9/9/20

"THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW" Our Duty To God And Country (22:15-22)

 

"THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW"

Our Duty To God And Country (22:15-22) 
 
 INTRODUCTION

1. Teaching in the temple, Jesus was approached by the Pharisees and the Herodians...
   a. They came with the intention of entangling Him in His teaching - Mt 22:15-16
   b. They questioned Him whether one should pay taxes to Caesar - Mt 22:17

2. Ever the Master Teacher, Jesus easily dealt with their question...
   a. Seeing through their hypocrisy, He called for a coin - Mt 22:18-19
   b. He asked whose inscription was on it, and they answered "Caesar's" - Mt 22:20-21
   c. His reply cause them to marvel, and to go away - Mt 22:21-22

3. The reply of Jesus:
   a. "Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's"
   b. "And to God the things that are God's"
   ...not only silenced His critics, but provided important teaching for His disciples

4. His reply reveals that we have responsibilities to both God and country
   a. There are things that we must render to Caesar (country)
   b. There are things that we must render to God

[What is our duty to God and country?  In this study we shall review
what the Scriptures tell us about our responsibilities as citizens and
as disciples.  We start with...]

I. OUR DUTY TO COUNTRY

   A. PAY TAXES...
      1. This was the point of Jesus in our text - Mt 22:17-21
      2. Paul also taught us to pay taxes - Ro 13:6-7a

   B. OBEY LAWS...
      1. We are to submit to the ordinances (laws) of the land - Ro 13: 1-5; Tit 3:1
      2. This we do for the Lord's sake, that we might silence foolish men - 1Pe 2:13-16

   C. FEAR AND HONOR...
      1. We are to respect and honor those in positions of authority- Ro 13:7b
         a. We are to fear the king - cf. Pr 24:21
         b. We are not to speak evil of our rulers 
              - cf. Exo 22:28; Ac 23:5; Tit 3:2; 2Pe 2:10; Jude 8-9
      2. Even as we are to honor all and love the brethren - 1Pe 2:17
      -- Do you notice that Paul or Peter never had unkind words about Nero?
   
   D. DO GOOD...
      1. We are to be ready for every good work - Tit 3:1
      2. We are to have conduct that is honorable before all - 1Pe 2: 11-12,15-16

   E. PRAY...
      1. To make supplications, offer prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks - 1Ti 2:1
      2. To pray for kings and all who are in authority - 1Ti 2:1-3

[Christians are but sojourners and pilgrims in this world (1Pe 2:11).
While our true citizenship is in heaven (Php 3:20), we are to be a
blessing to those earthly countries in which we sojourn.  Fulfill our
God-given obligations, and we will be an asset to any country in which
we live!  Now let's review...]

II. OUR DUTY TO GOD

   A. LOVE GOD WITH ALL OUR BEING...
      1. Jesus considered this the greatest commandment of the Law  - Mt 22:34-38
      2. Being the greatest command, I would suggest this is our greatest duty!

   B. OBEY GOD FROM THE HEART...
      1. If we love God, we will keep His commandments - 1Jn 5:3
      2. Even as Jesus taught that keeping His commandments is evidence
         of true love - Jn 14:15,21,23

   C. MAKE GOD OUR NUMBER ONE PRIORITY...
      1. His will, His rule, His righteousness, should be our first priority - Mt 6:33
      2. Not only over our personal concerns, but even over our duty to country
         a. Whenever there is a conflict between duty to God and duty
            to country, God must come first
         b. As stated by Peter:  "We ought to obey God rather than men"  Ac 5:27-29
      3. This helps to answer questions that often arise concerning the
         Christian's duty to government
         a. Can a Christian vote?
         b. Can one serve in political office?
      4. If such duties and privileges come at too high a price (i.e.,
         placing country before God), then a Christian must obey God rather than men
         a. In some countries, the price may be too high, and a
            Christian could not serve in political office or exercise certain rights as a citizen
         b. Other countries may allow for God to take precedence in
            one's conduct, permitting the Christian to participate in such things

CONCLUSION

1. Christians ought to be a blessing for any country in which they reside...
   a. A source of revenue, with respect for laws, and reverence for those in authority
   b. Contributing to the general welfare, through good deeds and fervent prayers

2. Christians can be such a blessing when...
   a. They render first to God what is His due, and then what is due the country
   b. The country respects the priority that must be given God by its citizens

While those in authority might not always understand their proper
place, and expect more of their citizens than what is right, may we who
are disciples of Christ never fail to "Render therefore to Caesar the
things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." 
 
Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2016

eXTReMe Tracker


The Consequences of Divorce and Remarriage by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=4188
 

The Consequences of Divorce and Remarriage

by  Dave Miller, Ph.D.

Christians increasingly find themselves faced with the dilemma of dealing with individuals (usually non-Christian) who divorce and remarry any number of times for any number of reasons, and who come wishing to become part of the local church. The tendency is to permit the couple to remain in the marriage relationship they are in when they become Christians—though the marriage was contracted in violation of Matthew 19:9. This position usually cloaks itself in feigned compassion for the couple when, more often than not, members simply lack the spiritual courage to press the biblical position. One argument posed in defense of this stance is the notion that if the couple cannot continue their marriage after baptism, then baptism did not really cleanse them and adultery becomes the “unpardonable sin.” Several points which show the error of this position are in order:

First, much is accomplished at the point of biblical baptism, but baptism was never designed to change a sinful practice into an acceptable one, or to transform a sinful relationship into a righteous one. Prostitutes, homosexuals, polygamists, bisexuals, bigamists, and adulterers must sever their relationships.

Second, the biblical doctrine of forgiveness must not be confused with the equally biblical doctrine of the consequences of sin. Being forgiven never implies that all of the consequences of sin will be erased. Past sin may be blotted out, but the consequences of past sin generally remain. For example:

  1. Syphilis of the brain is a lasting consequence of a promiscuous lifestyle;
  2. Permanent removal from the garden was a lasting penalty and consequence of the sin of Adam and Eve (Genesis 3);
  3. Being banned from Canaan was a lasting penalty of Moses’ sin (Deuteronomy 32:51-52), though he could be forgiven and one day be in heaven (Revelation 15:3);
  4. God pardoned the murmurers (Numbers 14:20)—but the negative effects of their sin were lasting and disastrous (Numbers 14:29-35);
  5. Esau’s mistake of selling his inheritance rights could not be rectified—“though he sought it diligently with tears” (Hebrews 12:17).

This biblical principle simply does not square with the notion that if anyone has to break up a marriage, too much is expected of them and forgiveness is not really what it’s “cracked up” to be. If biblical history teaches us anything, it teaches us that people cannot sin and then expect to have things the way they were before. More often than not, much suffering comes upon those who violate God’s will, even though they may be forgiven and have the hope of heaven.

So it is with marriage. People may reject God’s laws of marriage and fly in the face of His will. They may then be forgiven, but they may also have gotten their lives into such a fix that they will have no choice but to live single and celibate the rest of their lives. Such is not a reflection upon God’s justice or mercy. Rather, such is a reflection of man’s own stubborn disobedience and rejection of what God designed to be for man’s good. Just as a person can sin and in so doing lose his physical life without God intervening to prevent the effect of the sin (e.g., rob a bank and be killed by the police), likewise a person can so sin in the marital realm that he or she forfeits marital life without God intervening.

Third, baptism is not biblical immersion if it is not preceded by repentance. We often forget this, so anxious are we to get people into the baptistery. Repentance is not simply being sorry. Godly sorrow precedes genuine repentance which is, in turn, followed by a reformation of life (2 Corinthians 7:9-10). Reformation of life entails the cessation of sinful practices and the severance of sinful relationships (Matthew 3:8; 1 Corinthians 6:11). Paul put it this way in Romans 6:2—a person must not “live any longer therein.”

What did those who practiced sorcery do to show repentance in Acts 19:19? They burned their scrolls, showing that they were ceasing their former practices. Simply vowing to refrain from buying any further books, while insisting on keeping the books they already had, would manifest a lack of true repentance. If they held membership in a sorcery society, repentance would mean that they would sever that relationship. Simon’s repentance and baptism in Acts 8 demanded the cessation of his former relationship with sorcery. What did repentance and baptism mean to the Corinthians? Consider the following chart:

Whether the Corinthians had been practicing adultery, homosexuality, male prostitution, thievery, or swindling (1 Corinthians 6:9-10), repentance prior to baptism would mean that they would have ceased living in illicit sexual unions—whether adulterous or homosexual. They would have ceased stealing and would have severed their relationship with ill-gotten gain. They would have given up any business arrangement that would call for swindling others. Repentance, by definition, would demand such. And those who continue to live in such relationships have not really repented.

One final point merits attention. Some attempt to justify adulterous unions by comparing the sin of adultery to murder. They say that there are some wrongs which cannot be righted. In the case of murder, a man may repent but he cannot raise his victim to life. They say that an unscriptural marriage fits in the same category.

This is a false analogy. In the first place, severing an illicit relationship is not an attempt to rectify past divorces or restore past marriages. Rather, it is what is demanded by repentance and God’s laws of marriage. Second, the basic principle which does apply to both murder and adultery is that repentance demands that the individual cease committing murder and that he cease living in adultery (Colossians 3:7). Can a penitent murderer continue to murder? No. He will cease the relationship which he once had with the murderous life he once lived. Likewise, one who is living in a state of adultery will be lost if he or she dies in that state (Revelation 21:8). Just saying, “I’m sorry,” will not change that state or change that relationship into a righteous one so that it may be continued. Nowhere has God ever dealt with sin in such a way. He always demands the cessation of the sinful practice or relationship before He abundantly pardons. John the Baptizer was not asking Herod to simply acknowledge his sin, say he was sorry and ask forgiveness, and then continue to live with Herodias. Herod had married her (Mark 6:17). What did repentance demand? That they break up their marriage. Why? Because, as John declared, “It [was] not lawful for [Herod] to have her” (Mark 6:18)! There wasn’t anything that Herod could merely verbalize that would change the status of the marital relationship. It had to be terminated.

 

The Catholic Dogma of Infallibility by Moisés Pinedo

 

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=1521
 

The Catholic Dogma of Infallibility

by  Moisés Pinedo

When the Roman Pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA...he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his Church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. Therefore, such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the Church, irreformable (Vatican I, 1869b, chap. 4, s. 9).

This is the dogma declared by Pope Pius IX, and approved by the Vatican I Council, in regard to the alleged infallible teaching authority of the Roman pontiff.

For more than a century, this dogma has pressed greatly upon the shoulders of Catholics, who have worked feverishly to try to harmonize the nature of the infallible dogma with the declarations, teachings, and revelations of the popes who lived before and after the establishment of such a dogma. The truth is that the faithful Catholic does not have the option of rejecting the doctrine firmly imposed by Vatican I, because the canonical condemnation concerning its rejection is also firm. The canon warns:

So then, should anyone, which God forbid, have the temerity to reject this definition of ours: let him be anathema [condemned—MP] (Vatican I, 1869b, chap. 4, s. 9, emp. added).

Thus, the curse is set upon those who reject the dogma, and the dogma has the approval of the Vatican I Council; thus, the pope is deemed infallible. However, the definitions, implications, and applications of the dogma are questionable to the point that even within the whole hierarchical and ordinary body of the Catholic Church, consensus does not exist.

IMPLICATIONS OF THE DOGMA

In order to speak of this dogma, we first need to understand certain related subjects. And, since many antagonists of infallibility have been accused of ignorance and manipulation of both the concept and its implications, it is my purpose here to use only those definitions and explanations suggested by the same supporters of the doctrine postulated by Pius IX.

Unlike the commonly publicized idea that only the pope posses infallibility, Catholicism teaches that the Catholic Church, completely represented by its body of bishops, also is infallible. Therefore Vatican II declared:

Although the individual bishops do not enjoy the prerogative of infallibility, they nevertheless proclaim Christ’s doctrine infallibly whenever, even though dispersed through the world, but still maintaining the bond of communion among themselves and with the successor of Peter, and authentically teaching matters of faith and morals, they are in agreement on one position as definitively to be held (Lumen Gentium, 1964, chap. 3, s. 25, emp. added).

It must be noted here that, according to Catholicism, the infallibility of the bishops is subordinated to the infallibility of the bishop of Rome, and it is he who gives the final sentence. Consequently, the thesis of the dogma of infallibility may be summarized in this way:

Infallibility is divine assistance for the Church that protects the Pope of any error in matters of faith and moral.... Infallibility only applies to acts in which the Pope uses his apostolic duty completely; when he defines a dogma in virtue of his supreme authority and in his capacity as pastor of the universal Church. In these cases he speaks ex cathedra (see SCTJM, 1999b, emp. added).

Since the proclamation of the dogma has left many religious people (including Catholics themselves) with a dissatisfied feeling of not being able to conclude rationally by themselves when the pope is fallible and when he is not, Catholicism has found it necessary to set up the following conditions under which infallibility may “work.” According to Catechism of the Catholic Church, three conditions must be filled:

(1) The Pope must speak “as supreme Pastor and Teacher of all the faithful that he confirms [strengthens] his brethren”... (2) The Pope “proclaims the doctrine through a definitive act”... (3) The Pope speaks “in matters of faith and morals” (SCTJM, 1999a, emp. in orig.).

Therefore, with this more “systematized” explanation, Catholicism has “stopped” (or, more accurately, ignored) the endless charges against the popes of both past and modern times. However, is the Catholic doctrine of papal infallibility true? Are its “structured” explanations coherent and valid? Should the faithful Christian agree with, or oppose, this doctrine?

REASONS WHY THE DOGMA OF INFALLIBILITY SHOULD BE REJECTED

 

It is Inconsistent with Biblical Truth

The Vatican I Council, in its Pastor Aeternus, declares about the basis of infallibility:

For the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter.... This See of St. Peter always remains unblemished by any error, in accordance with the divine promise of our Lord and Savior to the prince of his disciples: I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren (Vatican I, 1869b, chap. 4, s. 6, emp. added).

So then, according to Catholic doctrine, papal infallibility is based on the fact that in Luke 22:32 Jesus promised Peter that his “faith” (i.e., his declarations of divine truths concerning “faith and morals”) would not fail. But a brief analysis of the biblical passage and its context reveals a completely different conclusion. Consider the following.

First, the contextual disposition of Luke 22:32 does not establish the basis for the dogma of infallibility. That is to say, there is no indication in the biblical text that suggests a papal primacy or a type of special “petrine prerogative.” The subject under consideration is the coming temptation of the disciples—and, more specifically, Peter’s impending denial of Jesus.

Second, the expression, “I have prayed for you,” does not impose a special dignity upon Peter; nor does it exclude some prayer in favor of the rest of the disciples. John 17:9-19 clarifies that Jesus had prayed, not only for Peter, but also for His other disciples. The reason why Jesus mentioned (in Luke 22) the prayer in favor of Peter finds its logical explanation in the fact that Peter would be one of the disciples who would confront a major “sifting” at the hand of Satan (Luke 22:31; cf. 22:34,54-62). Jesus, in telling Peter that He had prayed for him, showed him that a speedy recovery after the fall was His desire.

Third, when Jesus spoke of the faith of Peter, He used the Greek term pistis, which means “principally, firm persuasion, conviction based on hearing” (Vine, 1999, p. 374). There is no biblical sign in the text of Luke to suggest that Peter’s faith should be interpreted as his “future declarations of divine truths concerning faith and morals.” Rather, Peter’s faith could be contrasted with the fear of his own physical death—which ultimately would lead him to actually deny his Lord (Luke 22:54-61; cf. Mark 4:35-40). Here, the word “faith” emphasizes Peter’s faith as indicated by his trust in God, not his faith in the sense of “revelations of the truth.”

Fourth, when Jesus told Peter that He had prayed that his faith might not fail, He used the Greek term ekleipo, which can be translated as “leave,” “fail,” or “lack” (Vine, p. 371). A more exact translation would indicate that Peter’s faith would neither dim nor fade. While the faith (trust) that Peter had in Jesus might have failed (since he denied Him, Luke 22:54-61), it did not dim or fade, as evinced by the fact that Peter repented of his failure (Luke 22:62). Those in Catholicism who interpret Peter’s faith as his “infallible testimony of faith and moral dogmas,” fail to realize that Peter’s faith failed him at Annas’ courtyard. Therefore, this faith cannot account for any kind of alleged infallibility given to Peter, much less to Roman bishops.

Fifth, the phrase “when you have turned again” (Luke 22:32) denotes the tragic reality that Peter’s faith was going to fail. The Greek term for “turn” is epistrepho, which expresses the idea of being converted. Peter needed to turn back from his way of denial, repent, and confess Jesus (see Lacueva, 1984, p. 339). In fact, Peter’s personal disloyalty to his Master certainly does not offer any proof for “petrine infallibility”—but quite the opposite.

Finally, Catholicism also affirms that part of the evidence for the dogma of infallibility lies inherently in the text of Matthew 16:18-19, although, a correct exegesis of the text of Matthew shows that such a claim is untenable. [For an explanation of the text in Matthew, see Pinedo, 2005.] The truth is that there is nothing in the whole of the biblical text that would establish the dogma of papal infallibility.

It is Inconsistent with Itself

Papal infallibility also should be rejected because it cannot remain consistent with its own dogmatic presentation. By this, I mean that the dogma of infallibility is self-contradictory. A few examples will be enough to document this fact. For example, the following statement may be found in an explanatory article about papal infallibility:

[T]he Vatican I Council does not directly say that the Pope, when addressing matters ex cathedra of faith and moral, is infallible. It restricts itself to say that, in those cases (and only in those), the Pope enjoys the same infallibility which the Church is endowed with. Therefore, the Church’s infallibility is not defined by the one of the Pope, but the last by the first. And it seems to us to have a profound theological sense (Logos, 1996, emp. added).

Perhaps after reading this quotation it will seem to you that declarations with “profound theological sense” are so “profound” that they become incomprehensible. Catholicism states as a defense that Vatican I (the council that established papal infallibility) does not declare directly that the pope is infallible in matters of faith and morals. But if that is the case, the question becomes, why, for more than a century, has Catholicism insisted on imposing a doctrine that was not even declared directly? If it is said that the Catholic Church is infallible, and that this infallibility also is enjoyed by the pope, is it not an equivalent operation of: if A is equal to B, and if B is equal to C, then A is equal to C? And if it is a dogmatic implication, what kind of “theologically profound” defense is this?

I will let Catholicism continue explaining its own dogmas. In an article titled, “¿Puede el Papa Caer en Error o Herejía?” (“Can the Pope Fall Into Error and Heresy?”), the following declaration can be found:

Therefore, the Pope can err when he speaks about politics, medicine, physics, economy, history, etc. In anything except in religious matters. But he can also err in religious matters, if he speaks in table talk, or in a walk with friends, or a private discussion about religion. And also when he speaks as Mr. So-and-so and states his own personal theories, even in a publicly sold book, he can err (see Cristiandad, 2005, emp. added).

It is interesting to note the concept that this particular supporter of Catholicism has about “in anything except.” If the pope “also” can err in religious matters, can it be said that he can err “in anything except” in religious matters? If the Holy Spirit assists the pope as He assisted Peter and the other apostles of the first century, why, since the Holy Spirit never abandoned them, would the Spirit abandon the pope when he is not on his throne, in his council, or using his title of pontiff? Actually there is no biblical analogy for the dogma of infallibility as presented by Catholicism. Jesus not only spoke infallibly when He appealed to His Father’s authority (John 7:16-18), but also in His private conversations (John 4) or in His walk with friends (John 16:13). The Holy Spirit led the disciples to all the truth, not just part of it (John 16:13). The Bible is inerrant in religious and secular matters; it does not contain wheat and weed. Rather, all Scripture is inspired by God (2 Timothy 3:16).

Addressing the unavoidable reality of pontific heresy, a Catholic Web page declares about the pope:

And if he is a heretic, at least he is not going to declare his heresies as part of the doctrine of the profession, that is, things which we are required to believe and observe. It was never permitted by the Holy Spirit (see Apologética, n.d., emp. added).

That is to say, the pope can fall into heresy and even teach it, but in his heresy (since according to Catholicism he does not declare it ex cathedra), he must not be obeyed. This, of course, gives rise to a tedious problem of investigating whether or not the pope is speaking infallibly, and whether or not he must be obeyed. Ironically it also is declared:

Obedience to the Sumo Pontiff should not be limited to when he speaks ex cathedra. Neither should the disciplinary decree of the Pope be rejected with the pretext that they were not promulgated ex cathedra (SCTJM, 1999b, emp. added).

However, if the pope is both infallible and fallible in religious matters, and if Catholics are called to obey him in both areas, does that not represent a danger to the heart of many Catholic doctrines? The truth is that Catholicism cannot teach and defend papal infallibility as it does, and remain consistent.

It is Inconsistent in Its Application

Catholicism declares:

The possessors of infallibility are: (a) the Pope (the Pope is infallible when speaking ex cathedra), (b) the complete Episcopacy (the totality of the bishops is infallible when proposing a teaching of faith and moral as belief for all the faithful, either assembled together in a general council or scattered around the earth) [see Pivarunas, 1996, parenthetical items in orig., emp. added].

Therefore, it can be said that “infallibility” reaches its highest degree in ecumenical councils, where the pope, along with the body of bishops, offer up a seal of approval to dogmas of faith that Catholics must obey. Additionally Catholicism confirms:

Yes, it is truth that certain popes have contradicted other popes, in their private opinions or concerning disciplinary dogmas; but there was never a Pope who would officially contradict what a previous Pope officially taught about faith and moral matters. The same could be said about ecumenical councils, which also teach with infallibility. There was not an ecumenical council that would contradict the teaching of a previous ecumenical council concerning faith and morals (Keating, n.d., emp. added).

The Catholic defense can be summarized as follows: the pope can be a heretic, but he will not officially teach heresy; and the councils, which allegedly use infallibility, never contradict each other. But is such a concept true? What do the councils, which teach “infallibly,” say? A few examples will be enough to arrive at the conclusion that ecumenical councils, in application of their so-called infallibility, fail completely.

Vatican I Council, in its dogmatic constitution Filius-Dei on the Catholic faith, expressed the following:

The abandonment and rejection of the Christian religion, and the denial of God and his Christ, has plunged the minds of many into the abyss of pantheism, materialism and atheism, and the consequence is that they strive to destroy rational nature itself, to deny any criterion of what is right and just.... And so we, following in the footsteps of our predecessors, in accordance with our supreme apostolic office, have never left off teaching and defending Catholic truth and condemning erroneous doctrines (Vatican I, 1869b, s. 7-10, emp. added).

However, while Vatican I condemns erroneous doctrines such as the denial of Christ, Vatican II declares:

The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all-powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth.... Though they do not acknowledge Jesus as God, they revere Him as a prophet”(Nostra Aetate, 1965, s. 3, emp. added).

But since Muslims do not acknowledge Jesus as the prophesied Messiah (that is, the Christ), would that not be a denial of Christ, and thus the heresy condemned by Vatican I? Most assuredly!

Vatican I, in its canonic sentence on written revelation, states:

If anyone does not receive as sacred and canonical the complete books of Sacred Scripture with all their parts, as the holy Council of Trent listed them, or denies that they were divinely inspired: let him be anathema (Vatican I, 1869a, Can. 2, s. 4, emp. added).

However, Vatican II, in speaking about Hinduism, Buddhism, and other religions that discard much of canonical Scripture, declared that these religions

[t]ry to counter the restlessness of the human heart, each in its own manner, by proposing “ways,” comprising teachings, rules of life, and sacred rites. The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men (Nostra Aetate 1965, s. 2, emp. added).

On the permanence of the petrine primacy of the roman pontiffs, Vatican I, in its Pastor Aeternus, condemns.

Therefore, if anyone says that it is not by the institution of Christ the lord himself (that is to say, by divine law) that blessed Peter should have perpetual successors in the primacy over the whole Church; or that the Roman Pontiff is not the successor of blessed Peter in this primacy: let him be anathema (Vatican I, 1969b, chap. 2, s. 5, parenthectical item in orig., emp. added).

However, Vatican II beatifies:

The Church recognizes that in many ways she is linked with those who, being baptized, are honored with the name of Christian, though they do not profess the faith in its entirety or do not preserve unity of communion with the successor of Peter [that is to say, they don’t accept the proposed papal hierarchy—MP]. For there are many who honor Sacred Scripture, taking it as a norm of belief and a pattern of life, and who show a sincere zeal. They lovingly believe in God the Father Almighty and in Christ, the Son of God and Saviour. They are consecrated by baptism, in which they are united with Christ (Lumen Gentium, 1964, chap. 2, s. 15, emp. added).

Now Vatican II has united to Christ the same people who, for not accepting petrine hierarchy, were condemned by Vatican I as anathema. Truth be told, the Vatican I Council, which allegedly taught with infallibility, cannot coexist with the Vatican II Council that allegedly employed the same infallibility.

There are many other contradictions that could be added if space allowed, but the few presented in this article are enough to permit a definitive conclusion: the Catholic dogma of papal infallibility is not consistent with the truth. The Vatican II Council invoked by Pope John XXIII stands in strong opposition to the Vatican I Council invoked by Pope Pius IX (the father of the dogma of papal infallibility). On the other hand, there is only one infallible truth—the Word of God (John 17:17). It is this truth to which we need to come to learn about the salvation of our souls and to keep us away from error and apostasy. In the end, when our Savior comes back in the clouds to reward and punish in a universal judgment, it will not be the words of men’s fallible councils, but the Word of God that will be open, and then, the Lord will give the “canonic” sentence.

REFERENCES

Apologética (no date), Reflexiones en Torno a la Infalibilidad de la Iglesia [On-line], URL: http://apologetica.org/infalibilidad.htm.

Cristiandad (2005), ¿Puede el Papa Caer en Error o Herejía? [On-line], URL: http://es.catholic.net/conocetufe/358/1780/articulo.php?id=3324.

Keating, Kart (no date), La Infalibilidad Papal [On-line], URL: http://apologetica.org/infalibilidad-keating.htm.

Lacueva, Francisco (1984), Nuevo Testamento Interlineal Griego-Español (CLIE, Villadecavalls, Barcelona, España).

Logos (1996), Llamado de Atención Sobre la Infalibilidad [On-line], URL: http://www.sjsocial.org/logos/logos6.htm.

Lumen Gentium (1964), Dogmatic Constitution of the Church [On-line], URL: http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/
vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html.

Nostra Aetate (1965), Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions [On-line], URL: http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/
vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html.

Pinedo, Moisés (2005), The Pope, the Papacy, and the Bible [On-line], URL: http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2724.

Pivarunas, Mark A. (1996),La Infalibilidad de la Iglesia Católica [On-line], URL: http://www.cmri.org/font-96prog5.html.

SCTJM (1999a), Ex Cathedra, Tres Condiciones Deben Reunirse Para que una Definición Pontificia Sea Ex Cathedra [On-line], URL: http://www.corazones.org/diccionario/excathedra.htm.

SCTJM (1999b), Infalibilidad [On-line], URL: http://www.corazones.org/diccionario/infalibilidad.htm#Infalibilidad%20Episcopa.

Vatican I (1869a), Canon On Revelation [On-line], URL: http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/V1.HTM#5.

Vatican I (1869b), First Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of Christ [On-line], URL: http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/V1.HTM#6.

Vine, W.E. (1999), Diccionario Expositivo de Palabras del Antiguo y Nuevo Testamento Exhaustivo, (Colombia, Editorial Caribe, Inc.).

 

The Catholic Church Gives Away the Store to Skeptics by Kyle Butt, M.Div.

 

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=3733


The Catholic Church Gives Away the Store to Skeptics

by  Kyle Butt, M.Div.

English is filled with delightful idioms that describe in a colorful way what happens in discussions. For instance, the phrase “give away the store” means that a person makes a concession that so weakens his position that he might as well give up defending his belief. A recent article written by Philip Pullella shows the extent to which some people who call themselves Christians have “given away the store” when it comes to the creation/evolution discussion.

On January 6, 2011, Pullella posted an article titled, “God Was Behind the Big Bang, Universe No Accident: Pope.” In the article, he reported on a speech given by pope Benedict in Vatican City in which Benedict conceded that the Big Bang occurred, but that “God’s mind was behind complex scientific theories such as the Big Bang” (2011). Pullella further commented that the Catholic Church “now accepts evolution as a scientific theory” and “no longer teaches creationism—the belief that God created the world in six days as described in the Bible.”

The problem with Benedict’s position, and that of the Catholic church, is that they have “given away the store” to the evolutionists and atheistic cosmologists, in spite of the fact that real, experimental, verifiable science shows that the Big Bang is a scientific impossibility (see May, et al.) and that evolution is patently false (Sarfati, 1999). Gainsayers of Christ’s teachings can see exactly where such concessions logically lead. One skeptical reader who wrote a comment at the end of the article said, “sure, once you take out all the conflicts with science, you can have a guy who existed and taught stuff and was killed… but then how is that the son of god…?” In their attempt to appeal to the secular world, and make their message more palatable, the Catholic Church has conceded so much that its message does not contain the one thing that can set people free—the truth.

All those involved in defending the truth should keep in the forefront of our minds the reality that the majority of people in this world choose to believe things that are false and they travel down the broad road (Matthew 7:13-14). When we stand up for the truth, the world will hate us, just like it hated Jesus when He was on the Earth (John 15:18). Christians are not called to conform their minds to the false theories of the world, but to transform their minds by accepting and defending the truth (Romans 12:2), regardless of the social and political pressure to fit in. The Big Bang didn’t happen, evolution is not true, and there is much truth left “in store” for those who are willing to stand up against “science falsely so called.”

REFERENCES

Pullella, Philip (2011), “God Was Behind the Big Bang, Universe No Accident: Pope,” http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/06/us-pope-bigbang-idUSTRE7052OC20110106.

Sarfati, Jonathan (1999), Refuting Evolution (Green Forest, AR: Master Books).

May, Branyon, et al. (2003), “The Big Bang Theory—A Scientific Critique,” Reason & Revelation, http://apologeticspress.org/articles/2635.

3 Fundamentals of Spiritual Vision –Ken Weliever, The Preacherman

 


3 Fundamentals of Spiritual Vision

“I just can’t believe it,” gasped Rose Crawford as the doctor lifted the bandages from her eyes. For the first time in her life Rose saw a beautiful world of color.

Crawford, who had been blind for 50 years since birth, underwent a delicate surgery in an Ontario, Canada, hospital that restored her sight. But here’s the sad and stunning part of the story as related by David Sargent.

The operation had already been perfected 20 years earlier. The surgical techniques used could have given her vision when she was 30. The doctor said, “She just figured there was nothing that could be done about her condition.”

Why did Rose Crawford live in darkness longer than necessary? Possibly she thought her situation was hopeless. Probably she was not searching for a solution. Perhaps those who knew of the operation just never told her.

Rose’s story reminds us of the millions of people unnecessarily groping in spiritual darkness today. They are like those Jesus described whose eyes are blinded to the truth. Whether intentionally, or because they’re being led by others who are blind (Matt 13:13-17; 15:14).

As we continue our theme for the year “20/20 Vision: Restoring Our Focus,” consider 3 fundamentals necessary to open your eyes, restore your vision, and clearly see matters of spiritual importance.

#1 Spiritual vision begins with God. Not man. Not religious dogmas. Not subjective experiences. Not even your preacher or pastor.

Too many are blinded spiritually because they’re looking in the wrong direction. To the wrong person. And at the wrong things.

“In the beginning God…” It all starts with Him. “Draw near to God and He will draw near to you” (Jas 4:8).

Through the prophet Isaiah, Jehovah called on the people, “to Lift up your eyes on high.” He challenged them to see his power, might, and strength through the wonders of creation. (Isa. 40:25-26) The sun. The moon. The stars. The cosmos. The physical world in which we live. All serenely sing, “Our God. He is Alive.”

#2 Spiritual vision is opened, restored and enlightened by the Word of God. Like the Psalmist, our prayer and plea must be, “Open my eyes, that I may see Wondrous things from Your law” (Ps. 119:18).

Through the Word, we get a clearer view of who God is. His character. His nature. His personality. He’s our Heavenly Father. Our loving Shepherd. Our benevolent Protector. The gracious Giver of every good gift. And much more.

Human philosophy and personal opinions distort our image of God. But His Word allows us to clearly see Him and to see what His will is for our lives. Paul’s prayer for the Ephesian Christians and by implication for us, is that eyes of our understanding might be enlightened. When our spiritual vision is 20/20 we gain knowledge, receive wisdom, understand our purpose on earth, and get a glimpse of our future inheritance (Eph. 1:15-21).

#3 Spiritual vision is enhanced, enlarged and elevated by seeing and knowing Jesus Christ. “He who has seen Me, has seen the Father” (Jn 14:9) Jesus asserted.

The Bible affirms that Jesus is the “radiance of God’s glory and the “exact representation of His being” (Heb 1:3).

Through Jesus we see God’s goodness. Love. Mercy. Grace. Forgiveness. Compassion. Kindness. Patience. And holiness.

But we also see how we can become like Christ (Rom. 8:29, I Pet. 2:21-25). We receive precepts for daily living and principles by which we make better decisions. Jesus, the Great Physician, prescribes exactly what we need to solve our sin problem and mitigate the influence of Satan.

Our fervent desire and ardent ambition can be summed up in the supplication, “We want to see Jesus.”

The source and clarity of your spiritual vision will ultimately determine your final destiny.

–Ken Weliever, The Preacherman

DON'T BLAME ADAM FOR YOUR SIN BY STEVE FINNELL

 

http://steve-finnell.blogspot.com/2017/02/dont-blame-adam-for-your-sin-by-steve.html
 

 DON'T BLAME ADAM FOR YOUR SIN   BY STEVE FINNELL


Adam was the first man to sin. Adam was guilty of sin. Mankind does not share in the guilt of Adam's sin. Men are guilty of the sins they themselves commit. No person has to be forgiven for the sin that Adam committed. There is no such thing as guilt from original sin. Men do not inherited sin from Adam.

Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and death spread to all men,because all sinned---

All men will die because they sinned; not because Adam sinned.

James 1:14-15 But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. 15 Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.

Men sin and taste death because of their own desires. Do not blame Adam for your sins.

Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Men will receive wages for their own sin. They will not receive Adam's wages for his sin.

NO INFANT OR ADULT HAS TO BE FORGIVEN FOR THE SIN OF ADAM.

ALL MEN NEED TO BE FORGIVEN FOR THE SINS, THEY THEMSELVES COMMIT!

(All Scripture from: NEW KING JAMES VERSION)

 

Be holy in all your conduct by Roy Davison

 

http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Davison/Roy/Allen/1940/beholy.html

Be holy in all your conduct

This is a command of God. "But as He who called you is holy, you also be holy in all your conduct, because it is written, 'Be holy, for I am holy' " (1 Peter 1:15,16).

What does it mean to be holy and how is this possible?

The word 'holy' can mean: (1) set apart to the service of God, sacred; (2) spiritually pure, godly; (3) completely good, pure and righteous and therefore commanding absolute adoration and reverence.

God is the standard of holiness. Only He is completely good, pure and righteous. Only He is worthy of worship.

When 'holy' relates to people in Scripture, it means that they are dedicated to God, and that they participate to a certain extent in the characteristics of God, that they are spiritually pure and godly.

What a challenge, that God calls us to be holy! God created us in His own image. We ought to resemble Him.

Apostate churches often make a distinction between what they call 'clergy' and 'laity', a distinction not found in the Bible. The clergy (the ecclesiastical leaders) are presumed to be holy, but not much is expected of the laity (the common people).

According to the word of God, all Christians are to be holy. "You also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 2:5). "But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light" (1 Peter 2:9). Christians are a holy priesthood, a holy nation.

But there is a problem. Something unclean cannot be holy. Since we all have sinned, how can we be holy?

This is only possible with the help of God. We can be holy only if God cleanses us and makes us holy. This is called sanctification.

God wants to sanctify us. He is the only one who can do it. But we must co-operate. We must experience our sanctification, which includes avoiding evil and doing good, with God's help, of course.

"For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you should abstain from sexual immorality; that each of you should know how to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honor, not in passion of lust, like the Gentiles who do not know God; that no one should take advantage of and defraud his brother in this matter, because the Lord is the avenger of all such, as we also forewarned you and testified. For God did not call us to uncleanness, but in holiness" (1 Thessalonians 4:3-7).

We can be sanctified only by the blood of Christ: "For if the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies for the purifying of the flesh, how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?" (Hebrews 9:13,14). By the will of God "we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Christ once for all" (Hebrews 10:10).

The blood of Christ cleanses our conscience. Our sins are wiped out. We are sanctified. We are made holy. Thus purified, we may serve the living God.

Christ sanctifies His church so she can be His pure bride: "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for it, that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that He might present it to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that it should be holy and without blemish" (Ephesians 5:25-27).

This occurs when our sins are washed away at baptism (Acts 22:16). Paul wrote to the Corinthians: "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom, of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God" (1 Corinthians 6:9-11).

This also means that after our cleansing we may not continue in such practices. We must dedicate our lives to God in holiness. "But you have not so learned Christ, if indeed you have heard Him and have been taught by Him, as the truth is in Jesus: that you put off, concerning your former conduct, the old man which grows corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and that you put on the new man which was created according to God, in righteousness and true holiness" (Ephesians 4:20-24).

We are sanctified by the truth through the word of God. Jesus prayed for His followers: "Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth" (John 17:17). Paul told the Ephesian elders: "And now, brethren, I commend you to God and to the word of His grace, which is able to build you up and give you an inheritance among all those who are sanctified" (Acts 20:32).

Through the knowledge of Christ, God provides us with all we need: "Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord, as His divine power has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him who called us by glory and virtue, by which have been given to us exceedingly great and precious promises, that through these you may be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust" (2 Peter 1:2-4).

"Therefore, having these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God" (2 Corinthians 7:1).

"Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely; and may your whole spirit, soul, and body be preserved blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. He who calls you is faithful, who also will do it" (1 Thessalonians 5:23,24). Amen.

Roy Davison

The Scripture quotations in this article are from
The New King James Version. ©1979,1980,1982,
Thomas Nelson Inc., Publishers unless indicated otherwise.
Permission for reference use has been granted.

Published in The Old Paths Archive
(http://www.oldpaths.com)

Bible Reading for September 9 and 10 by Gary Rose

 

Bible Reading for September 9 and 10

World  English  Bible


Sept. 9

Psalms 52-54

Psa 52:1 Why do you boast of mischief, mighty man? God's loving kindness endures continually.

Psa 52:2 Your tongue plots destruction, like a sharp razor, working deceitfully.

Psa 52:3 You love evil more than good, lying rather than speaking the truth. Selah.

Psa 52:4 You love all devouring words, you deceitful tongue.

Psa 52:5 God will likewise destroy you forever. He will take you up, and pluck you out of your tent, and root you out of the land of the living. Selah.

Psa 52:6 The righteous also will see it, and fear, and laugh at him, saying,

Psa 52:7 "Behold, this is the man who didn't make God his strength, but trusted in the abundance of his riches, and strengthened himself in his wickedness."

Psa 52:8 But as for me, I am like a green olive tree in God's house. I trust in God's loving kindness forever and ever.

Psa 52:9 I will give you thanks forever, because you have done it. I will hope in your name, for it is good, in the presence of your saints.


Psa 53:1 The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt, and have done abominable iniquity. There is no one who does good.

Psa 53:2 God looks down from heaven on the children of men, to see if there are any who understood, who seek after God.

Psa 53:3 Every one of them has gone back. They have become filthy together. There is no one who does good, no, not one.

Psa 53:4 Have the workers of iniquity no knowledge, who eat up my people as they eat bread, and don't call on God?

Psa 53:5 There they were in great fear, where no fear was, for God has scattered the bones of him who encamps against you. You have put them to shame, because God has rejected them.

Psa 53:6 Oh that the salvation of Israel would come out of Zion! When God brings back his people from captivity, then Jacob shall rejoice, and Israel shall be glad.


Psa 54:1 Save me, God, by your name. Vindicate me in your might.

Psa 54:2 Hear my prayer, God. Listen to the words of my mouth.

Psa 54:3 For strangers have risen up against me. Violent men have sought after my soul. They haven't set God before them. Selah.

Psa 54:4 Behold, God is my helper. The Lord is the one who sustains my soul.

Psa 54:5 He will repay the evil to my enemies. Destroy them in your truth.

Psa 54:6 With a free will offering, I will sacrifice to you. I will give thanks to your name, Yahweh, for it is good.

Psa 54:7 For he has delivered me out of all trouble. My eye has seen triumph over my enemies.


Sept. 10

Psalms 55-57

Psa 55:1 Listen to my prayer, God. Don't hide yourself from my supplication.

Psa 55:2 Attend to me, and answer me. I am restless in my complaint, and moan,

Psa 55:3 Because of the voice of the enemy, Because of the oppression of the wicked. For they bring suffering on me. In anger they hold a grudge against me.

Psa 55:4 My heart is severely pained within me. The terrors of death have fallen on me.

Psa 55:5 Fearfulness and trembling have come on me. Horror has overwhelmed me.

Psa 55:6 I said, "Oh that I had wings like a dove! Then I would fly away, and be at rest.

Psa 55:7 Behold, then I would wander far off. I would lodge in the wilderness." Selah.

Psa 55:8 "I would hurry to a shelter from the stormy wind and storm."

Psa 55:9 Confuse them, Lord, and confound their language, for I have seen violence and strife in the city.

Psa 55:10 Day and night they prowl around on its walls. Malice and abuse are also within her.

Psa 55:11 Destructive forces are within her. Threats and lies don't depart from her streets.

Psa 55:12 For it was not an enemy who insulted me, then I could have endured it. Neither was it he who hated me who raised himself up against me, then I would have hid myself from him.

Psa 55:13 But it was you, a man like me, my companion, and my familiar friend.

Psa 55:14 We took sweet fellowship together. We walked in God's house with company.

Psa 55:15 Let death come suddenly on them. Let them go down alive into Sheol. For wickedness is in their dwelling, in the midst of them.

Psa 55:16 As for me, I will call on God. Yahweh will save me.

Psa 55:17 Evening, morning, and at noon, I will cry out in distress. He will hear my voice.

Psa 55:18 He has redeemed my soul in peace from the battle that was against me, although there are many who oppose me.

Psa 55:19 God, who is enthroned forever, will hear, and answer them. Selah. They never change, who don't fear God.

Psa 55:20 He raises his hands against his friends. He has violated his covenant.

Psa 55:21 His mouth was smooth as butter, but his heart was war. His words were softer than oil, yet they were drawn swords.

Psa 55:22 Cast your burden on Yahweh, and he will sustain you. He will never allow the righteous to be moved.

Psa 55:23 But you, God, will bring them down into the pit of destruction. Bloodthirsty and deceitful men shall not live out half their days, but I will trust in you.


Psa 56:1 Be merciful to me, God, for man wants to swallow me up. All day long, he attacks and oppresses me.

Psa 56:2 My enemies want to swallow me up all day long, for they are many who fight proudly against me.

Psa 56:3 When I am afraid, I will put my trust in you.

Psa 56:4 In God, I praise his word. In God, I put my trust. I will not be afraid. What can flesh do to me?

Psa 56:5 All day long they twist my words. All their thoughts are against me for evil.

Psa 56:6 They conspire and lurk, watching my steps, they are eager to take my life.

Psa 56:7 Shall they escape by iniquity? In anger cast down the peoples, God.

Psa 56:8 You number my wanderings. You put my tears into your bottle. Aren't they in your book?

Psa 56:9 Then my enemies shall turn back in the day that I call. I know this, that God is for me.

Psa 56:10 In God, I will praise his word. In Yahweh, I will praise his word.

Psa 56:11 I have put my trust in God. I will not be afraid. What can man do to me?

Psa 56:12 Your vows are on me, God. I will give thank offerings to you.

Psa 56:13 For you have delivered my soul from death, and prevented my feet from falling, that I may walk before God in the light of the living.


Psa 57:1 Be merciful to me, God, be merciful to me, for my soul takes refuge in you. Yes, in the shadow of your wings, I will take refuge, until disaster has passed.

Psa 57:2 I cry out to God Most High, to God who accomplishes my requests for me.

Psa 57:3 He will send from heaven, and save me, he rebukes the one who is pursuing me. Selah. God will send out his loving kindness and his truth.

Psa 57:4 My soul is among lions. I lie among those who are set on fire, even the sons of men, whose teeth are spears and arrows, and their tongue a sharp sword.

Psa 57:5 Be exalted, God, above the heavens! Let your glory be above all the earth!

Psa 57:6 They have prepared a net for my steps. My soul is bowed down. They dig a pit before me. They fall into its midst themselves. Selah.

Psa 57:7 My heart is steadfast, God, my heart is steadfast. I will sing, yes, I will sing praises.

Psa 57:8 Wake up, my glory! Wake up, psaltery and harp! I will wake up the dawn.

Psa 57:9 I will give thanks to you, Lord, among the peoples. I will sing praises to you among the nations.

Psa 57:10 For your great loving kindness reaches to the heavens, and your truth to the skies.

Psa 57:11 Be exalted, God, above the heavens. Let your glory be over all the earth. 

 

Sept. 9

1 Corinthians 5

1Co 5:1 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and such sexual immorality as is not even named among the Gentiles, that one has his father's wife.

1Co 5:2 You are puffed up, and didn't rather mourn, that he who had done this deed might be removed from among you.

1Co 5:3 For I most certainly, as being absent in body but present in spirit, have already, as though I were present, judged him who has done this thing.

1Co 5:4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, you being gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,

1Co 5:5 are to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

1Co 5:6 Your boasting is not good. Don't you know that a little yeast leavens the whole lump?

1Co 5:7 Purge out the old yeast, that you may be a new lump, even as you are unleavened. For indeed Christ, our Passover, has been sacrificed in our place.

1Co 5:8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old yeast, neither with the yeast of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

1Co 5:9 I wrote to you in my letter to have no company with sexual sinners;

1Co 5:10 yet not at all meaning with the sexual sinners of this world, or with the covetous and extortioners, or with idolaters; for then you would have to leave the world.

1Co 5:11 But as it is, I wrote to you not to associate with anyone who is called a brother who is a sexual sinner, or covetous, or an idolater, or a slanderer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner. Don't even eat with such a person.

1Co 5:12 For what have I to do with also judging those who are outside? Don't you judge those who are within?

1Co 5:13 But those who are outside, God judges. "Put away the wicked man from among yourselves."


Sept. 10

1 Corinthians 6

1Co 6:1 Dare any of you, having a matter against his neighbor, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints?

1Co 6:2 Don't you know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters?

1Co 6:3 Don't you know that we will judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life?

1Co 6:4 If then, you have to judge things pertaining to this life, do you set them to judge who are of no account in the assembly?

1Co 6:5 I say this to move you to shame. Isn't there even one wise man among you who would be able to decide between his brothers?

1Co 6:6 But brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers!

1Co 6:7 Therefore it is already altogether a defect in you, that you have lawsuits one with another. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded?

1Co 6:8 No, but you yourselves do wrong, and defraud, and that against your brothers.

1Co 6:9 Or don't you know that the unrighteous will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Don't be deceived. Neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor male prostitutes, nor homosexuals,

1Co 6:10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor slanderers, nor extortioners, will inherit the Kingdom of God.

1Co 6:11 Such were some of you, but you were washed. But you were sanctified. But you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and in the Spirit of our God.

1Co 6:12 "All things are lawful for me," but not all things are expedient. "All things are lawful for me," but I will not be brought under the power of anything.

1Co 6:13 "Foods for the belly, and the belly for foods," but God will bring to nothing both it and them. But the body is not for sexual immorality, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body.

1Co 6:14 Now God raised up the Lord, and will also raise us up by his power.

1Co 6:15 Don't you know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them members of a prostitute? May it never be!

1Co 6:16 Or don't you know that he who is joined to a prostitute is one body? For, "The two," says he, "will become one flesh."

1Co 6:17 But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit.

1Co 6:18 Flee sexual immorality! "Every sin that a man does is outside the body," but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body.

1Co 6:19 Or don't you know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit which is in you, which you have from God? You are not your own,

1Co 6:20 for you were bought with a price. Therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God's.