Protecting Our Minds
Chuck Webster

One day a mother was scraping vegetables for a salad as her daughter came into the kitchen to ask permission to go to a movie—one with sufficient rating to indicate that it had “adult” language and other material offensive to Christians.  “All the kids are going,” she said, “and their parents don’t think it will hurt them.”  As she talked, she saw her mother pick up a handful of the scraps and throw them into the salad.  Rather startled, she shouted, “Mother, you’re putting the garbage in the salad.” “I know,” her mother replied, “But I thought if you didn’t mind garbage in your heart and in your mind that you wouldn’t care about a little in your stomach.”  Thoughtfully, the girl picked the peelings from the salad and then smiled at her mother.  “I guess I’ll just tell them I’m staying at home tonight,” she said as she went through the kitchen door.

There’s a lot of filth out there in the world, and removing ourselves from it entirely is impossible.  We’re constantly bombarded with it—in the check-out lines at the grocery store, during commercials on television, on the radio, in prime-time programming, and certainly in most modern movies.  To escape completely we would have to withdraw from society—something God doesn’t expect (or want) us to do (1 Corinthians 5:9, 10).

Recognizing that a certain amount of exposure is inevitable, some Christians seem to remove any restraints whatsoever, embracing the media—however filthy and ungodly—with the same vigor as their non-Christian neighbors.  They might occasionally recoil at the bad language and shake their heads disapprovingly at the sex-saturated content, but they nonetheless expose themselves to programming that is permeated by themes inconsistent with Christianity.

We should ask ourselves: “What does Jesus want us to do?  What would He do if He were physically here?  Would He watch this movie?  Would He watch this television show?”

One Bible verse is especially relevant: “Finally, brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, dwell on these things” (Philippians 4:8 NASV).

How much of today’s television and movie programming fits into that verse?          W.O.T.

Chuck Webster, the former editor of this journal, is the evangelist for the church of Christ in Hoover, Alabama.  He may be reached at 3248 Lorna Road, Hoover, AL  35216.

Those who would teach the doctrine of Universalism say that in the end ALL are going to be saved, whether or not they have obeyed the word of God or, for that matter, whether or not they know anything about God.  There has been an overemphasis by some on God's grace, mercy, and love and, on the other hand almost silence about such things as the judgment of God and the holiness of God.  As a result many fall for the false doctrine of universalism.  Indeed, such a doctrine is pleasant to believe.  Many think that a God of love is just too good to condemn anyone to such an awful place as hell.  Man, we are told, is, after all, inherently good by nature.  Thus God won’t send, so we are told, “good people to hell.”  What does the Bible teach?  An important passage to restudy is 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10, “And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day” (KJV).

The truth set forth in this passage of scripture, without any doubt, makes it clear that those outside of Christ, those who have not obeyed the Gospel of Christ, are LOST.  Note what this text says that the judgment of Christ will be measured out BOTH to those who don't know God and those who know of God but do not obey the gospel of Christ.

If those who know not God or who have not obeyed the Gospel are in a saved state or have the promise of salvation without either knowing God or obeying the Gospel, then the imperative of missionary work is totally lost!  If those outside of Christ, those who have not obeyed the Gospel are going to be saved without knowing God and without obeying the Gospel, why bother?  Indeed, why would Christ’s sacrifice upon the cross have been necessary at all?  If God is going to save men without their obedience to the Gospel, then why did He send His Son to die on the cross of Calvary?

In 2 Corinthians 5:18 we read, “To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.”  Yes, “God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself” and He has committed the ministry of reconciliation to men.  Who is it that needs to be reconciled to God?  Is it just those who would visit our services?  Is it just those who would fit into our “class” of people?  Is it just those who are educated?  Is it just those in this country?

NO! “The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9).

Do we really believe what the Lord taught and what the Bible teaches about those outside of Christ?  Do we really believe that we would be eternally lost and would be in hell throughout all eternity if we did not know God and had not obeyed the Gospel of Christ?  Every other precious soul needs to have the opportunity to know God and obey the Gospel of Christ.  That is why the Lord gave us what we call the Great Commission to go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.  Let us make this our number one priority.          

Ken Chumbley is the evangelist for the church of Christ in Belvedere, South Carolina, a part of the Greater Augusta, GA area.  He can be contacted at 535 Clearwater Road, Belvedere, SC  39841-2574.

Mel Gibson’s movie about the last twelve hours of Jesus’ life is the topic of much discussion.  By now, it is clear that The Passion Of The Christ is one of the most successful movies of all time.  It may well end up in the top five.  Gibson’s epic has generated much conversation about Jesus and the Gospels, which is encouraging.  We truly hope all people will turn to the Bible and learn of Christ and His church.  Many churches, even some churches of Christ, have enthusiastically endorsed the film, and have used it as a tool for evangelism.  I have often said that I am waiting for a biblical epic about Jesus that will be scripturally accurate.  As of this writing, I am still waiting.

The film deserves every award it will receive (if any, considering the liberalism of Hollywood).  Gibson has crafted a well-made cinematic masterpiece.  Additionally, the scourging of Jesus and the crucifixion were the most realistic I have seen depicted.  Indeed, Gibson utilized in part a 1986 article from the Journal of the American Medical Association, “On The Physical Death Of Jesus Christ.” Also, Jim Caviezel portrayed Jesus, not as an effeminate weakling, but as a strong leader.

That being said, I was very disappointed in the movie. Many reports indicated that the film is the most biblically accurate depiction of Jesus ever made.  Having seen it, I respectfully disagree. An article that appeared in the September 15, 2003 issue of The New Yorker indicated that Gibson was utilizing the “visions” of two nineteenth century nuns, along with the Gospels.  Seeing the film confirmed that report.  An article in Christianity Today sheds even more light on Gibson’s thought process and inspiration.  In “The Passion of Mel Gibson,” editor David Neff spends much of his time praising Gibson and his work. Even so, Neff writes, “…the movie was shaped from start to finish by a devout Roman Catholic and by an almost medieval Catholic vision.”

Anne Catherine Emmerich wrote a book, published after her death in 1824, entitled The Dolorous Passion Of Our Lord.  Gibson freely admits that he drew heavily on that “vision” for many of his scenes.  Also, Mary is given a prominent role in the film.  This is not surprising, since Neff states that Gibson “prefers the Tridentine Latin Mass and calls Mary co-redemptrix.”  At one point, when Peter has denied the Lord, he stops in front of Mary and confesses to her, calling her “Mother.”  Every time Jesus falters in the film, he looks at Mary and seems to regain strength—again, inspired by Emmerich, not the Bible. Mary has almost as many scenes as does Jesus.

The “vision” of Emmerich is utilized by Gibson to shape one prolonged scene, where Pilate’s wife gives Mary large pieces of linen—and then, Mary and Mary Magdalene use the linen to wipe up the blood of Jesus around the flogging pillar.  Likewise, it is Emmerich who serves as the source for the scene where Satan is holding a demonic baby (a distortion of the painting Madonna With Child).  Emmerich is the source for the scene where some of the children of Jerusalem chase Judas.  And, it is again Emmerich who inspired Gibson to depict Mary holding Jesus at the foot of the cross (in a deliberate copying of Michelangelo’s sculpture Pieta).      

Roger Ebert, in his positive review of the film, said he immediately knew where Gibson drew part of his inspiration—from the “Fourteen Stations of the cross” in Catholic theology.  Being a former altar boy, he recognized them in the movie.  David Neff refers to the Catholic practice of meditating on “the Five Sorrowful Mysteries when saying the Rosary.”  He then asserts, “the structure of Gibson’s film conforms exactly to the list of the Five Sorrowful Mysteries.”  I personally could not get past the overt Catholicism, from start to finish, pushed by Gibson.

Which brings me to my biggest concern.  I can understand religious people in general endorsing the movie and using it to aid their cause.  But, I cannot fathom why some of my brethren would try to use the film to aid them in evangelism.  One would have to spend much of his time explaining the non-biblical references.  Claiming “poetic license” is not sufficient, given what we know.

All this should reinforce the caution we need to exercise concerning Gibson’s film.  I encourage people who want to see the movie to watch it, but with a critical eye, based on Scripture.  Gibson’s work is a marvelous piece of filmmaking—but it is not the Jule Miller video.  Some of my brethren need to keep that in mind.

When all is said and done, the Book is far better than the movie.  It should be the resource we use, for in its pages we will find the truth concerning our Lord.  “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek” (Romans 1:16).     W.O.T.

David W. Hester is the evangelist for the Center Point church of Christ in Pinson, AL.  He may be reached at 6836 Ashberry Drive, Pinson, AL  35126.

Paul warned the Ephesian elders that savage wolves would enter in among them (Acts 20:29, 30).  He knew the power of teachers, whether false teachers or teachers of sound doctrine.  He further urged Timothy, “Hold fast the pattern of sound words which you have heard from me...” (2 Timothy 1:13 NKJV).  Because he knew that the Christians at Ephesus needed encouragement and instruction, Paul sent Timothy there, urging him to especially charge the teachers (1 Timothy 1:3, 4).  Let us look at Paul’s opening remarks to Timothy to learn more about being teachers of sound doctrine.

Some Teachers Had to Be Charged (1 Timothy 1:3, 4)

Why did only “some” (certain) teachers need to be charged?  “Some” had strayed and turned aside to idle talk (1 Timothy 1:6).  “Some” had departed from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons (1 Timothy 4:1).  “Some” had already turned aside after Satan (1 Timothy 5:15).  “Some” had strayed concerning the faith (1 Timothy 6:21).  “Some” needed to be charged.

What does it mean to “charge” someone?  To “charge” someone means to “command” (NKJ), “instruct,” (NAS), or “warn” (CEV).  Some need to be charged not to do certain things.  Some need to be charged not to teach “another doctrine” (1 Timothy 1:3).   What other doctrine could they teach?  They could teach another Jesus than Paul had preached, a different spirit than the Ephesians had received, and a different gospel than that which the Ephesians had accepted (cf. 2 Corinthians 11:4).  They could be taught anything contrary to sound doctrine (1 Timothy 1:10). 

Guy N. Woods wrote concerning this text,

“Some were teaching doctrines contrary to that which the apostle had taught in Ephesus and were seeking to influence the saints by them.  These men were Judaizers–men who taught that Christians were obligated to be circumcised and to keep the law of Moses—and they sought to weaken Paul’s influence among the churches by impugning his motives, and by questioning his apostleship” (Woods 121).

Some need to be charged not to give heed to fables (1 Timothy 1:4).  Fables mean: “Talk of men, rumor, report, a story (true or false); later, a fiction” (Vincent 203).  They were not to busy themselves with stories (“myths”) and endless lists of ancestors.  Peter wrote, “For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty” (2 Peter 1:16).  Paul wrote, “But reject profane and old wives’ fables, and exercise yourself rather to godliness” (1 Timothy 4:7).

Some need to be charged not to heed endless genealogies (1 Timothy 1:4).  According to Galatians 3:18, some had become absorbed in tracing genealogies that were of no spiritual value, since in Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek (Matthews 611).  Evidently it was very important to demonstrate a relationship to an illustrious Jewish leader of the past (Bailey 29).  There are troubles caused by teaching other doctrine, heeding fables and endless genealogies.  These cause disputes (“mere speculation,” NASV).  No godly edification from faith comes from these because they don’t help people live a life of faith.

Love from a Pure Heart Is the Purpose for the Commandment (1 Tim. 1:5-7)

Love must come from a pure heart.  This love is opposite of the conflict that results from false teaching, following fables and endless genealogies.  “Love does no harm to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law” (Romans 13:10).  This love must come from a good conscience (cf. 1 Peter 3:15, 16).  This love must come from a sincere faith without hypocrisy (cf. Romans 12:9). 

Some have strayed from these things during Paul’s day (1 Timothy 1:6), and sadly, some have also strayed from these during our day.  To stray is to swerve and miss the mark.  Those that strayed turned to follow Satan (1 Timothy 5:15), profess knowledge (1 Timothy 6:20), and to fables (2 Timothy 4:4).  They had turned aside to idle talk and began telling tales that were full of empty chatter.  They desired to be teachers of the law but didn’t understand what they taught.

Let us use this warning from Paul to be both sound and loving.  Love must be the basic teaching of sound doctrine.

Works Cited

Bailey, Kent, “Warning Against False Doctrine,” Studies in Timothy and Titus, ed. David Lipe, Karnes, TN: East Tennessee School of Preaching and Missions, 1986.

Matthews, Paul, “Paul’s First Letter to Timothy,” Gospel Advocate, 24 September 1964. 

Vincent, Marvin R., Word Studies in the New Testament, Vol. 4, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1965.

Woods, Guy N. “Warning and Admonishing,” Gospel Advocate, 12 February 1978.

 William Gary Crump

I.    The church of Christ has a scriptural founder-Jesus Christ, the head of the Church (Matthew 16:13-18; Ephesians 5:23; Ephesians 1:20-23).

       A.    Christ purchased the church with His blood (Acts 20:28). 

       B.    Since Christ purchased the church with His blood, He is the owner.

       C.    The “church of Christ” IS NOT a religious denomination.

       D.    The church of Christ is scriptural in name.

II.     The Church of Christ was Established at the Scriptural Time and Place.

       A.    The church of Christ was established on Pentecost  (Acts 2:1).

       B.    The church of Christ was established in Jerusalem (Acts 1:4, 8; 2:5, 14).

III.   The Church of Christ Has Scriptural Terms for Membership

       A.    Hear the gospel (Matt. 17:5; John 5:24; Rom. 10:17; Rev. 3:2).

       B.    Believe (Mark 16:15-16; John 3:18,36; 6:46-47).

       C.    Repentance of sins (Matt. 3:2; Mark 1:15; Luke 13:3; Acts 2:38; 3:19).

       D.    Confess Christ (Matt. 10:32; Mark 1:5; Luke 12:8-9; Rom. 10:9-10).

       E.    Baptism for the remission of sins (Matt. 28:19; Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38).

    1.   The word baptize comes from BAPTIZO, meaning overwhelm.

     2.     Scriptural baptism is by immersion (Rom. 6:4; Acts 8:38).

IV.  The church of Christ grows in the scriptural way (Acts 2:41, 47).

      A.    The Lord ADDS the saved to His church. 

      B.     People do not “join” a church nor are “voted in.”

V.    Members of the Church of Christ Are Scriptural in Name. 

      A.   They are called Christians (Acts 11:26). 

      B.    Members of the church of Christ were first called Christians in Antioch.

VI.  The church worships on the first day of the week (Acts 20:7).

      A.    New Testament worship is the ONLY Scriptural pattern of worship. 

      B.     We do not Follow patterns of worship found in the Old Testament.

              1.    The Old Testament was fulfilled when Christ died.

              2.    The N. T. went into effect when Christ died (Heb. 9:11-18).

              3.    The Old Law was imperfect (Hebrews 8:6-12; 10:1-10).

              4.    Therefore, the New Testament was established.

      C.    The Scriptural pattern consists of the following elements

              1.    The Lord’s Supper each first day of the week (Acts 20:7).

                     a.    Matt. 26:26-30; 1 Cor. 11:23-29. 

                     b.    The unleavened bread and the fruit of the vine

              2.    Singing (Matt. 26:30; Col. 3:16; Eph. 5:19). 

                    a.    Faithful congregations do not use mechanical instruments

                    b.    Do not add or take away from God’s word (Rev. 22:18-19). 

                    c.    The New Testament does not authorize the use of choirs

                    d.    All are commanded to sing and not just a select few.

              3.   Giving (1 Corinthians 16:1-2). 

              4.   Prayer (Luke 18:1; Col. 4:2; 1 Thess. 5:17-18; James 5:16)

              5.   Preaching (Acts 20:7).

VII. The church of Christ is scriptural in its organization

       A.    Each congregation is overseen by elders (Titus 1:5).

       B.    Deacons were appointed to assist elders (Acts 6). 

              1.     Deacons were appointed to oversee benevolence. 

              2.     Deacons met certain criteria (Acts 6:3; 1 Tim. 3:8-13).

              3.    There’s no mention of a central governing body

              4.    Each congregation is autonomous of the other.

VIII. An eternal destination (John 14:1-4; 1 Thess. 4:17)

      A.    The church of Christ must have book, chapter, and verse

      B.    The church of Christ’s sole source of authority must be the Bible. 

      C.    The church of Christ MUST NOT subscribe to man-made creeds.

CONCLUSION: It is the sincere desire of the church of Christ to worship just as Christians did in the first century and to do Bible things in Bible ways.

EDITOR’S NOTE: It is not unusual to get questions from inmates, however, it is a bit unusual to get articles or outlines from inmates.  Brother Crump, having repented and having asked for the prayers of his brothers and sisters in Christ, is incarcerated in the South Central Correctional Center in Clifton, Tennessee, for the next seven years.

There is a difference in things which aid us in doing the exact thing required of God, and in things added to the will of God.  Plain additions to the word of God are classed by some as mere aids or expediencies.

“Aids” Permissible

Whatever aids us in doing the very thing authorized of God, without becoming an addition to the will of God, is permissible.  When God specially authorized a certain aid, then that thing must be done, in the way authorized.  However, if God commanded that a certain thing be done, but authorized no certain way of doing the thing required, then the thing required may be done in any way we think fitting, so long as no scripture principle is violated.

The Ark

God commanded Noah to build the ark (Genesis 6).  Now, if God had said nothing more to Noah, then he could have obeyed God and built an ark according to his own ideas. But God told Noah what kind of an ark to build.  He gave the dimensions of the ark (Genesis 6).  Noah could not add to the size required, nor diminish from it, without sinning in so doing.  But if God had said nothing more than this, Noah could have built the ark of metal, wood, skins of animals, or whatever he saw fit.  But God did not leave these matters to human judgment.  He said build the ark of “wood.”  This excluded metal, animal skins, etc., on the grounds that such things were not authorized.  They did not have to be excluded by special mention.  God did not have to say, “Thou shalt not use any of the following,” then name all the building materials in the universe.

Wood of His Choice

If God had commanded Noah to simply build the ark of “wood,” Noah could have used the wood of his choice.  He could have used pine, cedar, or any wood available.  Furthermore, he would have been obligated because of his interest in the ark and his salvation thereby, to use the best wood available.  But God did not leave the kind of wood to human wisdom: He said build it of “GOPHER wood” (Genesis 6:14).  This excluded all other kinds of wood.  Noah could not have used pine in flooring the ark, and gopher wood in the rest of the building.  He could not have claimed that his authority for pine rested in it as an “aid.”  Pine could not aid him in building an ark of “gopher wood.”  Hence the pine had to be left out entirely.  To floor the ark with pine would have been a plain addition to the word of God.  A so-called “aid” is excluded when it becomes an addition to the will of God, for it is a sin to add to God’s way (Deuteronomy 4:2; 2 John 9; Revelation 22:18, 19).

But There Were Aids

Some things were left to Noah’s judgment.  God did not command Noah to use tools in building the ark, yet tools were implied and essential.  Saws, hammers, etc., were legitimate aids in doing the thing required.  The same is true of a sled, wagon, cart, or an ox or some other animal, with which to haul or drag the “‘gopher wood” to the right place.  The use of the expedients would not have been in the same class with the use of pine in the ark, in addition to the gopher required.  To build any part of the ark of pine would have been to substitute pine for the “gopher wood” commanded.  Had Noah made such changes, it never would have been written: “Thus did Noah; according to all that God commanded him, so did he” (Genesis 6:22).

Some Applications

Some today scramble matters in trying to justify their additions to the word of God by labeling them “aids” and “expedients.”  IF THE THING BEING DONE IS NOT AUTHORIZED OF GOD, THEN THE ‘AID” ITSELF CANNOT BE SCRIPTURAL.  One cannot use a scriptural “aid” in doing an unscriptural thing.

The Music Example

The effort to justify the popular use of instrumental music in Christian worship usually includes a scrambling of “aids” and “additions.”  They say the organ is only an “aid” in worship.  But in fact instrumental music is an addition to the vocal music authorized in the New Testament (Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16).  God has not authorized both vocal and instrumental music in Christian worship any more than the use of all kinds of wood was authorized in building the ark. God selected the kind of wood when He said, build it of “gopher wood,” thus excluding other kinds of wood.  Likewise He selected the kind of music for our worship, when he said, “Sing,” thus excluding the other kind of music.

“Aid” Becomes an “Addition”

The organ “aids” in producing instrumental music—a kind of music not commanded in Christian worship.  Hence the organ is an unscriptural aid, enabling one to do an unscriptural thing in worship.  Song books, notes, etc., are true “aids.”  They aid most of us in doing the very thing which God said do, when He said “sing.”  The use of such things does not add an extra item to New Testament worship, as does the organ.  God commanded vocal music.  The organ “aids” in adding instrumental music to the kind commanded.  Our music is “singing,” whether we use the song book or not. If we sing from memory, we are doing what God said when He said “sing.”  But if we use the song book, notes, etc., we are still doing only what God required—we’re “singing.”

Not in Doubt

When Noah built the ark of gopher wood, he not only obeyed God, but did that which was right beyond a doubt.  Had he used pine, he would have been doing that which is questionable.  Likewise, there is no controversy about singing in Christian worship.  All admit this to be scriptural and safe.  The controversy now is over the use of instrumental music in Christian worship.  All those who claim to be plain Christians are united in the belief that singing is right.  There is no argument against singing.  No division exists because of it.  The division and controversy is all over “instrumental” music in worship.  Those who claim to speak where the Bible speaks, and to be silent where the Bible is silent, cannot consistently add instrumental music to the kind of music authorized in the New Testament, which is “singing.”  Therefore the organ aids in adding to New Testament worship, and is not a scriptural “aid.”  No “aid” can be scriptural if it “aids” in doing an unscriptural thing.

Back