For His Name’s Sake

Posted on March 19, 2024 by russellmckinney

The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want. He makes me to lie down in green pastures; He leads me beside the still waters. He restores my soul; He leads me in the paths of righteousness for His name’s sake. (Psalm 23:1-3, N.K.J.V.)

There are a slew of profound truths to be found in these three verses, but I would like to specifically draw your attention to the last part of verse 3. David says of the Lord: “He leads me in the paths of righteousness for His name’s sake.” That makes for an interesting motivation on Christ’s part, doesn’t it?

Of course, I realize that Christ’s name isn’t actually used in these verses. Undoubtedly, though, Jesus had this passage in mind when He said in John 10:11,14,and 27:

I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep…I am the good shepherd; and I know My sheep, and am known by My own…My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. (N.K.J.V.)

And so, Jesus leads Christians in the paths of righteousness for the sake of His own name. This means that He leads Christians in the paths of righteousness so that His name won’t be besmirched, soiled, or damaged. Obviously, Jesus is quiet concerned about His reputation.

Now, does walking in the paths of righteousness help the individual Christian? Yes, it does. Does a Christian walking in the paths of righteousness make the world a better place? Yes, it does. But neither of these motivations is mentioned in Psalm 23:3. The only motivation mentioned is that of Jesus protecting His own name.

In your mind’s eye, go with me back in time to a day in ancient Israel. Let’s tag along as a local shepherd leads a flock of sheep for the day. We don’t have to help the man do his shepherding. All we have to do is observe.

As we walk along behind the shepherd, we see that he seems to be doing an adequate job of leading his sheep. Now it is time, though, for the sheep to eat, and we are interested in how the shepherd will meet that need. We are also aware that once the sheep have filled their stomachs they will want to lie down and rest a while.

Much to our surprise, the shepherd leads the sheep right past a beautiful, green pasture that would provide perfect food and rest for the sheep. For some inexplicable reason, he seems to have another site in mind. Finally, he brings the flock to a rocky, almost barren piece of ground where just a few sparse patches of grass grow here and there. The sheep try to eat, but there just isn’t enough grass. This causes them to give up on the idea and lie down. They don’t get much rest, though, because the ground is far too hard and rocky.

After watching this, we begin to question the shepherd’s judgment. Still, we want to give him the benefit of the doubt and so we wait around until it is time for him to again put the sheep on the move. Now that the sheep have had their allotted time for eating and resting, it is time for them to get some water. We then accompany the flock as the shepherd leads them to an outstanding waterhole. We’ve heard that sheep don’t like rushing waters because they can’t swim very well and are terrified of swift currents, but these waters are still and quiet. This hole is just right.

We watch in amazement, though, as the shepherd shakes his head in disapproval. Evidently, he doesn’t think these waters will suffice. Onward he leads the sheep until finally the sound of a mighty, rushing river is heard. The shepherd picks up his pace, and upon arriving at the river, he brings the sheep to the water’s edge and waits for them to start drinking.

The sheep, however, are overly cautious and won’t go near the dangerous current. This keeps them from getting the water they desperately need. Once the shepherd realizes the sheep aren’t going to drink, he begins again with his leading. Now the sheep are hungry and tired because the shepherd walked them past the green pastures, and they are thirsty because he walked them past the quiet waters. It’s clear to us that the poor animals need to be refreshed, but the shepherd pushes them onward, seemingly oblivious to their plight.

We continue to follow close behind the flock even though by now we are completely bewildered at the shepherd’s actions. Over the remaining course of the day, we watch as the shepherd leads the sheep to places sheep have no business going. He leads them in precarious paths that run along the edges of cliffs. He leads them in dangerous paths that run by places where lions are known to suddenly attack. He leads them in rough paths that run through ditches and briars. Finally, we have seen enough and make our way back to town.

Once we get into town, a man comes to us and says, “You are the people who tagged along and watched the shepherd lead his flock. Tell me, what did you think of his shepherding?” Having seen what we’ve seen, what must our answer be? We must say that the shepherd doesn’t know how to care for sheep. We must say that he is dangerous for sheep. We must say that he is not to be trusted with sheep. The fact of the matter is, it is absolutely impossible for us to recommend that man as a shepherd. We explain this to the fellow who asked our opinion, and our critical words begin making their way through the town. Pretty soon, the shepherd’s reputation is ruined.

Now let’s come back to the present day. I ask you, Christian, what kind of reputation as a shepherd does Jesus desire to have among the people of this world? Answer: He wants to be known as a good shepherd. Okay, so how can He gain such a reputation? To gain it, He must lead us, His sheep, in the paths of righteousness. Therefore, Christian, every time you forego those paths of righteousness, you damage Christ’s name.

Maybe you would say, “But it isn’t right for Jesus to be blamed when He’s not the one who leads the Christian into paths of sin.” Well, you make a good point. The people of this world shouldn’t hold it against Jesus when a Christian refuses to live in a holy manner. The problem, however, is that the people of this world don’t always differentiate between Christian sheep who follow Christ’s leading and Christian sheep who don’t.

You see, Christian, your fellow Christians might understand that Christ is not the leader He can be if you aren’t the follower you ought to be, but there’s no guarantee that lost people will understand it. That’s why, when you stand up and say, “Jesus Christ is my Savior,” you’d better do all you can to ensure that you walk in Christ’s paths of righteousness. You failing at this assignment will not only damage your own name, it will damage Christ’s name. Neither of these things is something you should want, and Christ’s own reputation taking a hit simply because you played the part of a rogue sheep is surely not something He deserves.

Posted in Addiction, Backsliding, Character, Discipleship, Disobedience, Doing Good, Dress and Appearance, God's Will, Influence, Obedience, Personal Holiness, Sanctification, Separation, Sin, Temptation | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

The Right Kind of Meditation

Posted on March 15, 2024 by russellmckinney

We’ve been mining Psalm 1:1-3 for spiritual truth this week. So, here now is one last post on the passage. I’m calling this one “The Right Kind of Meditation.”

The practice of meditation is typically associated with far-eastern religions and the mental exploration of one’s “inner self.” But the Bible has nothing to say about that kind of meditation. The Biblical kind of meditation is described in Psalm 1:2, which says of the godly, blessed man:

But his delight is in the law of the Lord, And in His law he meditates day and night. (N.K.J.V., emphasis mine)

The Hebrew word translated as “meditates” is hagah. Specifically, it refers to the sighs and low sounds a person makes while musing over something. Imagine a man or woman silently reading a line from a book, pausing for a moment to give in-depth consideration to the line, and then lowly saying, “Hmmm…” That catches the idea behind the word.

The application of Psalm 1:2 is three-fold. First, we should devote diligent, somber study to God’s written word. Second, this studying should be done “day and night.” By the way, this doesn’t mean an employee has to quit work and study the Bible full time or that a student has to quit school and only study the Bible. It does mean, though, that we should make time during the day and night to study the holy scriptures. And then third, even more than just making time to study the scriptures, our studying should be serious enough to cause us to say, “Hmmm…” as God’s truths are driven deep into our hearts.

It’s been said that we hold our Bibles high but rarely open them. The average person’s Bible study might even be compared to the eating habits of a certain tribe of backwoods Aborigines in Australia. The explorers and researchers who discovered this tribe studied the tribe’s cultural habits and noticed that by age thirty the adults had practically no teeth. Further study gave the reason for this odd condition. It was learned that the tribe enjoyed cooking meat in the open sand with water and fire, and the meat was eaten with the sand actually clinging to it. As a result, by the time the adults reached the age of thirty, the years of having their teeth ground away by all that sand left them for the most part toothless. This meant that the children had to chew the meat in advance and give it to the adults. This, of course, kept the vicious cycle going because those children wouldn’t have any teeth left when they got to be adults.

That story describes a lot of people’s relationship to the Bible. They want someone else to “chew” the scriptures for them. They want someone else to put in the hard work of studying and then hand them all that knowledge and understanding. In that way, these people never have to meditate upon the scriptures themselves. They can grab a bite here and there from a sermon or a commentary and receive their nourishment that way.

I’m certainly not saying that preachers and teachers don’t have their place in God’s plan. No, everyone ought to enjoy the fruits of the labors of good, solid, doctrinally straight preachers and teachers. But what I am saying is that you need to study the Bible yourself as well. Fine meat might still taste good after it’s been chewed on by someone else, but doesn’t it make for a more pleasurable dining experience when you do your own chewing?

Posted in Bible Study, Discipleship, God's Word, Preaching, Scripture, Teaching, The Bible | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Sin’s Progression

Posted on March 13, 2024 by russellmckinney

Blessed is the man Who walks not in the counsel of the ungodly, Nor stands in the path of sinners, Nor sits in the seat of the scornful; (Psalm 1:1, N.K.J.V.)

In my previous post, I outlined Psalm 1:1-3 under the title “Blessedness.” Now, with this post, I’d like to narrow the microscope down onto one particular aspect of that passage and offer a word about sin’s progression. What do I mean by “sin’s progression”? I mean that hardened sinners don’t get that way overnight. No, they become hardened in their sin by way of a definite progression of events.

First, the individual in question gets counsel from an ungodly person and puts that wrong counsel into action. That gets him started walking in the wrong direction. That’s why Psalm 1:1 speaks of walking in the counsel of the ungodly.

Second, walking in that unwise counsel takes the individual off the path of God’s will and onto the path of sinners. That’s bad enough, but once he is on that path, he finds that he enjoys the sin. Consequently, he decides to stand around for a while in that path. So, now he’s stopped walking the path of sinners and is, instead, standing on it.

Third, sometime later, the individual gets tired from constantly standing on the path of sinners and chooses to actually sit down on that path. Psalm 1:1 describes this as sitting in the seat of the scornful. That term “the scornful” refers to the most hardened and calloused sinners who occupy that path. You see, when the individual takes his seat with them, he is settling in for a lengthy stay to become a fellow member of that group.

To use a specific sin to illustrate how this sad progression might play out in real life, let’s say that a husband is considering having an affair. He’s having some trouble in his marriage, and there is a woman at work who seems to be just what he needs. Well, rather than seek out wise counsel from a godly person who knows the Bible and how to apply it to life, this husband gets counsel from an ungodly buddy of his. This buddy has been married and divorced three times and had numerous affairs over the course of those marriages. Naturally, the buddy tells the tempted husband, “Have the affair. You’ll be glad you lived a little.”

Now the husband has a choice to make. Will he walk in that ungodly counsel by having the one-night stand with the coworker? Or will he keep himself safely inside the confines of God’s will for his life? Tragically, the husband makes the wrong choice and opts to have the one-night stand. In doing that, he is walking in the counsel of the ungodly.

Okay, what happens next? The husband discovers that he enjoys the one-night stand very much. Not only does he keep the affair under wraps, he finds that the sneaking around is exciting! This leads him to start meeting once or twice a week for sexual rendezvouses with the coworker. What’s he doing now? He is standing in the path of sinners as his rebellion toward God has become deeper and more concrete.

Then, somewhere along the way, that adulterous husband goes from standing in the path of sinners to sitting down in the seat of the scornful. He becomes cynical and hardened. In some illogical way, he’s angry at God because God didn’t give him a “happily-ever-after” marriage. This causes him to start mocking the things of God and despising anything remotely spiritual.

Do you see the progression of sin? First, there is the walking. Then there is the standing. Finally, there is the sitting down. That is sin’s progression.

And would you believe the story doesn’t even end there? Sadly, it begins anew and repeats itself on another victim. Sticking with the example of the adulterous husband, when a young man naively asks the hardened, scornful sinner about marriage, he sarcastically answers, “Yeah, that’s what you need to do. Go and get married. Hook yourself up to that old ball and chain.” That answer, of course, comes under the category “the counsel of the ungodly,” and the naive potential groom then has to make his own decision as to whether or not to walk in it and begin his own line of sin’s progression.

Posted in Adultery, Backsliding, Choices, Counsel, Doing Good, Holiness, Husbands, Influence, Marriage, Personal Holiness, Repentance, Seeking Advice, Sin, Temptation | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Blessedness

Posted on March 11, 2024 by russellmckinney

Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor stands in the path of sinners, nor sits in the seat of the scornful. But his delight is in the law of the Lord, and in His law he meditates day and night. He shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that brings forth its fruit in it season, whose leaf also shall not wither. And whatever he does shall prosper. (Psalm 1:1-3, N.K.J.V.)

Let me begin by pointing out that the proper pronunciation of the first word of this passage is “bless-ed” rather than “blessed” (as in “blest”). You see, the Bible uses one Hebrew word to refer to “bless-ed” and another to refer to “blessed.” The Hebrew word for “blessed” is barak, and it is used in passages such as Genesis 1:28, which says of Adam and Eve: “And God blessed them.” Notably, however, the Hebrew word used n Psalm 1:1 is esher, a word that means happy, fortunate, enviable, or prosperous.

Actually, esher is plural. This explains why it’s been suggested that esher might accurately be translated “blessednesses.” The point is, esher speaks of more than just one blessing. The person who is esher abides in a continual state of experiencing blessing after blessing as there is a multiplicity of blessings that rest upon the person. Trust me, you’d rather be “bless-ed” than just “blessed.”

But how does a person become “bless-ed”? Well, this passage gives us three main thoughts for an answer. Let’s walk through them together.

First, in verse 1 we are given a word about: the “bless-ed” person in relation to SEPARATION. “Bless-ed” people are marked by things they don’t do, deeds from which they keep themselves separate. Clearly, the book of Psalms opens by dispelling the notion that the sinful life is the good life.

Three negatives are mentioned. Negative #1 is: Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the ungodly. Tell me, who do you look to for advice? Is that person a godly person? Is that person living under the lordship of Jesus Christ? Is that person highly knowledgeable of what the Bible teaches? Is that person wise in applying the Bible to everyday life? Is that person really in tune with the Lord?

Negative #2 is: Blessed is the man who does not stand in the path of sinners. There is a path of sin in which the ungodly stand, and them standing in this path shows that their sinfulness isn’t just a one-time slip up. To the contrary, they are engaged in a daily, continual lifestyle of sin. Instead of trying to get off the path of sinners, they continually stand in it.

Negative #3 is: Blessed is the man who does not sit in the seat of the scornful. The Hebrew word translated as “scornful” is luwts. It can also be translated as “mockers” or “scoffers.” These scornful, mocking, scoffing people have unfiltered contempt for God, His ways, and His standards. Mention is made of such a person having a seat because he is thoroughly settled and fixed in his disgust toward God.

The passage’s second main thought concerns: the “bless-ed” person in relation to SCRIPTURE. Verse 2 says of the “bless-ed” man: “But his delight is in the law of the Lord, and in His law he meditates day and night.” The phrase “the law of the Lord” refers to that body of law God gave the people of Israel through Moses. That law was written down, which meant that it was the “Bible” by which the Israelites lived. Obviously, the fact that us modern-day believers have a completed “Bible” to consult should result in us delighting in God’s written words even more than those Jews did. Putting it simply, if you want to be blessed, love the scriptures and learn the scriptures.

Finally, the text’s third main thought deals with: the “bless-ed” person in relation to SUCCESS. Here the passage shifts from talking about things the “bless-ed” person does and doesn’t do and offers, instead, a simile (as evidenced by the use of the word “like”) to describe the results of the person’s blessedness. As verse 3 says: “He shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that brings forth its fruit in its season; whose leaf also shall not wither; and whatever he does shall prosper.”

Why doesn’t this tree wither away? It can’t wither because it is planted by rivers of water. That location ensures that the tree will always bring forth its fruit in season just when it should. Even its leaves don’t wither, which serves as further evidence of the tree’s health and vibrancy. This all makes for a beautiful description of the “bless-ed” person’s life.

Then the description gets even better! The end of verse 3 says that whatever the blessed person does shall prosper. Unfortunately, some people take this to mean that all a godly person has to do is take his or her wish list to God, have the necessary amount of faith, and wait for God to grant the wishes. Actually, however, God’s idea of prospering isn’t so simplistic.

We can best understand “whatever he does shall prosper” by looking at the life of Joseph. Did you know that even when Joseph was wrongly sold into slavery God called him a prosperous man and caused whatever he did to prosper? Genesis 39:2-3 says:

And the Lord was with Joseph, and he was a prosperous man; and he was in the house of his master the Egyptian. And his master saw that the Lord was with him, and that the Lord made all that he did to prosper in his hand. And Joseph found grace in his sight, and he served him: and he made him overseer of his house, and all that he had he put into his hand. (K.J.V., emphasis mine)

The Hebrew word used to describe the prosperity God gave Joseph is the exact same word, esher, that is used in verse 3 of our text. Therefore, when you understand what God did for Joseph, even as Joseph was a servant in the house of Potiphar, you will understand the kind of prosperity God bestows upon the “bless-ed” person.

As for what kind of prosperity that was, let’s consider the facts. When Joseph was a servant in Potiphar’s house, did Joseph have a lot of money in his bank account? Absolutely not! Did he have a wife and children? No. Was he a man of prestige and standing in the community? Nope. Still, though, God described him as a prosperous man.

Ultimately, Joseph did become rich beyond his wildest dreams as God made him the second most powerful man in all of Egypt, second only to Pharaoh himself. Also, God gave him a wife and two fine sons. Nevertheless, these later blessings and more obvious prosperity don’t cancel out the fact that Joseph was “bless-ed” and prosperous even before the power, wealth, and beautiful family. And so it is with any saved believer who truly lives the requirements of Psalm 1:1-3.

Posted in Adversity, Bible Study, Character, Discipleship, Doing Good, Faithfulness, God's Word, Holiness, Money, Obedience, Persecution, Personal Holiness, Prosperity, Reward, Sanctification, Scripture, Separation, Service, The Bible, Trials, Trusting In God | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Oral Roberts & “Seed Faith” Giving

Posted on March 8, 2024 by russellmckinney

Oral Roberts was undoubtedly one of the most famous preachers America has ever produced. He died on December 15th, 2009, at the age of 91, after 70+ years of ministry. As we look back over the totality of that ministry, it isn’t hard to spot both good and bad.

On the good side of the ledger, Roberts preached Jesus, reminded people of what the Bible teaches about Christ’s miracle-working power, and played a major role in bringing the church into the age of television. On the bad side, he gave many prophecies that turned out to be false, claimed to have performed literal resurrections and other miraculous healings, founded a religious empire that has frequently been associated with accusations of financial malfeasance, and was the originator of the “seed faith” approach to giving.

It is that “seed faith” approach to giving that I want to focus on in this post.

The basic idea with “seed faith” giving goes like this:

#1. The Christian generously gives his money to support a ministry (for example, the Oral Roberts ministry). This is called “sowing a seed.”

#2. The Christian has faith that God will return to him a greater harvest than the original “seed amount.”

#3. God rewards the faith and sends the greater harvest. This greater harvest can come by way of a job promotion, a sudden windfall of money, etc.

#4. With the increased wealth, the Christian can begin the process all over again by giving an even larger “seed amount” of money to the ministry.

#5. With more “seed” with which to work, God can reward the Christian with a harvest even bigger than the first one.

#6. Out of that greater harvest, the Christian can send yet another increased amount of money to the ministry and, subsequently, receive an even bigger harvest.

#7. From there, it’s basically a rinse-and-repeat cycle as the cumulative process keeps rolling along and the Christian, as well as the ministry, keeps getting wealthier and wealthier.

Oral Roberts claimed that Jesus Himself revealed the “seed faith” principle to him. Supposedly, Jesus did this by explaining to him how to rightly interpret Acts 20:35, the verse that quotes Jesus as saying, “It is more blessed to give than to receive.” According to Roberts, Jesus told him that translation doesn’t properly convey what He meant. Instead of it being more blessed to give than receive, it is more productive to give than to receive. At least that’s what Oral Roberts said Jesus told him.

Decade after decade, Roberts taught “seed faith” giving as part of his push to bring his brand of “health and wealth” Pentecostalism into the mainstream of Christianity in America. He preached “seed faith” giving in his crusades. He promoted it as part of his televangelism broadcasts. He wrote more than 130 books, many of which were variations on the teaching. In 1963, he also founded Oral Roberts University, a university that has churned out new “seed faith” preachers ever since. Most notable among those preachers are Joel Osteen and Kenneth Copeland.

Oral served as the President of Oral Roberts University until 1992. At that point, the school’s regents elected Oral’s son, Richard, to be the University’s second President. Richard had been serving as an integral part of his father’s ministry team for many years prior, frequently being featured as a singer in his father’s crusades and on his father’s television and radio broadcasts. He had also been elected President of the Oral Roberts Evangelistic Association in 1985 after his father had stepped down from that position.

Richard had married his first wife, Patti, on November 27, 1968, but by Richard’s own admission, that marriage had been a mistake. Despite the fact that the couple had produced two children together, the marriage had ended with Patti filing for divorce in 1978. Richard had then married his current wife, Lindsay, in 1980.

In her book Ashes To Gold, Patti reflects back on her days as Oral’s daughter-in-law. She talks about how guilty she felt about the excessive wealth the Roberts family enjoyed, and she seriously questions the validity of “seed-faith” giving. She says the “seed faith” teaching:

…bothered me a great deal because I saw that, when taken to extremes, it reduced God to a sugar daddy. If you wanted His blessings and His love, you paid Him off. Over and over again we heard Oral say, ‘Give out of your need.’ I began to question the motivation that kind of giving implied. Were we giving to God out of our love and gratitude to Him or were we bartering with Him?

Patti also pointed out that “seed faith” giving was promoted on every television broadcast produced by the Roberts’ broadcasting empire, whereas the Gospel itself was rarely given. For example, here’s a typical quote from Richard Roberts as he tried to get his audience to support the Oral Roberts Ministry by way of a financial gift:

Sow a seed on your MasterCard, your Visa or your American Express, and then when you do, expect God to open the windows of heaven and pour you out a blessing.

It should be understood, however, that Oral Roberts’ ministry was merely the fountainhead of what quickly became a massive river of “seed faith” preaching. Over the years, the water flowed out to wherever Pentecostal and Charismatic churches and ministries were found, and Paul and Jan Crouch’s TBN broadcasting empire sent it around the world. Today, thousands of “prosperity preachers” now preach “seed faith” giving every bit as fervently as Oral Roberts ever did.

But the central question remains: Is the doctrine of “seed faith” giving Biblical? In one corner, we’ve heard from Oral Roberts. In another corner, we’ve heard from his former daughter-in-law, Patti. This leaves us to ask, “What does God say?” And His ruling, revealed through His written word, is that the “seed faith” approach to giving, an approach that should lead every Christian to great wealth, is a lie. Let me prove that to you.

First, I’ll describe the earthly life of Jesus. Luke 9:57-58 says:

Now it happened as they journeyed on the road, that someone said to Him, “Lord, I will follow You wherever You go.” And Jesus said to him, “Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay His head.” (N.K.J.V.)

These verses certainly don’t describe an earthly life of wealth, do they? Jesus didn’t own a house. He didn’t have a lot of money. He didn’t live lavishly.

As you read the gospels, you will see that Jesus ate with anyone who would invite Him to eat, spent many a night outside, and probably had just one set of clothes. He rode into Jerusalem on a borrowed donkey. He and His disciples observed the Lord’s Supper in a borrowed room. After His death, His body was laid in a borrowed tomb.

As a matter of fact, rather than promoting the importance of worldly wealth, Jesus warned of the dangers of it. He said, “Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal; but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal” (Matthew 6:19-20, N.K.J.V.). He also said, “Assuredly, I say to you that it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. And again I say to you it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God” (Matthew 19:23-24, N.K.J.V.).

These quotes certainly don’t sound like the words of one who was preaching earthly prosperity as a byproduct of salvation, do they? The fact is, you won’t find a verse where Jesus says, “Follow me, and I’ll put money in your pockets.” Neither will you find one where He says, “Believe in me as Savior, and your financial woes will be over.”

Instead, what you will find is Christ’s constant downplaying of money. In His story of the beggar Lazarus and the rich man, it is the rich man whose soul ends up in Hell (Luke 16:19-31). In His story of the rich man who planned to tear down his overflowing barns and build bigger barns, God comes to that rich man and says, “You fool, this night your soul will be required of you: then whose shall these things be?” (Luke 12:13-21, N.K.J.V.).

This was the earthly life of Christ, and it certainly doesn’t line up with the idea that God wants to make every Christian rich. If anything, Jesus taught that the love of money is one of the primary hindrances to people being all that God wants them to be. Try fitting that into the whole mindset of “seed faith” giving.

Second, I’ll describe the lives of the apostles. In 1 Corinthians 4:9-13, we find some verses in which Paul vividly describes the life of an apostle. He writes:

For I think that God has displayed us, the apostles, last, as men condemned to death; for we have been made a spectacle to the world, both to angels and to men. We are fools for Christ’s sake, but you are wise in Christ! We are weak, but you are strong! You are distinguished, but we are dishonored! To the present hour we both hunger and thirst, and we are poorly clothed, and beaten, and homeless. And we labor, working with our own hands. Being reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we endure; being defamed, we entreat. We have been made as the filth of the world, the offscouring of all things until now. (N.K.J.V.)

Tell me, does that description sound like the apostles lived lives of wealth, ease, and luxury? It surely doesn’t! Well, was that because they just didn’t understand about “seed faith” giving? No, it was because it is not God’s will for all Christians to be monetarily rich.

Third, I’ll describe the lives of the Smyrna Christians. In Revelation 2:8-9, the risen, glorified Jesus gives a message for the apostle John to relay to the Christians who were living in Smyrna. That message was:

“And to the angel of the church in Smyrna write, These things says the First and the Last, who was dead, and came to life: ‘I know your works, tribulation, and poverty (but you are rich); and I know the blasphemy of those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan.’” (N.K.J.V.)

Notice that Jesus said to those Christians, “I know your poverty, but actually you are rich.” The interpretation isn’t difficult. Those Christians were poor in an earthly sense but rich in an eternal sense through the treasures laid up for them in heaven.

Jesus didn’t say to those people, “If you will give in faith, you will get that gift back with an increase.” He didn’t even say to them, “I know your poverty, and I’m going to do something about it.” What He said was, “I know your poverty, but don’t forget that you are actually rich.” For many Christians today, this same “Smyrna truth” applies: poor on earth but rich in heaven.

Fourth, I’ll describe the life of Timothy. In 1 Timothy 6: 3-10, Paul has some very telling things to say about money and worldly riches. He writes:

If anyone teaches otherwise and does not consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which accords with godliness, he is proud, knowing nothing, but is obsessed with disputes and arguments over words, from which come envy, strife, reviling, evil suspicions, useless wrangling of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain. From such withdraw yourself. Now godliness with contentment is great gain. For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out. And having food and clothing, with these we shall be content. But those who desire to be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts which drown men in destruction and perdition. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, for which some have strayed from the faith in their greediness, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. (N.K.J.V.)

Whatever else we might bring out of these verses, let’s at least get it settled that Paul did not say, “Timothy, God wants you to be rich in the wealth of the world. Why aren’t you?” What he said was, “Timothy, work at being content with having food and clothing.”

On the subject of “prosperity preachers,” let me say that I especially like the way the New Living Translation describes those false teachers to whom Paul was referring. In verse 5, it reads:

These people always cause trouble. Their minds are corrupt, and they don’t tell the truth. To them religion is just a way to get rich. (N.L.T.)

Now, as I begin to close, I’d like to point out that the Bible does provide us with many examples of believers who were rich by the standards of the world. Abraham was rich. Joseph was rich. Job was rich. Solomon was rich. Joseph of Arimathea was rich. So, I’m not saying that it isn’t God’s will for any Christian to be monetarily rich. What I’m saying is that no Christian has a right to expect or demand worldly wealth from God. Such wealth isn’t a matter of the Christian getting under the teaching of the right preacher, and it certainly isn’t a matter of lining up with the “seed faith” plan of giving.

When it comes to attaining worldly wealth, the Bible talks about things like: hard work, saving, giving a right portion back to God, paying your bills, giving to the poor, and avoiding sin. There’s even a bit here and there about wise investing. These things are the building blocks to getting rich in this world. It’s not about sending $100 to the Oral Roberts ministry or any other ministry and expecting God to reward you with a ten-fold, fifty-fold, or one-hundred-fold harvest on that original “seed.”

Truth be told, Oral Roberts’ false doctrine didn’t even work for him. In 1989, his City of Faith Medical Center was forced to close due to a lack of funds. The Center, which cost $250 million to build, reportedly drained the Roberts organization of $30 to $40 million per year. This was the cause of Oral’s infamous 1989 fundraising drive in which he announced to a television audience that God would “call him home” if the sum of $8 million wasn’t raised by March. Even though $9.1 million was raised, the City of Faith still closed not long afterwards. In light of the closure, onlookers were left to conclude that either Oral Roberts didn’t practice what he preached in regards to “seed faith” giving or the whole approach to giving simply doesn’t work. As for me, I might have my suspicions about the former but I have no doubt whatsoever about the latter.

Posted in Bible Study, Business, Contentment, Giving, Money, Reward, Seed Faith Giving, Sowing and Reaping, Stewardship | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Five Good Questions About Water Baptism

Posted on March 6, 2024 by russellmckinney

There is much debate and confusion concerning water baptism. This is sad because the subject is such an important aspect of Christianity. Only by going to the Bible and studying all of the passages that relate to the issue can we get at the truth. When we do this, we find the answers to five fundamental questions.

Question #1: Who is qualified for water baptism?

The Bible plainly teaches that only born-again Christians can rightly submit to water baptism. To be born again, one must put saving belief (faith) in Jesus Christ (John 1:12-13; 3:3; 3:16-18; 1 John 5:1). Born-again Christians are people who have heard the gospel of Christ, felt God the Holy Spirit’s conviction in regards to their sins, seen themselves as sinners bound for hell, understood that Jesus (God the Son) died in payment for their sins, and genuinely believed in Jesus as their personal Savior. This belief (faith) in Jesus brings eternal forgiveness and salvation to the individual (John 3:16; Acts 10:43; Romans 1:16-17; Galatians 3:26; Ephesians 2:8-9; 1 John 5:1,13).

Such “believers” are qualified for water baptism because they have experienced Holy Spirit baptism (Matthew 3:11; John 7:37-39; Acts 1:5; 10:44-48; 1 Corinthians 12:13). Holy Spirit baptism is God the Holy Spirit taking up residence within the person who has put saving belief in Christ. This happens at the initial moment of the saving belief. Actually, it is Holy Spirit baptism that produces the “new birth” that makes one a born-again Christian. It is nonsense for people to claim to be Christians if they haven’t experienced Holy Spirit baptism (Acts 11:15-18; 15:6-8; Romans 5:5; 8:8-11, 8:14-16; 1 Corinthians 6:19; 2 Corinthians 1:22; 3:3; 5:5; Galatians 4:6; Ephesians 1:13-14; Ephesians 4:30; 1 Thessalonians 4:8; 2 Timothy 1:14; 1 John 3:23-24; 4:12-13).

All of this means that the common practice of baptizing infants is wrong. Likewise, it is equally wrong to baptize any adult who hasn’t put legitimate saving belief in Christ. The fact is that anyone, regardless of age, race, or religion, who hasn’t been baptized with the Holy Spirit has no business whatsoever being baptized in water. This is why water baptism is oftentimes rightly referred to as “believer’s baptism.”

Question #2: Does a person have to submit to water baptism to be saved?

No. The New Testament provides us with approximately 200 verses that teach that salvation comes through belief (faith) in Christ. Many passages use the word “faith” while others use words such “belief,” “believe,” or “believed.” Obviously, these words are interchangeable in regards to the salvation experience.

If water baptism played any part whatsoever in salvation we would find it consistently mentioned in the Bible whenever the plan of salvation is presented. What we find, instead, is the exact opposite. For example, the apostle Paul admitted that he didn’t even do much baptizing (1 Corinthians 1:13-17). Likewise, he didn’t mention water baptism when he gave the Corinthians his definition of the gospel (1 Corinthians 15:1-11). Paul’s words and actions seem very strange if water baptism is required for salvation. Paul was like Jesus, who didn’t baptize anyone Himself (John 4:1-2).

It’s true that Peter mentioned water baptism in the invitation he gave as part of his famous sermon on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:37-38), but he didn’t mention it in other sermons he preached (Acts 3:12-26; 5:29-32; 10:34-43). As a matter of fact, the Bible even points out that those who were saved after hearing the Pentecost sermon were saved by belief (Acts 2:44).

To contend that water baptism is vital to salvation is to create two plans of salvation. Summarizing the matter simply, the people of the Old Testament age, not being baptized, would have been saved in a different way than the people of the New Testament age. Actually, even the people who placed saving belief in Jesus during His three-and-a-half-year earthly ministry did not experience Christian baptism unless they later did so once the church age was begun following His death, resurrection, and ascension. That group included the apostles.

While it’s true that many of those pre-crucifixion believers were baptized in the Jordan river by John the Baptist, John’s baptism was not Christian baptism. Any individual baptized by John was merely making a public profession of repentance (Matthew 3:4-12; Mark 1:4-5; Acts 10:34-37; 18:24-25; 19:1-5). This repentance was supposed to prepare the individual to accept the Messiah (Jesus), who was soon to come and offer salvation (Matthew 3:11-12; Luke 7:24-30). This explains why John was hesitant to baptize Jesus (Matthew 3:13-14). John knew that Jesus had no sins for which He needed to repent and that He was the Messiah.

Getting back to the Old Testament believers, despite the fact that they did not experience Christian baptism, they were saved (Psalm 23:6; Luke 7:37-50; 23:39-43; Hebrews 11:1-40). There is even an entire chapter (Romans chapter 4) that is devoted to the teaching that salvation has always been through saving belief (faith) in the one, true Lord. That’s how every saved person from Adam to today’s Christians got saved.

Finally, one last piece of evidence that proves that water baptism isn’t a requirement for salvation is the fact that no one can baptize himself or herself. This means that a third party, someone besides the believer and Christ, factors into the salvation equation. This sets up the possibility of some unthinkable scenarios.

For example, what if a pastor, for whatever wrong reason, refused to baptize a genuine believer? That would put that believer in a bad spot because he or she wouldn’t actually get saved until they could find a pastor who would baptize them. Or what if a person believed in Jesus as Savior during the winter and couldn’t be baptized until the spring because his church did its baptizing in the local river and the river was full of ice? And what if that person died while waiting for warmer weather to be baptized? Are we going to say that the soul of such a person would end up in hell simply because he or she picked the wrong time of the year to believe in Jesus? Or what if a person believed in Jesus as Savior on his death bed, mere moments before dying, and went out into eternity without being baptized because there wasn’t a preacher there on the scene who could drag that person out of the hospital bed and get him or her to a bathtub for baptism?

Do you see what I mean? To make water baptism a necessary part of salvation is to throw the door wide open for some bizarre scenarios, all of which could end in sincere believers dying and going to hell. But all that gets eliminated when the salvation experience is understood to involve only the individual and the Lord.

Question #3: Why should the Christian submit to water baptism?

If water baptism isn’t a requirement for salvation, why should the Christian submit to it? He or she should do so because water baptism is a beautiful object lesson. Let me explain.

On the one hand, water baptism shows what has happened in the Christian’s EARTHLY existence. First, in going under the water, the Christian is publicly saying, “I am now dead to sin in regards to my way of life” (Romans 6:1-2; 6:6-7; 6:11-14). (The waters of baptism have even been called “a liquid tomb.”) Second, in coming up from under the water, the Christian is saying, “I am now alive to walk in the newness of the Christian life” (Romans 6:4; 6:6; 6:8; 6:10-14). This all speaks to the Christ’s earthly existence.

On the other hand, water baptism also shows what will happen in the Christian’s ETERNAL existence. First, in going under the water, the Christian is publicly identifying himself or herself with Christ’s death and burial (Romans 6:3-5; 6:8). Second, in coming up from under the water, the Christian is publicly identifying himself or herself with Christ’s resurrection from the dead (Romans 6:5; 6:8-9). You see, by submitting to water baptism, the Christian is saying, “I know that Christ will not leave my body in the grave and that my body will one day be gloriously resurrected, just as His body was” (1 Corinthians 15:20-24; 15:42-50).

Understanding how water baptism is a two-fold object lesson makes it easy to understand why Jesus commanded that those won to Him should submit to it (Matthew 28:19). The Bible even says that a Christian can be saved from a guilty conscience toward God only by submitting to water baptism (1 Peter 3:21). If the Christian refuses water baptism, he or she will eventually feel guilty about the disobedience (Luke 6:46; John 15:14; James 4:16).

In the days of the early church, those who believed in Christ as Savior were expected to immediately submit to water baptism (Mark 16:15-16; Acts 2:37-41; 8:12; 8:26-40; 9:17-18; 10:44-49; 16:14-15; 16:25-34; 18:8; 19:1-7). Keep in mind that the early Christians had no church buildings, pews, aisles, or altars. Therefore, a water baptism in public was a profound way for an individual to openly confess Christ as Savior (Matthew 10:32). For that matter, it still is!

Question #4: What mode of water baptism is correct?

Total immersion is the only mode of water baptism described in the Bible. This is seen not only in the passages that describe John the Baptist’s baptisms (Matthew 3:13-16; John 3:23) but also in the passage that describes Phillip baptizing the Ethiopian eunuch in the days of the early church (Acts 8:35-39). Putting it bluntly, the modes of sprinkling and pouring are just not scriptural.

Those who would object to this interpretation need to remember that it’s baptism’s object lesson that makes the mode so important. Again, water baptism is supposed to depict the Christian’s symbolic death and burial to sin as well as Christ’s literal death and burial. Accordingly, total immersion in the water is the only mode that truly pictures death and burial. When we bury a corpse, we don’t just sprinkle or pour a bit of dirt over that body. Instead, we immerse that body completely in the ground.

Question #5: What words should be said during water baptism?

Frankly, the exact words said during a water baptism don’t seem to be nearly as important as the mode. Consider the following:

Jesus told His followers to baptize “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19).

Peter told a group of Jews to be baptized “in the name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 2:38).

Peter told a group of Gentiles to be baptized “in the name of the Lord” (Acts 10:48).

Paul baptized a group of believers “in the name of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 19:5).

Most churches use the Matthew 28:19 words. This verse is also one of the Bible’s proof texts that God is one God who exists in three distinct personages. In the verse, Jesus says to His disciples, “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name (singular) of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” You see, there is no need to immerse the believer three times into the water. To do so is to confuse the fact that God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are One. Furthermore, it is to miss the fact that corpses aren’t buried three times.

Posted in Baptism, Belief, Bible Study, Christ's Death, Christ's Resurrection, Church, Conscience, Doctrine, Faith, Obedience, Salvation, The Holy Spirit | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

God Is Watching

Posted on March 4, 2024 by russellmckinney

It was lunchtime at a Catholic elementary school, and a large pile of apples was placed on a tray at the head of the long table upon which the food was placed. A note posted on the tray read: “Take only ONE. God is watching.” As the children moved further along the lunch line and got to the other end of the long table, they found a large plate of chocolate chip cookies. There, one mischievous child had written a note that read: “Take all you want. God is watching the apples.”

I hope you know that God can watch the apples and the cookies at the same time. The theological word for Him being everywhere at the same time all the time is omnipresent. This word combines two words omni (all) and present (in a particular place).

But how can God be omnipresent? He can do so because He is not a physical being. He is Spirit (John 4:24) rather than Body. This doesn’t mean He cannot assume bodily form if He chooses to do so. Proof of this can be found in God the Son’s frequent Old Testament appearances as The Angel of the Lord (Genesis 16:7-17; 22:11-18; Exodus 3:1-22; etc.) and in Him being born to the virgin Mary. As for God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, however, they remain eternally Spirit.

Charles Ryrie, in his book Basic Theology, writes the following about God’s omnipresence:

…omnipresence does not mean that God’s being is diffused throughout the universe as if part of Him is here and part of Him there. His whole being is in every place, and the presence of the Lord within every believer serves as a good illustration of this.

Omnipresence does not mean the immediacy of His presence does not vary. It does. His presence on His throne (Rev. 4:2), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chron. 7:2), or in the believer (Gal. 2:20) certainly differs in its immediacy from His presence in the lake of fire (Rev. 14:10). Though in the lake of fire people will be separated from the face-presence of God (2 Thes. 1:9, prosopon), they will never be separated from Him who is omnipresent (Rev. 14:10, enopion).

The Bible’s most extensive passage on the subject of God’s omnipresence is Psalm 139:7-12, where David says to God:

Where can I go from Your Spirit? Or where can I flee from Your presence? If I ascend into heaven, You are there; If I make my bed in hell, behold You are there. If I take the wings of the morning, And dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, Even there Your hand shall lead me, And Your right hand shall hold me. If I say, “Surely the darkness shall fall on me,” Even the night shall be light about me; Indeed, the darkness shall not hide from You, But the night shines as the days; The darkness and the light are both alike to You. (N.K.J.V.)

Jeremiah 23:23-24 also speaks to the fact of God’s omnipresence. That passage says:

“Am I only a God nearby,” declares the Lord, and not a God far away? Who can hide in secret places so that I cannot see them?” declares the Lord. “Do not I fill heaven and earth?” declares the Lord. (N.I.V.)

So, if you will permit me to play off my opening illustration, take all you want of some sin today, but just know that God is watching. He fills heaven and earth and doesn’t miss one thing you do either for good or bad. If you will keep this simple fact in mind as you move through each day, you’ll be surprised at how it helps you live a more godly life.

Posted in Backsliding, Character, Choices, Conscience, Decisions, Disobedience, Doing Good, God's Omnipresence, Man's Freewill, Obedience, Personal Holiness, Rebellion, Sin | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Great One-Liners

Posted on March 2, 2024 by russellmckinney

Several years ago, a friend of mine handed me a list of spiritual one-liners. I want to share that list with you. I have no idea where my friend got these, but there’s some good stuff here.

Don’t let your worries get the best of you; remember, Moses started out as a basket case.

Some people are kind, polite, and sweet-spirited until you try to sit in their pews.

It is easier to preach ten sermons than it is to live one.

The good Lord didn’t create anything without a purpose, but mosquitoes come close.

When you get to your wit’s end, you’ll find that God lives there.

People are funny; they want the front of the bus, the middle of the road, and the back of the church.

Opportunity may knock once, but temptation bangs on your front door forever.

Quit griping about your church; if it was perfect, you couldn’t belong.

If the church wants a better pastor, it only needs to pray for the one it has.

Some minds are like concrete, thoroughly mixed up and permanently set.

Peace starts with a smile.

Be ye fishers of men. You catch them – God will clean them.

Forbidden fruits create many jams.

God grades on the cross, not the curve.

God loves everyone, but probably prefers “the fruit of the Spirit” over “religious nuts.”

God promises a safe landing, not a calm passage.

He who angers you controls you.

Don’t give God instructions – just report for duty.

The task ahead of us is never as great as the Power behind us.

The will of God never takes you to where the grace of God can’t protect you.

We don’t change the message, the message changes us.

You can tell how big a person is by what it takes to discourage him.

The best mathematical equation ever is: 1 cross + 3 nails = 4 given.

Posted in Humor, Personal | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Is the King James Version God’s “Perfect” Word?

Posted on February 29, 2024 by russellmckinney

There are some Christians who staunchly believe the King James Version of the Bible is a “perfect” translation. This belief is called “King James onlyism.” I encountered this belief early on in my pastoral days and have since spent untold hours studying it. In regards to “K.J.V. only” advocates, I’ve listened to sermons from Jack Hyles, who ruled as the pastor of the First Baptist Church of Hammond, Indiana, for over 40 years. I’ve spent hours reading David Cloud’s “Way of Life” website. I’ve subscribed to “The Sword of the Lord” paper, which is edited by Shelton Smith. I’ve even attended two Sword of the Lord conferences in Walkertown, North Carolina. Trust me, I’ve heard the arguments for the K.J.V. translation being a “perfect” Bible. Here are three of those main arguments.

#1: God has promised to preserve His words. The supposed “proof text” for this promise is Psalm 12:6-7, which says in the K.J.V.:

The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

According to the “K.J.V. only” folks, the K.J.V. is God’s preserved word for the English-speaking people. Putting it another way, the K.J.V. is God’s way of fulfilling His Psalm 12:6-7 promise to “keep” His words and “preserve” them forever, at least in regards to the English language. As for the more than 7,000 other languages in the world, especially the more than 3,700 languages for which we currently don’t have a Bible translation, evidently God doesn’t have a promise of preservation for them.

Sarcasm aside, the majority of commentators tell us the word “them” in the line “thou shalt preserve them” refers to the oppressed “poor” and “needy” of verse 5 rather than the “words of the Lord” of verse 6. Why do they interpret the Psalm in this way? They do it because 95% of Hebrew scholars agree that “them” in verse 7 should be translated as “us.” This makes the Psalm about God preserving the godly weak in a world of the ungodly strong rather than preserving His word in some singular translation of the Bible. Consequently, translations such as the English Standard Version, the Holman Christian Standard, and the New International Version use the word “us” in verse 7 instead of “them.” Of course, how those other translations read means absolutely nothing to the “K.J.V. only” folks.

Before we move on from this first argument, let me also mention that it is commonly accepted that the K.J.V. translation, which was first published in 1611, has been revised at least four times before what we call the “modern” age, with the last revision taking place in 1769. And how many differences are there between the 1611 version and the 1769 one? Over 22,000! While most of those changes simply involved either changes in the spelling of certain words or the correction of printing errors, let’s not ignore the more than 100 of them that involved actually “revising” (i.e. “changing”) a word or phrase. This leads to the question, “If God’s preserved word for English-speaking people is the K.J.V., which version of that translation is the preservation?” The vast majority of the “K.J.V. only” people would answer, “The 1611 edition.” Okay, fine, then why did God allow all the changes to take place to it, and why is everybody in the “K.J.V. only” camp today reading a later revision?

#2: God’s word is settled in heaven. The so-called “proof text” here is Psalm 119:89, which says in the K.J.V.:

For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven.

I once heard Jack Hyles say in a sermon that the “word” that is settled in heaven is the King James translation. He said that when he got to heaven he would see a King James Bible there. I guess all those Christians who make it to heaven but can’t read English will have to take the time in eternity to learn the language. Then again, God might just instantaneously give them that ability the way he caused those Pentecost believers to speak in languages unknown to them (Acts 2:1-13). Actually, however, since Jack Hyles also taught that the K.J.V. is the “incorruptible” “seed” of “the word of God” that 1 Peter 1:23 says is necessary for anyone to be “born again,” maybe there won’t be anybody in heaven who’ll have to learn to read English after all!

Would you believe the most extreme of the “K.J.V. only” group even contend that the K.J.V. is actually superior to the Old Testament’s original Hebrew and the New Testament’s original Greek? This idea was most famously promoted by Peter Ruckman, who founded the Pensacola Bible Institute. He went so far as to teach that the K.J.V. is advanced revelation over the Bible’s original texts! This doctrine is now known as “Ruckmanism.”

#3: The men who served as the translators of the K.J.V. were all godly men who believed they were handling the word of God. While the group of translators who gave us the K.J.V. might have been godly men, they weren’t even “K.J.V. only” themselves. In the original 1611 K.J.V., there are eleven pages that serve as the Preface. This Preface is labeled “The Translators To The Reader.” By way of that preface, the translators clearly encourage the use of other translations. To quote that Preface, “a variety of translation is profitable for finding out the sense of the Scriptures.”

Those same K.J.V. translators also praise translations that came before theirs by saying:

Truly (good Christian reader) we never thought from the beginning, that we should need to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one…but to make a good one better or out of many good ones, one principal good one.

Furthermore, those translators made a point of saying that scripture must always be in the most current, up-to-date language so that the common people can easily understand what they are reading. The direct quote is:

But we desire that the Scripture may speak like itself, as in the language, that it may be understood even of the very vulgar.

Ironically, even the meaning of that word “vulgar” has changed since those translators wrote. During their day it meant “common, simple, or uneducated.” Now it typically means “crude, lewd, offensive, or profane.” Does that make the translator’s argument or what?

As evidence that much of the language of the K.J.V. is no longer even close to being language a commoner can understand, consider the following list of archaic, obsolete words the translation uses:

“abjects”; “aceldama”; “affright”; “afore”; “agone”; “ague”; “almug”; “ambassage”; “amerce”; “anon”; “appertain”; “assayed”; “astonied”; “beeves”; “bethink”; “betimes”; “bewrayeth”; “blains”; “bolled”; “brigandines”; “bruit”; “caul”; “chambering”; “chapiters”; “chapmen”; “chode”; “choler”; “churl”; “cieled”; “clouted”; “cogitations”; “collops”; “concision”; “concupiscence”; “contemn”; “cotes”; “countervail”; “crookbackt”; “cruse”; “cumbered”; “daysman”; “descry”; “discomfited”; “doleful”; “durst”; “emerads”; “ensample”; “espied”; “felloe”; “flagon”; “forswear”; “gad”; “gainsaying”; “glede”; “habergeon”; “harrow”; “hart”; “hoar”; “holpen”; “hough”; “husbandman”; “implead”; “importunity”; “inditing”; “jangling”; “kine”; “knop”; “lade”; “lees”; “listeth”; “mammon”; “marishes”; “maw”; “mete”; “meteyard”; “murrain”; “neesing”; “nitre”; “noised”; “noisome”; “obeisance”; “ouches”; “outwent”; “paps”; “paramour”; “pate”; “patrimony”; “penury”; “peradventure”; “pilled”; “plaiting”; “prating”; “purloining”; “purtenance”; “quarternion”; “redoud”; “requiet”;”rereward”; “ringstraked”; “sackbut”; “scall”; “scrip”; “servitor”; “sheepcote”; “sith”; “staves”; “stomacher”; “suretiship”; “surfeiting”; “tabret”; “taches”; “thitherward”; “trode”; “trow”; “unction”; “untoward”; “vaunt”; “verity”; “victuals”; “visage”; “wen”; “wimples”; “winefat”; “wont”; and “wot”

Getting back now to the problem of certain words changing meanings over time, consider the following examples from the K.J.V.:

The word “fetched” in “fetched a compass” (Joshua 15:3; 2 Kings 3:9; Acts 28:13) doesn’t mean “went and got.” Instead, it means “to turn around” or “to go around” or “circled.”

The word “leasing” in “seek after leasing” (Psalm 4:2) doesn’t mean “entering into a contract whereby you pay for the use of property or land.” Instead, it means “lying.”

The word “replenish” in “replenish the earth” (Genesis 1:28) doesn’t mean “fill something up again.” Instead, it means “fill.”

The word “wax” in “evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse” (2 Timothy 3:13) doesn’t mean “polish,” “treat,” or “cover.” Instead, it means “increase.”

The word “conversation” in “ye have heard of my conversation in time past” (Galatians 1:13) doesn’t mean “a talk” or “a dialogue.” Instead, it means “conduct.”

The word “instant” in “be instant in season, out of season” (1 Timothy 4:2) doesn’t mean “happening immediately.” Instead, it means “persistence,” “readiness,” or “steadfastness.”

The word “mean” in “he shall not stand before mean men” (Proverbs 22:29) doesn’t mean “unkind,” “unpleasant,” or “cruel.” Instead, it means “obscure” or “insignificant.”

The word “without” in “without the camp” (Exodus 29:14; Leviticus 4:12; Numbers 5:3; etc.) doesn’t mean “in the absence of.” Instead, it means “outside.”

The word “simplicity” in “the simplicity that is in Christ” (2 Corinthians 11:3) doesn’t mean “easy to understand.” Instead, it means “sincere,” “pure,” or “not corrupted.”

The word “emulation” in “I may provoke to emulation” doesn’t mean “imitate in an effort to surpass.” Instead, it means “jealousy.”

The word “let” in “only he who now letteth will let” (2 Thessalonians 2:7) doesn’t mean “allow.” Instead, it means “restrain.”

The word “polled” in “he polled his head” (2 Samuel 14:26) doesn’t mean “recorded the opinion of.” Instead, in the case of a human, it means “to cut the hair from.” In the case of an animal, it means “to cut the horns from.”

The word “carriages” in “we took up our carriages” (Acts 21:15) doesn’t mean “a four-wheeled passenger vehicle pulled by animals.” Instead, it means “”baggage.”

The word “prevent” in “shall not prevent them” (2 Thessalonians 4:15) doesn’t mean “keep from happening.” Instead, it means “precede” or “go before.”

The word “wit” in “we do you to wit” (2 Corinthians 8:1) doesn’t mean “keen intelligence” or “mental sharpness.” Instead, it means “make known to you.”

The word “charger” in “in a charger, the head of John the Baptist” (Mark 6:25) doesn’t mean “a horse trained for battle.” Instead, it means “a platter.”

The word “quick” in “the word of God is quick” (Hebrews 4:12) doesn’t mean “moves at a fast rate.” Instead, it means “living.”

The word “rank” in “rank and good” (Genesis 41:6) doesn’t mean “having an unpleasant smell.” Instead, it means “fat” or “healthy.”

The word “devotions” in “beheld your devotions” (Acts 17:23) doesn’t mean “times of prayer or religious observances.” Instead, it means “objects of worship.”

The word “convenient” in “to do those things which are not convenient” (Romans 1:28) doesn’t mean “blending in well with a person’s needs, plans, or activities.” Instead, it means “fitting” or “proper.”

I certainly mean no disrespect to the K.J.V. translation. After all, I did grow up reading it and have preached from it for the bulk of my pastoral ministry. I’ll even agree with the assessment that the K.J.V. has been used in God’s service more than any other translation. But let’s not go off the deep end here. The K.J.V. is not “perfect.”

Even if we choose to overlook the translation’s use of 17th century, Old English words that nobody understands today, and even if we explain away the fact that the meanings of some of the translation’s words have now changed, outright errors in translations are things we should never ignore. And does the K.J.V. have various demonstrable translation errors in it? Yes, it does. Here is a list of some of its translation mistakes:

Genesis 42:27; Genesis 43:21; Exodus 4:24: “inn” should be “the lodging place” or “the encampment”

Genesis 49:6: “they digged down a wall” should be “they hamstrung an ox”

Exodus 20:13: “kill” should be “murder” (This clears up an apparent contradiction between this verse and passages such as Exodus 21:12-21.)

Judges 15:19: “in the jaw” should be “in Lehi” or “at Lehi.”

1 Samuel 27:10: “Whither have ye made a road today?” should be “Where have you made a raid today?” or “Where have you gone raiding today?”

1 Kings 10:28: “linen yarn” should be the Egyptian town “Keveh”

Psalm 77:2: “my sore ran in the night” should be “my hand was stretched out in the night without ceasing”

Matthew 6:25: “Take no thought” should be “Do not worry” or “Do not be anxious”

Mark 6:20: “observed him” should be “kept him safe” or “protected him”

Luke 14:7: “chief rooms” should be “places of honor”

Acts 5:30: “and hanged” should be “by hanging”

Acts 12:4: “Easter” should be “Passover”

Acts 19:2: “Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed?” should be “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?”

Romans 8:16,26: “Spirit itself” should be “Spirit Himself”

1 Corinthians 4:4: “For I know nothing by myself” should be “For I am conscious of nothing against myself”

Galatians 2:10: “forward” should be “earnest” or “diligent”

1 Thessalonians 5:22: “all appearance of evil” should be “every form of evil”

1 Timothy 6:10: “the root of all evil” should be “the root of all kinds of evil”

2 Timothy 2:15: “Study” should be “Be diligent” or “Do your best”

James 3:2: “For in many things we offend all” should be “For we all stumble in many things”

You see, if even one of these errors stands up to scrutiny and proves to be factual, it means the K.J.V. loses the claim of perfection. You can’t be wrong in even one way and still be “perfect.” Please understand now, by in large the K.J.V. is a reliable translation that does a good job of translating the Bible’s original Hebrew and Greek into English. We’re talking about just a few problems in the translation’s vast universe of words. Nevertheless, those problems are there.

In closing, let me mention Romans 10:2, where we learn that it’s possible to have a zeal for God that is misdirected in that it is “not according to knowledge.” While the zeal is sincere, it is either uninformed or ill-informed. In the cases of some of the “K.J.V. only” folks, their zeal is uninformed because they’ve never really taken the time and put in the work to study the issue for themselves. In the cases of others, their zeal is ill-informed because they’ve studied the issue in great detail and reached the wrong conclusion about it.

Either way, it’s an honest-to-goodness shame because the “K.J.V. only” people are, by in large, devout Christians who desire to live a life pleasing to the Lord. I know some of them personally and can say without reservation that if everybody served Jesus as well as they do, the world would be a better place. I just wish they’d consider all the evidence against the King James translation being the best translation for the 21st century (to say nothing of it being “perfect”) and give other translations a chance. One thing is for sure, if they won’t most of their children and grandchildren will. That’s just the way things are trending. And I, for one, think it’s a good thing.

Posted in Balance, Bible Study, Discernment, God's Word, King James Only, Pastors, Preaching, Scripture, The Bible | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 10 Comments

Clint Eastwood Westerns

Posted on February 26, 2024 by russellmckinney

I’m going to drop my pastoral guard and admit something to you: I love Clint Eastwood westerns. There, I said it. Now hang on and hear the rest of it. I don’t love every scene in them, and I’m fully aware of the valid criticisms that can be brought against them. But I’m not going to lie and say I don’t love those movies. (In the interest of full disclosure, I’ve got Dish Network with a DVR feature that allows me to fast forward through scenes I’d rather skip.)

The reason I love Eastwood’s westerns can be summed up in one simple word: justice. In those movies, the bad guys get theirs. Consider the following examples:

  • In those famous “spaghetti” westerns (The Good, The Bad, & The Ugly; A Fistful of Dollars; and For a Few Dollars More), Eastwood is the gunfighter/bounty hunter who takes care of the outlaws the law can’t handle.
  • In Hang ‘Em High, he’s the wrongly hung man who turns marshal and rounds up the culprits.
  • In Two Mules For Sister Sara, he prevents the dastardly French from making inroads into Mexico.
  • In Joe Kidd, he’s the rancher who has to put a stop to Robert Duvall and his group of vigilantes who oppose land reform.
  • In High Plains Drifter, he’s the marshal’s ghost who comes back to handle not only the hypocritical, cowardly citizens of Lago but also the outlaws who killed him.
  • In The Outlaw Josey Wales, he’s the Missouri farmer who turns guerrilla fighter to avenge the senseless killing of his family.
  • In Pale Rider, he’s the mysterious preacher (actually another ghost, that of a gunfighter) who saves a little group of prospectors from a greedy, ruthless mining company.
  • In Unforgiven, he’s the ex-killer who gets back into the business to bring down not only the men who brutalized a prostitute but also the mean ole’ sheriff who pretty much let them get away with it.

Do I sense a pattern here? Sure do. If you want some real justice dispensed, call Clint Eastwood and give him a horse and a six-shooter.

What makes Eastwood’s justice so particularly appealing is the fact that it gets carried out so swiftly. In many scenes, troublemakers are dealt their comeuppance in a matter of seconds. In no case does the justice take more than the span of a movie. This stands in stark contrast to our own legal system, a system that typically gets bogged down in things like continuations, booked court calendars, recesses, appeals, appeals of appeals, and retrials.

Oh, and did I mention that the villain in a Clint Eastwood western never goes free? Forget loopholes, circumstantial evidence, and the like. If the guy’s got it coming, he gets it! No questions. No apologies. No regrets. In the late 1980s, Eastwood served a couple of years as the mayor of his hometown of Carmel, California. He missed his calling in that he should have been its sheriff.

Am I the only one who ever wishes that God would hurry up His justice? I have no doubts that His justice is found in spades in the afterlife, but why can’t it be found more in this life? Consider the following three examples of known murderers who, as best we can tell, escaped justice in this life altogether:

London’s “Jack the Ripper” taunted the police and got away with viciously, sadistically killing five prostitutes in the Whitechapel section of East London in 1888.

Josef Mengele, the German SS officer and physician known as “The Angel of Death” because of his horrific experiments upon Jews in Germany’s concentration camps of World War II, escaped to Argentina following the war and lived uncaptured for decades before dying of a stroke in Bertioga, Brazil, in 1979 and being buried under the name “Wolfgang Gerhard.”

The serial killer known as “The Zodiac Killer” killed at least five victims in Northern California between 1968 and 1969, taunted the police by sending them codes to decipher, but was never caught.

The families of the victims of these men could well have asked, “Where was God when all of these crimes were being committed?” Even more to the point, they could have asked, “Where was His justice afterward?” Frankly, there would have been no easy answers to either question.

I love Deuteronomy 32:4, which says of God:

He is the Rock, His work is perfect; For all His ways are justice, a God of truth and without injustice; righteous and upright is He. (N.K.J.V., emphasis mine)

I read that verse and think, “Yes, yes. That’s the God I serve!” But then I hear the news about a crime that has remained unsolved for decades or some other grievous miscarriage of justice. Such things simply don’t appear to line up with Deuteronomy 32:4.

Actually, though, there are even scriptural examples of people who, evidently, escaped justice in this life. One that comes to my mind is Herod Antipas. Even though he had John the Baptist beheaded (Matthew 14:1-12) and played a role in the trial of Jesus (Luke 23:6-12), historians tell us he lived for several years after these events. Where’s the justice in that?

I think we have to admit that causing justice to get done in this world just doesn’t seem to be a high priority with God. If you think this is a blasphemous statement, then you’ll have to label Job a blasphemer, too. He himself admitted to being thoroughly confused by God’s lack of justice when he said of God:

He destroys the blameless and the wicked. If the scourge slays suddenly, He laughs at the plight of the innocent. The earth is given into the hand of the wicked. He covers the faces of its judges. If it is not He, who else could it be? (Job 9:22-24, N.K.J.V.)

Additionally, Job also asked:

Why do the wicked live on, growing old and increasing in power? (Job 21:7, N.K.J.V.)

Such talk puts Job in good company. Another godly man, Asaph, once said:

Behold, these are the ungodly, who are always at ease. They increase in riches. Surely I have cleansed my heart in vain, and washed my hands in innocence. For all day long I have been plagued and chastened every morning (Psalm 73:12-14, N.K.J.V.)

Likewise, Jeremiah asked God:

Why does the way of the wicked prosper? Why are those happy who deal so treacherously? (Jeremiah 12:1, N.K.J.V.)

Similarly, Habakkuk got very blunt about the matter when he said to God:

Therefore the law is powerless, and justice never goes forth. For the wicked surround the righteous. Therefore perverse judgment proceeds (Habakkuk 1:4, N.K.J.V.)

So, why does God so many times delay His justice until the afterlife? I would offer two reasons. Reason #1 is: God is merciful, patient, and longsuffering because He loves even the wicked and hates banishing them to hell. As 2 Peter 3:9 says:

The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. (N.K.J.V.)

Likewise, 1 Timothy 2:4 says that God:

…desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. (N.K.J.V.)

Similarly, Ezekiel 33:11 says:

“Say to them: ‘As I live,’ says the Lord God, ‘I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live. Turn, turn from your evil ways! For why should you die, O house of Israel?’”(N.K.J.V.)

Reason #2 why God’s justice is delayed is: God wants to allow the iniquity of the wicked to reach its full measure so that His judgment upon them can reach its full measure. In Genesis 15:16, God explains to Abraham why His descendants can’t go ahead and possess Canaan. That reason was: The iniquity of the Amorites wasn’t yet complete, which meant that it hadn’t yet reached its full measure.

The Amorites were one of the most powerful of the races who occupied Canaan, and in the Genesis 15:16 verse they represent all those races. God knew that when He finally did give the order for the people of Israel to go in and claim Canaan, that order would be accompanied by the command to kill the land’s inhabitants, including the women and children (Exodus 23:23-33, 33:1-2; Deuteronomy 9:1-5, 19:1, 31:3-5; Joshua 6:21, 8:24-29, etc.). Such a cold, calculated command would demand a worthy reason, and delaying Israel’s conquest of Canaan for over 400 years would give the land’s inhabitants more than four centuries to revel in their sins and bring them to a boiling point that would befit such an extermination.

In closing, let me say that these two reasons for the delays in God’s justice are still at work today because each of them is indelibly woven into the very fabric of His nature. One comes under the category of hope while the other comes under the category of doom, but the immediate effect of both is the same: the delay of justice. You see, God has more than a quick scene or a two-hour movie in which to impart His justice. He paints on the canvas of eternity. That means that, in the short run, He can be more merciful, longsuffering, and patient than one of Clint Eastwood’s characters. But it also means that, in the long run, His brand of justice, one that lasts for all eternity, is much more devastating than Clint’s.

Posted in Coming Judgment, Eternity, God's Wrath, God's Judgment, Hell, Justice | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment