling;” and it does not reveal who the “called out of” are; thus, it only identifies a fact that there is an “ekklesia.” Notice how the word is used having no relationship to the saved, the “ekklesia of God:” “Some therefore cried one thing, and some another: for the assembly (ekklesia) was confused; and the more part knew not wherefore they were come together (Acts 19:32). As here noted, the word “assembly” is from the Greek word, “ekklesia.” Now, what is the context, “the whole city was filled with confusion,” (verse 29) not knowing what was going on; therefore, the people who formed the “ekklesia,” were “confused” at the time. Nevertheless, they were an assembly, an “ekklesia,” fulfilling the meaning of the word. Continuing to read this text, notice, Alexander (the town clerk) said to this “confused” “ekklesia:” “But if ye enquire any thing concerning other matters, it shall be determined in a lawful assembly (ekklesia)” (verse 39). The “confused” mob was an “unlawful called out” ekklesia. Therefore, “And when he had thus spoken, he dismissed the assembly (ekklesia)” (verse 41). Alexander “dismissed the called out” people. Clearly this event has nothing to do with what is “called out of God!” The point being, there is nothing magical about the Greek word, “ekklesia,” but as used today, the English word “church” has reached the “magical” state of being limited to religious bodies. However, this was not the case in the first century and the word “ekklesia!”
It should be clear, the Greek word “ekkliesia” as the English word “church,” must have identifying terms. It is a noun, the result of action, but standing alone, it is unidentified. It would have been correct in Paul’s time, for one to say: “The ekklesia is a people, who while being in the theater, heard the town crier announcing the king is coming.” In this case, the people would have been the “ekklesia” resulting from the words of the town crier, and they were the “ekklesia” in order to see the king. In like manner, people, who are saved, are the “called out of” the world by the gospel in order to be saved; the saved being the “ekklesia.” This is why Luke wrote: “… And the Lord added to the church (the ekklesia, the saved) daily such as should be saved” (Acts 2:47). This makes “the called out of” the saved!
So, what do we have in reading the following words: “Unto the church (ekklesia, the called out of) of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours” (1 Cor. 1:2). Does it mean more to you, if we read the text, “Unto the called out of God which is at Corinth?” You see, these are the called out of God “that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called saints.” In this case, these people are always the “called out of God,” be they gathered for worship, in their own homes, or places of business. Where a person may be, at any given time, if he is saved, then, he is always part of “the called out of God.”
Now, the next time you read the words, “the Barnes church of Christ,” please understand, these words are identifying a people who have been removed from the world (the lost), and are now an “ekklesia,” the “called out of Christ,” created by obeying the gospel of Christ. In doing so, you will have a better understanding of the Greek word, “ekklesia!”

— Frank R. Williams

One of the things we learned early is to count, one, two, three, etc.; however, this is not the type of counting of this article. The type of counting which is to be addressed here is not so easy to do. Most children are taught to count, as in numbers, very early in life, but the counting in mind here requires spiritual maturity. Some never reach the required maturity to “count” as did the apostle Paul.
What do we know about the man Saul, best known as Paul, an apostle of Christ? He was born in Tarsus of Cilicia, a free city; he was a Roman citizen, he was educated in Jerusalem by the highly respected teacher of the law, Gamaliel; he excelled above his contemporaries in Judaism; and was a tent-maker by trade. He writes of himself that he was a Hebrew of Hebrews (Meaning both is parents were Hebrews.), of the tribe of Benjamin, circumcised the eighth day, as touching the law, a Pharisee, concerning zeal, persecuting the church, touching righteousness which is in the law, blameless (Phil. 3:5-6). In all these Saul had a bright future in Judaism to look forward to. However, this future would never be fully realized.
Saul is introduced to the reader of the New Testament in the following: “Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord, And cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man’s feet, whose name was Saul. And they stoned Stephen …” (Acts 7:57-59). From here, Luke gives us the following: “And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem, … As for Saul, he made havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them to prison” (Acts 8:1,3). Just how high in the Jewish religion he would have reached no one knows, but his leadership and respect among the Jews is unquestionable! It is to these that Paul writes: “But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ” (Phil 3:7). Paul relates the word “gain” to those things of the Jewish religion and his station among the Jews. It is here that the idea that spiritual maturity is required in order to honestly “count” such “gain” as “loss for Christ!”
A few words about the word “count” which is the Greek “hégeomai” and means as used here to consider; Paul in his spiritual maturity had learned to consider all his former life among the Jews as something he willing gave up. The word in Greek is in the middle voice, which means, he did this himself for himself. It was a personal action to benefit him! Salvation requires a personal action which benefits the one doing it! It is like what Ananias said to Saul: “And now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16). The words might be translated: “And now why tarriest thou? Stand up and get yourself baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.” Saul was to get himself baptized for his own benefit! Therefore, in the same way, Paul was able, in his spiritual maturity, to “consider” all he had “gained” and might have gained in his former life, “loss for Christ!” Paul was able to count!
On the other hand, just as spiritual maturity is required to “count” gain as “loss for Christ,” spiritual maturity is required to “count” our spiritual blessing received in Christ. In a world filled with heartaches, family problems, bad health, loss of jobs, murders in our neighborhoods and shopping malls, and now acts of terrorism; how is one able to count his spiritual blessing? Yes, it does call for spiritual maturity! It also requires that we allow our mind to go back to earlier years and just start counting: one, two, three, etc. As the beautiful song, written by Johnson Oatman, Jr. rings out: “When upon life’s billows you are tempest tossed, When you are discouraged, thinking all is lost, Count your many blessings, name them one by one, And it will surprise you what the Lord hath done.”
Yes my brethren, stop and count your many blessings and name them one by one!

— Frank R. Williams

(Oatman was born April 21, 1856, near Medford, New Jersey, and died September 25, 1922 in Norman, OK. And wrote the lyrics for 5,000 songs, some of which are: Higher Ground, The Last Mile of the Way, No Not One, just to name a few.)

Yes, at first it may appear to be a little late to be writing about Christmas, as we are in the month of January. However, this is the right time; the emotions of the debate have cooled; therefore, cooler heads may be able to think about the subject more clearly.
Each year it appears there is an attempt to remove “Christ” from Christmas. Business folks are encouraged to greet customers with a “Happy Holidays,” and not with the common words, “Merry Christmas.” However, the debate is much larger than Christmas. There are some who desire to remove Christianity from the public square. Therefore, to take Christ out of Christmas is just one small step, but this is not the only objective!
First, a study of the word “Christmas” is in order. It is a compound word, meaning “Christ’s Mass;” the “Mass of Christ.” It is Catholic in origin and was first used, according to the best information found, in 1038. This means, “Christmas” has no part in Christianity, as all that is of Christianity was completely revealed when the New Testament was completed (1 Cor. 13:8-10). After more than forty years of study, it is my opinion that all the New Testament books were written before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A. D. Just a little food for thought, the prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem is a major point in the teaching which Jesus did, recorded in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21; (Also in the Old Testament, Dan. 9:26-27) and, referred to in a number the other books. If not one New Testament writer referred to the destruction of Jerusalem in the past tense; as an event which had already happened, is this not evidence that the event had not taken place?! All the New Testament books were written before the destruction of Jerusalem and nothing which came after this is part of Christianity. “Christmas” is not part of the New Testament, having no part in Christianity! Therefore, Christ was never in Christmas in the first place.
Second, it is generally understood, “Christmas” is regarded and celebrated as the birth of Jesus. Much of the world celebrates the birth of Jesus on December 25th, but for more than 300 year after the completion of the New Testament, it was not so. The best evidence found shows the first time the birth of Jesus was celebrated on December 25th, was in A.D. 336. So, what does this mean? It means the celebration of the birth of Jesus, as in “Christmas,” has no part in New Testament Christianity. It is generally admitted that no one really knows the date of Jesus’ birth. It was a sixth century monk, Dionysus Exiguss, who dated all history from December 25th, the year of our Lord  1. On the other hand, others have identified mid-November to late March as the birthday of Jesus. However, the most important evidence comes from the New Testament itself. Luke covers the birth of Jesus more than any other New Testament writer, but Luke, writing by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, never gives a date for the birth of Jesus. It should be noted, no where, nor at any time, did the early church (thus, Christians) celebrate the birth of Jesus. Therefore, the celebration of the birth of Jesus, as in “Christmas,” has no part of Christianity!
Yet, it is troubling to see people try to take “Christ” out of Christmas; when in fact, “Christ” has never been in Christmas! The reason for this concern is that it is a much larger subject. It is not that people are trying to take “Christ” out of Christmas that is so troubling; no, they are trying to remove Christ, to remove God, thus, Christianity all together out of America! It was June 17, 1963 that the Supreme Court of the United States ruled, with an overwhelming majority (8 to 1) that Bible reading and prayer in school were unconstitutional and with this, the battle was on: God must go! Here is a good question: “Just what religion is established in the reading of the Bible?” If one reads the Old Testament, is Judaism established? If one reads the New Testament, is Christianity established? In reading the Bible is any one denomination, such as the Baptist, the Methodist, the Lutheran, or the Presbyterian, church established? Then, there is this question: in the reading the Bible is the Southern Baptist, First Baptists, the Missionary Baptist, Landmark Baptist, or the Free Will Baptist, church established? It should be easy to understand that reading the Bible does not establish Judaism, nor Christianity, neither does it establish any one of the many denominational churches.
Has America become a better nation through the years that have followed the above ruling by the Supreme Court? Will America improve if we take Christ out of “Christmas?” Be assured, big business does not desire to remove Christmas; as this is their biggest money making time of the year. So, it is not Christmas that businesses, which only give in to the “screeching” of the anti-religion folks, are seeking to remove; even if they desire to remove Christ from Christmas. However, if it is possible, at some point in time, to remove Christ from Christmas, what would be left? A secular meaningless “Holiday” having no root in anything! What kind of “Holiday” would it be?

— Frank R. Williams

As one who has reached the age of seventy-three years, never have I seen a stoning! Now, it is clearly understood, in some parts of the world, people have been stoned to death. In fact, here is a report, dated: September 29, 2013, “Two months ago, a young mother of two was stoned to death by her relatives on the order of a tribal court in Pakistan. Her crime: possession of a mobile phone.” One report stated, “Stoning is legal or practiced in at least 15 countries or regions.” However, this is not the subject of this article.
No, the subject of this article is to address the punishment for violating “The Ten Commandments” of the Jewish laws. Many denominational churches; thus, members of such, teach that those living today must keep “The Ten Commandments” as given by Moses in Exodus chapter twenty. It should be one of the easier things to understand, if people today are not subject to the punishment of these laws, then, they are not under these laws!
First, it must be remembered, that the Sabbath is the seventh day of the week, Saturday; not Sunday, which is the first day of the week. This point is made because some appear to believe that Sunday is the “Christian Sabbath.” There is no evidence of such in the New Testament; as Luke reported the church of the New Testament assembled on “the first day of the week” in Troas. In fact, he reveals that Paul and company (which included Luke, notice the personal pronoun in verse 6, “we”) “abode seven days” in Troas,” “And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread” (the Lord’s Supper, FRW). Never in the New Testament is the “Lord’s Supper” ever taken on any other day, than, “the first day of the week.” With the New Testament, came a new day of worship: “the first day of the week.” Therefore, there is no evidence that “the first day of the week” (Sunday) is referred to as the “Christian Sabbath!”
Second, what was the punishment for those who violated the Sabbath? Remember the commandment reads: “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.” (Ex. 20:8-11). Now, what was the punishment for violating the Sabbath commandment? Let Moses answer the question: “Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death” (Ex. 3:15). However, it was not, just “put to death,” but the manner of such death is also revealed: “And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day. And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation. And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him. And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp” (Num. 15:32-35). Therefore, for those who work, even gathering “sticks upon the sabath day,” are to be put to death by stoning! To those who desire to be under the “Ten Commandments, are you obeying this part of the same law?
Third, the same punishment is revealed for violating other of the “Ten Commandments.” Notice the commandment: “Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land …” (Ex. 20:12). Now, what was the punishment for violating this law? Hear Moses: “And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death” (Ex. 21:15); but this is not all: “And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death” (Ex. 21:17). To those who desire to be under the “Ten Commandments, are you obeying this part of the same law?
One last question: Where did the idea of the “Christian Sabbath” come from? The best information reveals it came from the Puritans of the 16th and 17th centuries. Nevertheless, those who claim we who are living today are under, subject to, the “Ten Commandments,” have to confess they, themselves, do not obey the Ten Commandments!

— Frank R. Williams

The “Ten Commandments,” as they are commonly called, are in the news from time to time, as lawyers fight in court, over the legality of having them on government owned property. It is not the purpose of this article to cover in anyway this subject, but to make the point the Ten Commandments are Jewish in origin and nature. God, the Hebrew el-o-hee-m, gave these laws to Moses on Mount Sinai; who then delivered them to the new nation of Israel; thus, they are uniquely Jewish!

Many do not know, or else just ignore the fact, that the Jews hold that God gave to Moses, not just ten commandments, but 613 commandments. Each of these 613 commandments is given explicitly, or implicitly, though there is some disagreement whether certain commandments are independent commandments. (They may be found on the internet.). The words ,“Ten commandments,” in Hebrew is “Aseret ha-Dibrot,” and may be translated, as one Jewish writer put it, “Ten Sayings, the Ten Statements, the Ten Declarations, the Ten Words, or even the Ten Things, but not as the Ten Commandments, which would be Aseret ha-Mitzvot.” Whatever they are called, not one commandment is any less than the other, as all were given by God! However, they are Jewish in origin and nature, in that it is written: “And Moses called all Israel, and said unto them, Hear, O Israel, the statutes and judgments which I speak in your ears this day, that ye may learn them, and keep, and do them. The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb (Sinai, FRW). (Deut. 5:1-2).
Now turning attention to the heart of the matter? The commandments, better known as the “Ten Commandments,” are Jewish, not Christian! Never in the New Testament, (the teaching of Christ) are the “Ten Commandments” found. It is true that most of the “ten” commandments may be found within “the teaching of Christ.” But, never are they found as a body of teaching, as they are in Exodus 20:3-17. In fact, the commandment: “Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work …” (Ex. 20:9-10), is not found as a commandment in “the teaching of Christ.”
Some may object to this conclusion, but a few questions might help in understanding the truth. Question number one, how many of those who object, worship on the Sabbath, the seventh day of the week? Question number two, how many of those who object, work on the Sabbath, the seventh day of the week? Now turning attention to the New Testament and Peter’s sermon on the day of Pentecost, and those who “… gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls” (Acts 2:41). Thus, being saved, what did they do first? Luke wrote: “And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers” (Verse 42). Yes, they worshiped God! What day is the first worship done under “the teaching of Christ?” Pentecost is always the first day of the week, not the Sabbath! But, looking farther, Luke wrote of Paul’s visit with the church in Troas: “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). Yes, once more God’s people worshipped, not on the Sabbath, but on “the first day of the week!” It must be understood, Christians do not worship on the Sabbath, per the “Ten Commandments,” but on “the first day of the week.”
So, what does this mean? It means that the “Ten Commandments” as given by Moses in Exodus chapter twenty, are Jewish and not Christian! Does this mean that it is lawful to murder, because we are not under the law which said: “Thou shalt not kill” (Ex. 20:13)? It does not! It was wrong, sin, to murder before the “Ten Commandments” were given to Moses and it is wrong, sin, to murder according to “the teaching of Christ.” When Paul listed the works of the flesh, “murders” are in the list; and says: “that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God” (Gal. 5:21).
As a matter of fact, Christianity is more demanding that the “Ten Commandments!” Here is what Jesus said: “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment:…” (Matt. 5:21-22).

— Frank R. Williams

Did you read the title and ask the question: “What is the ‘it?” The “it” is anything you planned to do during the year 2014. You might have finally made the decision this is the year I am going to lose weight. It will require a strong, determined will-power, as you may have made the same decision any number of times before. Of course, you may be saying at this very moment, you could have picked a different subject to start the New Year!
Well, how about this? You have decided this is the year, 2014, I am going to grow in Christ! Did the subject get any better? Of course, you have thought about this in years past, even last year; but somehow the days went by and turned into months and no growth took place. You see, making the decision to lose weight is a lot like the decision to grow in Christ. Our intentions are good, we made the decision in all honesty, but it just never happened! So, what can we do about growing in Christ? You can take care of the weight problem.
Have you ever thought about the question: “What is the one reason I have not grown in Christ through the years?” Why is my life just about the same as it has been for a number of years? What is the one reason? Stop and take a deep breath, as you are not going to like the answer! When Jesus was asked, “Master, which is the great commandment in the law;” he answered: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind” (Matt. 22:36- 37). You see, in your mind, you are thinking, “How dare anyone question my love for God?” The words come flying through the air: “Preacher, I am in every worship, both Sunday morning and evening; unless I am physically unable to be there.” And on you go: “I never miss a Wednesday Bible study.” To God be the glory, but this is not the question. Remember the question: “Are you going to grow in 2014?” Of course, the subject is spiritual growth and you knew the moment you read the title!
What will your love of God: “with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind,” and “with all thy strength” (Mark 12:30), compel you to do in the year 2014, that you did not do in the year 2013? Let’s start with the mind of Christ! You know the words: “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus” (Phil 2:5). If you really had the mind of Christ, which is expressed by the words, humble obedience (Phil 2:8); what would you do different in the year 2014, that you did not do in the year 2013? Well, will you be able to say at the end 2014, “The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up” (John 2:17)? What about having the “spirit of Christ” in the year 2014?” Recall just here, Paul’s words to the Romans: “Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his” (Rom. 8:9). Now the question: What had Jesus done that made the disciples remember the words: “The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up?” If you remember, it was when he saw that some had made the temple into a “house of merchandise”? What had Jesus done before he uttered these words? He “had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers’ money, and overthrew the tables; And said unto them that sold doves, ….” (John 2:15-16). Will you express the same kind of zeal that Jesus did when you see and hear of those who are doing their very best to change the nature and character, the worship, work, and mission, of the church? If not, what about your love of God? Is it growing?
As a child of God, growth is natural; and when spiritual growth does not take place, tests can be done to determine what is wrong! Well, if you did not grow spiritually in the year 2013, and you have no real plans to grow spiritually in the year 2014, do you think it might be time to see the spiritual doctor?
Have you ever sung the song: “The great Physician”? Read the words and think: “The great Physician is now near, The sympathizing Jesus; He speaks the drooping heart to cheer, Oh! Hear the voice of Jesus. Sweetest note in seraph song, Sweetest Name on mortal tongue; Sweetest carol ever sung, Jesus blessed Jesus.” Jesus, the great physician” is standing by desiring to help you grow spiritual in Christ in the year 2014! ARE YOU GOING TO DO “IT” IN 2014?
— Frank R. Williams