Tracts From the Past – Christians Outside the Church?

Here is another tract written by James Bales.  The date is unknown, but the content is well worth reading.

Christians Outside the Church ?

JAMES D. BALES

One can be a good moral man outside of the church, but can one be a Christian without being a member of the church which is the body of Christ? The New Testament only can furnish us with the answer.

WHAT IS THE CHURCH?

If one can be a Christian outside of the church it is evident that one can be a Christian outside of what the church is. The church is:

(a)  Composed of the called out (John 17: 14, 20; 2 Thess. 1:1;.2:14; 2 Tim. 1: 8-9).

(b)  The kingdom of heaven (Matt. 16:18, 19; Col. 1:13; Mk. 9:1; Lk. 24:47; Acts 1:8; 2-1-, 47; 8:12; 28:31)

(c)  Composed of those who have been born again (John 3:5).

(d)  The house of God (1 Tim. 3:15).

(e)  The pillar and support of the truth (1 Tim. 3:15).

(f)   Composed of the sanctified (John 17:17, 20; 1 Cor. 1:1; Eph. 1:1).

(g)  The body of Christ (Col. 1:18; Eph. 1:22, 23; 1 Cor. 12:27).

(h)  The saved are added to it (Acts 2:41, 47).

(i)    Baptized into it for we are baptized into Christ (Acts 2:41, 47; Gal 3:27).

What person, who knows the Bible, will affirm that one can be a Christian and not be in the church? Of course, the church does not make a person a Christian; obed­ience to the gospel does that. However, when one obeys the gospel God adds him to the church. All Christians are in, not outside of, Christ.

WHAT IS IN THE CHURCH?

If one can be a Christian outside of the church, one can be a Christian without that which is in the church. The church is the body of Christ. What is in Christ? Here is the scriptural answer: salvation: forgiveness; saints; the faithful; spiritual blessings; the chosen; the accepted; re­demption; no condemnation; the gathered; the inheritance; the sealed, the quickened, and the raised; God’s spiritual workman­ship; the covenant relationship: those who have been made nigh by the blood of Christ; the one new man; the reconciled; the holy temple inhabited by God’s Spirit; God’s promises to both Jew and Gentile; God’s wisdom is made known through the church; access; glory to God; truth; the inheritance; grace and members of His body (Acts 4:12; 2:41, 47; Eph. 5:23; Col. 1:14; Eph. 1:7; 1, 3. 4, 6, 7; Rom. 8:1 and Gal. 3:27; Eph. 1:10, 11, 13; 4:30; 2:5-6, 10, 2, 3, 6, 21-22; 3:6, 10, 12, 21; 4:21; 5:6, 9, 30; 2 Tim. 1:9).

All these things are in Christ and no one who knows and respects the Scriptures can maintain that one can be a Christian and be without these things. The important question is: How does one come into Christ? Paul taught that we are baptized into Christ (Gal. 3:27). Scriptural bap­tism is the burial and resurrection, with Christ, of a penitent believer (Rom. 6:2; Col. 2:12; Matt. 28:19f Mk. 16:16).

GOOD MORAL MEN NEED SALVATION

Christ purchased the church with His precious blood and it is composed of the re­deemed (Acts 20:28; 1 Pet. 1:18; Col. 1:14). Christ placed great value on the church and those who maintain that they can be Christians and remain outside of the church, do not realize the mind of Christ on this subject. Furthermore, they overlook the fact that one can be a good moral man and still be lost. Cornelius was devout, religious and moral but he had to hear words whereby he was to be saved (Acts 10:1; 11:14). Christians must be morally good but moral goodness alone does not make one a Christian. Cornelius, a good moral man, had to be baptized into Christ, into His church. And so do you, if you have never been buried and raised with Christ for the remission of your sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38).

Becoming a Christian, and becoming an actual member of the church, amount to the same thing. That which puts you in­to Christ, puts you into His church, The baptized are added, the saved are added, to the church for baptism is into Christ (Acts 2:41, 47; Gal. 3:27). Of course, to have meaning baptism must be preceded by faith and repentance and be a part of the obedience of faith.

Search the Scriptures diligently and you will be led to the conclusion that one can­not be a Christian and be outside the church. Christ is the Savior of the church, which is His body, and you must be in that body (Eph. 5:23). Do not reject God’s word on this subject for by His word you are to be judged (John 12:48).

Bible Q&A – Is the Bible from God?

This week’s Bible Q&A is like a “part 2” to last week’s question.  Six years ago, I had to write a letter proving that God exists.  The follow-up assignment was “OK, now you’ve convinced ‘Agnostic Agnes’ that God exists.  Now write her a letter proving that the Bible is inspired.”

This letter may make you chuckle, but hopefully it will also show you that showing the Bible is from God isn’t as hard as you might think.  And in case you wondered, “Aunt Agnes” isn’t a real person.  Enjoy!

Dear Aunt Agnes,

I heard about the confrontation you had with your science teacher at college. I never dreamed that you would share my last letter with him. Grandpa said you wouldn’t sit down until he read the letter and answered the arguments for the existence of God. It amazes me that he didn’t even try to argue. Good job! Has uncle Bubba’s toe healed yet? He needs to be more careful with that post-hole digger.

I am happy that you have come back to realizing that God truly exists. I do disagree with you, however on one thing. You said in your last letter that there is no proof that the Bible is really from God, and I am just taking it on blind faith. That’s really not the case. I’ll see if I can explain what I mean.

Could Junior have written a book like “Gone With the Wind”? Of course not. Junior’s not smart enough to have written that book. That proves it was written by someone more intelligent than him. It’s the same way with the Bible. If we can look at the Bible and see things in it that are beyond the capacity of human beings, it must have come from someone more intelligent than any human. That someone would be God. By the way, that is another way you can prove to someone that God exists.

For example, in Isaiah 40:22, it speaks of the circle of the earth. The word there actually means a sphere, like a ball. That’s not much of a surprise to us today, but when that was written (over 2,000 years ago), everyone thought the earth was flat. If you remember, that was still the common belief when Columbus sailed to America just over 500 years ago! But somehow the Bible knew it before anyone else.

Also, I learned in elementary school that there are currents in the oceans. If you saw that movie Finding Nemo, you’ll remember that the dad fish and the turtles rode the East Australian Current. That is one of them. They were discovered less than 150 years ago. Before that, no one knew about them. Well, no one except for the Bible. Psalm 8:8 speaks of the paths of the seas. This was around 3,000 years ago!

How could the Bible contain things that humans have only discovered in that past few hundreds of years? There is only one possible explanation: it was given by God. The people who wrote the books of the Bible were given what they were supposed to write straight from God.

If the Bible was just something that a group of men came up with, how could it have endured for thousands of years when people have tried and tried to destroy it? Even in the Bible, there were people who attempted to destroy all traces of God’s word. There was a wicked king named Jehoiakim who heard God’s word read to him and he got so made after only a few pages that he cut it up and burned it. That’s in Jeremiah chapter 36. If you read further, you will see that God just had Jeremiah’s secretary write it again. So, even the king could not destroy it.

Over 2,000 years ago, there was a somewhat insane ruler named Antiochus who tried to destroy all traces of Jewish worship. He even went so far as to burn every copy of the Old Testament that he could find, and kill all the people he found that possessed copies of it. This man was the ruler of the empire at the time, and yet the Old Testament still exists and we have many copies of it. He’s dead, but the Bible lives on.

Many people since then (including some rulers of the entire Roman Empire) have tried to physically destroy the Bible. Some extremely powerful people have done everything that they could to keep all copies of the Bible out of the hands of the common people.

Still others have tried to destroy the Bible intellectually. Many people who did not believe in God stated that the Bible would be completely forgotten in their lifetimes. But they keep dying; the Bible lives on. How do you explain the fact that the Bible has endured more persecution than any person or book in history, yet it still lives on in abundance? There are literally millions of Bibles printed every month. God gave us the Bible, and He is making sure we always have it.

Do you remember hearing a few years ago about them finding another ancient city that was mentioned in the Bible? That happens quite frequently nowadays. The archaeologists keep digging up more things that confirm that the Bible is correct. There have been many people mentioned in the Bible that skeptics say never really existed, but time after time, evidence keeps proving them wrong. There was an entire nation of people in the Bible, called the Hittites, that some people said did not ever exist, but archaeological evidence has proven that they existed, and that they existed exactly when the Bible says they did.

Some people have even gone so far in their efforts to discredit the Bible that they say Moses couldn’t have written the first five books of the Bible because there was not any written language back then. Yet, archaeologists discovered that there was a written language around 3500 BC, which was about 2,000 years before Moses was born. How is it that the “greatest” historians have to keep re-writing their histories as new evidence comes up, but the Bible is always right? It can only be that the Bible is from God; that is why it is 100% accurate.

Another thing that proves the Bible came from God is the fact that even though it was written by around 40 men over a period of about 1600 years, they all agree with each other. The writers of the Bible came from far different backgrounds and educations, yet they are all united in their presentation. There were kings, shepherds, a doctor, and even a tax collector that all wrote what God said to write. Have you ever wondered how all these people could have known what to write, and to make it in perfect harmony with the rest of the Bible? You could not get 40 people who knew each other to sit in the same room and write on the same subject and all be in agreement. How is it that the Bible accomplished just that? God told them what to write!

I bet you’re probably thinking “but the Bible does not always agree.” You probably think that there are contradictions in the Bible. I once heard someone say there were thousands of contradictions in the Bible. That is simply not true. While we might not completely understand everything involved in a supposed contradiction, most of them are easily explained. For example, suppose you were speaking with aunt Rex and Uncle Blondie and asking them who they saw in the grocery store. Rex says she saw Kacie and Rick, but Blondie just tells you they saw Rick. Is one of them lying to you? No, Rex is just telling you a more complete version of it.

A large chunk of the supposed contradictions involve similar scenarios. Matthew 8:28 speaks of two demon-possessed men healed by Jesus, while Luke and Mark both only mention one. Well, Matthew simply mentions all of them, the others only mentioned one of them. That is not a contradiction. The same type of “contradiction” appears in how many angels were at the tomb of Jesus. Matthew and Mark each mention one angel, but Luke mentions two. Luke gave a fuller account of what happened there. There is no contradiction. One great writer once said that a contradiction cannot exist unless it is impossible for both accounts to be true. If there were two angels, it is obvious that there was at least one angel there. The records of the Bible are complimentary.

Sometimes, there are totally different things mentioned in the same story. Well, Agnes, why do they always call so many witnesses in trials? Isn’t one witness good enough? You know better than that. One person sees things from a different angle, and may relay different parts of the story from another. The same is true with the Bible. Over the four gospel accounts (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John), there are seven different things said by Jesus while He was on the cross.   Is one of them untrustworthy if he doesn’t mention all seven things? Are they contradictory if they mention some, but not others? Of course not. You must have read twenty different biographies of Elvis, but do all of them say the same thing that the others do? No, they all add different information that the others leave out. It all depends on what the author was wanting to focus on. When you read them all, you get a fuller idea of who Elvis was. In the Bible, there are four different books about the life of Jesus; when you read all of them, you get a fuller idea of who Jesus really was. You get the whole story that way.

One of the things that a lot of people point to as a contradiction is the genealogies of Christ. There are two of them given in the New Testament. One of them is in Matthew, and the other is in Luke. There are almost no similarities between them, except for just a few names. Let me ask you something before I go any further: is your mother’s family line the same as your father’s? Of course not. One of the genealogies was from Jesus’ mother, Mary’s side of the family, and the other was from His adoptive father, Joseph.

So you see, there are some things that seem at first glance to be contradictions, but when you look at them, there is a logical explanation for each of them. Sometimes, we don’t know the answer, but when you have a reliable witness, you take it on faith until you find the evidence to prove it. That might seem odd to say, but remember old aunt Sue? You could take her word for anything; she never told a fib. If she told you something that sounded outlandish, you would still believe her, right? That’s because she has been completely trustworthy and reliable on everything else. You should treat the Bible in the same way. As I’ve mentioned throughout this letter, the Bible has been proven reliable and accurate over and over again. There is no reason to doubt anything that it says!

Well, I guess that’s about it for now. Remember, you can always call me if you have any questions about this stuff. I’m no expert, but I’ll do my best to talk with you so that we’re both on the same page. Have a nice week!

Brad

Sermon Thursday – Assembling With the Saints

This week, we continue our look at the Fundamentals of the Faith and look at the topic of assembling with the saints to worship.

Introduction:

I’ve been saved, why do I need to come worship with the church?  I mean, I can think of quite a few reasons not to come:  I’m tired; I’ve got other things to do; I don’t like the preacher; I don’t know the songs; if I go, they’ll expect something out of me; I just don’t like church.

Some people teach that gathering with the saints isn’t necessary, others teach that it is.  The truth of the matter is that coming together with other Christians is an outgrowth of what’s in your heart.  If you don’t come, then that shows where your heart is.  If you do come, but you complain about it or are unwilling to participate, that also shows where your heart is.  If you come, and you actively join in, then that shows where your heart is as well.

We all would (I hope) agree that the Bible is our standard of right and wrong.  So today, let’s look at what the Bible says about gathering with the saints.

When was it done?  Where was it done?  Why was it done?  Must it be done?

When did the saints meet for a specific time of worship?

There are several religious groups who claim that the church met on the Sabbath (Saturday), and that meeting on Sunday is from Satan.  But we’re not interested in what they have to say.  We’re only interested in what the Bible has to say about it.

Jesus rose on the first day of the week (John 20:1-ff). This obviously isn’t proof in and of itself, but it is evidence that points in a certain direction.  Christianity is completely based on the fact that Christ rose from the dead, it would make sense that the church would gather on the same day of the week.  This is circumstantial evidence, proving nothing by itself, but it does help point the way.

The disciples gathered together on the first day of the week after the resurrection (John 20:26). In this passage, it says “after eight days…”  The Jews counted time by including whatever day it happened to be at the time, so they would have counted the Resurrection day as day 1, so the eighth day would have been the next Sunday.  “After” would place it on Sunday evening.  This, as well, isn’t definitive proof, but it is noteworthy nonetheless.

The church was established on the first day of the week (Acts 2). Pentecost literally means “fifty days.”  It took place fifty days after the feast of Passover.  This places the first sermon in the church, the first meeting of the church, on the first day of the week.

But, let’s look further.

The disciples came together to “break bread” on the “first day of the week” (Acts 20:7).  This is talking about the Lord’s Supper.  But even if it wasn’t, it is noteworthy that the apostle Paul waited an entire week in the city of Troas so that he could meet with the saints there (20:6-7).  This shows us—without any doubt—that there was a specific gathering of the saints on the first day of the week, at least in Troas.

But was this just a local custom, or was it something that took place in all the churches?

The church in Corinth—by apostolic authority—met on the first day of the week.  In Acts 18, Paul went to Corinth, and he is the one who planted the church there.  He stayed for 18 months, teaching them the doctrine of Jesus Christ, and how God is to be served in the Christian era.  He later wrote to them, and said, “Upon the first day of the week, let every one of you lay by him in store” (in other words, take up a collection), I Corinthians 16:2.

But notice that this is something that was to take place on the first day of the week—the day that Paul obviously told them was their day to come together and worship God.

But there’s more—the verse before it says that Paul made the exact same command to the churches in Galatia; that is, to take up a collection on the first day of the week.

When did the church in the Bible gather together for worship? On the first day of the week!  By inspiration of God, Paul commanded it.

It is also significant that there is not one passage in the New Testament that shows Christians gathering for worship on the Sabbath.  There are passages where Paul went to the synagogue on the Sabbath to teach the Jews—because that’s when the Jews would meet.  But not one passage that says the church ever gathered on the Sabbath.

It’s true that especially at the beginning of the church, the Christians met together daily for food, encouragement, and support (Acts 2:46).  But meeting specifically for worship (specifically the Lord’s Supper and giving) was expressly stated to be on the first day of the week.  Is it any surprise that it has been known as “The Lord’s Day” for almost 2,000 years?

Where are the saints to gather together?

The city doesn’t matter.  We have records in the Bible of Christians meeting in Jerusalem (Acts 2:46).  But also in Corinth (II Corinthians 1:1), Ephesus (Ephesians 1:1), and many other cities.

The churches met in different types of places.  The church in some locations apparently met in synagogues (James 2:2 – the word “assembly” is the Greek word “synagogue”).  The church in Troas met in an “upper room,” but nothing is specified as to whether this was on top of a house or above a merchant’s shop, or perhaps even a community building (Acts 20:6-8).  The church in Laodicea met in the house of Philemon (Philemon 1-2).  It is possible that the Christians in Jerusalem met at the temple for a time (Acts 5:12).

What can we take from this?  That the physical location is unimportant.  The important thing is to actually meet with the saints, wherever they are meeting.

Why should the saints gather together?

God never gave a command that was arbitrary—every command has a benefit for us.  So, what is the benefit of gathering together with the saints?  To the Bible for the answer!

To take the Lord’s Supper (Acts 20:7).  Judging by the biblical testimony, it appears that the Lord’s Supper was the centerpiece, or focal point, of the early Christian worship.  Acts 20:7 says that they came together in order to break bread (take the Lord’s Supper).  Paul severely chastised the Christians in Corinth because when they came together, it wasn’t for that purpose (I Corinthians 11:17-20).  In fact, he called it heresy! (v 19).

This isn’t to say there weren’t other things that took place (as we will see), but that was to be the main reason—remembering Christ’s death through the memorial feast.  The saints should gather on the first day of each week to take the Lord’s Supper and honor Jesus Christ through it.

To give as they have been prospered (I Corinthians 16:1-2).  In the context, Paul was specifically telling them that they needed to start taking up a collection each week so that the poor Christians in Jerusalem could be aided.

But we can easily take this principle and apply it to other financial needs that may arise, such as assisting others (Galatians 6:10), paying those who proclaim the gospel and do other work for the church (Luke 10:7), purchase food for feeding the members of the congregation (Acts 4:37; 6:1), and helping out Christians who had need (Acts 4:34-35).  Is there ever a time when there is not a need?

But what benefit do we get from this?  It is more blessed to give than to receive (Acts 20:35).  It is a time to remind ourselves of the blessings that God has given to us.  It’s an opportunity to show our love for others and for God by sharing some of what we’ve been blessed with.

To sing praises to God (I Corinthians 14:15-19, 23).  Singing songs of praise to God was to be done “in the church” and when “the whole church is come together in one place” (these are phrases used in the context of verse 15).  Thus, they were to be done when they church comes together.  They were to be intelligible songs (sing with the understanding).  These songs are to teach (Colossians 3:16).  These songs are to be sung to the Lord (Ephesians 5:19).  These songs uplift and edify us.

To encourage one another (Hebrews 10:24).  “Let us consider one another to provoke unto love and good works, not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together.”  Coming together as a family shows support, encouragement, and love for one another.  This is one of the many blessings that come with assembling with the saints.

To study God’s word (Acts 20:7).  When the Christians of Troas came together, Paul preached to them.  When the Corinthians were gathered together, it was understood that someone would be bringing a message from God (I Corinthians 14).  What better time than this to study God’s word deeper?

Must the saints come together?

We’ve seen when, where, and why the saints came together in the Bible; now the question is “Must the saints come together?”  Is it required?  Is it mandatory to get to heaven?  Again, let’s go to the Bible for the answer.

“Not forsaking the assembling of yourselves together as the manner of some is, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the day approaching. Because if we sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sin” (Hebrews 10:25-26).

The inspired writer here says that if you sin willfully, your sins will not be forgiven.  In fact, he goes on to say that the only thing you will have to look forward to is judgment and fiery indignation reserved for the enemies of God (10:27).

But look at what his example of willful sin is—verse 25 – forsaking the assembling of yourselves together.  This isn’t missing a service here or there because you’re sick or otherwise physically unable to come.  This is willfully deciding that you aren’t going to worship with the saints.  And this is the example of willful sin that makes you an enemy of God!

Must the saints come together? If they want to go to heaven, they do.

I don’t like hearing people say “I have to go to church.”  Our attitude should be “Ain’t it great? I get to go to church today!”  Skipping services isn’t the problem, it’s just a symptom of a spiritual problem.

Conclusion:

I’m glad you made the decision to gather with the saints to worship God today.  It is my prayer that you have been blessed by being here.

Jesus Christ gave His life for you, and is it really asking all that much that you devote a few hours of your week to coming together with His people?

If you truly appreciate Jesus’ sacrifice, then you’ll want to devote your entire life to Him.  If you’re not a Christian, then what are you waiting for?  You’re lost in sin, surrounded by the fiery pits of hell on all sides, but Jesus is reaching out to save you!  All you have to do is take hold of Him by believing that He is the Christ, the Son of God; repenting of your sins, confessing His name, and being baptized—the water saves you from the fire!

If you are a Christian, and your priorities haven’t been where they should be, why not make it right today?

Is It Profitable?

If you haven’t heard it already, you probably will.  Someone will surely tell you that the Bible doesn’t say anything about a certain topic.  While it may be true that it is never specifically mentioned in the Word, there are many verses that give us Godly principles that can be applied to almost all topics.  With these verses, we can determine what we should and shouldn’t do; what is right and what is wrong in God’s eyes.  These verses not only apply to the so-called “grey areas” but can also be applied to more black-and-white topics.

Paul said, “All things are lawful unto me, but not all things are expedient.  All things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.” (I Cor. 6:12) The ESV says “…not all things are helpful…” “…I will not be enslaved by anything.”

  • I Thessalonians 5:21, 22 tells us to “Prove all things, hold fast to that which is good.  Abstain from all appearance of evil.
  • Matthew 12:36 says, “Every idle word that man shall speak, they shall give an account thereof in the day of judgment.
  • I Cor 10:31: “Whether therefore ye eat or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.
  • I Cor 3:16, 17: “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the spirit of God dwells in you?  If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.
  • I Cor 8:12, 13: “But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ, wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world stands, lest I make my brother to offend.

Paul told us that while some things may have been permissible in and of themselves, he wouldn’t do them because of the way it would look to others.  “abstain from all appearance of evil,” we are told (I Thessalonians 5:22).  If it even has the appearance of being wrong, we ought to at least give serious thought before we do it!

These are interesting principles, but what can they apply to?

Drinking alcoholic beverages.

The New Testament says “be not drunk with wine” (Eph. 5:18), and it says that elders should not be “given to wine.”  Many people take that and say that it is OK to drink alcohol as long as we don’t get drunk.  First off, please get out your Bibles and read Proverbs 20:1. It’s OK, we’ll wait.

It is well-known that Paul told Timothy to “drink a little wine” for his stomach’s sake, and for his constant infirmities.  This verse—which might not even be speaking of alcohol (same Greek word for grape juice)—was a prescription given to a specific person at a specific time for a specific purpose.  Even if this is speaking of alcohol, it doesn’t permit it to be used for any and every reason!  Is it OK to use morphine and narcotics for medical pain-relieving purposes?  Of course.  Does that them make it OK to use them just for fun?  No way!

Let’s take the topic and apply the earlier mentioned Biblical principles to it.  First, if–and that’s a big IF–it is spiritually lawful, is it expedient (or helpful)?  Is it profitable (as another translation says)?  Will drinking a beer help our soul?

Paul says things may be lawful, but he will “not be brought under the power of any” (I Cor. 6:12).  It’s been scientifically shown that even one drink kills brain cells.  We all know that alcohol is addictive, so can someone really drink and “not be brought under the power” of the alcohol?  Can we drink alcohol to the glory of God (I Cor. 10:31)?  Remember, no matter what we do, no matter if we think it’s right or wrong, we will have to answer to God at the day of judgment!  Mark 8:36 says, “What shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his own soul?”  Is it worth your soul for just a drink?

Smoking cigarettes.

This is a topic that most people have opinions on.  This is also the topic (outside of worship matters) that most often brings forth the words, “there’s nothing in the Bible that says it is wrong!”  Smoking didn’t originate until about 1200-1300 years after the Bible was written.  It was first used by American Indians as part of their religious ceremonies.  So, obviously, Paul and the other writers had no knowledge of smoking, nor any reason to mention it.  But the principles in the Bible can help us discover if a Christian should smoke.

Once again, we start with Paul’s statement.  If indeed it is lawful (as some will say), is it expedient?  Is it profitable?  Smoking is very addictive, and anyone who smokes is indeed “brought under the power” of smoking.  Can we smoke a cigarette to the glory of God?

Everyone, by now, is aware that smoking is very harmful to the body.  The question then presents itself: Why do people still do it?  It is possible to quit.  Paul said, “I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.” (Phil 4:13)

We preach and teach that we are to love one another and show love one for another.  We believe we should live by Christ’s words when he said, “Love thy neighbor as thyself.”  According to research, sSecond-hand smoke is responsible for approximately 3,000 deaths per year among non-smokers!  Are we showing our love for our neighbors if we smoke?

We should also look at the parable of the talents in Matthew 25:14-30.  We’re shown that God rewards those who are good stewards of what he’s given them.  Is it being a good steward to spend the money he’s blessed us with on cigarettes?  An average pack costs $4.00 (the average smoker smokes one pack per day), which is almost $1,500 per year!  Imagine what good could be done with that money!

Conclusion:

When Paul said “not all things are profitable,” he meant it.  There are things that do nothing to help the body or the soul, and do nothing to bring others to Christ.  Paul also said he would not do something if it offended others (I Cor. 8:8-13), in fact he said “While the world stands” he would not do it!

Just ask yourself this: What would you think of someone who went door-to-door with a cigarette in their mouth and a beer in their hand, trying to convert people to Christ?

Indeed, not all things are profitable, and we will give an account to God of every little thing we do.  Do all to the glory of God.  Let us apply these principles to everything we do in our lives!

(NOTE: this article was first written in 2007, and has undergone some revision since then)

–Bradley Cobb

Tracts from the Past – The World’s Greatest Question

THE WORLD’S GREATEST QUESTION

(No. 8 of The Gospel Tract Series)

By Eugene S. Smith

“Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” This question, asked in Acts 16:30 by a man in Philippi nineteen hundred years ago, has never been equaled in importance. In substance this same question is asked in two other places in the Book of Acts. In the inspired answer to this question, asked three times, we have an infallible answer. To this we do well to give heed in these days.

The importance of this question stems from the fact that it deals with the salvation of our souls. Nothing in this world, no, not even the world itself, can be compared in value to our souls. The soul of man, your soul or mine, is the most important thing in the universe and the question concern­ing its salvation is the greatest and most important that we can ask.

It Is of Doing

Please note in beginning this study that the question is, “What Must I Do?” We know that “God so loved the world that He gave his only begot­ten son” (John 3:16). We know that Christ so loved the souls of men that He “tasted of death for every man” (Heb. 2:9). We also know that the Holy Spirit, through the Apostles, revealed unto us “the way of salvation” (Acts. 16:17). These, therefore, having done their part in our salvation, we are now interested in what we should do.

Further, it is not a question of what one should be, how one should feel, where one should live, or the language that one should speak. This is a ques­tion of doing, and the answer that is given by inspiration (as the question was asked these three times) is evi­dence that there is something for us to do and that everyone must do these same things.

Acts 16:30-34

In the sixteenth chapter of Acts when the question was asked the im­mediate reply of Paul was, “Believe on the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved, thou and thy house” (Acts. 16:31). A great many people want to stop here, thinking that this is all the answer that was given to the question. However, an examination of the verses fol­lowing reveals that this is not all of the answer and that to stop here is to stop short of a complete answer.

The remainder of the answer of Paul is indicated by the words of the fol­lowing verse: “And they spake the word of the Lord to him, with all that were in his house” (Acts 16:32). This was necessary for even faith could not come to the man or his house apart from the hearing of the word. Paul has said, “So then faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17). The word had to be spoken to produce the faith and faith could not come till the word was spoken. However, when the word was spoken we find that the jailer had learned that he must do more than be­lieve and this he did. Verse 33 says that “he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, im­mediately”. Here repentance and bap­tism are definitely shown to have been included in the word of the Lord, the answer given by Paul and Silas to the man’s question, “What must I do to be saved?” The washing of their stripes indicates repentance and it is definitely stated that the man was bap­tized, Therefore, these things were in­cluded in the answer given him or he would have known nothing of them. These are as much a part of the word of the Lord as belief and have as much to do with our salvation from sin.

Therefore, we must remember that in answer to this man’s question he was taught to, 1. Believe on the Lord Jesus, 2. Repent of his sins, and, 3. Be baptized unto the remission of his sins. When he had done these things, the record says that he “rejoiced great­ly, with all his house, having believed in God”. By his obedience his faith was made perfect and he became a Son of God and could rejoice in that rela­tionship.

Acts 2:37-42

In the second chapter of Acts the question again is asked. This time, however, those who ask are believers in the Christ. Although only a few days previously they had denied the Christ and condemned him to be cruci­fied they are now convicted of their sins and realizing that he is the Christ cry out to Peter and the others of Christ’s apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” (Acts 2:37).

With all directness the Apostle Peter gave answer to these inquiring souls as he said, “Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins” (Acts 2:38). This answer of inspiration is too plain to need ex­planation and “They then that received his word were baptized” (Acts 2:41). Here again sinners were taught to: 1. Believe on the Lord Jesus, 2. Repent of their sins, and 3. Be baptized unto the remission of their sins.

Having done this they “continued steadfastly in the Apostles teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of bread and prayers” (Acts 2:42). That is they “walked in the newness of life” (Rom. 6:4) and were acceptable in the sight of God as his children.

Acts 22:10-16

In the twenty-second chapter of Acts, Paul gives an account of his own con­version. On the Damascus road he be­lieved in the Lord and confessed that faith, calling him Lord. He repented of his sins and desired to know and do the will of the Lord. This is all evi­denced by his asking the question, “Lord, what shall I do?” (Acts 22:10). This question shows the faith and the repentance of Saul of Tarsus yet he was not saved.

The Lord, in answer, told him to go into the city and there it would be told him all things appointed for him to do. When in that city Ananias came to him he said, “Why tarriest thou? Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins, calling on His name.” (Acts 22:16). This is Paul’s own account of the matter and one I am sure we can trust. Paul realized that his sins were not re­moved by faith or repentance but only when his faith was expressed in obe­dience to the Lord’s command to be baptized.

Thus, again we have the question and the answer is the same, 1. Believe. 2. Repent. 3. Be baptized unto the remis­sion (washing away) of your sins. This brought him “into Christ” and in Christ he was a new creature.

Therefore, the question is asked and answered. You can see the answer as given by inspiration. You can walk in the same way to your own salvation.

Bible Q&A – Does God Exist?

This week’s Bible Q&A is a little bit different than normal.  Six years ago, I was asked to write a letter to an agnostic (someone who believes the existence of God cannot be proven one way or the other).  The purpose of this assignment was to see if we could explain how we can know that God exists.

And in case anyone wonders, “Agnostic Agnes” is not a real person.  This letter will probably make you chuckle, but it will also show you that you don’t have to be an intellectual to talk to people about “Does God Exist?”

Enjoy!

Dear Aunt Agnes,

I was thrilled to hear that you decided to go back to college to finish your degree.  Congratulations!  That is a very admirable thing to do, especially in your 60s.  I hope uncle Bubba is doing well.  I heard about the accident with the pick-up, but I am glad to hear that he’s recovering.

Grandpa told me that you took some science classes there at the university, and that the teacher was trying to convince everyone that God does not exist and that anyone who believes in God was ignorant.  Grandpa told me that you weren’t really sure what to think about it anymore.  Does God exist?  I tell you that He does, and I’ll tell you why I know it.

First off, take a look at the watch that your sister got you for your birthday.  You see how nice it looks?  You know there are quite a few cogs, springs, and wires inside there that are wound and placed in the perfect place to make your watch work correctly.  Now, did that watch happen by an accident?  Did every small piece just happen to fall together somewhere and land perfectly in the shape of a perfectly functioning watch?  Of course not, that’s obvious.  If something shows obvious design, there must have been someone who designed it to work that way.  Not only that, but there must be somebody to put the thing together in order to make it work.  That’s just common sense, right?

Now, look at the world around you.  Isn’t it interesting that humans can breathe the air on this planet easily?  Is it not also interesting that the air we breathe out is carbon dioxide, the exact thing that plants “breathe in” to survive?  Look also at the human DNA.  I know you went over the DNA in your science class.  They call it “the human blueprint.”  A blueprint is a design, is it not?  Even your science books admit to that design.  Look at the solar system.  Do you realize that if the earth’s tilt were just a little different, we would freeze to death?  The earth’s rotation is just the right speed, too.  If it were much faster, we would be thrown into the air.  If it were much slower, the gravity would hold us so much that we could hardly move.  Everything in us as humans, on the earth, and in the solar system is designed perfectly for us as humans.  If it is designed perfectly (which it is), who designed it?  A watch cannot happen by accident.  The universe is far more complex, and your teacher expects us to believe that it was an accident?  No, since there is design, there must have been someone who designed it, and that someone is God.

Another thing to consider is this: if evolution is really the answer to how we got here, how do they explain the morals of humans?  Anywhere you go, in every civilization throughout history, there has been a moral code of some sort.  While there are shades of differences in some of them, some remain the same.  Where has it ever been looked upon as right to murder someone who was completely innocent?  When has kidnapping been viewed as a noble thing?  What about thievery?  There are some things that are wrong, and everyone knows it.

But let us look at it from another angle.  Suppose a bull gores and kills a man.  This man was completely innocent and did not deserve death.  Do we then take the bull and arrest it, putting it on trial?  Of course not!  That is ridiculous!  Bulls don’t have the sense of morals that humans do.  But if a man kills another man, it is a different story, right?  If evolution were true, then there would be other animals that have the same moral code within themselves as we do.  This moral code within us is something that we are born with.  When your great-nephew Matthew got cut in front of in line last month, didn’t he tell the other kid cutting was wrong?  How does Matthew know that it was wrong?  If evolution is true, then there is no real right or wrong, but only what someone thinks is good for them.  That Matthew knew it was wrong shows that he has a sense of morals (and we know it didn’t come from his parents).  The fact that humans, and only humans, have morals within themselves shows that it had to come from some place.  If it were evolution, other animals would have it.  Morals have no scientific basis.  Science can not find a “moral gene” or some muscle in your body that controls morals.  It doesn’t exist.  The place it comes from is God!  That is the only explanation for the existence of our morals.

Another thing you might think about is this: there is a law in science that everything is the result of something else.  Basically, nothing can exist, work, or move without something creating it or moving it.  There is no perpetual motion, because eventually everything slows down and stops working.  Your watch is a good example of this.  It will not work on its own without you winding it, right?  Everything that moves or works has to have someone start it.  What about the planets?  What about the universe?  Since there is no such thing as perpetual motion, the planets had to have been started by something.

I know that your science teacher probably said that everything started with the “big bang,” right?  But let’s look at the other part of the law I just mentioned.  Nothing can exist without someone making it.  If you start with nothing, you end up with nothing.  You can’t just sit and wait and expect a pizza to show up on your table without someone making it and putting it there, right?  Since matter (stuff) and energy eventually run down, they had to have been created and put into motion at some point.  The big bang is a fun explanation for how everything began if you ignore the fact that there had to have been something to make the “big bang.”  Where did that something come from?  Science, then, is back in the same mess they had before trying to explain where everything came from.  Simply put, God made everything and put it into motion.

Something else to consider is this little experiment.  Imagine the most horrifying, scary monster possible.  Think of all the horrible features you could give it, both in looks and in powers and attitude.  Now, what did you think of in that monster that you had not either read about, seen, or heard before?  Everything we can think of is based on something that we have experienced or sensed before, right?  I know in your philosophy class, they told you that there is no such thing as a new or truly original thought.  They are correct.  No matter how hard you try, you cannot think of anything new beyond that which you have sensed or experienced.

What does that mean?  Have you noticed that all cultures and civilizations all have worship to a higher being?  The Indians have the “great spirit,” the Muslims have “Allah,” the Greeks and Romans had a large group of mythological gods.  There is an inner desire to find God.  Have you ever wondered why so many people are looking for their purpose in life?  If we came from evolution, there is no purpose in life.  But isn’t just about everyone yearning to find a purpose?  Something beyond themselves?

Putting the two of those together, how could anyone, let alone all the cultures on earth, have a concept of a higher being beyond themselves if one did not exist?  Remember, man is only capable of imagining that which they have sensed or experienced.  Since man has a conception of the idea of God, the only explanation is that somewhere along the line, God interacted with man.  Since man has a concept of God, God must exist.

If your science teacher is anything like the teacher I had at John A. Logan College a decade ago, he likely used pain and suffering as his “ace in the hole” against God existing.  The thing is, that does not really prove anything.  The teacher liked to say “if God is all-loving, why does evil exist?”  Let me ask you a question, Agnes.  Do you love your son, Junior?  I know you do.  That is why you let him make his own decisions (although I still think you should kick him out of the house; he is 35 now).  God is the same way.  He loves us all, and because of that, He lets us make our own decisions.  People can choose to murder, rob banks, kidnap, drive drunk, and all other kinds of things.  But when they do, does that show God as uncaring?  No!  If Junior robbed a bank, does that show that you don’t love him?  Of course not!  Evil exists because of choices that people make to do those things that are evil.

What about the innocent people who are hurt?  They didn’t do anything wrong, right?  How can we say God cares when innocent people get hurt all the time?  It is a fact that the choices we make affect us and other people as well.  You can’t say that it not true.  If you and the rest of the ladies up there stopped going to McDonald’s every morning, they might go out of business.  Something that you do can affect other people.  It can have good effects (like when you helped that homeless man get some food) or it can have bad effects (like when someone chooses to drive drunk and kills someone).  It is all because of choices that we make.  If someone chooses to do something wrong, evil exists, and innocent people might get hurt because of it.

I know that it breaks your heart when a baby is born with some kind of problem.  Was it the baby’s fault that it had the problem?  Of course not.  But, you have seen parents who smoke and drink while the baby is growing in the womb.  Those things do affect the baby.  Also, there may be things that one of our ancestors did that caused there to be a problem with us.  Sometimes, it takes multiple generations for these things to manifest themselves, and we never know exactly where they come from.  But it all comes down to people and the choices they make.

Agnes, I know you are busy with finals coming up, so I’ll go ahead and end this letter here.  I hope I have given you some things to think about.  Let me know what I can do to help in the future.  Give uncle Bubba my regards.  Tell Junior to get back to work.

Bye,

Brad

Sermon Thursday – The Lord’s Supper

This week, we continue our series on Fundamentals of the Faith.  Enjoy!

Introduction:

Why do we have a snack in the middle of worship on Sundays?
Why do we call it a supper?
Why is it always the same thing?
Does it mean anything?
Is there a reason why we take it so often?

There are a lot of questions surrounding what is called “The Lord’s Supper.”

There are so many people who teach conflicting doctrines about it, and in the church there are many different views and attitudes towards it.  You want to see how confused some people are on this topic?  Here’s things that are said about the Lord’s Supper:

  • Take it annually; take it quarterly; take it monthly; take it each week; take it whenever you feel like it.
  • Must be unleavened bread and alcoholic wine; must be unleavened bread and non-alcoholic grape juice; it doesn’t matter what you use there so long as you’re thinking about Jesus; you can take the bread, but only a priest can take the fruit of the vine.
  • It is to be done until the end of the world; it isn’t to be done at all; it had to be done religiously until Jerusalem was destroyed.
  • It is supposed to be part of a congregational meal; it is to be the centerpiece of our worship; it is irrelevant.
  • It represents the sacrifice of Jesus Christ; it is something to keep the parents from getting hungry in the middle of services; it is a time set aside by Jesus so you can make out a check or dig through your purse to find money to put in the collection plate.

How can we cure all this confusion? BACK TO THE BIBLE!

 Where did it come from?

There are a lot of things that are done religiously that are nothing more than traditions.  The specific order of worship (announcements, two songs, Lord’s Supper, two songs, sermon, two songs, prayer).  The time to assemble (9:00? 9:30? 10:00?).

But the Lord’s Supper isn’t a tradition—it’s from the Bible!

It was instituted during the Passover. You may say, why does that matter?  It matters because (1) the Bible specifically says it, and (2) It helps us understand what specifically is being referenced.

Matthew 26:17-29 records that the Lord’s Supper was instituted during the Passover celebration, on the first day of the feast of unleavened bread.

It was instituted by Jesus Christ.  Matthew 26:26-29 shows clearly that Jesus is the one who established the Lord’s Supper.  I Corinthians 11:23-26 reiterates that it was Christ who instituted the Lord’s Supper.

Thus, the Lord’s Supper is not a tradition of man, but is a Divinely-given ordinance for the followers of Jesus Christ.

What does it consist of?

Some years back, there was a great uproar in the religious world when a denominational leader came out in favor of changing the contents of the Lord’s Supper to hamburgers and coke.  When you don’t believe that the Bible is the standard, then things like this sound acceptable.  But when you follow God’s word as your standard, you know that making changes like that are unauthorized, disrespectful, and sinful.

Jesus authorized specific items which were to be used in the Lord’s Supper.  He used “bread.”  This bread was unleavened.  What this means is that it was a flat bread, with nothing in it that would make it rise.  The modern-day equivalent would be a tortilla, which may actually be more authentic than the cracker-type bread we normally use.

How do we know that it was unleavened bread?  Because the Lord’s Supper was instituted during the feast of unleavened bread (Matthew 26:17).  Because the Passover feast, when instituted by God, began with getting rid of all leavening from the house (Exodus 12:15).  Because of the evidence, the only acceptable bread for use in the Lord’s Supper is unleavened bread.

He used “the fruit of the vine.”  It seems noteworthy to me that the Bible never once describes the drink that Jesus used here as “wine.”  In all the accounts of the Lord’s Supper being instituted, it is called “the fruit of the vine” (Matthew 26:29, Mark 14:25, Luke 22:18) or “the cup” (I Corinthians 11:25).  The only “fruit of the vine” that the Jews drank was grape juice.

Well, was it grape juice or was it alcoholic grape juice—wine?

One thing that is important to remember is that grape juice becomes alcoholic when it ferments, when yeast forms in it and “leavens” it.  If all leavening was to be cast from the house before the feast began, could there have been any “leavened” or “fermented” grape juice in the house?

Why is that question important?  Because if it was grape juice, then it would be sinful to substitute alcoholic wine in its place (just like it would be sinful to used leavened bread).  Because if it was alcoholic wine, then it would be sinful to use regular grape juice.

By inspiration, the writers of the Bible did not use the word oinos which can refer to either grape juice or alcoholic wine.  Instead, by direct guidance of the Holy Spirit, the writers used the phrase “fruit of the vine,” which refers to juice as it is directly from the grape—grape juice.

These are the only two items authorized for use in the Lord’s Supper.

What does it represent?

The bread and the fruit of the vine are meaningless unless you know why you’re taking them.

The bread is the body of Christ. That is, it is a reminder of the body of Christ; it represents the body of Christ.  When Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper, He said of the bread, “this is my body which is for you.”  Jesus hadn’t died yet, so it obviously wasn’t the literal body of Christ.

Instead, the bread is there to remind us of the body of Christ, the body that was beaten and nailed to the cross because of our sins, and the need for our sins to have a means of forgiveness.

When you take the bread, it is a reminder of your sins, and that they caused the death of Jesus Christ on the cross.

The fruit of the vine is the blood of Jesus Christ. Again, it is a reminder or a representation of the blood of Christ.  Christ had not yet shed His blood, but He knew it was going to happen.  Because of the surety of its taking place, Jesus could say “this is my blood which is shed for many for remission of sins” (Matthew 26:29).

The blood of Christ is that which washes away our sins (Revelation 1:5).  When you take of the fruit of the vine, remember that your sins put Christ on the cross, but the blood of Christ is what has brought forgiveness.

The bread reminds you of your sins, the fruit of the vine reminds you of the forgiveness.

It is the perfect representation of the gospel message.

Give it Up Already!

We praise people who are willing to act on their principles and conviction.  When someone is willing to give up a job, or money, or other “important” things because of their moral convictions, we look up to them as a person who has great character.  One person said, “character is what you stand for.”  We might add to that definition that character is being willing to give up anything in order to stay true to your convictions.

If I were to ask 100 Christians, “What would you be willing to give up to get to heaven?” I would be willing to wager that most of them would reply, “anything.”  However, if you were to get a truly honest answer from them, you’ll find that there are some things that they’re not really all that interested in giving up.  Mentally, we are ready to say “I’ll give up anything!”  But like the apostle Peter, when it comes down to actually doing it, it is a different matter (see Matthew 26:35 and verses 69-75).

In fairness to Peter, the Scriptures teach that he was willing to give up his livelihood in order to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20).  The same can be said of Peter’s brother, Andrew, as well as two other brothers: James and John.  They left their fishing business behind in order to follow Jesus.

Are your convictions that strong?  If the place where you worked began selling pornography or supporting sinful behavior, would your convictions be strong enough to quit?  Or would you rationalize it away and say, “well, I’ve got to pay the bills”?

Jesus made a promise to all of us that if we put Him and His kingdom first, everything we truly need will be taken care of by God (Matthew 6:33).  When God Himself (in the flesh) makes a promise, it’s one we can depend on!  Do you have enough faith in God to trust that promise–even if it means quitting a job you may have worked at for decades?

Most of us will never be in a situation where we may be forced to quit our jobs over such things.  But what about other things in life?  Do you spend more time on Facebook than you do in prayer and Bible reading combined?   If you realize that doing things online is keeping you from focusing on God, do you have the convictions to do something about it?

But let’s make it even more practical.  How much time do you spend on the computer compared to the time you spend with your children?  or your spouse?  It’s a commonly reported sight to see a husband and wife out to eat with each other, but both are so busy doing things with their phones that they aren’t actually spending time together.  If things continue like this, I won’t be surprised if 80% of American adults end up with a condition I like to call “texter’s hunch”…but I also won’t be surprised if most of the marriages have major problems because of a lack of real communication.

Take a look at your relationship with God and Christ.  Take a look at your relationship with your spouse and your children.  Then take a look at the things in your life that are keeping those relationships from being what they should–and give them up!

If it’s a hobby, give it up!

If it is unnecessary time on the computer, give it up!

If it is a relationship with someone else, give it up!

You may say I’m being harsh, but I ask you this: what is more important to you, God or your stuff?  your marriage, or your stuff?  your kids or your stuff?

What kind of character do you have?

–Bradley Cobb

Tracts from the Past – Salvation by Grace?

Today’s offering is a “Tract from the Past.”  This one is called “Salvation by Grace” and is written by Eugene Smith.  Mr. Smith was a proficient writer during his life, authoring several tracts.  We hope you enjoy it!

Smith_SavebByGrace

Of all the great doctrines of the Bible, none is more capable of arous­ing the appreciation of man than the idea suggested by the words of the apostle Paul in Eph. 2:8, 9, where he says, “for by grace have ye been saved through faith; and that not of your­selves, it is the gift of God; not of works, that no man should glory.” In this statement the kindness and love of God is revealed to such extent that we should be eternally grateful to God and in our appreciation should humbly sub­mit to His will in all things.

Christ, of course, is the manifesta­tion of the grace of God. In him the love of God is shown as he was present­ed as the perfect sacrifice for sin. This sacrifice was “not by works done in righteousness, which we did ourselves, but according to his mercy” (Tit. 3:5). Nothing good that we had done was or could be sufficient to merit the sacri­fice of Christ upon the cross. This was the unmerited favor of God to lost and dying man. This was “the kindness of God our Saviour, and His love toward man” (Tit. 3:4), that appeared for our redemption from a curse which was too great for us to lift.

This grace of God was not bestowed on “the few” but rather on “the many.” Paul said in Tit. 2:11, “For the grace of God hath appeared, bringing salva­tion to all men.” All were in need of a Saviour and when God gave His Son He made him a “propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only but also for the whole world” (I John 2:2). When we look upon Jesus today we behold the one whom God “crowned with glory and honor, that by the grace of God he should taste of death for every man” (Heb. 2:9).

Therefore by the unmerited mani­festation of the goodness and kindness of God our love for him is born and kept alive. John said, “We love, because he first loved us” (I John 4:19). The great love of God which was manifest to the world in the death of Christ is enough to ever keep us humble and grateful before the throne of God for the great gift was made while we were yet sinners and was therefore strictly by the grace and love of God. Paul said of this in Rom. 5:8, “God commendeth His own love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” Enough has been said, therefore, to cause us to realize that it is by grace we are saved.

An Oft-Made Mistake

However, in thinking of the doctrine of Salvation by Grace there is a mis­take often made that leads to the wrong conclusion. Some have supposed that the fact that salvation is by grace has precluded and excluded all re­sponse on our part. Some have argued that since it is by “grace” there is nothing we can do in any way in the matter of our salvation. These argu­ments are usually summed up under three headings which are erroneously based on the text of Eph. 2:8. They are: (1) Salvation being of grace there is nothing we can do toward that salva­tion; (2) It being the gift of God there is nothing we can do to receive it; and (3) It being “not of works” we are ex­cluded from doing anything whatso­ever to receive it. Believing the above thoughts to be entirely wrong and based upon a mistaken understanding of the text we want to examine them very carefully in the light of God’s word.

Does Grace Exclude Obedience?

Some have supposed that grace ex­cludes obedience to the commandments of God but this cannot be for it would make of God’s word a mass of contra­dictions and we know this is not so. Christ said, “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 7:21). Christ in this verse and in the illustration of the two builders (Matt. 7:24-27), which fol­lows, makes clear to all that obedience to God’s will is an essential pre-requi­site of salvation.

The apostle Paul, in speaking along this line, has very clearly said, “He (Christ) became unto all them that obey him the author of eternal salva­tion” (Heb. 5:9). Peter said, “Seeing ye have purified your souls in your obedience to the truth” (I Pet. 1:22) and the beloved John said “This is the love of God that we keep his command­ments” (I John 5:3). Therefore it is impossible to suppose that grace ex­cludes obedience. Nay, rather grace de­mands obedience for in view of the wonderful manifestation of the love of God we should gladly humble our hearts before Him and do His will, obeying His commandments which are given to us in His word. Any course other than this would be contrary to the scriptures and to common sense. We must obey God, obey the truth, or keep His commandments for thus we show our love for Him.

Does A Gift Exclude Obedience?

Some have likewise supposed that since salvation is a gift we can do nothing to receive it. Now to say we can do nothing to merit it is one thing and to say that we can do nothing to receive it is quite another thing. I realize that nothing we can do will ever give us merit enough to make God owe us salvation as a debt He must pay. It is not in this respect that we speak of our obedience. It is not that we are to do a thing or things to merit salva­tion but we must, according to the word of God, do certain things that we may receive salvation.

Christ says, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved” (Mark 16:16). If we are to receive the “gift of God” we must then “believe and be baptized.” Some will accept the idea that we must believe but will reject the companion thought that we must be baptized. These two, belief and bap­tism, are joined together by the con­junction “and.” One of the elementary rules of the English language is that this conjunction joins words or phrases of equal rank or importance. Therefore when it is used to join belief and bap­tism it makes them of equal import­ance.

The gift of salvation from Christ is held forth to man and he says it will be bestowed upon the man who “be­lieveth and is baptized.” If anyone an­swers that to believe and be baptized is to make it no longer a gift he is surely mistaken about that for the Bi­ble cannot be a book of contradictions. But think one moment about this. If I were to say to you, “Write me a letter and I will give you a book,” you could understand the meaning of my words. If you then wrote me the letter would that in any way show that you had earned the book. No, for when you had complied with my request the book would still be received as a gift and not something you had earned.

A Bible Illustration

To illustrate the fact that one can obey the commands of God and still re­ceive his blessings as a gift we turn to the sixth chapter of Joshua to study the illustration set forth. These things “happened unto them by way of ex­ample; and they were written for our admonition” (I Cor. 10:11). They are given that in them we may see and learn God’s way of dealing with the sons of men in the earth. Paul tells us this again in Rom. 15:4, where he says, “For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learn­ing.” Therefore we can, by studying the examples of Israel in the Old Testa­ment, learn of God’s dealing with man even today. Not that the Old Testa­ment is to be considered our law but the examples thereof are valuable to us as warnings.

“Now Jericho was straitly shut up because of the children of Israel: none went out, and none came in” (Josh. 6: 1). This was the condition of the city as the children of Israel under Joshua’s leadership encamped before the city. Then in verse 2 God talks with Joshua in the following words, “See, I have given into thy hand Jericho, and the king thereof, and the mighty men of valor.” The city of Jericho was a gift of God to Joshua and the children of Israel.

However God did not end His speak­ing with His statement that He would give them the city. He went on to say, “And Ye shall compass the city, all the men of war, going about the city once. Thus shalt thou do six days. And seven priests shall bear seven trumpets of rams’ horns before the ark: and the seventh day ye shall compass the city seven times, and the priests shall blow the trumpets. And it shall be, that, when they make a long blast with the ram’s horn, and when ye hear the sound of the trumpet, all the people shall shout with a great shout, and the wall of the city shall fall down flat, and the people shall go up every man straight before him” (Josh. 6:3-6).

Now if Joshua had been like some people today he would have said “Not so Lord for if we do all that thou hast commanded we shall earn the city and it will not and cannot be a gift.” That is the way people sometimes talk to­day when obedience to the command­ments of God is emphasized by gospel preachers. People are wont to cry, “If we do anything it cannot be a gift.” In this they make a serious mistake that will finally result in the condemnation of millions for failing to do the will of the Lord.

Joshua, however, being a man of faith, did not so speak. He immediately marshalled his forces as God had com­manded and began to fulfill those com­mandments of Jehovah. All that the Lord had said was done in just the way that the Lord had said it should be done. When they came to the seventh day of their obedience we hear Joshua speaking again to the children of Israel as the priests blew the ram’s horn trumpet according to God’s command­ment. He said, “Shout; for Jehovah hath given you the city” (Josh. 6:16). Therefore it must be forever settled and known that men can obey God’s commandments and still receive the promised blessing as a “gift of God.”

More than this in our contemplation of God’s gift to man we must remem­ber that Paul said it was “By grace through Faith” (Eph. 2:8). This is God’s gift and it is received “through faith.” Now let us note another simi­larity between this gift of God and the one we have been studying in Joshua. We read in Hebrews 11:30, “By faith the wall of Jericho fell down, after they had been compassed about for seven days.” Here then is a further confirma­tion of the necessity of our obedience of God’s commandments if we are to be saved by grace.

The salvation by grace is through faith. The falls of Jericho fell down by faith. However they did not fall by faith till God’s commandments were obeyed and therefore we do not receive the blessing of God’s grace till our obedience to God’s will of today is com­plete. Then, and then only, can we re­ceive the blessing by faith. For until our obedience is rendered before God, our faith is dead and vain and can never bring the blessing of God.

Does Grace Exclude Works?

Now we come to the final objection of those who would reject obedience to God as having anything to do with our salvation. They cry “it is not of works” and thus would turn many away from doing the will of God. Let me say first of all that this limitation cannot be un­derstood in an absolute sense, that is to say, prohibiting all works of any kind, for that would cause the apostle to contradict himself in the two verses with which we began this study.

Paul says of this salvation by grace that it is “through faith” and then goes on to say it is “not of works.” Now I know that he does not mean by this that all works are excluded for to do that would even exclude faith. The Christ himself hath said, “This is the work of God, that ye believe on Him whom He hath sent” (John 6:29). God has commanded men to believe and Christ says this is a work that is com­manded of God; a work that men are to do. Therefore as salvation is “through faith” we cannot exclude all works or we would thereby even ex­clude faith. This we know cannot be.

Moreover, we know that “works of righteousness” are not excluded by Paul’s statement for we hear the apos­tle Peter speaking to Cornelius and his household in the city of Caesarea and these were to be the first converts from among the gentiles. As he preached to them we hear him say, “Of a truth I perceive that God is no re­specter of persons; but in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is acceptable to him” (Acts 10:34, 35). Therefore the “works of righteousness, do have something to do with our being accepted of God. In Titus 3:5 as we have already noted they had nothing to do with God send­ing His son but now that the grace of God has been manifested to the world in the son we are acceptable in the sight of God as we “work righteous­ness.”

Working righteousness is obeying the commandments of God for the com­mandments of God are His righteous­ness. We read this in Psa. 119:172, where David says, “All thy command­ments are righteousness.” Therefore it is evident that to “work righteousness” is to “work God’s commandments.” Therefore it is on the basis of our obedience to the commandments of God that we are acceptable in the sight of God and our obedience to God’s com­mandments is not the thing under con­sideration by Paul when he said in Eph. 2:9, “Not of works.”

Moreover Christ has said that our “works of righteousness,” that is our obedience to God’s commandments, is nothing about which we can boast or glory. He says, “Even so ye also, when ye shall have done all the things that are commanded you, say, we are un­profitable servants; we have done that which it was our duty to do” (Luke 17:10). In obeying God’s commands and receiving His blessing we have noth­ing to boast about. The children of Is­rael could not boast about their capture of Jericho. God’s way was not the way that would create boasting on their part but rather a way that would in­crease their faith in and respect for Him.

Had the children of Israel captured the city by force of arms they might have later boasted about it; but taking it as they did they could never glory in it but must always give glory to God. Likewise in our obedience to Christ’s commandments we can never glory for who could say that believing in the Christ, repenting of our sins, confessing our faith in Christ and be­ing baptized could ever be enough to “earn” for us the glory of heaven. Nay, rather, it only emphasizes our depend­ence upon the mercy and grace of God. Therefore as we obey and when we have done all things commanded we are unprofitable and it is still by God’s grace that we are saved. However it is evident that his grace does not ex­clude the “works of righteousness” which he has commanded us to do.

What then can be the meaning of Paul’s statement, “not of works.” It is very simple, and as usual in God’s word, we find it in the very sentence we are considering. Notice, please, that Paul says, “not of works, that no man should glory” (Eph. 2:9). The King James version says “boast” instead of “glory” as we find it in the American Standard Version. This is the key of the entire matter, it is not of works that we can glory in or boast about. It is not by works that we earn salvation or place God in debt to us. This is the en­tire meaning of the apostle’s words and when we thus consider the matter we can see that some works are ex­cluded but that the “works of right­eousness” are not excluded but are the obedience of faith by which we are to receive the “gift of God.” Therefore it is important that we obey the com­mandments of Jesus that he may be the author of eternal salvation to our souls as he is to all them that obey him (Heb. 5:8, 9).

The Ephesian Example

Now in conclusion we want to re­member that our text for this study was written to members of the church in Ephesus. These were said to be saved by “grace through faith” so if we can learn what they did and how they were saved it will be of great im­portance to us in our study. Let us therefore turn our attention to the nineteenth chapter of Acts where we read of the establishment of this church and in this record learn of the conversion of the Ephesians.

“And it came to pass, that while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper country came to Ephesus, and found certain disci­ples: and he said unto them, Did ye re­ceive the Holy Spirit when ye believed? And they said unto him, Nay, we did not so much as hear whether the Holy Spirit was given. And he said, Into what then were ye baptized ? and they said, Into John’s baptism. And Paul said, John baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people that they should believe on him that should come after him, that is on Jesus. And when they heard this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 19:1-5).

In this account we have the begin­ning of the church in Ephesus. These are the people to whom Paul wrote, “By grace have ye been saved through faith.” Therefore it is evident that Paul’s conception of salvation by grace did not exclude obedience to God’s commands. Nay, contrary to that, it so emphasized obedience to Christ that when he found these who had been one time baptized but with an improper faith he taught them the truth and they were baptized again. Therefore these were baptized twice, once wrong and once right, and still were saved by grace.

There are hundreds of thousands in this land of ours who are like those at Ephesus. They have been baptized but did not understand the true signifi­cance and meaning of it at the time. Their baptism is invalid and they like the Ephesians should be baptized with the baptism commanded by Christ. That is they should be baptized into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to receive the remission of their sins for this is the baptism commanded by the Lord and therefore the baptism in His name (Matt. 28:18-20; Mark 16: 15, 16).

There are other hundreds of thou­sands who have never been baptized. These need to believe in Christ with all their hearts (Acts 8:36, 37), repent of their sins (Acts 17:30), confess their faith in the Christ (Rom. 10:10), and be baptized into Christ (Rom. 6:3) unto the remission of their sins (Acts 2:38). Thus they would in their obedi­ence to the commands of the Christ have him become the author of eternal salvation to their souls. Thus they would “work righteousness” and be­come acceptable in the sight of God. Thus they would “by faith” receive “the gift of God” the salvation of their souls and as children of God “by faith in Christ Jesus” rejoice in the sweet assurance of salvation by and through the grace of God for “as many of you as were baptized into Christ did put on Christ” (Gal. 3:27) and since “in Christ” the grace of God is made known and bestowed they would be saved “by grace through faith.”

All About the Book of James

As a gift to our readers, we’re presenting here the complete introduction from Justified by Works: A Study of the Letter from James, by Bradley Cobb (available in print or eBook here).  Our regular Bible Q&A segment will return next week.  Enjoy!

Introduction

The book of James is unique among the New Testament letters. At first glance, like the book of Proverbs, it seems to be a disconnected series of practical godly living. Some, because of the content of the letter, rejected it as authentic. Others accepted the book but have denied the truths contained therein. Among those who believe in the inspiration of the Bible, there is more debate about the author of this book than any other (except perhaps Hebrews). There’s even disagreement about why and when the book was written. But even with all these disagreements, the letter from James is a goldmine of knowledge and practical application. It’s no wonder that James is many Christians’ favorite book of the Bible.

Who Wrote It?

All Scripture is inspired by God (I Timothy 3:16). As such, the author is God, who by means of the Holy Spirit inspired men to write down His holy word (II Peter 1:21). But now, the question before us is: what man did God inspire to write the book called ‘James’?

The name James is the same as the Old Testament name Jacob. In fact, in Greek, James is spelled Iacob (there is no letter J in Greek). The writer of this book was named after the great patriarch of Israel: Jacob.

There are four men in the New Testament who were named James. Three of them were holy men of God who spoke by inspiration. Each of these three have—to one degree or another—been suggested as the author of this book. But in order to narrow it down, let’s consider each one individually.

James, the brother/father of Judas

The only thing we know for sure about this man is that he was related to Judas, one of the twelve apostles (Acts 1:12-14). The Greek text literally says “Judas of James.” Almost every translation adds words explaining this phrase. The King James Version reads “Judas the brother of James.” The New King James Version reads “Judas the son of James.”

The King James rendering tries to make a connection between this Judas/James relationship and the words of Jude in Jude 1. The New King James rendering is more true to the original language, and appears to distinguish Judas the son of James from Judas Iscariot (something which the original writers thought was necessary—John 14:22).

No one has seriously considered this man as the author of the book of James for the following reasons:

  • No one knows if the man was living or dead when Jesus chose His disciples.
  • No one knows if this man (if he was still alive) ever became a Christian.

In short, there is nothing in the Scriptures to suggest that this man could have been the inspired writer of James.

James, the son of Zebedee.

This man was among the first of Jesus’ disciples (Mark 1:19-20), and one of the twelve apostles (Matthew 10:2-4). He was a fisherman by trade, the brother of the apostle John (who wrote five New Testament books), and was one of Jesus’ closest friends. Only James, John, and Peter were permitted to go with Jesus to the mountain to witness the Transfiguration (Matthew 17:1-2).

This James is usually rejected as the writer because he was murdered by Herod around AD 44 (Acts 12:1-2). One has to wonder, however, why James couldn’t have written this book before his death. This question is even more applicable when you realize that many writers think this book was written very early (usually suggesting around AD 45).

Having said all that, this James was not the author of the letter called James. The contents of the letter demand a date after this James—the son of Zebedee—was killed. This will be covered more when we get to the section titled When Did He Write It?

James, the son of Alphaeus.

This man was an apostle of Jesus Christ (Matthew 10:2-4). He was also the brother of another apostle, Matthew (or Levi), who wrote the first book of the New Testament (see Mark 2:14). It is generally agreed that he is the James mentioned in Mark 15:40. There, he is called James the Less. Literally, that verse calls him “James the little one” or “the short James.” It is the same word (mikron, mirco) that is used to describe Zaccheaus—the “wee little man.” James, the son of Alphaeus, was short.

Some people—mostly Catholics—have gone to great lengths to supposedly prove that this James is the same as the man known as James, the Lord’s brother (they say it means “cousin”). Guy N. Woods has shown beyond a doubt that this cannot be the case.[1] We can summarize his main points as follows:

(1)   The apostles had been chosen out of His disciples—those who believed in Him—but Jesus’ brothers did not believe in Him (John 7:5). Therefore, none of Jesus’ brothers were apostles.

(2)   Jesus’ brothers are mentioned as a separate group from the apostles (I Corinthians 9:5, Acts 1:13-14). Therefore, none of the apostles were brothers of Jesus.

This James, being an apostle, would be a prime candidate to write inspired Scripture. The main argument against his being the writer is that he actually was an apostle. The man who wrote this book identifies himself as “a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ.” The argument goes like this: since he didn’t identify himself as “James, an apostle of Jesus Christ,” then that proves he wasn’t an apostle. However, Paul didn’t identify himself as an apostle in four of his letters (Philippians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, as well as Philemon). John never identified himself as an apostle in his letters or in Revelation. This argument carries little—if any—weight.

The second argument used against this man as the author is that nothing is known about him outside of the fact that he was an apostle of Jesus Christ. Barclay states it this way: “of James, the son of Alphaeus, nothing else is known; and he also can have had no connection with this letter.”[2] Shelly says, “So obscure a person could hardly have written this kind of letter, for the epistle of James presupposes the fact that its readers would know its author and heed its counsel accordingly.”[3] One man said that if this James were the one who wrote it, he would have given extra information to show that he was he James under consideration. This argument is an argument from supposition. It assumes that the apostle James was not well-known enough to have just identified himself as “James.” The early church would have been familiar enough with the apostles that if the apostle James had written them a letter, he wouldn’t have had to specify that he was James the apostle.

N.T. Caton, among others, takes the stance that James, the son of Alphaeus, is the man who wrote this letter. He states:

To these twelve men [the apostles] the Master had said: “He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.” I conclude, therefore, that the twelve were essentially ministers plenipotentiary [invested with the full authority of Christ]. They spake for the King, and when they spake it was the same as if the King had spoken. None others could be so rec­ognized.[4] [Bracketed explanations and bold font added.]

I have no arguments against James, the son of Alphaeus, being the author of this letter. However, I believe that another James is more likely.

James, the brother of Jesus Christ

This man, the son of Joseph and Mary—and thus the half-brother of Jesus—didn’t believe in Jesus during His earthly ministry (John 7:5). But something happened to radically alter everything he thought he knew about his older brother. After His death and resurrection, Jesus appeared in person to James (I Corinthians 15:4-7). James was a man convinced and convicted. He would have quickly gone to tell his other brothers (Jude, Joseph, and Simon) that they had been wrong. We know this because less than 50 days after the death of Christ, all of Jesus’ brothers were gathered with the apostles and other disciples of Jesus (Acts 1:12-14). After Pentecost, James was an integral part of the church in Jerusalem. He was called a “pillar” of the church there (Galatians 2:9), and was numbered with their elders by AD 49-50 (Acts 15:6, 13; 21:18).[5]

His work for the Lord was focused on the Jews (Galatians 2:9). His concern for the Jewish Christians can be seen in his conversation with Paul in Acts 21:17-26. He is mentioned by Josephus (a non-Christian Jewish historian in the first century) as one who was murdered by order of the Jewish high priest in AD 62. An early Christian historian, Hegesippus, —though he embellished parts of it—records that James was viewed in high regard by all Jews because he was frequently to be found at the temple on his knees praying for the Jews. Because of his unwillingness to show respect of persons, it is said that he was known as “James the Just.” This same historian records that James was cast from the pinnacle of the temple, but survived long enough to pray for his attackers before being stoned and then finally being beaten to death with a club. Hegesippus dates his death immediately before Vespasian’s army came against Judea (AD 66-67, though some believe this is speaking of the attack after Vespasian became emperor, which would place it in early AD 70). How much of this is truth and how much is embellishment is difficult to tell. Josephus, having no sympathy for the Christians, would seem to be the more reliable account. Either way, it is agreed by all sources that James, the Lord’s brother, was murdered because he was an outspoken Christian.

This James is the most likely candidate for the author of the book which bears his name. The following reasons are given in support of his authorship:

  • His ministry was to the Jews (Galatians 2:9). The book of James was written to a Jewish audience (James 1:1).
  • Because of his status and influence within the Jerusalem church as an elder (a status he shared with Peter and John), and being Christ’s brother, there would have been no question as to his authority in writing this letter.
  • What we read of James from Acts 15 and 21 shows that he was focused on practical application of God’s word. The book of James is almost exclusively devoted to practical applications of God’s word.
  • There are some specific Greek words and phrases that are only appear in two places: (1) Acts 15 in connection with the brother of Jesus, and (2) in the book of James.

o   “Hearken” – Acts 15:13 (spoken by James) and James 2:5.

o   “To visit” – Acts 15:14 (spoken by James) and James 1:27.

o   “Your souls” – Acts 15:24 (perhaps written by James) and James 1:21.

Outside of the Bible, the first mention of the authorship of James comes from the third century when Origen attributed the book to the brother of Jesus.

Some have argued against this James as the author, saying that the Greek in this letter is too far advanced for a Jew from Galilee. J.W. Roberts, a Greek scholar who taught at Abilene Christian College many years ago, spends a lot of time proving this argument false.[6] Basically stated, Greek was a universal language. Most first-century Jews would have been bilingual, and would have been quite fluent in it. Besides this, we are told nothing about the education of James. Can anyone say with any degree of certainty that James never worked on becoming proficient in speaking and writing Greek? It’s basically the same as saying that no one from Mexico could ever write something well in English.

It is James, the brother of Jesus (and of Jude—see Jude 1) that most likely wrote this book.

Who Did He Write to?

Like Peter and John, James directed his ministry toward the Jews (Galatians 2:9). It should come as no surprise, then, that his letter was addressed to Jews. However, this wasn’t written to just any Jews. James had a specific audience in mind when he wrote.

James wrote to “the twelve tribes scattered abroad” (James 1:1). Literally, this says “the twelve tribes in the dispersion.” The Greek word translated scattered abroad is diaspora. This is a technical word that meant “Israelites dispersed among foreign nations” (Thayer). The word only appears three times in the Bible. James 1:1, I Peter 1:1, and John 7:35. Each time it has reference to the Jews who lived in the Gentile nations. James was writing to Jews who did not live in the Promised Land.

Some have said that James was using the phrase “the twelve tribes scattered abroad” spiritually to refer to the Christians scattered throughout the Roman Empire. This is trying to force a figurative meaning on the words when a literal one fits the evidence. It should also be noted that James wrote to people who met in the synagogue (James 2:2—the word translated assembly is the Greek word sunagoge). The synagogue was a Jewish meeting place.

But the audience is even more specific than that. James was writing to Christian Jews who were scattered abroad. James wasn’t writing to non-Christians. This is obvious when you read James 2:1: My brethren, do not hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with partiality (NKJV). He couldn’t have called Jesus our Lord if his readers weren’t already Christians.

It is possible (especially if an earlier date is assumed—see below) that James is writing to those who had come to Jerusalem for Pentecost (Acts 2) and who had stayed in Jerusalem with the church. Many of these people were forced to flee the city because of the persecution brought on by Saul of Tarsus (Acts 8:1-4).

James wrote to Jewish Christians who were living outside of Palestine, throughout the Roman Empire. Interestingly enough, this is also the audience that both Peter (I Peter 1:1) and John (Revelation 1:4) wrote to as well.

When Did He Write It?

Most writers suggest a period of time between AD 45 (after the death of James, son of Zebedee) and AD 62 (when Josephus records that he was killed). There are arguments for an early date (45-50), as well as arguments for a later date (61-62). We will briefly consider both.

The Early Date (AD 45-50)

James, the brother of Jesus, isn’t seen as a leader in the church until after the death of James, son of Zebedee, in AD 44. Because of this, most people propose a date of no earlier than AD 44. Here are the arguments used in favor of an early date (note: compare these with the arguments for the late date).

  • Because there is no mention of Gentile Christians or the problems that were addressed in Acts 15 (AD 49-50), this letter was written before these things became an issue.
  • The persecution that the Jewish Christians were suffering (James 1:2, c.f. Acts 8:1-4)[7] was not as severe after AD 50, so it must have been written before that date.

If this letter was written in the 40’s, then it may well be the earliest of all the inspired letters.

The Late Date (AD 58-62)

Obviously, James could not have written the book after his death, so the latest possible date is AD 62. The evidence in favor of the late date is as follows:

  • There is no mention of the controversy surrounding the Gentile Christians, such as was addressed by James in Acts 15. Thus, this must have been written at a time when the controversy had settled down.
  • The persecution that the Jewish Christians were suffering was intense throughout the Roman Empire, specifically from other Jews (see Acts 17:5-7, 21:27-28, Revelation 2:9).

If you’ll notice, the main arguments for an early date are the same arguments used for the late date. J.W. Roberts stated:

There is really nothing decisive to settle the question. There is an 18-year period from 44-62 A.D. when the letter was most likely written. But the choice between the middle of the 40’s and the decade of the 50’s is difficult. This writer would incline to the latter date, but it is merely a feeling.[8]

Before we move from the discussion of the date, there is one more piece of evidence that must be considered. This evidence, in my opinion, is conclusive.

You also be patient. Establish your hearts: because the coming of the Lord is at hand (James 5:8)

The phrase “at hand” shows the nearness of something. The only coming of the Lord that was near in the first century was the coming of Christ in judgment upon Jerusalem in AD 70 (see Matthew 24:1-34, especially verses 27, 30, and 34). This argues heavily for a later date (AD 60-62) and against an early date.

If Josephus is correct in dating James death in AD 62, then this book should be dated about 61-62. If Hegesippus’ dating of James’ death is correct, then this book could be written as late as AD 66-67.

Why Did He Write It?

This question is one that we should ask about every book of the Bible as we begin to study it. It is when we understand why it was written that we can begin to truly understand what it means and how it applies to us.

To Supplement Paul’s Epistles?

False teachers had been perverting Paul’s teachings, claiming that salvation is by “faith-only” and that “works have nothing to do with salvation.” Because of this (it is claimed), James wrote this letter to counteract these false teachers, and to show that “faith without works is dead.” While this is indeed possible, it is based mostly on guesswork.

It is interesting that these false teachings are still prominent in the religious world today.

To Encourage Practical Christian Living.

Many people are obsessed with learning, understanding, arguing, and debating things in the Bible. There are many Christians whose study of God’s word is barely more than an intellectual pursuit. People break off into groups based on their unique collection of theological beliefs. If you don’t believe it, go to a congregation and ask them which congregations that they have nothing to do with. Then ask them why. Many times, the answer is that the other congregations believe something differently.

In the face of such differences, James basically says that the true test of Christianity is not your theological beliefs, but on your actions.

Pure and undefiled religion before God the Father is this: to visit the orphans and widows in their afflictions, and to keep himself unspotted from the world (James 1:27).
After all, what is it that we will be judged on? The Scriptures never say that Christians will be judged based on their beliefs on eschatology or expediency. Instead, the Scriptures are clear that in the final judgment, we will be judged based on our works.

For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that everyone may receive the things done in his body, according to that which he has done, whether it be good or bad (II Corinthians 5:10).

Then shall the King say to them on His right hand, “Come you blessed ones of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. Because I was hungry, and you gave me food. I was thirsty, and you gave me drink. I was a stranger and you took me in. I was naked and you clothed me. I was sick and you visited me. I was in prison and you came to me.”… And the King will answer and say to them, “Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as you have done it to the least of these, my brethren, you have done it to me” (Matthew 25:34-40).

And I saw the dead ones, great and small, stand before God; and the books were opened…and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works (Revelation 20:12).

After reading these passages, you could imagine the following scene taking place at Judgment:

“But God, how could you let HIM in? He believed __________!” God ‘s reply, “He gave his money to the poor, worked tirelessly in evangelism, brought many to Christ, and humbly repented any time he discovered he had sinned.”

In fairness, there are obviously certain things we must believe in order to be among the saved (believe in God, believe in Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God, and believe that the Bible is His inspired word). But these are necessary in order to become a child of God.

James writes to get people to move from being an intellectual Christian to being Christian who shows his faith through his works.

Some Other Thoughts

When you get in the habit of living out your Christianity, it becomes more and more a part of you. It is quite possible that James was trying to get Christians in this habit because he knew that it would help make them more faithful. This is important when you understand that within three years, the Christians’ world was turned completely upside down as Rome and the Jews launched a joint attack against them—thousands upon thousands of Christians were ruthlessly murdered in the years that followed.

The conclusion? The time to get in the habit of living out your faith for Christ is now.

The book of James encouraged them, but it also encourages us to live a life of faith shown by our works. Don’t be a mental disciple, but be an active one!

James’ Place in the Bible

It has been argued by some that James wasn’t really inspired, and they give different reasons for this assertion. Some say that James contradicts Paul, therefore James isn’t inspired. The truth of the matter is that James contradicts what people have claimed Paul taught. James and Paul are in perfect harmony with each other when you throw out the false idea of “faith-only” salvation.

Others make the claim that James wasn’t widespread in the early churches, so it couldn’t have been accepted as inspired. It’s easy to explain why copies of James may not have been widespread. The massive persecution which began in AD 64 wiped out entire Christian communities and all of their writings throughout the Empire. Since James was written in 61-62, there would not have been as much time for it to be copied and spread around. This is the same reason why there were not many copies of II Peter, Jude, Revelation, II John and III John found from that period.

There are several early writers who allude to James, and some outright quote his letter as authoritative Scripture. Some scholars have shown that some Christian writers as early as the first century (AD 80-99) based parts of their writings on the book of James.

Conclusion:

Regardless of when it was written and which James wrote it, this book is filled with practical, useful instruction that applies to every Christian’s life, every single day. The commands may not always be easy, but you can rest assured that they are right and that they are from God, given as a gift to the ones who are willing to accept them (II Peter 1:3, James 1:17).

 

[1] See Woods, Guy N., Gospel Advocate Commentary on James, pages 12-ff.

[2] Barclay, William, The Letter of James, Revised Edition, page 8.

[3] Shelly, Rubel, What Christian Living is All About (Studies in James), page 3.

[4] Caton, N.T., Commentary on the Minor Epistles, pages 5-6

[5] It should be noted here that the text of Acts 15 nowhere states that this James is the Lord’s brother. However, what we learn from Paul in Galatians 2 seems to indicate that the Lord’s brother was a man of great influence in the Jerusalem church. As such, the general consensus is that the James from Acts 15 is the Lord’s brother. But to be fair, it is possible that Acts 15 is a reference to James the apostle.

[6] Roberts, J.W., A Commentary on the General Epistle of James, pages 13-16

[7] Shelly, Rubel, ibid, page 6.

[8] Roberts, J.W., ibid, page 27.