The Journey To Denominationalism (No.1)

     Dear friends, this is a subject that we should consider very seriously because its
implications reach into eternity. There was a time when the people of God knew the
Bible, and they maintained an undying loyalty to divine authority and to the blood
bought body of the Lord Jesus Christ. In former days preachers, elders, and Bible
class teachers made a determined effort to inform Christians about the errors of
denominationalism but it is different in many places today. What have we accomplished
if we teach against moral sins such as homosexuality, abortion, adultery, racial prejudice,
incest, stealing, and drunkenness), yet fail to teach against doctrinal errors such as once
saved always saved,  the  direct  operation of the Holy Spirit  on  the sinner's heart in
conviction and conversion, salvation by faith only, present day miraculous divine healing,
sprinkling and pouring instead of immersion, and  the  use of mechanical instruments of
music in  New  Testament  worship?  What we will have done is this: sown the seed of
apostasy, tilled the soil of ecumenism, and created an atmosphere of tolerance for every
form of doctrinal corruption among God's people. The purity of the local congregation
involves  both  moral  and  doctrinal  conformity  to  the  word  of  the  living God. The
congregation   at   Pergamum   had   people  who  were  practicing  sexual  immorality
and  some among   them   held   to   the   teaching  of   Balaam   and   the   teaching 
of   the Nicolaitans, and as the result of their lack of conformity in doctrine and practice
the Lord said, "I have a few things against you ... repent then." (Rev. 2:12-16)

     In  the  early  1990's  I   read  a  lot  about  a  heinous  movement  that  had   roots
in Florida. In those days older preachers with knowledge and experience were saying if
this new movement is not challenged, we will see numerous congregations  with their
elders and deacons become so soft that they will take the journey to denominationalism.
The movement was known as The Crossroads Movement. The assessment of the
wise older preachers was exactly right. They hit the nail on the head. The movement
eventually expanded and developed its own system of teaching and organization and
later evolved into The Boston Movement. The movement had cultic tendencies and
several congregations and elderships could  be identified  as  congregations of  Christ
only in "name." Their attitudes changed from a formerly militant stance of walk softly
and carry a big stick to a "tip-toe and carry a toothpick" posture. (Jude 3) Their practice
changed from only doing what was authorized by the New Testament, to doing what they  
wish could be found in the word of God. The only thing that brought more sorrow to the
hearts of men who were committed to "sticking with the book," was the fact that those who
departed from the truth of God had a rather large group of sympathizers.  What are some 
of    the  telltale   signs    that   a   person  or  congregation  is  taking  the   journey   to
denominationalism?

     1) When  a  person or congregation looks  for  something  in addition to the
word of  God  to  lead  them  to  the  salvation in  Christ.  Many   people   in  the
Crossroads Movement talked  about the Holy Spirit  guiding them, touching their eyes
and preparing their hearts to  obey God. They  were  expecting  the  Holy Spirit to do
something to them that the  word of God could not do for them. They  were  implicitly
denying the all-sufficiency of the word of God as the message of salvation. They seemed
oblivious to the fact that the word is  the  instrument  through  which the Spirit works to
convict  and  convert  the  alien  sinner,  and  to  build  up  the  believer.  (Acts 20:32;
2 Tim. 3:16-17;  Jas. 1:25;  2 Pet. 1:3)  "For  the  word  of  God  is  living  and active."
(Heb. 4:12) It is not only "living," but living and active, meaning it gets inside a person's
heart and brings forth results. The word of God does this because God designed it this
way. We are "brought forth by the word of truth." (Jas. 1:18) The implanted word "is able
to save our souls." (Jas. 1:21) The "word  of  the  cross" is the power of God to salvation.
(Rom. 1:16;   1 Cor. 1:18, 21) I    have    never    met    a    person  who believes the Holy
Spirit is influencing them  apart from  the teaching of sacred  scripture, who did not begin
teaching things that the Holy Spirit  did not reveal  to  the  apostles  of Christ. (Jno. 16:13;
1 Cor. 2:13; Eph. 3:5) When this happens, if they do not see the error of their way and turn,
the inevitable consequence will be to take the journey to denominationalism.

     2) When a person or congregation speaks disparagingly of the concept that 
the  New Testament  constitutes  a pattern for faith and conduct. This  is  usually
done when the "progressives" want to initiate a program or work, that  as things stand,
they cannot find any authorization for in the New Testament, so their choices are either
to abandon the unauthorized concept, or as is usually done, to say, "Well, we don't need
authority for everything we do anyway because the New Testament does not constitute
a pattern. It is a series of 'love letters' that are primarily applicable to the apostolic age."
The apostles believed their writings were authoritative, absolute, and that they were to
guide the Lord's people. Therefore, they believed in "pattern authority." Paul said there
is one gospel, and that no one, angel or otherwise has any right to change it! (Gal. 1:6-9)
Paul was certain that he was writing the "commandments of the Lord." (1 Cor. 14:37)
He told Timothy to "Follow the pattern  of  the  sound words that you have heard from
me." (2 Tim. 1:13, ESV) James said we have "the perfect law of liberty." (Jas. 1:25)
Jude said "the faith has been  once for all  delivered to the  holy people." (Jude 3) The
point is, if the New Testament is not to be changed, consists of the commandments of the
Lord, is a pattern of sound words, is a perfect law of liberty, and is the faith that has been
once for all delivered to the holy people of God, (and all of these things are true), therefore
the New Testament is the pattern or standard for faith and practice. I have never known a
person  who  believes  that  the  New  Testament  is not  a  pattern  for  faith  and  practice,
who did not begin believing and practicing things that are not taught in the New Testament.
If they do not see the error of their way and turn, the  eventual  road  they  will take is the
one leading to denominationalism.
                                                                                                                    R. Daly

Copyright 2011


     


    

A New Direction?

     It is unquestionably true that some who profess to be members of the body of Christ
want the Lord's people to go in a new direction. They  are  determined to bring about
changes in the doctrine, practice, and  attitude  of the Lord's  people  toward religious
error. Some call them "change agents," and such they are, but before they became change
agents they became "softies." Many of these men, whether elders, preachers, or editors
of religious journals, have lost their perspective about the need to "fight the good fight of
the faith" (1 Tim. 6:12, ASV), to "be strong in the Lord, and in his mighty power...so that
you can  take your stand" (Eph.6:10-11, NIV-11),  and  to "contend  earnestly  for  the
faith  which  was  once  for  all  delivered  to  the saints." (NASB-77)

     It is often alleged by some young preachers of today, and some of the older ones who
have softened like butter left on the dinner table, that the older generation of preachers
proclaimed such  strong  "doctrinal"  sermons  that  they  neglected  to preach on other
important subjects such as grace, mercy, love, and unity. I deny their claim with every
fiber of  my  being! I  have  never  met  or  heard  a preacher of the gospel from the past
who did not believe in and preach on grace, mercy, love, unity and any other "positive"
subject in God's word. The difference between them and many of our day is, they
understood that those very subjects include all that God has done and taught, and that
unity is attained through adherence to the word of God, and not as the result of doctrinal
compromise, neglect, and an ecumenical spirit in which anything goes. (John 17:17,
20-21; Eph. 4:1-6)

     Many  preachers, elders, and members  in  local  congregations  are seeking a new
direction of positivism that refuses to inform  people  when they are  religiously wrong.
Instead of telling their religious acquaintances that  they  are  wrong  in doctrine, faith,
and practice, they first seek common ground of agreement. This is usually the result of
espousing a misconception of love. To them, love is an emotion or affinity that promotes
comradery. The New Testament uses the word love to denote intense interest in the
spiritual  well-being  of  others. It  seeks  peoples'  best  interest even when it strongly
differs with them, and  it  always  puts  God  and  his  will  first.  The  person who is
characterized by biblical  love  realizes  that emotionalism and personal affinity toward
those who are religiously wrong are not the answers to their need.

     Jesus loved everyone he met during his earthly service for his Father, yet he never
hesitated to tell the religious leaders among the Jews when they were wrong. He told
the Pharisees and scribes that they broke the commandment of God for the sake of
their tradition. (Mat. 15:3) He said they were hypocrites. (Mat. 15:7) And he said they
were   blind   guides  and   that   they   were  not  planted  by  the  heavenly  Father.
(Mat. 15:13,14) When the Sadducces questioned him about the resurrection of the
dead based on their erroneous assumptions,  he  plainly  told them, "You are wrong,
because    you    know    neither   the    Scriptures    nor   the   power    of   God."
(Mat. 22:29, ESV-2011) The apostles imitated Jesus and so should we. (1 Cor. 11:1;
Phil. 4:9)

     A new direction for the doctrine would be the wrong direction. God teaches that
his word is not to be changed. It is a fixed body of truth, as it has been "once for all
delivered to the holy people." (Jude 3) Jesus shed his blood for the New Covenant.
(Mat. 26:28; Heb. 9:11-17) It is "the complete law of liberty" and therefore allows no
changes. (Jas. 1:25) It constitutes a pattern of sound words from the mouths and pens
of the apostles and other writers who were guided by the Holy Spirit. (2 Tim. 1:13;
1 Cor. 2:13; Eph. 3:5) It is our standard of faith and conduct. Therefore, there can be
no "new direction" for the doctrine!

     Some of these men are deemphasizing the most  fundamental doctrines such as the  
one church/congregation of the saved  (Eph. 4:4).  Some  of them will not rest till they
have "proven" the acceptability of denominationalism. Perhaps a friend, child, mother,
or other family member has died, and they are allowing human emotions to alter what
the sacred scriptures teach. They often do this under the guise that they have "matured"
in their thinking through the years, and the veil of "church of Christ traditionalism" has
been lifted. They are seeking a new direction and are willing to sacrifice and compromise
the truth to get there! (Mat. 7:13-14; cf. Jer. 6:16)

     Others   are   seeking   a   new   direction for the biblically based  worship that has 
characterized the congregations of Christ. They decry the biblical viewpoint that we are
to sing without mechanical accompaniment. (Acts 16:25; Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16) They
now say  that  whether  or  not  we  use  instrumental  music in worship is a matter of
opinion. It  is  optional  and  is of  no  consequence. They are wrong. They go further
and   state   that  choirs,  choruses,  and   other   singing   groups  are  authorized   in
the worship of the congregation. We ask, "Where's the proof?" Some among them go
further in their pursuit of a new direction. They hesitate to directly employ instrumental
music in their worship, so they use their voices to "mimic" the sounds of the instruments
they reject. This, too, is without warrant  in  the   New  Testament. God says "teaching
and admonishing one another in all wisdom...singing." (Col. 3:16) I would like to know
how mimicking the sounds of instruments of music in worship meets the standard that
God has set. 

      Rather than seeking a new direction for the doctrine, practice, and attitude of the
Lord's disciples toward religious error, we should seek the right direction, and when
we  find  it,  we  should  walk  in  it and  if  need  be, give our very lives in defense of it.
(Prov. 23:23; 2 Tim. 4:1-8)
                                                                                                              R. Daly

Copyright 2011

What Is A Religious Denomination?

     Many  people  believe  that  every  religious  group,  society,  or  institution is a
denomination. Such is not the case and we intend to allow the facts to serve as proof
of our thesis.

     The word denomination is defined as, "a religious group, usually including local
churches, often  larger  than  a  sect." (Webster's  Encyclopedic  Unabridged 
Dictionary of the English Language,  page  386,  Copyright  1989.) Stated
another way, a denomination is " a religious organization uniting in a single legal and
administrative body a number of local congregations." (Webster's Ninth Collegiate
Dictionary, page 339, Copyright 1989)

     Based on the preceding definitions, a denomination is a religious organization,
consisting  of  local  congregations,  with said  organization being the legal and/or
administrative body of those local congregations. By extension, a denomination
also has a distinct name, organization, doctrine, practice, and worship that are not
authorized by the New Testament.

     No denomination is found in, authorized by, or given any credence in the New
Testament. The congregation of Christ is found in, authorized by, and given credence
in the New Testament, but it is not a denomination. The word that is generally used
in the New Testament to identify the people of God is ekklesia (which means
assembly, congregation, or group), though it is translated "church" in most English
versions of the scriptures.

     Ekklesia in its singular and/or plural forms is used to identify:

     (1) The universal body of Christ consisting of those who have obeyed the gospel
whether living or dead. It  has  no organized structure  through  which  each  person
functions,  nor   is  it  comprised  of  local  congregations. The  universal  body  or
congregation of Christ consists of people who have been saved  from  sin,  whose
head   is  Christ,  and   whose  law  is  the  gospel.  It   is  a  "brotherhood"  not  a
"church-hood."  (Mat. 16:18-19;  Eph. 1:22-23;  Col. 1:18; 1 Pet. 2:17)

     (2) The local congregation which consists of those who have obeyed
the gospel and live and meet in a specific geographical area in order to carry out
its mission under common oversight. For example, there were congregations of Christ
in Jerusalem, Ephesus and Philippi. They were "organized" with overseers. (Acts 15;
Acts 20:17,28; Phil. 1:1) There was no "religious organization uniting them in a
legal and administrative body." They were independent and autonomous groups.They
had their own organization, work, worship, and mission.

     (3) A congregation of the Lord's people who live and work in a region. Acts 9:31
tells  us, "So  the  church throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria enjoyed peace,
being built up; and going on in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit,
it continued to increase." (NASB-77) They did not constitute a "region wide" organization,
nor was any such organization "over" them dictating their course of action, work, worship,
etc. The concept of denominationalism that is so prevalent in today's religious world
is foreign to the New Testament! The following admission is found on page 22 of  The
Standard Manual For Baptist Churches, editor, Edward T. Hiscox, D.D., "It is most
likely that in the Apostolic age when there was but 'one Lord, one faith, and one baptism,'
and no differing denominations existed, the baptism of a convert by that very act
constituted him a member of the church..." It is indeed true that in the apostolic age, no
differing denominations existed!
                                                                                                       R. Daly

Copyright 2011
   
   

"Too Hard"

     Have you ever heard people say that some preaching is too hard? What was your
response to the statement? Did you pass it off as a harmless opinion? If you did, you
shouldn't have. It is not a harmless opinion. It portrays a spirit that says, "Yeah, it's
okay to preach the truth, but don't hurt feelings." One problem is, some folks will take
offense at the simplest Bible truths! Atheists take offense when we preach on God's
existence. (Gen. 1:1; Heb. 11:6) Methodists take offense when we preach about
the falsity of substituting sprinkling and pouring for the act of immersion. (Rom. 6:
3-4; Col. 2:12) Baptists take offense when we preach on the fact that a person
cannot be a Baptist and a Christian at the same time. (Acts 11:26; 1 Pet. 4:16)
Seventh Day Adventist take offense when we preach that the observance of the
sabbath day was under the old law, and is no longer binding. So, must we soften
the impact of truth in order to appease those who embrace religious error? No!
We must do exactly what Jesus and his apostles did; we must preach the truth and
accept the consequences.

     During Jesus' earthly ministry, some of his disciples said, "This is a hard saying;
who can listen to it?" (Jno. 6:60-62; ESV-2011) People often reject the plain truth
because they have grown accustomed to being fed a diet of refined sugar, and
they  think  any  scriptural  truth  is  "too hard."  How  can  a  man  preach too
hard if what he is preaching and teaching is the word of God?

     We are not making an appeal for preaching that is mean-spirited, unnecessarily
harsh, and belligerent. But, we are saying that the world needs men who are strong
enough to preach the truth; all the truth, and nothing but the truth, anytime, anywhere,
and before anybody! Too many people believe that congregations grow when the
teaching program is "sweet," "soft," and "non-combative." It won't happen. A
congregation may "swell" from soft preaching, because it is prone to draw tolerant
disciples from other congregations, but soft preaching is not a catalyst for true
growth.

     Some people have their roots in congregations that tickled their ears, scratched
their backs, and manicured their feet, instead of telling them what God wants them to
know. A child that has lived on a diet of junk food will expect junk food every time
he eats. A congregation is not a university for lecturing. It is a group of God's people
and they need bold preaching. God says so! (1 Tim. 4:11-16; 2 Tim. 4:1-5) God's
people have the responsibility to rise up and question any preacher and teacher
when any error is taught. Many people are worried about hurting someone's feelings,
making people angry, and driving people away. But, the same people do not seem
to be concerned about making God angry and causing God's Spirit  to grieve by their
silence and tolerance of wrongdoing. (Eph. 4:30; 1 Jno. 4:1) May God bless all
preachers and teachers of the gospel to be as hard as scripture teaches that they
should be in order to accomplish the most spiritual good.
                                                                                                         R. Daly
Copyright 2011
     

Personal Bias In Bible Study

     Preachers of the gospel often tell people that they should allow the scriptures to
speak on their own merit, without shaping their theology by tradition, former teaching,
family influences, etc. It is important for us to interpret the sacred writings in a fair
and credible manner. But, it is also necessary for us to know how to safeguard our
hearts in a way that allows us to study the Bible without personal bias. How can
we do this?

     First, it is imperative to remember that when we study the word of God,
we are seeking God's will, and  that  doing  so  necessitates  that we allow the
Bible to speak for itself regardless of what others think or say. It is never right to
force the scriptures to teach something that they do not teach, in order to please
a friend, parent, spouse, or even an enemy. It is not right to corrupt or make
merchandise of the word of God! (2 Corinthians 2:17) We do not want to be like
the preacher who was looking for a place to preach, and one of the elders of a
congregation asked him, "Where do you stand on the 'brotherhood' issues?" The
preacher replied, "Where do you want me to stand?" In order to protect oneself
against personal bias in Bible study, a person must be brutally honest with the
word of the living God.

     Second, a person must be willing to change when God's word contradicts
some  personal  or  doctrinal  belief   that  he  holds. This  is  one  thing  that
many people will not do because it may mean that they will appear to be weak
or wishy-washy to other people. Most people would rather remain wrong and
save face than to change and save their souls! Honest people will approach God's
word asking, "What would you have me to do Lord?" Satisfying the Lord's will is
their supreme goal in life. When arrogance and pride get in the way, personal bias
becomes a stumbling block and such a person chooses to fight rather than switch.
(Proverbs 16:18; 1 Peter 5:6)

     Third, be prepared to "let the facts be the facts."  "Stick to your guns"  when
you have thoroughly studied a subject, a word, or a biblical concept, and have
reached the proper conclusion that aligns with Bible teaching, Resist the temptation
to stand with notable men even when they are wrong. We should not be afraid or
ashamed to differ with people whom we respect when their understanding and
application of scripture are erroneous. We are servants of the most high God.
Jesus told the Jews, "You will know the truth, and the truth will make you free."
(John 8:32) God's word is truth. (John 17:17) God's word has veracity and it
must be allowed to stand. Seek truth...accept the facts on any religious subject.

     Fourth, we  can  alleviate  personal  bias  in  Bible  study  by  approaching
the scriptures with "freshness" each time we turn to them. There could be and
usually is something we missed. As an example: many people have read John 3:16
many times, and have not realized that the phrase "God so loved the world," is not 
indicating the intensity or degree of God's love for the world. The word "so" translates
the Greek word  houtos which is an adverb, indicating the manner or way God
loved the world. There is no doubt that God's love for the world is great, but that is
not the point of the word "so" in John 3:16. (cf. Eph. 2:4)

     It is incumbent on all of us to approach the scriptures as free of personal bias
as we can be, for in this way we will allow the Book to speak and we will listen.
The Book will lead and we must follow.
                                                                                                             R. Daly

Copyright 2011
 

    

Authority In Religion (No. 4)

                                        Application of Authority


     The New Testament teaches that we must have authority from God before we
act in the religious realm. Paul wrote, "And whatever you do, in word or deed, do
everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through
him." (Col. 3:17) According to the apostle, all must be done "in the name of the
Lord Jesus." The phrase "in the name of" is an idiom that means in honor of the
power  or  attributes  possessed  by  the  person  who  wears the name. In the
Colossians' text it is the name of the "Lord Jesus." The word "Lord" means master
or ruler; one who is in control. Therefore, whatever the Christian does must be done
in honor of  Jesus' authority.

     There are many things that distinguish the Lord's people from the denominational
world. One of the most prominent marks of distinction is the fact, that we who believe
and accept the teaching of the New Testament do not use mechanical music in worship.
The fact that we do not employ instrumental music in worship is not a matter of tradition,
opinion, or our likes or dislikes. It is a matter of authority. If mechanical music is authorized,
we have the right to use it; if it is not authorized we must avoid it and warn against its use
in worship.

     Mechanical music in worship is not authorized in the New Testament. There is no
direct statement that tells us to use it. There is no account of action under apostolic
direction which shows us that we may use it. Nor is there a word, phrase, or text that
implies that we must use it. To the contrary, God through the written testimony of the
Holy Spirit in the sacred scriptures, teaches us to sing without mechanical accompaniment.
The direct statements in the new covenant that speak of music in worship tell us to
"sing." (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16; Jas. 5:13) The accounts  of  action  under  apostolic 
guidance teach us to sing without mechanical accompaniment. (Acts 16:25; 1 Cor. 14:15)
Therefore, the words, phrases, and texts that relate to the kind of music that God desires in
New Testament worship imply that we are to sing without mechanical accompaniment.
(Rom. 15:9; Heb. 2:12; 13:15)  

     God has specified 'singing and making melody in the heart" as the kind of music
that pleases him in worship. (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16))  He revealed this through the Holy
Spirit to the apostles and prophets of New Testament days. (1 Cor. 2:9-13; Eph. 3:5)
We have no right to deviate from what God has authorized and add another kind of
music to the will of God.

     Those who believe the New Testament constitutes God's will and our rule of faith
and practice accept the testimony as revealed, and we dare not add to nor take from
it. We are satisfied to allow it to remain as written! 
                                                                                                           R.  Daly
Copyright 2011

                                        

Authority In Religion (No. 3)

                                 
                          How Do We Determine What Is Authorized?

     Sometimes people ask, "How do we established Bible authority?" In my judgment,
that is the wrong question. It is not in the hands of human beings to establish authority
in  religion. All  authority  resides   in God. Our   duty is   to  determine what God has
authorized by the teaching of his word. Authority is not established by human wisdom
and ingenuity. God has spoken.

     Mankind has been required to act by divine authority during each period of human
history. This was true during patriarchy, Judaism, and the age of the gospel. During
patriarchy God gave Noah a pattern for building the ark. (Genesis 6:14-16) God
told Noah the kind of wood to use in making the ark. He also told him the dimensions
of the ark. Notice Moses' language in describing God's instructions to Noah, "And
this is how you shall make it..." (verse 15) The phrase implies that there was a
pattern! Noah understood that God's directions constituted a pattern because Moses
told us, "Thus Noah did; according to all that God had commanded him; so he did."
(Gen. 6:22; 7:5, 16; NASB-77) God gave Noah a pattern and Noah built according
to the instructions that Yahweh gave. Noah built the ark by divine authority.

     The Israelites were to respect the authority of God during Judaism. God spoke
to them through Moses and the prophets. They were not to add to nor take from any
thing that God has prescribed. God's will was to remain intact. Moses said to the
people of Israel, "You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor
take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of Yahweh you God which
I command you." (Deut. 4:2) He also said, "Whatever I command you, you shall be
careful to do; you shall not add to nor take away from it." (Deut. 12:32) The fact
that Yahweh through Moses told them not to "add to nor take away" from his word
clearly shows that there was a pattern, and  the  pattern   was  not  to be altered!
Yahweh put Nadab and Abihu to death because they offered "unauthorized" fire.
(Lev. 10:1-3) They failed to respect God's pattern. (Lev. 6:12-13; 16:12)

     The same is true during the age of the gospel. The gospel is not to be changed
in any way. (Gal. 1:6-9) We are not to go beyond what has been written. ( 1 Cor.
4:6) We are to remain within the teaching of Christ. (2 Jno. 9-11) When a person
speaks, he is to speak as the very words of God. (1 Pet. 4:11) When he does so,
he "retains the standard of sound words." (2 Tim. 1:13; NASB) The ESV says,
"follow the pattern of sound words." The ASV says, "Hold the pattern of sound
words." The preceding information shows that we must be certain that we carefully
examine  the  sacred  scriptures   in   order to  know  what God has and has not
authorized. Therefore we ask, "How do we determine what God has authorized?"


    
     The issue of whether or not physical  circumcision   was binding   in this age
was one of the burning issues during the days of the apostles. "And certain ones
of the sect of the Pharisees who had believed, stood up saying, 'It is necessary to
circumcise them, and to direct them to observe the Law of Moses.' " (Acts 15:1,5)
The apostles and elders came to the forefront and debated this issue with the
Judaizers. The issue was not decided on the basis of human emotions, tradition,
family religion, or academic credentials. The apostles appealed to the authority
of God.

     Peter stood up and said, "Brothers, you know that in the early days God made
a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the
gospel and believe." (Acts 15:7) He used himself as an example approved by God,
of one who preached to the Gentiles. But, he did not preach that the Gentiles had
to be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses. So, by an approved account of
action we learn that circumcision was not commanded of the Gentiles.

     Peter also makes the following direct statement, "And God, who knows the
heart, bore witness to them, giving them the Holy Spirit, just as he also did to us;
and he made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith."
(Acts 15:8-9) Friends, please notice, that "God knows the heart...bore them
witness...giving them the Holy Spirit...made no distinction...cleansing their hearts
by faith." And he did all that without commanding the Gentiles to be circumcised.
So, by a direct statement we learn that circumcision was not commanded of the
Gentiles.

    
     After Peter appealed to an approved account of action and a direct statement,
he concluded in this way, "Now therefore, why do you put God to the test by
placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we
have been able to bear?" (Acts 15:10)  Peter implies that since God has not
indicated that the Gentiles must be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses by
an  approved  account  of  action   nor  by  a  direct  statement, then physical
circumcision is not a part of the gospel! His conclusion is, "But we believe that we
will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will." (Acts 15:11)

   
     The same means by which the issue of physical circumcision was discussed
and settled is the means by which one determines the authority for any religious
issue at any time, any place, and before any group. In short, God authorizes by
means of approved  accounts of action, direct statements, and implication. This
is illustrated throughout the New Testament.
                                                                                                           R. Daly
Copyright 2011