Denominationalism Is Sinful

In the discussion of denominationalism and its evils, I am discussing the question, "Is it possible for one to know for certain when he is in the church the Lord had in mind when He said in Matthew 16:18, '...I will build my church..."? If I can find that church, and how to enter it, then I will have paved the way for the destruction of all denominations, for they will be of no more use in this world. 

It is common to hear people say, "How can you know which one is the church the Lord built?" They say, "Since you cannot know which one He built, then we just get in a branch of the church." The Lord said, "I will build my church..." He never said, "I will build branches of my church." Now for one to know that the "branch" of which he is a member is a "branch" of the church the Lord built, he would have to find the church the Lord built. If he could not find the one the Lord built, how could he know that the thing he is in was a "branch" of it? Well, if he found the one the Lord built, then why not just come down out of the limb and get in that which the Lord said He built? 

Now turn with me to Acts 2, and find out just how we become members of the church of the Lord. It is the day of Pentecost. The promise of the Lord to His disciples of the Spirit has been fulfilled (Acts 2:33). They are now speaking as moved by the Spirit, (Acts 2:1-4), Who came to guide them into all truth (John 16:13)? That truth is now being spoken. It is from heaven, and not from men. 

On that day, Peter told them they had crucified the Lord of Glory, and that they did it by wicked hands. He brought the Old Testament prophets to witness that the things taking place there that day were the things spoken of by them, that Christ was raised in fulfillment of them, and that He was raised up to sit on the throne of their father, David. He declared that Christ was at that time exalted at the right hand of God, and commanded them to know assuredly that this same Jesus whom they had crucified was then made both Lord and Christ. 

They were cut to their hearts by this message. Nothing but faith, or belief, in that message would have cut them to the heart and made them inquire, "...What shall we do?" (Acts 2:37). Thus faith comes before repentance, Baptist preachers notwithstanding. Then, guided by the Holy Spirit, Peter answered that question in these words: "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the Gift of the Holy Ghost." (Acts 2:38). Not a denominational preacher that I know will give that answer and stay with it all the way through. Did you ever hear a Methodist, Baptist, or Presbyterian preacher give that answer? Why do they not give it? It is not the doctrine of denominationalism. The Lord is the author of Peter's answer. Man has made an answer to fit his denomination. God did not build a denomination, branch, or limb of the church, and neither has He given the various doctrines that govern those "limbs." He built the church and gave the terms of admission into it, and here those terms were given. 

How do I know that to believe the word of the Lord, repent of sins, and be baptized for the remission of sins are the conditions of membership in the church of the Lord? Hear the book as it speaks in verse 41: "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls." Verse 47: "...And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved." 

Now we have a question or two to ask. The Lord said in Matthew 16:18, "I will build my church..." In Acts 2:47, the record says "...the Lord added to the church..." To which church did the Lord add them? He said He was going to build His church, and here we find Him adding to the church. To ask that question is to answer it. He added them to the church He built. What had they done? Those who believed what Peter preached were told to, "Repent, and be baptized...for the remission of sins..." So they were not members of a church that will not preach that same thing. But those who did that back there were members of the church the Lord built, and it looks like all preachers could see this. 

Did you know that the Lord did not take 500 of them and add them to the Baptist Church, then add 500 to the Methodist Church, 500 to the Nazarene Church, etc., until He got them all situated? There were no such denominations then. These denominations are the products of error taught in our land, and if all taught today just what Peter taught then, there would be no denominations and we would all be one. Someone is teaching error, and that is the church — or churches — that deny what Peter preached as being necessary today. If you are in one that will not teach what he did, then you are in the wrong one. It could not even be a "branch" or "limb" — if there were such a thing — for you would have the branch trying to destroy the trunk! 

What is the danger in being in that which the Lord did not build? In Matthew 15:13, Jesus said, "Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up." Be it remembered, He never did say, "I will build branches of the church as warring denominations." He said, "I will build my church," and it was one body (I Corinthians 12:13; Ephesians 2:16). 

Now, since He never promised to build "branches" of the church — one teaching one thing and the other denying it — but since He promised, and built His church, and has definitely said He will root up all He has not planted, don't you think you'd best be thinking whether you are out on a limb that has no connection with the Lord's building program, or whether you are in that which the Father sent His Son to build? 

Friends, get out of denominations now and come to the sermon preached by Peter and obey it, and let the Lord add you to the church, as we of the church of the Lord beg you to do. We have done just what they did on Pentecost. Since God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34; Romans 2:11), He has added us to the church He built, just as He did those on the day of Pentecost, and will add you to that same church if you will obey Him.

E. R. Harper

 

A REVIEW OF THE BIBLE - Part 3*

Episode 5 "Survival"

Part 3 of the miniseries on The Bible contains the fifth and final hour devoted to the Old Testament and also the first hour of dealing with the New. The previous hour had ended with David’s life, with only an honorable mention made of Solomon. His glorious reign is not mentioned; neither is the division of the kingdom after his death. Nothing is said of Rehoboam and Jeroboam, nor his putting the two golden calves in Dan and Bethel. The northern kingdom is never heard of again. The series is silent about Ahab and Jezebel, the time period of Elijah and Elisha. None of the southern kings are noticed, either (Asa, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Manasseh, Josiah). Any reference to the Assyrian Captivity is absent. The viewer is instead taken to just prior to the Babylonian Captivity and King Zedekiah, who is described as the 21st king of Israel.    

Zedekiah was, in fact, the 19th king over the southern kingdom, following three kings of the united kingdom (Saul, David, and Solomon), which obviously would make him the 22nd king—unless they did not count Saul since he was of Benjamin rather than Judah, but if so, they are the only ones we know who count the kings in that manner. No reference work calls Zedekiah the 21st king.    

Jeremiah and Zedekiah do speak to each other, but the conversation they had alone is not shown. Jeremiah tells the king to surrender or die, and he is beat up. The producers did get one part correct—Zedekiah and his sons do escape through a secret passage and are caught. His sons are killed before his eyes, and then his eyes are put out. Daniel and his three friends are taken alive, but Jeremiah is said to escape. In actuality, Jeremiah was set free by the conquering Babylonians and was given the choice to do whatever he wanted. He chose to stay with a remnant of Israel, who decided, against the counsel of God, to go into Egypt. None of those things, however, were referenced; instead the focus of attention now becomes Babylon. 

Babylon    

When Daniel interprets Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, he only mentions Babylon and the kingdom of God. Nothing is said of Medo-Persia, Greece, or Rome. When Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah (whose Babylonian names are Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego) told Daniel they could not bow down to the king’s golden idol, he tried to talk them out of it, saying, “Don’t do this; he’ll kill you.” Really? One does not expect this behavior from one of the most faithful men of God who ever lived. The reason he is not required to bow down is that he is considered part of the king’s party (thus exempt from the command). The image stands above them, and apparently the fiery furnace is below this observation deck. Daniel does, however, try to talk the king out of punishing them, claiming, “They will serve you faithfully, all their lives, as I will, but they will only worship God.”     

This fiery furnace bore no resemblance to the one described in the Scriptures. Rather than being thrown into a furnace seven times hotter than normal from above, they are made to walk into it; then the fire is lit. God appears in the furnace, and the three lads come to no harm. King Nebuchadnezzar cannot believe it. He puts his hand forth toward the fire and brings it back burned. While this serves to show that the fire is real and that it was a miracle that the young men were not consumed in flames, it is not the way the event occurred. Afterward, the people of Judah are told to arise. All other captives apparently had no objection to worshiping the image.     

In the Scriptures, Nebuchadnezzar becomes a wild beast that forages in the fields, but in this version he is imprisoned in chains and seems to die as a raving madman. Daniel laments that he is unable to help the Jews and says they will need to rely on the next king. Actually, King Nebuchadnezzar’s sanity was restored. Cyrus and Daniel    Cyrus is let into the city of Babylon without a fight. It is stated that the Babylonians knew they didn’t stand a chance. Had those producing this miniseries read Daniel 5, they would have known that the kingdom of Babylon fell the night that Daniel interpreted the writing on the wall for Belshazzar, who did not welcome a new king to take charge from him, but rather he was slain (Dan. 5: 30). The king that conquered Babylon (and he did so by diverting the water that flowed into the city so his soldiers could enter surreptitiously) was Darius the Mede. It is in the reign of Darius that Daniel is thrown into the lion’s den; Cyrus is only mentioned at the close of Daniel 6 (v. 28).    Trying to persuade Cyrus that he should let Israel return to their land, Daniel says, “There’s a prophet here in Babylon—Isaiah…” and then he points to the prophecy of Isaiah (44:28 or 45:1) saying that Cyrus will let them go. The only problem is that Isaiah had died 100 years earlier, having preached from about 740-700 B.C. (This event occurs about 536 B.C.)    

When Daniel is taken to the den of lions, it is by his enemies; no king comes to wish him well, but he does show up the next morning. Only two lions were visible, for some reason, we always envisioned more than two. This segment ends with Cyrus granting leave to Israel to return to their land. But nothing is mentioned of Ezra, Nehemiah, or Esther, the rebuilding of the temple, or the rebuilding of the walls of Jerusalem. As the Jews leave the city, Daniel speaks some sort of prophecy which ties together certain elements that have no connection to one another. The Old Testament five hours now comes to an end, and now the viewer will see how they handle the New Testament.

Episode 6 "Hope"

Rome and Herod    

As the New Testament era begins, the narrator comments that Israel suffered under the Romans like never before. Hmm. Does that include when they lived a life made bitter with hard bondage under Egypt? Was the government of Rome worse than being conquered by Babylon, in which thousands were killed and others were taken captive? Of this sorrowful event Jeremiah wrote his Lamentations. Was it worse than life under Antiochus Epiphanes, who offered a sow on the altar in Jerusalem, thus causing rebellion to erupt? To be sure, Rome was despised and hated, and probably at times their ruthlessness rivaled some of these other occasions, but it would be a stretch to say that it was worse.    

Although the Bible does not mention it, Herod the Great allegedly put an eagle (the symbol of Rome) above the Jewish temple, which caused great offense. Some men are killed while trying to remove it. Herod seems like another contender for Monday Night Raw on the USA network. He is totally self-absorbed, which likely is an accurate portrayal. He seldom speaks without bellowing.   

Mary is greeted by an angel in the midst of a skirmish between Jewish zealots and Rome. Their conversation is not lengthy. Soon she begins showing, and Joseph spurns her. She asks him to believe her and to trust her—that she had not been with a man. He rejects her pleas, saying, “Mary, God doesn’t do this to people like us.” Interesting. However, after an angel speaks to him, he defends her and rescues her from a crowd that was on the verge of stoning her. Nothing is reported concerning her visit to see Elizabeth, who was about to give birth to John the Baptizer.   

Herod only consults the priests after the wise men leave. Predictably, the wise men come to Mary and Joseph in the stable on the night Jesus was born rather than when they were living in a house some time later (Matt. 2:11). Instead of being warned by an angel to leave Bethlehem for Egypt, Joseph sees a vision of Rome coming, and they leave. The narrator says, “And one child escapes.” Technically, that is true, but it was due to God’s intervention. The soldiers do come and kill the remaining children.    

One final event occurs with Herod. He has his oldest son brought in, and he is put to death before the wicked king himself dies. The Jews stage a rebellion, sensing an opportune moment, but it fails, and about 2,000 are crucified in Galilee. This event concludes this section of history.

The Baptism of Jesus    

One of the more well done events of the miniseries arrives at this point. John is preaching and immersing people. We can almost forgive a dozen inaccuracies for getting this important fact right! The reason that we rejoice in this accurate portrayal is that some have made movies with John waist-deep in the Jordan River, with people wading out to him while he preaches—and then he pours water over their heads! Apparently, no one is supposed to ask, “Why would John be out in the middle of the river if he only needed to pour a little water on someone? How preposterous is that!     

But in The Bible John is doing it correctly. When he sees Jesus, he says that he had need to be baptized of the Lord. However, instead of Jesus saying, “Allow it to be so to fulfill all righteousness, He says, “What you are doing is right,” which must be another one of those lackluster dynamic equivalences. Also, John only says that Jesus will baptize with fire, omitting the part about “with the Holy Spirit.” After Jesus’ baptism, a picture of clouds rolling along overhead is shown, but there is no voice, which says, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased”—and no Holy Spirit descending as a dove.

The Temptations in the Wilderness    

Jesus is walking through the wilderness after His 40 days without food, and he falls to the ground from weakness. While he is lying there, a serpent slithers over His body. He sits up and turns around to see a hooded figure approaching Him. Satan, who has long black nails, picks up a rock and throws it to Jesus. He catches it, but it has become bread. Challenged by Satan to turn the stone into bread, Jesus answers that man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God. Unfortunately, for the second temptation, Satan only asks Jesus to throw Himself off a cliff instead of the pinnacle of the temple. His answer varies from the Scriptures here in that He says, “How dare you put God to the test?”    

But the third temptation is done most cleverly. As Satan is offering Jesus all the kingdoms of the world, He experiences alternate visions. He is seated upon a throne of splendor, and Pilate places a crown upon His head; this vision is countered by one in which the crown of thorns is placed upon His head. Pilate pours water on his ankle and foot, kissing Him there, but he also sees the nails being driven into His body, with Pilate saying “Crucify Him!” Jesus answers Satan, “I worship the Lord My God and serve Him only.” The serpent slithers off.    

This scene became the most controversial of the entire series because the appearance of Satan was a cross between the Sith Lord of Star Wars and Barack Obama. Many believe this resemblance was intentional, since the actor portraying Satan is white. Others, however, point out that Roma Downey and Mark Burnett are supporters of Obama. So, it remains a mystery how this likeness occurred. Maybe, it is just that the devil is in the details.

The Conclusion    

The sixth hour of the series ends with the death of John the Baptizer intertwined with the calling of Peter to be His disciple. Jesus walks out to Peter’s boat and asks for a hand to get inside, which Peter gives Him. Then he asks, “What do you think you’re doing?” Jesus smiles and replies, “We’re going fishing.” Peter has protested that there are no fish out there, but they haul in two nets full. Andrew, James, and John are not around. Jesus offers to make him a fisher of men. “What are we going to do?” Peter asks. “Change the world,” the Lord replies. Jesus never said those words, but He did in fact change the world.     

Meanwhile, Herod Antipas is visiting John the Immerser in prison. Herod says, “What am I going to do with you and your dangerous mouth?” The viewer has no comprehension of the reason John is in prison. Nothing is portrayed of John telling him that it was not lawful for him to have his brother Philip’s wife. John answers that Herod should listen. Herod asks: “To a seditious fool? I don’t think so.” John answers that he should listen to God’s message. As per the miniseries, John’s only crime was mentioning the coming King. Just before Herod has him killed, John says, “He is already here.” Nothing is said about Herodias and her daughter’s part in his death—or the fact that this was all due to his preaching on the subject of marriage and divorce.

Gary W. Summers

*altered format from original publishing to correspond to aired episodes

 

A REVIEW OF THE BIBLE - Part 2*

Episode 3 "Homeland"

Jericho    

The fall of Jericho closed out the first two hours and began the next two. Over all, it was fairly well done, with Rahab saying that she did not know how the people could fight against the God of Israel. Okay, there were a few inaccuracies. The spies climbed up the outside wall to get in; they had to fight a skirmish or two in the streets. They entered Rahab’s house and threatened to kill a child if she did not help, and the scarlet cord was on the door to the city instead of the outside wall, but at least it accurately conveyed the power of God. The Commander of the Lord made an appearance to Joshua; the Israelites marched around the city as directed and then shouted, after which the walls collapsed. No mention was made of the parting of the Jordan River so that Israel could reach Jericho.

Samson    

The worst representation of a Bible event thus far in the series pertains to Samson. Forget the fact that Samson and his mother are both Black (what branch of the Israelites were they?). Samson’s father, Manoah, seems not to exist. He neither appears nor is referenced, thus missing an opportunity to use one of the great lines in the Bible, when he prayed to God for Him to “teach us what we shall do for the child who will be born” (Judges 13:8). Instead, when the angel of the Lord announces to Samson’s mother that she will have a son who will be a Nazarite, she seems to be pregnant instantaneously, which would constitute a virgin birth. Whether this idea was intended or not, Samson has no father. Besides, would a virgin-born child have behaved as immorally as Samson did?    

Whereas Samson’s wife was given to another, the producers omitted that fact, along with Samson setting the foxes on fire. They just burn her and her father to death. When the Philistines enlist Delilah’s cooperation to bring Samson down, she protests that he is a changed man since he met her. However, money talks and she gives in. He tells her the secret of his strength the first time she asks. After he is blinded, he stands between two pillars, but they are not that close together. He keeps running and banging into first one and then the other until he knocks them down. Samson also looks as though he could be on Wrestlemania. His mother mourns his death amidst the rubble. 

Samuel, Saul, and David    

Beginning with Samuel, the series improves (it would almost have to). The people demand a king of Samuel and tell him that his sons are not righteous as he is, all of which is correct. Samuel anoints Saul, and one wonders how many times the actor playing Samuel had to practice anointing someone’s forehead without the oil coming down into the recipient’s eyes. Saul and the people bring Agag back alive, but Samuel just stabbed him with a sword rather than hacking him to pieces (not that anyone wanted to see Agag dismembered; it simply could have been commented on).    

Episode 4 "Kingdom" 

When Saul anoints David, there is no mention of his family or his brothers. David’s relationship with Jonathan and Michal were accurately portrayed, which was refreshing. When David faced Goliath, he took five stones from the ground where the army was rather than from the brook, and an interesting touch was David saying portions of the 23rd psalm as he went out to face the giant. The producers also included the part about David giving Saul 200 foreskins of the Philistines in order to have Michal as his wife.    

Saul’s execution of the priests of Nob was not particularly well done. The student of the Word waits in vain for the priests there to defend themselves, claiming that David was the king’s son-in-law, but the three of them only offer a feeble response to Saul. One would never have imagined that there were 70 who were put to death. When David and his men have a chance to kill Saul in the cave, Saul proves to be ungrateful for having his life spared.

This is a different interpretation than what is recorded in the Scriptures. And who is David’s right-hand (not to mention handsome) man in the cave? One wonders if it is Joab, but it proves to be another.    

Saul cries out to God that he has been God’s faithful servant, which is presumptuous since he has continually tried to kill David, an innocent man, and since he was so bold as to kill the priests of God. It does indicate that God is not speaking to him, but how much longer would it have taken for him to say that God had not communicated with him by means of dreams, by Urim, or by the prophets (Samuel was now dead)? There is no woman with a familiar spirit at Endor to whom Saul goes in this version of the Scriptures.    

When it comes to that last battle that Saul has with the Philistines, Jonathan dies first, and Saul is grieving at his loss. Rather than being wounded, however, or having an armor-bearer, Saul falls on his sword because of the loss of his son. An Amalekite furtively enters the battleground and removes Saul’s crown, which he takes to David, thinking he will receive a reward. He is taken away as David laments, “How the mighty are fallen!” Much of this movie seems to be done the way some translators approach the Scriptures—via the “dynamic equivalent” route. Sometimes, the key facts are present, but the way some of the events occurred had a wide latitude of interpretation. 

David’s Reign

The second two-hour episode of The Bible concludes with a few events from David’s reign. One of those is the conquering of Jerusalem, which will serve as David’s capital city (don’t even try to find anything about Abner and Ishbosheth). David offered to whomever climbed up into Jerusalem by means of the water shaft the position of chief and captain, but David himself leads the way in this presentation.   

Then there is the transportation of the ark into Jerusalem, and David is leaping and dancing as it occurs. Now we discover who David’s trusty lieutenant is—Uriah the Hittite. Yes, they have been close warriors for some time now. And (sit down for this one), David dances with Uriah’s wife in public, amidst all the rejoicing about the ark. Apparently, this is a precursor to what happened later, thus making David’s sin even worse, since Uriah seems to be his most faithful soldier. The idea that a king and a woman would have actually danced in public together is ludicrous. Nothing like that ever happened.    

Bathsheba’s famous bath does not occur at night but in broad daylight; nothing is mentioned of David’s other wives. David comes on rather aggressively to her, but she protests that she is loyal to her husband. David responds by saying, “No one will know.” Surely, David knew better than that. Although it may not be the worst blunder in the ten hours of the series, it is certainly one of the greatest disservices to the viewer when Nathan confronts David.    

In the Bible, Nathan comes and tells the king of a poor man who only had one ewe lamb, which was taken by a wealthy man to serve to a guest (although he had plenty of his own). As David becomes enraged at this behavior, Nathan says to him: “Thou art the man!” David immediately humbles himself and repents after this brilliant method of showing his sin to him. In the miniseries, Nathan says to David, “You think you can sweep what you’ve done under the carpet.” Really? Is this supposed to be some modern dynamic equivalent to 2 Samuel 12? Phooey! It sounds more like a petty dispute than a serious matter.    

The conclusion of part two contains a very ominous statement. There is a mention of Solomon (one of the few ever given), and the words used are chilling. “Solomon will build God’s temple, but, like his father, he’ll find it impossible to obey God’s commandments.” Was David just compelled to commit adultery? Could he not have prevented it? Would Solomon have no choice but to build idolatrous temples for his foreign wives? Surely, these words are not trying to excuse adultery, murder, and idolatry. Of course, people are going to be guilty of lesser things and be in need of His grace. And those who commit these atrocities can still be forgiven through God’s grace, but these words make it sound as though we have no control over anything we do, which has the effect of removing us from personal responsibility or guilt. That the producers chose such words with which to close a segment of The Bible is quite perplexing.

Gary W. Summers

*altered format from original publishing to correspond to aired episodes

 

A REVIEW OF THE BIBLE - Part 1*

Episode 1 "In The Beginning"

The week before this 10-hour series premiered (3-3-13), Roma Downey (Touched by an Angel) and her husband Mark Burnett (Survivor, Celebrity Apprentice, Shark Tank) made guest appearances on various television shows to promote The Bible, which together they produced. They assured audiences that they had consulted several sources in order to be accurate, two of them were Rick Warren (The Purpose-Driven Life and The Purpose-Driven Church) and Joel Osteen, also a successful writer. Neither one of them would probably know enough to compete against a group of fifth-graders in a Bible Bowl. Still, many of us held out hope—until the first night; then we knew the presentation was only going to be accurate in spots while at other times it lost out to fanciful thinking and outright distortion.    

The way it began was interesting—with the Flood. While the ark is being tossed about on the waves, Noah recounts the history of the world. He describes each day of creation, while depictions of what occurred on those days are shown. When Adam arose from the ground, his face was caked with clay; the special effects were quite good. And, mirabile dictu (marvelous to say), when Adam and Eve ate from the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, it was not an apple. This fact alone was enough to make Bible students want to stand up and cheer! The size of the ark was considerable, and the flood was worldwide. Praise is due for getting all of these important details correct.    

But, the inside of the ark was a mess, water pouring in from everywhere. Back in 1958, the Four Preps had a number 2 hit record with “26 Miles.” It went: “26 Miles across the sea, Santa Catalina, is awaitin’ for me. Santa Catalina, the island of romance, romance, romance, romance. Another verse switches measurements, beginning with, “40 kilometers in a leaky old boat.” That is what the ark resembled. Noah at one point picks up a mallet and drives a peg back into the side of the ark. No evidence of pitch is seen anywhere.  

The audience could probably overlook Noah talking in an Irish (or Scottish) accent, although it seems peculiar since there was only one language at this time in the world. But the big question was, “To whom was Noah reciting all the details of creation?” It was not an adult, but someone about the age of 13-15. Only eight souls were on the ark; so who was this girl? She certainly was not Noah’s wife or any of his sons’ wives. A Bible student has got to be wondering where this girl came from. Apparently, she was made up out of thin air. It would have worked just as well if Noah had been recounting these things to his daughters-in-law or the entire family. The rainbow after the Flood was nice. 

Abraham and Lot    

Few events and Bible personalities are mentioned. The Tower of Babel is entirely omitted, and we find Abraham being told by God to go to a new land. “We already have a land,” Lot’s wife says. The viewer has a bad feeling about her from the get-go. After the herdsmen struggle, it is her idea for them to separate. Abraham protests that the family must stay together. Uh, well, actually it was Abraham’s idea that they separate (Gen. 13:8-12).    

When the four kings square off against the five cities of the plain (Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboiim, and Zoar), and Lot’s family is captured, Abram rescues him. Before even thanking him for saving them, they tell Abraham that they are going to move to Sodom while he again insists that they should stay together. Then comes the visit from the three angels, and those watching the program begin to understand what it is like to see portrayal of Bible personalities in a multicultural age. The angel of the Lord looks Jewish, but the other two are Black and Asian. When they get to Sodom, they look like they have been beaten, and they appeal to Lot for help. No, it’s not quite the same as Lot seeing them at the gate and inviting them home.  

When a few men of Sodom knock at the door, the angels then go out to face them, and the angels give them a vicious look, which makes them hurtfully blind. But others come, and the Asian angel reaches over his head to remove two swords strapped to his back. He and the Black angel slice their way through the men with ease, looking satisfied with the carnage. Nothing is said about Lot offering his two daughters, which is just as well, since they look to be about 11-13 years of age. Furthermore, as one critic put it, if the viewer did not already know what the sin of Sodom was, he would not have learned it from this miniseries.

Abraham and Sarah  

 The best scene between Abraham and Sarah involved her giving her handmaid Hagar to him. The viewer gets to see what a bad idea this was, without the characters ever having to say a word. The looks on their faces were sufficient. Many of the characters seem dirty all the time, and Sarah does not seem so beautiful that the king of Gerar would just have to have her, but these are minor points.     

When God tells Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, He responds by saying, “Haven’t I shown my faith to you enough?” But he obeys, nevertheless. Instead of traveling away three days with his servants, he climbs a hill in his back yard instead. When Sarah realizes what is going on, she chases after them. Abraham struggles with Isaac, who is not cooperating. After the angel of the Lord calls to him, and he does not need to kill Isaac, he turns around and sees a baby sheep (instead of a ram). Sarah arrives and thinks Isaac has been sacrificed, but then he walks into view.

Episode 2 "Exodus"

Moses    

Jacob and Joseph are part of one sentence in the narrative, and then the focus of attention moves to Moses. As in Cecil B. DeMille’s classic, The Ten Commandments, Moses does not know his heritage (even though he was nurtured by his own mother). He does kill a taskmaster, but a slave hides the body for him. He leaves Egypt, but no mention is made of him having a wife or children during the 40 years that follow.    

He steps out of his tent to see the burning bush (neatly done) in his back yard. There is not much conversation between the two of them. God does not require him to remove his sandals because he is standing on holy ground, nor does Moses make five excuses not to go deliver the Israelites. He asks God, “Are you real?” The Lord answers, “I AM.” Moses readily accepts his assignment.    

When Moses and Aaron first demand the release of the Israelites, there is no rod turning into a serpent; in fact, they are beaten and removed from Pharaoh’s presence. Nothing is said about making bricks without straw. Moses and Aaron view Pharaoh swimming in the Nile from afar. When the rod turns the Nile red, Pharaoh emerges all bloody—even on his head.  

Pharaoh looks and sounds like a refugee from Wrestlemania. He can only shout. When the people are released from Egypt, it only looks like about 500 people on the shore instead of 2-3 million, and they only cross the sea a few at a time, which would have probably taken six years. There was no pillar of cloud or fire, moving from the front of the camp to the rear to fend off the Egyptians. The closing of the sea was the most well done part of the account. God did not speak the Ten Commandments to the people, and Moses’ receiving of them could not match the DeMille version. Nothing is said about a golden calf, either, and the quick departure of the people from God.

Gary W. Summers

*altered format from original publishing to correspond to aired episodes

Thoughts on the Words of Our Prayers

All that we do in word or deed (prayer involves both) must be that which the Lord authorizes (Colossians 3:17). Those who lead such prayers in our assemblies at times use expressions they apparently have not thought about very carefully. Faithful brethren will ever seek to conform their prayers to wording that conveys only Scriptural concepts. With these factors in mind, as one who at times misspeaks, I humbly suggest reappraisal (and abandonment) of some of the prayer terminology I hear on occasion. Please consider the following:

Godhead Confusion: Prayers at the Lord’s table often mix the respective identities of the Father and the Son. When one, in giving thanks to the Father for the elements of the supper says, “We thank thee for this bread, which symbolizes thy body” or “We thank thee for this fruit of the vine, which represents thy blood,” the confusion is unmistakable. The Father never had a body or blood to offer. Rather, His Son made the ultimate offering of body and blood for our sins (Matthew 26:26–28), and we err when we confuse this Scriptural distinction.

This confusion is also evident when a brother, in a prayer addressed to the Father (there is no authority for thus addressing Jesus or the Holy Spirit), closes his prayer with, “In thy name we pray.” I mean no unkindness, but it is nonsensical to pray to the Father in the name of the Father. We are to pray to the Father in the name of His Son (John 16:23–26).

Worshiping the Word: Liberals have long hurled Bibliolaters (Bible worshipers) at those of us who dare insist on Scriptural authority for all that we do. (They apparently do not believe that contempt for the Lord’s Word equals contempt for Him [John 12:48]). No, we do not worship the Bible; we worship the God who speaks through the Bible—and by no other means. I have, however, heard otherwise knowledgeable brethren pray: “We are thankful we can come together to worship thy Word.” Such unfortunate (and unauthorized) wording plays right into the hands of liberal accusers. If one does not believe in “worshiping the Bible,” he should never say so in his prayer. If he believes in “worshiping the Bible, “he needs additional teaching before further leading public prayers.   

“Just” Prayers: “Father, we just pray that…, and we just thank thee for…, and we just ask for forgiveness…,” have become all too common prayer expressions in recent years. Just in such contexts conveys the idea of “merely” or “only” (viz., “I have just [merely, only] five minutes to speak.”). Is it fitting to “merely” ask God to forgive us when we sin, knowing the cost of our redemption (Acts 20:28)? And how can it make sense to ask for just (i.e., “only”) one more thing repeatedly (this is about as rational as to claim that one is saved both by faith “only” and by grace “only”). Over the years I have heard many denominational preachers offer prayers filled with “just” this and “just” that. I suspect that brethren have, wittingly or unwittingly, adopted this practice from them. The Truth will be better served if they leave it where they found it—with the denominations.

Worship or Learn About? Some apparently confuse these two activities by stating that we have gathered “to worship about God.” No, we assemble to worship God and His Son (John 4:23–24). In the process of studying the Bible and singing spiritual songs, we learn about God and His Son, but this does not constitute “worshiping about God.” Such an expression is foreign both to Scriptural concept and terminology, as well as to grammatical sense.

I do not believe that brethren who thus speak in their prayers intend to make unauthorized statements. I think such untoward expressions them mostly from thoughtlessness, along with ignorance of grammar and/or of Scripture. Let us be more conscious of our words and of their implications. Let us be concerned in our assemblies with representing the Truth of God’s Word in our prayers, even as we must be with our sermons and our songs.

Dub McClish

“Let Us Be Noble”

Thoughts on Bible Study

The Hebrews writer stated: without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him (Hebrews 11:6). Knowledge of God can come in one of two ways: the natural revelation, which is the creation and the special revelation, which is the Bible. Regarding the natural revelation the Psalmist said, “The heavens declare the glory of God; And the firmament sheweth his handiwork” (Psalms 19:1). Also, Paul stated: the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen,  being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse (Romans 1:20). From the foregoing we learn that it is possible to know some things about God, however this knowledge is insufficient for salvation. For this cause God has given us the special revelation—the Bible. The faith spoken of by Paul comes from this source: “So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Romans 10:17). “The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: The testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple” (Psalms 19:7). Since the Bible is the source of saving faith, it is the most important book man has ever been privileged to read. This article is designed to encourage devoted Bible study so Bible devotion can be perfected. There are many difficult problems with which we must deal with in this life. When seeking answers to these problems, the world often turns to manmade philosophies and self-help books with the results often leading to more complicated problems. The only answer to a better life today and eternal life in the future is by living a life of faith as the Bible directs. With this in mind let us prayerfully consider the following. The Bible is the only all-sufficient guide to all of our spiritual needs. We are told that God “hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue” (II Peter 1:3). There are many things that are attributed to the Word of God. Notice the following:

  1. The Word will be our standard in the Day of Judgment, it will be that by which we shall be judged (John 12:48).
  2. The Word has the power to cleanse us (John 15:3).
  3. The Word is an agent in sanctification (John 17:17).
  4. By abiding in the Word we become true disciples (John 8:31).
  5. The use of the Word brings knowledge which in turn brings freedom from sin (John 8:32).
  6. The Word produces faith (Romans 10:17).
  7. The Word exerts an influence in the lives of people which can increase and grow in its effect (Acts 6:7; 12:24).
  8. Through the Word Christians are able to comfort sorrowing loved ones (I Thessalonians 4:18).
  9. The Word is able to pierce the inner- most self of man (Hebrews 4:12).
  10. By having the Word living and abiding in us, our prayers will be more effective (John 15:7).
  11. The directing of one’s life should be left to the power of the Word (Matthew 4:4).
  12. It is through the Word that we are begotten again unto salvation (I Peter 1:23; James 1:18).
  13. The Word is God’s instrument of reconciliation (II Corinthians 5:19).
  14. The Word is able to save sinners (James 1:21; Acts 11:14).
  15. The Word, which is the Gospel, is also said to save (Romans 1:16; I Corinthians 15:2).
  16. Finally, the Word is able to produce growth to maturity in Christ (I Peter 2:2).

Bruce Stulting