Barnes church of Christ

“And whatsoever ye do, in word or in deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus.” –Colossians 3:17
The Bible prohibits actions by one of two ways. One of which is by simply telling us not to do it [e.g., “Thou shalt not….”]. The other is by not giving us the authority to do it in the first place.
Suppose you go to a restaurant and order dinner number three. However, along with dinner number three, the waiter also brings you dinners number one, two and four through ten, and presents you with the bill of $80! You correctly object, “I said I wanted dinner number three. That is all you were to bring me. I did not have to tell you, ‘I do not want dinner one, two, nor four through ten.’ When I told you what I wanted, I did not have to tell you what I did not want.”
So it is with the Bible. When God tells us what He wants, He does not have to tell us what He does not want—in order for it to be prohibited. God made this point abundantly clear in many verses. One such verse is Hebrews 1:13, “But of which of the angels hath he said at any time, ‘Sit thou on my right hand…?’” The Father said this only to Jesus [like our ordering dinner #3]. By the virtue of the fact that He did not say those words to any of the angels [like our non-order of dinners 1, 2, 4-10], no angel had the authority to sit on the right side of the Father. Furthermore, God did not have to say to each angel, “Don’t you sit here” [just as we did not have to say, “I don’t want #1. I don’t want #2. Etc.”]. Of a truth, when God tells us what He wants, He does not have to tell us what He does not want—in order for it to be prohibited.1
Why do we not have hot-dogs and pop for the Lord’s Supper? Because God told us to use unleavened bread and the juice of the grape, and when God told us what He wants, He does not have to tell us what He does not want—in order for it to be prohibited. Why do we (the New Testament church) not use mechanical instruments with our singing in worship? Because God told the New Testament church what to do, and that is sing (Eph. 5:19, Col. 3:16; et. al).
How we wish that all who seek after God would recognize and abide by this crucial Bible truth. May each consider his every practice and ask, “Does the Bible tell us to do this?”

Gary Henson

1 This truth is also taught in: Acts 15:24; Heb. 7:14; Jer. 19:5; Jos. 6:10; etc.

“The Lord is a man of war” –Exodus 15:3

This question can be easily solved by answering another question: “Does God ever tell man to do that which is sinful?” In other words, would God ever command you to sin?
Anyone who knows anything about the God of the Bible would answer in the negative. If God commanded a man to do that which is sinful, then either: (1) the man will do that sinful thing (and is therefore guilty of sin); or he will not do the sinful thing (and therefore is sinning by disobedience). Thus, to answer in the affirmative would have God placing man in a situation in which he sinned no matter what he did!
However, God does not do that to man. He assures us that He “will not suffer you to be tempted above that you are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it” (I Cor. 10:13). In other words, God will not put a man in a situation in which he cannot but sin. God never puts man in “checkmate.”
Thus, the answer to the question (Does God ever tell man to do that which is sinful?) is “No.”
With this established, turn to and read Deuteronomy 20:16-19. Here, God commanded (v.17) His people to go up against the (evil) inhabitants of Canaan. He commanded them to destroy them (v:17), besiege them (v: 19) and, yes, make war (v:19).
Since God does not tell man to do that which is sinful, and since God is telling His people (i.e., children of God) to go to war, then it is not sinful for God’s children today (i.e., Christians) to go to war.
May we pray and hope for peace. But if war comes, our children and our brethren who go to war are not committing that which is sinful in God’s sight.

Gary Henson

Note: Not all war is pleasing to God. There are evil, aggressive nations as well as individuals. God was not pleased with the war which the Ninevites involved themselves. (Nahum 1:15; 2:1,3; 3:1). Those who engage in such are sinning (Nahum 1:3; 3:5).

Under the Mosaical Law those who accidentally caused the death of another could flee for safety to one of six cities of refuge. Today, the sinner has his “city of refuge” in Christ. The analogy is distinct. Furthermore, even the very names of those cities teach valuable truths Consider:
KEDESH. This city’s name meant, “separate; set apart.” This describes Jesus (who is the soul’s city of refuge) as one who was fully set apart for the work of the Father. Jesus Himself stated, “For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me” (John 6:38). Such unselfishness of His own will and welfare (to our benefit) ought to compel our appreciation and loyalty.
SHECHEM. This name meant, “shoulder.” “Shoulder” indicates the bearing of another’s burden; to prop one up; to sustain. Such aptly describes Jesus. In the teaching of the lost sheep, when it was found, “he layeth it on his shoulders” (Luke 15:5)—away from the thorns, wolves and dangerous waters. Thanks be to God for the world’s wonderful shoulder.
HEBRON. The southwestern city meant, “friendly association; fellowship” We all need friends. Man is a social being. God created us that way. Unfortunately, many have (or will) encounter circumstances in which they become lonely. Who, then, is our friend? “Hebron” indicates that Jesus is our friend. He will always be there. He will never leave. It is Jesus who told us, “I say unto you my friends” (Luke 12:4; cf. John 15:12-15). Furthermore, Jesus gives us friends through Christian fellowship (Mark 10:29-30). Truly, Jesus is our friend—our true friend.
BEZER. This means, “fortified.” Likewise, Jesus is a strong defense. He is called Mighty God (Isa. 9:6). No one, not even Satan, can snatch us out of the hand of God (John 10:28). Truly, “if God be for us, who can be against us?” (Rom. 8:31).
RAMOTH. Its meaning is, “exalted, eminence.” If we exalt a worthy man, how much more ought we exalt the prince and savior of our souls?! (Acts 5:31).
GOLAN. This northeast city’s name meant, “passage, transmigration.” Such aptly describes Jesus, who said, “I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved” (John 10:9). Yes, Jesus is the passage (John 14:6).
The six cities of refuge—an amazing description of the relation of Jesus and ourselves. May these six terms help us better our appreciation and loyalty to Jesus.

Gary Henson

“These were the appointed cities for all the children of Israel, and for the stranger that sojourneth among them, that whosoever killeth any person unwittingly might flee thither, and not die by the hand of the avenger of blood” —JOSHUA 20:9

The twentieth chapter of the book of Joshua consists of only nine verses, yet it contains a most valuable analogy for men living today. It is the account of the cities of refuge.
There were six cities chosen by God which were evenly located within the nation of Israel. These cities were designated as a place of safety for anyone who accidentally caused the death of another. As long as he remained within the city, the avenger of blood of the one who died could not harm him. Consider some of the analogies for men living today.
First: Just as God provided a city of refuge in Moses’ day, He also has provided “a city of refuge” for man today. That place is in Christ. Man has sinned (Rom. 3:23) and punishment is certain (Rom. 6:23). However, to escape, we can go to Jesus. Second Timothy 2:10 tells us of “the salvation which is in Christ Jesus.” Thus, just as the man had to be in the city for protection, man today must, must be in Christ.
Second: The way to the cities were clearly marked. The cities were upon hills to be easily seen, and there were signs posted for direction. The way to safety was plain. Likewise, directions to the salvation of the soul are made clear in the Bible. Paul stated, “When ye read, ye may understand” (Eph. 3:4). Jesus said, “If ye abide in my word, ye shall know the truth” (John 8:32). Yes, God’s instructions to safety is made clear to all.
Third: The manslayer himself had to go to the city. He could not send a representative. So it is with salvation in Christ. It is personal. One cannot be saved simply because his relative is a Christian. We are told, “Repent and be baptized every one of you for the forgiveness of sin” (Acts 2:38). Salvation is strictly personal.
Fourth: After the slayer entered the city, he had to remain in the city for safety. If he ever stepped out, the avenger could kill him. Likewise, the one who has entered into Christ must continue to abide in Him by faithful obedience to His Word. We are warned, “Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life” (Rev. 2:10), and “If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned” (John 15:6). Yes, one must remain in Christ by faithfully obeying His Word—the New Testament.
The circumstances and conditions concerning the slayer and the cities of refuge are so easy for us today to understand. We would think for a man under this law to fail to comply with these instructions to be wholly without excuse. What then, can be said of those of us today who do the same with Jesus?

Gary Henson

Today, many people claim they miraculously speak in tongues–languages totally unknown to humanity. It is maintained that, since Jesus promised believers the ability to speak in tongues (reference is made to Mark 16:17), then believers today should be able to speak in tongues.
Although their desire to please God must be appreciated, we must kindly point out their error (Eph. 4:15).
First, the tongue speaking which is spoken today is not the tongue speaking of the Bible. Today, the speaking is ecstatic utterances. It is not a human language at all. Some call it “jibber-jabber.” However, in the 1st century, tongue speaking was the miraculous ability to speak in a foreign, human language. This is made abundantly clear in Acts 2. In verse 4, the apostles “began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.” Then, when those who lived in foreign lands [who had traveled to Jerusalem for the day of Pentecost (v:1)] heard them, “they were confounded, because every man heard them speak in his own language” (v:6) and they asked “how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?” (v:8). Thus, whatever it is our religious friends are uttering today, it is not what they were doing in the New Testament–and those in the New Testament were speaking in tongues.
Second, believers today do not have the ability to do the miraculous (which includes speaking in tongues). Again, God makes it clear, the miraculous ability was to cease. He said, along with other miracles, “whether there be tongues, they shall cease” (1 Cor. 13:8). When ? When the “perfect is come, then that which is in part [i.e., the miraculous (v:9)] shall be done away” (v:10). What then, is the “perfect”? It is the completed revelation of God in the 27 books of the New Testament–it “is that good, and acceptable, and perfect will of God” (Rom. 12:2); it is “the perfect law of liberty” (Jam. 1:25).
Yes, believers had the miraculous ability to speak in foreign, human languages, but only as long as the N.T. was in the making. Today, the N.T. has long been completed (some 1900 years), and so has ceased the tongue speaking.

Gary Henson

It appears that many seem to think so. In a report, of the top ten study Bibles purchased, the King James Version did not even place. [The NKJV was sixth]. The versions which occupied the other nine positions were unreliable “thought translations.”
Of the general translations, KJV was second and NKJV was third. However, that version which was the best seller was the “thought translation,” NIV.
A reliable version is a version that is a “word for word” translation. Such a version strives to give us the English equivalent to the original Greek words which God selected (1Cor. 2:13). However, “thought translations” merely give us that which the translating committee THINK God means. But, if the translating committee “thinks wrong,” then we do not have God’s Word—we have man’s! And when one follows man’s teachings, he follows in vain, “teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Mat. 15:9).
The warning to refrain from adding to and taking away applies to Bible translators too (Rev. 22:18-19)!! God said, “Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish from it, that ye may keep the commandments of Jehovah your God which I command you” (Deut. 4:2). When a translator “mis-thinks” what God means, then, as he writes his translation, he will either be adding to or taking away from what God is commanding, and the reader is not able to “keep the commandment of Jehovah.”
May we as members of the Lord’s church be aware of this trend and infiltration of non-word-for-word translations (Deut. 4:2; Mat. 5:18; 1 Cor. 2:13; Rev. 22:18,19). It is sadly getting (rather, has gotten) to the point that, not only do we have to help people who are mislead to see what the Word of God says, we also have to help people see what the Word of God is.

Gary Henson

At a former Cosmic Questions Conference, which is sponsored by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, 200 people debated about a Designer for nearly five hours. The USA Today (April 20, 1999) highlighted the statement of Nobel Prize-winning physicist, Steven Weinberg as he scoffed at the idea of a miraculous creation by a Supreme Being: “Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you’d have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things.” Evidently, Mr. Weinberg does not fully grasp the implications of his statement.

Atheists continue to speak of that which is good and evil. However, if there is no God and all that exists owes its origin to self-creation (the big-bang) and evolution on earth, then there is no absolute moral standard by which to judge who and what is good or evil! If we are merely matter in motion, then there is no moral difference between a man killing a cockroach or killing a child. There would be no good act nor evil act. Rather, it would be acts that we like or dislike. Thus, if a man desired (liked) to kill a child, then we could not say he is an evil person doing an evil thing. Yet, this is precisely what Weinberg said!

Why do atheists (from Nobel Prize winners to those across the fence) continue to speak of good and evil, and objective moral right and wrong? It is because God put that “ought to” in us and there is no getting away from it. Romans 2:14-15 teaches, “For when the Gentiles which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves; Which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the meanwhile accusing or else excusing one another.”

So, the next time your atheist friend speaks of an objective moral right or wrong act, why not help him see that he just proved the existence of God?!

Gary Henson