La Vista Church of Christ

No One Can Snatch Them

Jeffrey Hamilton — Tue, 07 Jul 2026 01:00:35 +0000

by Terry Wane Benton

In John 10:28, Jesus points to the safety of staying within range of the Shepherd's voice. “My sheep hear my voice,” and this hearing sets the stage for the next claim: “no one shall be able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand.” The Father’s hand is the pen, the zone of safety. Can any of the sheep wander away? That is a different concept from the idea of another “snatching” them out. Can a sheep develop “an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God?” (Hebrews 3:12). They are in the pen for greater safety. The concept is that the pen is the Shepherd’s safety zone from predators. They are all in the owner's hands when they are brought into the holding pen. They are in range of the Shepherd’s voice, and they know they are safe here in this holding pen. No one can “snatch” them here. Does this passage argue that a sheep cannot escape or get themselves out of the pen, the holding place? Is the metaphor so tight that it never allows for a sheep to look for and find a way out of the holding pen?

It is not an argument about the inability of the sheep to tune out and escape the safety pen, but about where the safety zone is that keeps the sheep safe from predators “snatching” them like they can when they are out of the pen in a grazing situation. Out of the owner's hand or pen, when they are out wandering, a wolf or lion can quickly “snatch” them in the open fields. If they wander out of range of the Shepherd's voice, there is even more danger of being snatched. Can they be snatched in the owner’s holding pen? No! Can a sheep find a way out of the pen, the “holding” area, and increase the danger to itself? He may indeed! But that is not the point Jesus was making. Two things in the context bring great security to God’s people:

Continual “hearing” or “listening” to the Shepherd’s voice, which means being careful not to wander out of range. This keeps the sheep more secure. The further out of range of “hearing” one wanders, the greater the danger of being “snatched” by the predators.
Staying in the pen, the “holding” zone of the owner, makes it almost impossible for the predators to “snatch” them out of the owner’s hand.

“My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me; and I give unto them eternal life…” (John 10:27–28).

Jesus gives eternal life to those who are presently hearing and following. The grammar is continuous action (present tense): hearing and following are ongoing. The security applies to the sheep, not to those who stop following. One becomes a sheep by starting to hear and follow, and if one continues to do so, one is safe. Thus, the text does not address what happens if someone ceases to hear and follow. Can one stop hearing and following? Can we reverse the process that made us become sheep? If one were not a sheep and then became a sheep, can one cease to be a sheep? The answer is a definite “yes!” We were not “snatched” from non-sheep to suddenly becoming sheep, and it is certain that we cannot be snatched from being sheep to becoming non-sheep. A process moved us from one status and nature to the other and that can be reversed if we are not very careful to continue to hear our Shepherd.

Using a different metaphor, John mentions in chapter 15 the vine and branch comparison. The sheep and hand (pen) metaphor did not mention that one could die on the vine, but in this different metaphor He shows us that it takes more than physical association. It takes actually drawing your spiritual sap from the Vine. “Abide in Me,” he said (John 15:6). That is like “abide in His hand.” It means you can cease to “abide”. If you abide, you will be drawing your spiritual energy from the Vine and will be alive, growing, producing. If you make a mental and spiritual disconnect, you quit drawing the sap of His love and strength into yourself like a branch connected to the vine, then you can die on the Vine and be cut off and thrown into the fire. The metaphor was designed to show that it can happen. It doesn’t mean the branch never was a branch or never was connected to the Vine. It just means that the branch can, for whatever reason, stop drawing energy from the Vine and then die on the Vine. “If you abide in Me” presupposes that you have the ability to either abide or not abide. Security is not a forced matter, it is something we can ensure for ourselves or forfeit for ourselves. Continue to hear the Good Shepherd and stay in the owner’s hand are the equivalent of “abide in Me” (the Vine). You can “wander” off and then get “snatched” by predators, or you can stay in the safety zone where you will not be snatched. You can “abide in Him” as a branch on a Vine, or you can cut off drawing your spiritual sap and die on the vine, then be cut off as fruitless branches and thrown into the fire. Neither metaphor speaks of the impossibility of apostacy, ceasing to be a sheep or of the inability to quit drawing spiritual sap from Jesus and dying on the Vine. In fact, both metaphors speak of how to ensure your safety: Sheep can continue to hear the Shepherd and stay in the owner’s holding pen and as a branch connected to the Vine we can continue to draw our energy from the Vine. There are ways to ensure our spiritual safety and growth, and there are ways we can exit the safety zone and enter danger zones. Neither metaphor teaches the impossibility of apostacy and spiritual danger. You can do things to “make your calling and election sure” (II Peter 1:5-13), or you can do things that can get you “cut off” and “thrown into the fire.” Be wise!

Rules for Detecting Apocrypha

Jeffrey Hamilton — Mon, 06 Jul 2026 22:27:20 +0000

by Ron Halbrook
via Sentry Magazine, Vol. 21 No. 4, December 1995

(I am regularly asked why the Apocrypha of the Catholic Bible should not be considered a legitimate portion of God’s word. Several years ago, Rpn Halbrook presented the following material to the Bible class he was teaching in Athens, Alabama. Brother Halbrook has given permission to reprint part of that material here. We thank him for this, Floyd D. Chappelear.)

A writing has no right to claim to be a part of the Bible if:

It contains manifest contradictions.
It contains any statement of history, geography, chronology, or narrative contradictory to known history, geography, chronology, or narrative.
It contains anything bizarre, trifling, silly, or fabulous.
It mentions things of a date later than the time the supposed author lived or later than the time of the setting of the writing,
It has a style entirely different from the alleged author's known style.
It uses idiom or dialect different from the country or time of the alleged author ("The influence of native idiom appears nowhere more remarkably than in the ... New Testament.").
It shows a disposition and temper different from the alleged author.
It consists of mere extracts from other books.
It was never referred to as Scripture by either the friends or the enemies of Christianity for the first 400 years A.D.
It was expressly rejected and exposed by writers in the first 400 years A.D.
(As in the case of every single apocryphal Old Testament book) It is universally acknowledged to have never had a place in the Hebrew Bible
(As in the case of every single apocryphal Old Testament book) It is never quoted or approved by Christ, the apostles, or any New Testament writer.
(As in the case of every single apocryphal Old Testament book) It makes no claim to divine inspiration and authority, nor does it definitely disclaim such inspiration and authority, as some do.
It suggests a lower spiritual and moral level by upholding practices and doctrines contrary to the known Scriptures. Some such books sanction lying, suicide, salvation by works of merit, magical incantations, and prayers by the living for the dead.

NOTE: The 14 rules given are condensed and reworked from rules suggested in General Biblical Introduction by H. S. Miller, The Canon of the Old and New Testaments Ascertained by A. Alexander, Famous Biblical Hoaxes (Modern Apocrypha) by E. J. Goodspeed, and other sources.

Leslie Diestelkamp Has Died

Jeffrey Hamilton — Mon, 06 Jul 2026 22:01:10 +0000

Author Unknown
via Sentry Magazine, Vol. 21 No. 4, December 1995

(Most of you knew Leslie Diestelkamp and what a wonderful saint he was. He has gone on to be with the Lord after a lengthy illness following a stroke. The following is a letter from a father to his children who are away from home. All references that might identify the writer have been deleted. The message is worth sending to all of our children. Floyd D. Chappelear)

Dear Children,

We received word recently that Leslie Diestelkamp died, after several months in a nursing home as a result of a stroke ... You may remember him because he was in our home a few times, and held meetings in *** when we assembled in ***. He was one of my heroes in the faith. Strong and staunch in the Truth, yet loving and compassionate without compromising Truth. A great example.

Leslie and his first wife (Alice ... she died when Leslie was about 60 years old) reared five children. All five children are faithful Christians. Three of the children were boys: Karl, Al, and Roy. Al is an acquaintance of mine. Karl and Roy are personal friends. Leslie had two daughters. They both married godly men who preach the gospel: Robert Speer (a preacher and elder-acquaintance of mine) and Brother Hodges of Florida College (whom I don’t know). I know Leslie was a contented and happy man because of his steadfast faith in the Lord and the knowledge that his children are all unaffected by Satan's deceit and the ravages of sin. His children are bound for Heaven, and he will see them again!! That’s joy and contentment!

In a personal letter, Leslie’s youngest son, Roy, made a remark to me that I did not know. Apparently, this information came out at his funeral. (There were two funerals, one in Aurora, IL, where he died, and the other was in St. James, MO, where he grew up and obeyed the gospel. Apparently, Leslie loved the Lord with all his heart, mind, soul, and strength. He put the Lord as the first priority in his life. He sought first the kingdom of God and His righteousness. One bit of evidence tells the story ...

Leslie, as a sixteen-year-old lad, became a Christian upon hearing the gospel preached in the little country church of Christ in St. James, MO. Following his conversion in 1928 (the Great Depression and economic hardship were about to begin), Leslie walked 20 miles to put his Lord first by assembling with His church, the people of God. He walked 20 miles! Today, people complain if they can’t sleep in because they are tired, or complain about having to drive 20 miles twice on the Lord’s Day for assembling with the blood-bought body of Jesus. Leslie walked 20 miles because of his love for the Lord, the truth, and the church of our Lord. A great modern day example was left by Leslie, along with a greater legacy .... there are five of his children who are just as dedicated to the Truth and the Lord’s church as was the "old man" (a term of respect because Leslie spent his life learning the Lord’s way ... he didn’t grow up from being a young fool to being an old fool, like so many in the world do). I know that Leslie, as did Abraham, "died full of years and satisfied with life.”

I thought you would want to know about Leslie, since he had been in our home in ***. We were honored to have such a one call us brethren and friends and stay under our roof!

As you wish,
Dad

Misinformation

Jeffrey Hamilton — Mon, 06 Jul 2026 20:32:09 +0000

by Jeff Smelser
via Sentry Magazine, Vol. 21 No. 4, December 1995

No informed individual can rationally claim the Bible does not condemn homosexuality. There are people who try to make such a claim, but these fall into two categories: the uninformed and the biased representatives of the homosexual community. The latter are engaged in a disinformation campaign, hoping to confuse the issue with a lot of double talk and outright lies in order to neutralize their opposition. The uninformed become their unwitting allies.

The Providence Journal (Providence, Rhode Island) carried a three-part series on "Gays and Religion" (May 17-19, 1992) in which an attempt was made to leave the impression that the Bible’s stance regarding homosexuality is a matter of some controversy. Well, certainly there are those who will claim that the Bible does not condemn homosexuality. There are also those who will claim that smoking is not unhealthy, namely, the uninformed and the representatives of the tobacco industry. But we don’t expect a responsible newspaper to treat the two sides of that debate as having equally strong arguments. We expect a responsible newspaper to consider the source. A responsible newspaper would not run the headline, "Is smoking unhealthy?" above two columns, one labeled "Yes" and the other labeled "No." And yet, the Journal carried such a column asking, "Does the Bible condemn homosexuality?" with accompanying "yes" and "no" columns. In small print, there was a subtitle reading, "A summary of interpretations of key passages and doctrines," but the most prominent headline was one that announced, "The Bible on homosexuality." A Journal editor attempted to explain that this was just a representation of different interpretations and not an attempt to report what the Bible actually says. Well then, should the most visible headline have read, "The Bible on Homosexuality"? Furthermore, journalists are supposed to be well-informed so that they can distinguish between informed opinion and ludicrous misinformation. For that matter, a journalist who is doing a major series on gays and religion ought to go to the trouble to pick up a Bible and see for himself what it says.

The series on "Gays and Religion" was written by David Crumm of the Detroit Free Press, along with Frank Bruni. As one would expect, the "No" column contained factual errors, irrelevancies, and logical nonsequiturs. The "Yes" and "No" columns, as they appeared in the Providence Journal, were slightly abridged from the original version that ran in the Detroit Free Press. We will note the claims in the "No" column as they originally appeared in the Detroit Free Press.

The Claim

"The Bible is a divinely inspired guide to God's plan for the world. But its many laws, histories, letters, and poetry are complex and are to be interpreted in light of modern religious experience, human history, and God's continuing revelations to church leaders."

The Fallacy of the Claim

Well, that’s a bunch of double talk. It first pays lip service to the notion of divine inspiration, but then makes the "divinely inspired guide" subject to human evaluation and reinterpretation based on human experience. If one really thought he had a divine revelation from his Creator, would it make sense for him to modify its contents based on his own thinking? Isn’t that a little like a car owner who knows nothing about mechanics, but decides to modify the instructions in the owner’s manual and substitute hand lotion for motor oil because, in his experience, hand lotion is a wonderful lubricant? To be sure, the parallel would be closer if it were the car itself that decided to reinterpret the manufacturer’s instructions.

In reality, the people who engage in this sort of double talk do not really believe in inspiration. They believe Scripture is subject to human revision because they believe it was flawed from the beginning by all the shortcomings of its human authors. Thus, we see that once one cuts through all the double talk, this point really is the crux of the controversy. Obviously, what the Bible says about homosexuality is not controversial. The only issue is, what do we think about the Bible? Ironically, this is the one claim in the original piece that the Providence Journal entirely omitted.

The Claim

"There are less than a dozen verses that mention sexual acts between men among the 31,173 verses in the Bible. It's not a big concern of the Bible's authors."

The Fallacy of the Claim

That’s like arguing that there are fewer than a half-dozen verses that mention sexual acts between men and animals (all of which clearly condemn such), surmising that "it’s not a big concern of the Bible’s authors," and therefore, concluding that the Bible does not condemn bestiality!

But the claim is not only logically ludicrous but also factually misleading. Passages which clearly refer to sexual acts between men include the following: Genesis 19:5, 7; Leviticus 18:22; Leviticus 20:13; Judges 19:22-24; Romans 1:27; I Corinthians 6:9; I Timothy 1:10; and Jude 7. That’s a total of eleven verses. But, in addition to these, there are another 6 verses that refer to such acts in veiled terms. Furthermore, why do we limit the list to sexual acts between men? Why not include Romans 1:26, which condemns sexual acts between women? (You will find out why momentarily!) Then again, the impression is left that the remainder of the Bible is neutral with reference to homosexuality. What about Genesis 19:6, right between verses 5 and 7? This verse is part of the description of Lot’s refusal to accommodate his neighbors' homosexual intentions. In fact, Genesis 19:1-29 tells of the circumstances of God’s destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah on account of their sin. Is it fair to count 27 of these verses as being neutral toward homosexuality, just because sex between men is not specifically mentioned in each and every one of these verses?

Do you see why we say only the uninformed or the biased advocates of homosexuality will make any claim that the Bible does not condemn homosexuality? Into which category the writers of the newspaper article fall, God knows. But it’s one or the other, or both!

The Claim

"The Bible's authors had no sense of homosexuality as a basic sexual orientation and the Bible never clearly refers to lesbians. A proper understanding of God's gift of human sexuality is something the church is learning about in modern times ..."

The Fallacy of the Claim

There are actually a couple of claims involved here. One boils down to the same old presupposition discussed earlier: namely, that the Bible is nothing more than the opinions and understandings of its human authors.

The other claim is simply patently false. Romans 1:26 clearly refers to what is today called lesbianism. The passage says, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural." Lest there be any doubt that sexual relations between women are meant, let it be noted that the next verse, which condemns male homosexuality, continues as follows: "...and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire towards one another, men with men committing indecent acts... "

Now, why did the reporter claim the Bible never clearly refers to lesbians? In a telephone conversation with David Crumm, this factual error was called to his attention, and Romans 1:26 was cited. Mr. Crumm’s response was, "What does it say?" He didn’t even know the passage existed! Before you deem that excusable, remember that he was working on a major story that was to run as a series over several days. Mr. Crumm interviewed a dozen or more theologians and the like. In all of that research, it would have been a very easy matter to pick up one of the many Bible encyclopedias or Bible dictionaries and readily discover the reference to female homosexuality. Nothing more than the research skills of an eighth grader would have been required. Again, only uninformed people or biased advocates of homosexuality claim the Bible does not condemn homosexuality.

Whether by accident or intent, the Providence Journal managed to avoid this blunder when it carried Mr. Crumm’s material. The claim that there is no biblical reference to lesbians in the Bible was omitted in the Journal’s rendition of Crumm’s material.

The Claim

"The Code of law in Leviticus was intended for the ancient Hebrews and doesn't apply today. Leviticus forbids the sin of sex between men but it also condemns as evil many things that are commonly accepted today..."

The Fallacy of the Claim

It is true that the law of Moses in general was intended for the ancient Hebrews and is not binding today. But does it follow that the Bible does not condemn homosexuality when there are four passages in the New Testament that explicitly condemn the practice?

Furthermore, one of the two contexts in Leviticus that condemns homosexuality happens to be a passage stating things that God finds abominable among all men, not just the ancient Hebrews. Leviticus 17 and 18 contain descriptions of practices which God abhorred even among the Canaanites, and because of which God punished them (see Leviticus 18:24-30). Included among these was homosexuality (Leviticus 18:22). The letter described in Acts 15:22-29 and written with the guidance of the Holy Spirit apparently makes reference to Leviticus 17 and 18 in Acts 15:29, recognizing that while Gentiles were not under the Law of Moses, there were certain prohibitions mentioned in the Law of Moses, specifically those of Leviticus 17 and 18, which pertain to all men.

The Claim

"The Destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19 is a story of God's punishment, but the crime was not homosexuality, God was angry because the men of Sodom had tried to rape two angelic messengers he had sent to Lot's house. This was partly a violation of the code of hospitality, a very important set of social customs in ancient society that ensured the protection of visitors. It also was evil because men were trying to abuse angels sent by God. Almost nothing is said about Gomorrah in this story, except that it was situated in the same valley as Sodom. There is no record of God destroying anyone because of homosexuality."

The Fallacy of the Claim

Well, Jude 7 tells us that not only Sodom but also Gomorrah and the cities about them were destroyed because they had "given themselves over to fornication and gone after strange flesh״ (ASV). One can only attempt to sustain his claim that the real sin was in hospitality if he is willing to refute Jude’s analysis of the situation, which again is to deny inspiration. Certainly, there are some who are willing to do this. But let it be clear that the line of demarcation between those who view homosexuality as acceptable and those who do not is the line between those who believe the Bible is God’s word and those who don’t.

The Claim

"It is incorrect to translate the Greek words of I Corinthians or I Timothy 1:10 to condemn all "homosexuals.” Paul probably was referring to the Greco-Roman practices of sex between men and boys or of male prostitution, both of which concerned Paul because they were casual or abusive. In Romans 1:24-27, Paul also is complaining about people who satisfy their sexual desires with casual sex."

The Fallacy of the Claim

To claim that Paul was only concerned with "casual or abusive" relations is utterly fanciful. Nothing in any of the passages cited would suggest such. In fact, in I Corinthians 6:9-10, the list of those who will not inherit the kingdom of God is an expanded version of the list in I Corinthians 5:11, with fornicators, adulterers, effeminate, and homosexuals in I Corinthians 6:9 all corresponding to the general term for fornication in I Corintians 5:11. Therefore a better inference than the one claimed in the newspaper article would be that any unauthorized sexual relationship, i.e., any sexual relationship other than between a husband and his wife, concerned Paul.

The Claim

"Jesus never talked about homosexuality. His main concerns were preaching about compassion caring for neighbors, and God’s love for all people. In Luke 6:37, Jesus says: 'Do not judge others, and God will not judge you; do not condemn others, and God will not condemn you.'"

The Fallacy of the Claim

Jesus condemned fornication. Fornication is any illicit intercourse, including homosexuality. Remember, Jude explained that the sin which brought God’s wrath upon Sodom and Gomorrah was fornication, and specified that the fornication being committed in these cities involved going “after strange flesh," that is, pursuing unnatural sexual relations. He condemned homosexuality every time he condemned fornication.

I’m Only Human

Jeffrey Hamilton — Mon, 06 Jul 2026 20:05:29 +0000

by Ney Rieber
via Sentry Magazine, Vol. 21 No. 4, December 1995

When someone uses the phrase "I’m only human!" you can be pretty sure that they are getting ready to do something inhumane. What do we mean when we say "I am only human?"

Most often, "I’m only human!" is used to describe a person's baseness. It is used to indicate that one has reached the end of one's patience and is about to take some action that is not very nice.

How many times have you heard "I can only take so much; I’m only human," or perhaps "I can’t help it; I’m only human"? "I’m only human" indicates that some rash action is about to be taken? Perhaps you have heard, "My old human nature just reared up and I did it!" or "The animal in me..." or "My animal nature can only tolerate so much." "I’m only a man" - all phrases used to indicate that patience has been exhausted. "I’m only a man" is also an excuse. It means, "I can’t help myself because of what I am."

Being "human" is used as an excuse to do harm or as a means of justifying the evil one does. People have come to ascribe evil to human nature and hold a very low opinion of it. Is this a valid and scriptural perspective?

What does being "human" really mean? Webster defines human as "being or characteristic of man." This definition of what it means to be human does not indicate evil. Cognates of "human" indicate just the opposite. Humane means to be marked by compassion, sympathy, or consideration for others. A humanitarian is one who practices philanthropy (the love of mankind).

Webster indicates that being human is a good thing, not a bad thing. The Scriptures indicate something even greater. They tell us that being human is being in the image of God. The first man was created in the image of God. Genesis 1:26 reads, "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."

After the fall, after man became subject to sin, man is still in the image of God. In Genesis 9:6 we read, "Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man."

Jeremiah 1:4-5 tells us that the infant in the womb is still created by God when he writes, "Then the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou earnest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations." Isaiah 44:24 conveys a similar idea when it says, "Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself." To say "I’m only human" is to say that I am the special creation of God.

To say, "I’m only human," is to say I am in the image of God! Being human is also being the object of God’s love. Romans 5:8 says, "But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." Other passages, such as Ephesians 2:1-5 and Titus 3:3, say the same thing. God loves mankind. He loves mankind without qualification or reservation. He loves mankind enough to die for mankind. Being only human is to be blessed by the love of God.

Being human is having the ability to live righteously! Romans 2:14-15 says, "For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another." Even the Gentiles who were not the recipients of God’s revelation could and did choose to live righteously.

Being human is having the ability to choose good. Deuteronomy 30:19 tells us, "I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live." Life with God is a choice only humans can make. "And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD" (Joshua 24:15). Joshua chose to serve God. He encouraged all Israel to do the same. Being human means that we have the ability and opportunity to choose to serve God!

Being human is having the ability to see beyond oneself. I John 3:16-18 reminds us that we are not in this life alone. There are others to help and be helped. It says, "Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren. But whoso hath this world’s good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him? My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth." As humans, we have the ability to see beyond ourselves and care about others. We can show that concern in our treatment of others.

Being human is having the ability to be like Jesus. It is God’s desire that all mankind be like Jesus. We read in Romans 8:29, "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren." To become like Jesus is to undergo a transformation of character. Paul writes in Romans 12:2 "And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God." What a glorious concept - that this one who is "only human" can be transformed into the image of Jesus.
Being human is having the power to become children of God. The Apostle John, in John 1:12, wrote, "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name." God has given every human being that ever lived or will live the potential to become a child of His.

I’m only human. Only human? Being human, I am created in the image of God. Being human, I am the object of God’s love. Being human, I have the ability to live righteously. I have the ability to choose good. I have the ability to see beyond myself and have compassion for others. Being human, I have the ability to become like Jesus. I have the potential to become a Child of God!

Being only human - what a wonderful thing to be!

Teaching Other Faithful Men

Jeffrey Hamilton — Mon, 06 Jul 2026 18:57:42 +0000

by Hugh DeLong

Having preached now for over 50 years, one of my favorite instructions on preaching is II Timothy 2:2: “The things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.”

I think this may have been the most productive aspect of my work, as it has allowed ‘my work’ to spread far beyond what I could ever do on my own. Years ago, brother Pete Wilson told me that after years of working in England, and then back in the USA, when he began implementing this verse as one of the main aspects of his preaching, the amount of evangelism and teaching that then got done was far greater than all those years of his personal work of teaching. When he began doing this, the men he trained could all be teaching, almost every day, and that was around 10 men.

Of course, Pete has died, and I am afraid that I am ‘next’ in line. But these men I worked with have been at it for many years and, in turn, have taught and worked with yet other men. This ‘one-on-one’ work has proven effective. God knew what He was doing when He gave this instruction.

The caveat, if there is one, is what one passes on to these other faithful men! It has to be what God revealed through Paul and the other apostles and prophets. Such is timeless and universal. Such is the power of God to create faith in others. Such is a great and enduring part of a preacher's work.

Here we are, 2000+ years later, in a faraway land, speaking a then-unknown language, yet the same message is being propagated. May God bless all those involved in such work.

The Discipline of an Athlete

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sun, 05 Jul 2026 20:40:21 +0000

by Lee Wildman
via Biblical Insights, Vol. 14 No. 8, August 2014

Paul used examples from athletics to illustrate principles by which Christians are to live. His readers, especially those in Greece and the surrounding areas, knew very well what it meant to be an athlete in the 1st century. Let's look at some of those lessons.

We must compete according to the rules (II Timothy 2:5).

It is the Lord’s race, and we must enter and run as He dictates. There are rules to be obeyed, and they have not changed since they were first given. And the rules are not hard to understand (Ephesians 3:4). But some say we should read the New Testament as a story or collection of love letters. Surely the story of God’s love is the central point of the message, but seriously, am I to read Romans and I Corinthians as love letters?! When Jesus wrote the seven churches in Asia, His love for them demanded repentance, or else there would be consequences for not keeping His rules.

We must live a disciplined life (I Corinthians 9:24-27; Hebrews 12:1).

We must at first lay aside our old sinful habits, or else in the end, they will disqualify us from the hope of victory. And yet, there are other things that need to be laid aside. Can you imagine someone watching a track and field event during the Olympics, sitting in their recliner with a bag of chips in one hand and a cold drink in the other, saying, “I could do that.” Ridiculous, for sure, especially given how those athletes have trained.

Now look at a Christian who has strong Bible knowledge and can skillfully use it to teach others. He lives with reverence, integrity, patience, and love. His children respect him and are faithful to the Lord. Sounds like a shepherd in the church, doesn’t it? But how did he become such? For certain, he did not allow the cares of this world, the deceitfulness of riches and the desires for other things to choke out the word from his heart (Mark 4:19). He didn’t spend his life working and playing and then say, “I could be an elder if I wanted to be.”

Discipline means learning to do the right things over and over again. Some think that doing the same things over and over leads to going through the motions. But didn’t Daniel pray three times a day? Did this “routine” suggest that he was just going through the motions? It takes more discipline to learn to do the same things with greater love and devotion than to change what we do.

Running with discipline also means doing what the Lord asks, even when we might not feel like it. We must learn to worship, study, pray, forgive, and love our enemies, even when our emotions tell us not to train today.

Every Christian runs to win (I Corinthians 9:24).

In 1980, the cross-country team at WKU won the OVC championships with all five runners crossing the finish line together. But that did not mean all of them had the same ability. A few weeks later, in the NCAA championships, they were each running the very best they personally could run. Only one of the five was qualified to be an All-American.

Some will run better than others. They have had more time to train while others are just getting started. Others run better because they have decided to do so. They are willing to train harder. But beware, for if you decide to run ahead, you may be criticized. Some will think you’re strange (I Peter 4:4), including some of your own brethren. But we must run humbly, hoping that others will follow our example. Our example in the assemblies, at home, at work, and during trials does matter. Each will be looking out for others rather than themselves, even encouraging some to get up and run again.

It’s an endurance race (Hebrews 12:1-2).

There will be days when our resolve to win will be sorely tested. There will be thorns in our flesh and some “Job-like” events in our paths. We may look around and wonder, like Peter, why some seem to have it easier than we do. What do we do then? Complain that it’s not fair? No, we will do as the Lord told him, “You follow me” (John 21:18-22).

Victory awaits all finishers (II Timothy 4:7-8).

The victory is ours in Christ. We have a victory wreath awaiting us (II Timothy 4:7-88; I Corinthians 15:54-58). We must keep our eyes on Jesus, who has run on before us, looking forward to meeting Him at the finish line. Please, don’t ever quit (Galatians 5:7).

The Faith of Abraham

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sun, 05 Jul 2026 20:29:12 +0000

by Jeremy Paschall
via Biblical Insights, Vol. 14 No. 8, August 2014

In the Gospel of Jesus Christ, God has revealed His power to save mankind from sin (Romans 1:16). It is not a salvation based upon the works of men (Ephesians 2:9), requiring that they “earn” their way with sinless obedience (Romans 3:20), for then none would ever be saved (Romans 3:23). Instead, it is a system by which men may receive forgiveness of their sins and then stand justified — righteous — before God by His grace and mercy (Romans 3:24; Ephesians 2:5). However, such generous provisions for salvation do not inherently exclude conditions required for one to receive these blessings. Indeed, in one passage of Scripture we find a discussion of both God’s grace and His condition for receiving it:

"But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all those who believe. For there is no difference; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and thejustifier of the one who has faith in Jesus" (Romans 3:21-26).

Faith is, as it has always been (Hebrews 11), the fundamental condition upon which one may receive the favor of God (Ephesians 2:8). Indeed, even “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness” (Romans 4:3; cf. Genesis 15:6). He is our example, “the father of all those who believe” (Romans 4:11). Like Abraham, those who stand righteous before God today do so, “having been justified by faith” (Romans 5:1); their “access...into
this grace” has come “by faith” (Romans 5:2). In order for one to please God, there is simply no substitute for an informed, trusting faith.

Many err, however, when they fail to search out the true nature of saving faith. They conclude, without having thoroughly examined or understood the Scriptures, that the faith necessary to please God involves merely accepting, intellectually and/ or emotionally, His existence and His saving power. In other words, they believe and proclaim salvation for anyone who believes in God and in the sacrificial death of God’s Son, Jesus Christ. But the Scriptures reveal much more concerning the subject of saving faith. James wrote, “What does
it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him?… Faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead” (James 2:14,17). Genuine saving faith must manifest itself in works that please God.

Not even Abraham was saved by faith alone: “Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.’ And he was called the friend of God. You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only” (James 2:21-24). By faith, Abraham “obeyed,” “dwelt,” “went out,” “waited,” and “offered” (Hebrews 11:8, 9, 10, 17). His righteousness depended upon his faith manifesting itself in works which pleased God. By his works, Abraham’s faith was “made perfect” and he was justified before God.
We must not think ourselves to be any exception to this divinely given rule. For our faith to justify us before God, it must also manifest itself in humble submission to Him. “Faith without works is dead” (James 2:26), but a living faith motivates one to trust and obey God’s will as it is revealed in the Scriptures. Is your faith like the faith of Abraham — faith with works of obedience? In other words, is it truly a saving faith?

What Can Kill a Church?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sun, 05 Jul 2026 17:03:11 +0000

https://www.lavistachurchofchrist.org/cms/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/What-Can-Kill-a-Church.mp3

by Jeffrey W. Hamilton

Download Audio

Text: Revelation 3:1-6

I. The certainty of life is that it will eventually be followed by death - Ecclesiastes 9:5

A. And it is not just people who die, churches die as well.

1. Unlike people, churches don’t have to die, but they do.

B. The church at Sardis appeared to be alive, but the Lord declared that it was dead. Not completely dead, but it was close enough that it might as well be dead - Revelation 3:1-2

C. If you consider the history of the congregations around the country, you realize that there are not that many “old” churches, even though the church has been in this country for several hundred years.

D. The letters to the churches in Asia serve as warnings as to what can cause churches to fall away.

II. A Lack of Love - Revelation 2:1-7

A. Ephesus was a faithful church.

1. It took strong stands against false teachers

2. It had weathered difficult times and showed the ability to persevere

3. It was doing all the right things, but it lacked the proper motive

B. Love is key to the commandments - Matthew 22:36-40

1. Love is the defining element of being a Christian - John 13:34-35

2. Without love for God there is no motivation to remain obedient - John 14:15

3. Without love for our brethren we die - I John 3:14-18

C. The problem in Ephesus is much the same problem addressed in II John 4-8

1. John commends their faithfulness, but reminds the chosen lady that a part of faithfulness is love for the brethren

2. It is a command just like any other

3. Without it, she would fall prey to the very deceivers she was standing against

D. Love is not an option

1. Only by love of each other can we know God - I John 4:7-12, 20-21

2. Only through love can we remain faithful - I John 5:1-3

III. Pursuing Sensuality - Revelation 2:12-29

A. Both Pergamum and Thyatira had members following the course of this world

1. Teachers had arose encouraging the acceptance of idols and sexual immorality

B. Becoming soft on sin, accepting things that make you feel good, is a common way for false teachers to peddle their doctrine - II Peter 2:1-3, 12-19

C. Desire for the world is key to the entrance of sin - I John 2:15-17

D. But being a Christian is marked by holiness - I Peter 1:13-16

1. We are to be set apart - I Thessalonians 4:1-8

2. We are to be separate - II Corinthians 6:17-7:1

IV. Avoiding Making Waves - Revelation 3:14-22

A. Laodicea strove for the middle ground.

1. She was neither hot nor cold in what she did

2. She saw no need for improvement

3. Such contributed to the death of Israel - I Kings 18:21

4. Christianity is not about having it both ways - Matthew 6:24

B. There is an appeal to avoiding problems

1. It makes it look like something good is being done

2. But the truth is that nothing is being done - Psalms 123:4

3. They become prideful, and cannot see destruction on the door step - Isaiah 47:8-9

a. A church that avoids problems means they are inexperienced in handling problems

b. When those problems arise, as they surely must, they are overwhelmed

C. The lack of zeal means there will be no true growth

1. We are to be fervent in spirit - Romans 12:11

2. Some groups strive for a more neutral ground

a. If we don’t make waves, more people will stay

b. If we don’t take a strong stand, people won’t become offended and leave

3. But then we are not fully with Christ - Matthew 12:30

D. Christ found the middle ground disgusting

1. On fire is what he wants

2. But even cold is preferable – at least it is a more honest assessment of their true status - II Peter 2:21

3. The middle ground is a lie

V. Will this church survive?

A. It has been in existence since 1972, but that doesn’t mean it will continue

B. Without love, purity, and zeal it will die like others before it

C. And a few can’t prop up a dying church

1. Sardis had some who were faithful - Revelation 3:4

2. But they would could not stem the tide

3. A preacher, elders, or a few faithful members can’t keep a church alive – not on their own.

Suppositions Without Support

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sun, 05 Jul 2026 14:20:15 +0000

by David Gibson

Jumping to conclusions

John the Baptist warned the Jews, “… do not suppose that you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham for our father ...” (Matthew 3:9). Simply depending on physical descent from Abraham without the faith and repentance God requires is a baseless assumption (see John 8:37-42, 44, 47; Romans 2:25-29).
Jesus said, “And when you are praying, do not use meaningless repetition as the Gentiles do, for they suppose that they will be heard for their many words” (Matthew 6:7; see I Kings 18:26-29).
Regarding those whom Pilate killed, Jesus said, “Do you suppose that these Galileans were greater sinners than all other Galileans because they suffered this fate? I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish” (Luke 13:2-5; also John 9:1-3).
On the day of Pentecost, a huge crowd from many countries was amazed when they heard the apostles speak in languages they could understand. Some mockers in the crowd accused the apostles of being intoxicated. Peter explained, “For these men are not drunk, as you suppose…” He then cited Joel’s prophecy that the Spirit (not spirits) empowered them to speak (Acts 2:6-21).
An angry mob in Jerusalem nearly killed Paul because “they supposed” that he had brought a Gentile into the temple, which he had not done (Acts 21:27-31; see Acts 24:5-6).

And today ...

Sad to say, many today base their hopes on false premises, such as infant baptism; salvation by faith alone; saying the Sinner’s Prayer; the doctrine of once saved, always saved; reliance on good deeds; acceptance of traditions and writings of human origin; dependence on one’s own subjective feelings; etc.

The Bereans are highly commended for diligently searching the Scriptures to determine truth (Acts 17:10). They didn’t rely on supposition but rather on what God had revealed in His word.

May that describe us as well!