religion – La Vista Church of Christ

Religion and Science

Jeffrey Hamilton — Thu, 17 Sep 2026 15:10:06 +0000

by Samuel A. Matthews

“Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God” (Hebrews 12:1-2 KJV).

Loved ones, science and religion were born of the same house, and that house is not divided against itself. There is, and will be, an apparent conflict between them, but it is of human origin, arising from the defects of our knowledge and not from its greatness. A clash between true science and true religion is as impossible as parallel lines meeting. Truth does not bisect itself. God is truth (John 14:6)! God is the first scientist, and as our text says, God is the "author and finisher of our faith."

In all nature “the heavens declare the glory of” their Maker, sang Israel's poet, while “day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge" (Psalms 19:1-2). Astounding as the achievements of human scientists are, a greater Scientist fashioned all materials and formed all laws. The greatest of men cannot create; they can only use tools that God made. Men can only "think God's thoughts after him." The more of God's thoughts they find, the more they are awed by what remains to be learned.

“It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honor of kings [scientists are regal] is to search out a matter” (Proverbs 25:2). The Wright brothers deserve commendation, but the engineer of aerodynamics should have more. Harvey's discovery of circulation is universally eulogized, but primary tribute belongs to him who made blood flow.

“I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvelous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well” (Psalms 139:14). Preposterous, then, is the conception that science and religion can ever disagree. Faulty ideas about the God of science and faulty ideas about the God of religion can, and do, collide; but the truth will prevail. “But wisdom is justified of all her children” (Luke 7:35).

Faulty religion, as Rome's denunciation of the Copernican system and the treatment given Galileo, has prejudiced some scientists against religion; and, conversely, pseudo-scientists have alienated some religionists. But truth is truth, in whatever field, though oft hindered by prejudice or animosity.

The wise man said, “Buy the truth, and sell it not…” (Proverbs 23:23). And one greater than he promised: "Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32). Truths in religion, as in science, continually release men from ignorance, from superstition, from diseases, from darkness. But everything that is called truth in religion is not of Christ.

The Apostle John warned, "Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world" (I John 4:1).

The Apostle Peter warned, “But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction” (II Peter 2:1).

When a religionist claims for God that he made the earth in 4004 B.C., he makes an unsubstantiated claim. God said He did it "in the beginning," whenever that was. Similarly, everything that is called truth in science is not science. Much has been found not to be science (knowledge), but mere imagination.

There was a time that “spontaneous generation” was scientific, and it appeared plausible: frogs, flies, gnats from slime and mud; bees from veal; beetles from mule flesh; scorpions from crabs. If an “enlightened” Christian had accepted that “science,” learning better than to believe in an outmoded Bible story of the creation of life, what would a skeptic think of that Christian's loyalty to his Lord?

It would appear such a one had made "accepted science" his god; and if Christ fit into the scheme, he would accept Christ; otherwise, Christ must get out. How embarrassed such a faithless one would be when "accepted science" reverses itself! It did reverse. Spontaneous generation was rejected. Scientists admitted they had been wrong.

With some such an about-face went against their hopes, but they had to do it. The doctrine that life can only come from life won out in the end. They did not, not because the Bible taught all life comes from him "in whom we live, and move, and have our being…" (Acts 17:28), but simply because of nature's proofs.

But to a Christian, faith in the perfect Christ, the Lord of creation and our own brother, is the criterion of all truth. If today's accepted science contradicts Christ, a loyal disciple is not disturbed. It has done so before, but “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and today, and for ever" (Hebrews 13:8).

When a godless Laplace [a French astronomer and mathematician] rejected Genesis and substituted his nebular hypothesis, many were victimized. Because many scientists had not walked with God as they had with nature, because they had not read their Bible daily as they had human books, they were completely enraptured with new vagaries. Not only was astronomy affected, but geology was based confidently upon it. For a hundred years it was not seriously questioned. But humble Bible believers were not perturbed, for their faith lay not in the "wisdom of men, but in the power of God” (I Corinthians 2:5).

Astrology was once "scientific." Every court had a hired interpreter of the skies. Wallenstein, the field marshal of the imperial armies in the Thirty Years' War, relied much upon his astrologer, whom he kept always at hand. Even Kepler, an acknowledged astronomer, made a horoscope for Wallenstein. Evidently, however, it failed to warn the general of his assassination, which occurred at Eger in 1634.

But not only have spurious notions of science oft been cast aside, but likewise spurious notions of what the Bible teaches. When some thought the word would come to an end in the first century, it was only their mistaken idea of what the New Testament writers had said, not what those writers really said, that was at fault. When many, because of presumed Bible support, thought the world would end in A.D. 1000, they were soon self-refuted— they just did not know what the Bible taught. And when William Miller's followers donned their ascension robes in 1843, they were as sincere as learned men who believe in organic evolution. Those Adventists had as much misinterpreted the Bible as evolutionists have perverted nature.

But concerning true science and true religion, which is more important? No matter what science can accomplish, it never can be the “summum bonum” (the supreme good from which all others are derived). Science is limited, for it deals only with the natural. And since man is more than an animal, the natural sciences cannot cope with all of man's needs.

Religion, like an older brother, takes up man and fills his spiritual needs when science falters. Religion does what science is not equipped to do. Science is honorable, but religion is more so. "Covet earnestly" the gifts of science, but there is "a more excellent way” (cf. I Corinthians 12:31).

Misconceptions of science, Dr. Link has said, led him away from religion; but better insights into the sciences have led him back to religion and have made him realize its superiority. “In spite of the great benefits which the physical sciences have bestowed on mankind—a longer life, a more comfortable life, a life more free from physical pains, and a life filled with an infinite variety of interesting objects and educational experiences—there is no evidence that individuals are happier, that families are more united, that governments or political bodies are wiser, or that nations are less likely to go to war." ("Return to Religion," Link, 14, 15.)

After two thousand years, psychology has learned that happiness is achieved only through self-sacrifice and self-denial. “A man that hath friends must shew himself friendly” (Proverbs 18:24).

Religion on Parade

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sun, 29 Mar 2026 17:10:50 +0000

https://www.lavistachurchofchrist.org/cms/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/Religion-on-Parade.mp3

by Jeffrey W. Hamilton

Download Audio

Text: Matthew 23:5-12

I. Jesus condemns the Pharisees many times and in our reading he condemns them for using religion as a way for people to notice them. - Matthew 23:5

A. What is a phylactery (or some translations say frontlet)?

1. It comes from passages like Exodus 13:6-9.

a. The sign or monument or memorial was taken literally.

b. But notice that it was the Passover meal that was the sign on their hand and forehead.

2. Deuteronomy 6:4-12

a. Again the statement in verse 8 was taken literally, despite the preceding statements that it was to be in their hearts.

b. God said that the teachings of God and his word was to always to be a topic of conversation so that they would not forget God.

c. Instead of putting God’s word in their hearts they literally bound them on their arms and foreheads.

3. There were phylacteries for both the head and the hand. It was a leather box, cube shaped, closed with an attached flap and bound to the person by a leather band. One was bound to the inner side of the left arm so when the arm was bent, the phylactery would rest over the heart. The knot fastening it to the arm was done in the form of the letter yodh and ending in a string that was wound around the middle finger of the hand. Inside the box were copies of the passages Exodus 13:9, 13:16, Deuteronomy 6:8, and 11:18 – the passages stating to keep God’s word near at hand. A second leather box was bound in the center of the forehead. The knot on this band was done in the form of the letter daleth with the letter shin at each end of the box. These letters, including the one on the arm, forms the Hebrew word “shadday”, which the word for the Almighty.

4. Elaborate ceremonies were developed for attaching the phylacteries. The arm was bound first and then the head while quotations from the Scriptures were recited. They were worn by every male over 13 years old at the time of morning prayer, except on Sabbaths and festival days, since such days were sufficient reminders of the commands, statutes, and ordinances of God by themselves.

B. What are Tassels?

1. Twists of threads on the corners of their garments to remind them of the law of God - Numbers 15:38-40

2. It seem to become the custom to line the borders of the outer garment with fringe.

C. What Jesus said was that the Pharisees and Scribes, to show their piousness, would use wide bands and large boxes for their phylacteries and make their fringes extra long.

1. They did it to be noticed by others, so others would see them as religious men.

2. As if the size of the things they wore would reflect their piousness.

II. This is not the only way they showed off their religion

A. They expected places of honor because of their position in the Jewish religion.

B. They expected special greetings when people met them. They especially loved the title “Rabbi”, which means “teacher.”

C. Matthew 6:1-4 - They made sure everyone knew when they gave aid to the poor.

D. Matthew 6:5-8 - They prayed publicly so others would see them

E. Luke 20:46-47 - They made long prayers so others would notice

III. God doesn’t need a show, He sees the heart. Only men look for a show

A. The Pharisees justified themselves in men’s eyes, but forgot that God sees the heart.

1. In other words, they did things outwardly so that other people would see but neglected to understand that God knows everything, even the things others may not see.

B. John 5:41-44 - Jesus did not seek the honor of men and therefore men did not accept him.

1. Even those inclined to believe on him would not admit it before others - John 12:42-43

2. This is why confession is required for salvation.

C. Philippians 2:2-3 - Nothing should be done from selfish motives or empty pride.

D. Selfish motives breeds evil - James 3:14-16

IV. How Christians should behave

A. Christians purposely pick the lowly - Luke 14:7-11

B. Our prayers should reflect our knowledge of our true position before God - Luke 18:9-14

C. Our righteous deeds and prayers are done in private - Matthew 6:1-8

V. Yet the desire to show off our religion still exists

A. Have you noticed that few churches meet in plain, simple buildings?

1. What drives the desire for large, ornate buildings with stain glass windows?

2. Is it the desire to please God? Or do the bronze name plates, saying “donated by ... ,” have something to do with it?

B. Have you noticed that religious leaders have special robes calling attention to their office?

1. Is this found in the word of God?

2. Is God impressed with such attire or is there another motivation?

C. We can also mention the use of special titles by religious leaders.

1. Men are called “reverend”, “pastor”.

2. It seems people are not satisfied with this. Now a days it is “right-most reverend” or “senior pastor”

3. When I object to titles, people say “we just want to give respect.” Yet, I as a man do not deserve such respect, especially by my fellow men.

D. Lay people also get into the act

1. I can’t begin to number the people I have seen wearing crosses or other symbols of Christianity, and yet they speak foully and act unbecomingly of a follower of Christ.

2. How does the wearing the symbols of a faith make a person religious? It doesn’t!

3. For whom is the wearing for? God? Or to impress others with your claims to a belief?

E. There have been gatherings at the flag poles at schools for prayers.

1. I don’t object to prayers said at school or in behalf of schools, but why at the flag pole - out front where everyone sees?

VI. Our religion is seen by others, but it is not for show.

A. It should never be done to impress others.

B. It should not be done to declare to others “I am a Christian.”

C. God’s light shines through us because we are Christians and not because we wear Christian adornments - Matthew 5:14-16

D. Paul’s prayer is that Christ dwells in your hearts and not on your sleeves - Ephesians 3:14-19

How God Could End Religious Confusion

Jeffrey Hamilton — Fri, 13 Feb 2026 20:29:42 +0000

by Dennis Allan

I recently met a man on a bus, and our conversation quickly came around to spiritual questions. He spoke of his experiences in studying various religions. He had participated in several “Christian” denominations, had studied Buddhism, Islam, etc. We readily agreed on some fundamental facts, including God's existence and the sad reality of religious confusion.

During our conversation, my new friend made an interesting observation about how God could end religious confusion. He suggested that God could simply reveal His will to men, saying that this would be the definitive standard for all to follow, and that, in that way, there would be no more confusion or division.

I found his commentary interesting. I asked him how things would be if God were to do that in another 500 years. I then suggested that he consider that God had already done exactly what he was suggesting and even sent His own Son to present His will to men, but that the long-term results were not what this man expected. Consider the facts and their implications.

God never left man without guidance. The Bible shows that God began to communicate His will to men from the very first day that Adam and Eve existed. The ability to use and understand language was not the result of millions of years of evolutionary happenstance. On the day that God created the first human beings, He used spoken language to reveal permission, responsibility, prohibition, and consequence. Some of the first instructions were recorded in Genesis 1:28-30 and 2:15-17. As time passed, He revealed other things. Man was never left without guidance, as God made available the information necessary for the creature to serve the Creator. More time passed, and He gave the Israelites a specific law (Exodus 19-20), while other peoples continued to be governed by the basic instructions already given for the benefit of all. The presence and nature of prophetic messages to and about the Gentile nations make it clear that the just God never left them totally without rules to follow.

Since ancient times, history shows the great problem of religious confusion. Despite having received instructions from God, humans fell into countless contradictions. Adam and Eve chose disobedience. Cain killed his own brother. In just a few generations, divergence from Divine will reached the point that God “saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually” (Genesis 6:5). And that privileged nation that received a special law did the same thing. The people of Israel abandoned the Lord and were almost totally destroyed because of their idolatry and rebelliousness. Even when God revealed His will, men chose to be disobedient, turn from Him, and embrace every imaginable form of religious confusion.

God did not give up on His stubborn creatures. He revealed His will for all men in Jesus Christ. After teaching in various ways the benefits of obedience to Divine will and the dangers of ignoring what the Lord says, He sent the perfect revelation of His will in the person and teaching of Jesus. In Christ, God did what my friend on the bus thought would be necessary: He revealed His will to men and taught them that they should follow His word. Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me” (John 14:6). He taught by the example of His life, which is why Peter emphasized that benefit of the life of Christ: “... leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps” (I Peter 2:21). Jesus also taught through His words, and emphasized the importance of accepting those teachings: “He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him - the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day. For I have not spoken on My own authority; but the Father who sent Me gave Me a command, what I should say and what I should speak” (John 12:48-49).

Jesus published His words through people He chose and trusted. He used the apostles and others to transmit His words and to record them for future generations (see Matthew 28:18-20; Hebrews 2:3; Romans 1:16; Colossians 1:23). As those men neared the end of their lives on earth, they were not concerned about creating or sustaining mechanisms for future revelations. They focused on leaving a written record to remind their brothers of what had already been taught and to guide future generations (II Peter 1:12-15).

After God sent His Son to offer the perfect revelation, what have men done? They twist His words, invent their own doctrines, and lead others into the ever-increasing religious confusion that most have come to consider normal and even healthy.

Is there a solution? As Paul reminds us in Galatians 1:6-10, it is up to us to return to the message revealed by Jesus and the apostles, rejecting any additions or alterations. Human history shows us that this is not the popular course, but it needs to be our course!

Reactionary Religion

Jeffrey Hamilton — Thu, 16 Oct 2025 19:57:36 +0000

by Allen Malone
via Sentry Magazine, Vol. 18 No. 1, 31 March 1992

God’s people of old went astray as they desired to be like the nations around them (I Samuel 8:19-20). They left the way of God because they were more interested in following the customs of others than in following God's prescribed path. Regrettably, many today are similarly motivated in religious matters. All should guard against being so influenced.

But what of those of us who rue being like "the (denomi-)nations round about?" Does our being different make us right? Does our opposition to the erroneous beliefs and practices of others suggest that our own are God-approved? The answer is a resounding "No!" In fact, if we often judge religious doctrine and practice on the basis of what those about us believe and do, it is probable that, for that very reason, we are at times violating the scriptures. The reasons for this are very simple.

First of all, let us remember that the way of error is the "broad way" of which Christ spoke in His sermon on the mount (Matthew 7:13-14). Satan is not particular; his way allows room for all manner of wrong. On any given subject, his supermarket of sin offers countless brands of error from which we may choose. We may reject another’s erroneous position on some issue only to accept a position equally erroneous. Satan’s desire is that we believe and practice error. He cares little about which erroneous position we choose to espouse. We can therefore be very different from others we know to be wrong and yet not be right ourselves.

Secondly, it should be recognized that people who are mistaken on many points are probably not mistaken on all points. If our primary motivation (consciously or subconsciously) is to be different from our religious neighbors, we can easily become victims of our own prejudice. Rejecting a particular religious doctrine or practice because of who accepts it can lead us to reject not only their erroneous practices but also those things for which they happen to have biblical authority. Let us beware lest we throw out the proverbial baby with the bathwater.

Thirdly, it should be realized that a religion that reacts to what others are doing will tend to go to extremes. Remember this: simply because our position on some religious issues seems to be the opposite of a position we know to be false does not suggest that our position is true. Many religious errors are "extreme positions" that result from emphasizing some scriptures on Bible subjects to the exclusion of others. Generally, to react to these erroneous conclusions by assuming that the opposite position is true is simply to go to the "opposite extreme." Is one extreme better than the other? Generally not, for in most cases, "opposite extremes" simply emphasize and ignore different sets of scriptures. Thus, while positions at opposite extremes seem to be very different, they usually have one unfortunate similarity—neither considers all that God has revealed regarding the subject in question. Let us realize that the sum of God’s word on any subject is the truth on that subject (Psalms 119:160 ASV). Our beliefs and practices, no matter how different from others’, are only right if they are biblically sound.

All of this exhorts us to acknowledge both intellectually and practically that God’s word must be our only standard in religion. What others may believe or practice has no bearing on what is pleasing to God. What He teaches and authorizes in His word is right. What He does not teach or authorize is wrong. The Israelites forgot this and went astray as they tried to be like their neighbors. If we forget this, we may go astray as we try to be different from ourselves.

What Are Some Examples of "Reactionary Religion?"

Example #1:

Some, in reacting to emotionalism, have begun to advocate Stoicism. There are many religious groups whose assemblies are conducted in a manner designed to arouse emotion. Lights are dimmed; hands are clapped, held, or wildly shaken; bodies sway, and ecstatic utterances are encouraged. The arousal of emotion has become an end in itself. In reacting to this error, some brethren have decided that virtually any show of emotion, especially in worship, is inappropriate.

Does rejecting emotionalism mean that we must become Stoics who express no emotion? Certainly not! The proper place of emotion in the worship and service of God is emphasized in the Bible. We are instructed to sing with "grace in your hearts to the Lord" (Colossians 3:16). We are to give recognizing that "God loveth a cheerful giver" (II Corinthians 9:7). When the preaching of the word convicts us of sin, we should remember, "Godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation" (II Corinthians 7:10). We should neither be surprised nor displeased if sincere prayers, songs, sermons or affirmations of love and salvation are accompanied with rejoicing or tears, for thus it has ever been among God’s faithful (Nehemiah 8; Acts 13:47-48; 20:31; Philippians 3:18; 4:4). When we partake of the Lord’s Supper and are caused to remember our Lord and all that He has done for us, we should expect that at times we will be especially moved to rejoice as we look to the same joy to which He looked (Hebrews 12:2) or to weep as we think of that death to which He approached "with strong crying and tears" (Hebrews 5:7). We should not, therefore, reject proper emotion through over-reacting to the religious world’s emotionalism, but allow ourselves to feel and appropriately express the emotion aroused by God’s word.

Example #2:

Some, in reacting to false teaching regarding grace and faith, have come to feel that they must rely on themselves. In the 16th and 17th centuries, the reformers went astray by reacting to the false concept of salvation by works. Their reaction led to the development of the doctrines of "faith only" and "grace only." Today, we live among their spiritual descendants and readily perceive their rejection of plain scriptural teaching regarding man’s responsibilities before God. Nevertheless, let us realize the danger of our reacting to their lopsided, extreme views regarding salvation; the likely result will be our reverting to a concept of salvation as somehow based on our works rather than on God’s grace in Christ.

The central theme of the gospel is that when we were weak, defiled sinners, incapable of doing anything to reconcile ourselves unto God, Christ bore the penalty of our sins. This is the basis, the very means, of our salvation -- past, present, and future (Romans 3:21-26; 5:6-8; Ephesians 2:1-10). Without question, it is also true that God has conditioned our reception of the benefits of His grace upon our approach to Him by faith (Hebrews 11:6) and that the faith that avails with Him is an obedient "faith that works by love" (Hebrews 5:9; Galatians 5:6; James 2:21-26). Even so, let us never react to others’ denial of faith’s conditions by accepting the concept that faith’s obedience somehow earns us something or the feeling that we must merit God’s pleasure by some sort of perfection! The faith that saves is faith in Christ, not faith in our obedience. All who stand spiritually stand in God’s grace (Romans 5:1-2) and are but "unprofitable servants" (Luke 17:10).

Example #3:

Some, in reacting to the improper influence and labor of denominational preachers, have misconstrued the legitimate roles of evangelists and elders. In the denominations about us, the "pastor system" prevails. A preacher is given the title "Pastor," and becomes the corporate administrator of a congregation. We have been unable to find in the Bible any accounts of evangelists being given this type of labor and influence.

One unfortunate reaction to the "pastor system" has been the rejection of "located preachers" by a few brethren. This reaction stands in opposition to various New Testament examples (Acts 11:26; 18:11; 19:8-10; 20:31). Far more often, however, brethren have reacted by feeling that as long as they had the local evangelist do virtually all of the teaching and preaching in the congregation and did not allow him to "run things," that all was well. Consequently, in reaction to the denominations "pastor system," another "pastor system" has developed-a system in which the preacher does the "shepherding" (pastoring) of the flock and those men who are supposed to be shepherds, the elders (Acts 20:28-35; Hebrews 13:7, 17-24; I Peter 5:1-4), are merely titled "Pastors" and then serve as little more than a board of corporate administrators.

Furthermore, whereas the apostle Peter forbids elders to act as "lords over God’s heritage" (I Peter 5:3), the reaction of many congregations to the world’s "pastor system" has actually encouraged this abuse. Thinking that "the office of a bishop" is a position of rank, rather than a work of service (I Timothy 3:1). Some have come to view elders as having a superior position over all other saints. Passages such as Hebrews 13:17 receive much emphasis, but are rarely considered in the light of related scriptures such as I Peter 5:3 and Mark 9:42-45. This, coupled with the concept of many brethren, especially some elders, that decision-making is the primary work of elders, creates a situation in which it is not uncommon for saints in God’s churches to be constrained to submit to the will of elders, while neither being consulted nor kept informed regarding the decisions their elders arbitrarily render.

The Bible shows that God desires that the work of faithful evangelists prevent these kinds of abuses by elders. Yet, due to the brethren’s reactionary response to the denominations’ "pastor system," rarely do we see evangelists in the churches of God being allowed, much less encouraged, to do their God-given work of appointing and disciplining elders (Acts 14:23; Titus 1:5; I Timothy 3:1-15; 5:17-22).

Sadly, a frequent consequence of these things is that churches lose their desire for elders. In elderless churches where business meetings run smoothly, the prevailing sentiment is that elders are unnecessary—decisions are being made just fine without them. Where the sting of "lordship" has been felt most strongly in the past, members often dread the local church having elders again lest once again the membership will have virtually no input in decisions regarding the collective work in which they are to be involved.

To say the least, much study is needed regarding the important God-ordained work of both evangelists and pastors (elders). Without this study, we risk reacting improperly to certain aspects and unknowingly adopting others from the "pastor system" that prevails in our religious world.

Brethren, let us realize that merely being different from our religious neighbors does not make us right. Any position we take that is merely a reaction to what others are doing is likely to be less than, or something other than, what the Bible actually enjoins. The nobility of character extolled in the scriptures is neither tainted with gullibility nor prejudice (Acts 17:11), but searches the scriptures with a desire to learn God’s will from God Himself.

Religion by Majority

Jeffrey Hamilton — Tue, 19 Aug 2025 23:54:51 +0000

by Dub McClish

A Pew Poll of 35,000 Americans, released in June 2008, revealed some interesting statistics about religious beliefs. More than half (57%) of “evangelicals” (strong in their belief in the Bible and in Jesus as God’s only begotten Son, right?) opined that Christianity is not the only way to Heaven. Mainline Protestants stated the same opinion by a whopping 83%. The average of all who professed any religious affiliation, 70% said that there are many ways (religions) by which one might attain eternal life. Of those polled, 92% claimed to believe in God. Belief in the Bible was reported by 88% of Evangelicals, 61% of mainline Protestants, and 63% of all those surveyed.

Among other things, these figures indicate a widespread religious pluralism, reflecting the popular philosophical nonsense known as “postmodernism.” This philosophy denies the existence of objective truth and posits that all things are relative. Its deluded adherents babble about “your truth” and “my truth” as if all views were equally true and valid. This drivel is but the natural progression of the generations-old denominational inanity: “It makes no difference what you believe, as long as you’re sincere.” The Bible says it makes all the difference. Just as there is one God and one Savior, there is only one Gospel by which men can enter Heaven (Mark 16:15-16; Romans 1:16; Galatians 1:6-9).

Postmodernism has opened the door for the “Emerging” or “Emergent” church movement that has been gaining momentum since the last decade of the previous century. It is the ultimate Burger King “have-it-your-way” approach to religion. It smacks of the old anti-establishment movement in culture and politics of the 1960s, only applied to religion. The Emerging/Emergent church movement is an unabashed attempt to bend religion to every secular and humanistic influence in society. The Emerging/Emergent approach allows one to believe and practice anything (or nothing) regarding God and man’s relationship to Him, and still call himself a “Christian.” It holds few, if any, moral absolutes. Its main concerns are with the here and now and “social justice,” rather than with sin, redemption, and immortality. One critic likened it to a “Build-Your-Own-God” shop, while another identified it as outright paganism.

Propositional truth and Biblical authority are passé, if not subjects of ridicule to their leaders. The Bible is of no use or concern to them. Were we still in the era of outhouse “bathrooms,” these pseudo-theologians would doubtless place their Bibles alongside the Sears-Roebuck catalog in such facilities. To them, one can deny the Father and the Son, John’s definition of an “antichrist” (I John 2:22), and still be a “Christian.”

The concept of many ways to Heaven (assuming one still believes in the immortal soul) indisputably contradicts the claim of belief in the God of the Bible. The very basis of the Mosaic law pronounced the God of the Bible to be the only true and living God, not “a god” among many: "Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee a graven image, nor any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them, for I Jehovah thy God am a jealous God" (Exodus 20:3-5).

The New Testament consistently echoes this cardinal fact. That very God sent the Redeemer into the world in the person of Jesus Christ, and “like Father, like Son”—He claimed to be the exclusive avenue to eternal life: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life: no one cometh unto the Father, but by me” (John 14:6).

Biblical religion is decidedly monotheistic and anti-pluralistic. It may evince “tolerance” for declared believers in God and the Bible to aver that there are many paths to Heaven; it is also hypocritical and patently anti-biblical. Men may reject this biblical teaching, but it is consummate folly to deny that the Bible so teaches.

Paul’s warning is very appropriate: "Take heed lest there shall be any one that maketh spoil of you through his philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ" (Colossians 2:8).

Religion

Jeffrey Hamilton — Mon, 15 Apr 2024 13:42:19 +0000

by Terry Wane Benton

I keep hearing people talk about “religion” as a bad thing. I hear some say things like, “I believe in God but not religion,” or “I accept Jesus but reject all religion.” It’s as if they have a concept of “religion” that is all negative, but Jesus is all positive. There seems to be a disconnect between what exactly people mean and what they think they mean by the term “religion.”

James said that there is such thing as “pure religion” (James 1:27), and he, by the Spirit, exhorted us to practice “pure religion.” You cannot serve Jesus and reject practicing “pure religion.” They go together! They are not two separate things. I know that modern use of the term has invented a concept of “religion” being all bad, but that is a modern faulty concept. “Pure religion” is not bad. It is expected that you would love and serve God. Only the impure religion should be rejected. It is an impure religion that God rejects, but not the “pure religion.”

I had one guy argue that God rejects all religion. When I pointed out that God demands “pure religion” and gave him the verse, he became adamant that the translators were all wrong. Why? Because he swallowed the newly invented concept that all “religion” is bad. That concept was not around when the translators gave us the words “pure religion” in English. English usage predates the modern concept. The word in Greek is “threskia” and has been translated as “religion” for hundreds of years in English. The translators thought it was a valid word for the Greek word “threskia.” So, who gets to come along later and change the word “religion” and make it all evil? Modern usage does not get to redefine the word that for hundreds of years was just “binding back” to God as a lifestyle. You can bind back in a pure way, or you can go about binding back in an impure way. The etymology of the word is:

In English, the meaning "particular system of faith in the worship of a divine being or beings" dates from c. 1300; the sense of "recognition of and allegiance in the manner of life (perceived as justly due) to a higher, unseen power or powers" dates from the 1530s.

If we have faith in God and believe we should worship and serve Him and bind our hearts back to Him, then that is, by definition, what religion is. You practice this either purely or impurely, but you cannot escape the fact that it is your religion. Jesus gave us a particular system, a pure doctrine to follow in the New Testament, a pure example in Himself to pattern our lives after. We either do this as “pure religion,” or we do impure religion, but your faith in God is your religion, no matter what. “Pure religion” is good. Claiming to have no religion is bad. Practicing impure religion is bad. Don’t let people confuse you. You must practice pure religion if you claim any relationship with God!

Daily Religion

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sun, 09 Apr 2023 23:11:15 +0000

https://www.lavistachurchofchrist.org/cms/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Daily-Religion.mp3

by Jeffrey W. Hamilton

Text: Luke 9:23-26

I. What kind of religion do you have? How is your faith expressed?

A. Acts 5:42 - The early Christians had a daily religion

B. It seems today that many have a once a week, once a month, or even a once a year religion

C. Even in the Old Testament, the worshipers offered sacrifices on a daily basis.

1. Even with this daily reminder, they still strayed from God

2. Some Christians believe they can be more faithful remembering God once a week.

D. Let us learn from the past - Romans 15:4

E. The giving of ourselves to God is our reasonable service - Romans 12:1

II. What do you do each day?

A. Daily prayer

1. Romans 12:12 - Devote, steadfast, instant in prayer

2. The wicked are active day and night - Psalms 55:9-11

a. So David counters by praying to God morning, noon, and evening - Psalms 55:16-17

3. I Thessalonians 5:17-18 - Pray without giving up

4. Ephesians 6:18 - Pray all kinds of prayers on all occasions

B. Daily study

1. Wisdom and instruction comes by daily looking for them - Proverbs 8:33-35

2. The Jews wanted to know if Jesus was the Christ. His answer - search the Scriptures - John 5:39

3. The Bereans did this with Paul’s teachings of Christ - Acts 17:11

4. Paul told Timothy to give diligence to word of God - II Timothy 2:15

5. How much time do we devote to secular learning? Can a child grow up with only 104 hours of book learning per year? Can we grow up on the same?

C. Daily evangelism

1. Paul taught the Ephesians day and night for three years - Acts 20:31

2. The early Christians were in the temple every day - Acts 2:46

D. Daily exhortation

1. Hebrews 10:24-25 - Exhort to good works at every opportunity

2. Hebrews 3:13 - Exhort daily less we fall into unbelief

3. Paul’s labor among the Thessalonians - I Thessalonians 2:9-12

E. Daily service to others

1. Acts 6:1 - The church took care of its needy daily

2. Galatians 2:10 - Encouraged to remember the poor

3. James 1:27 - Visit the widows and orphans

4. I John 3:17-18 - If we cannot do so, why expect God’s help?

F. Daily cross bearing - Luke 9:23

1. Jesus was perfected through sufferings - Hebrews 2:10

2. We must suffer with him - II Timothy 2:11-13

3. II Corinthians 4:8-11 - Always bearing sufferings to manifest Christ

4. Matthew 10:38 - Unless we are willing to bear the cross, we are not worthy of Christ

III. Our daily service will produce daily results

A. Acts 16:5 - Churches were established and grew daily

B. Acts 2:47 - Christians were added daily.

C. Sometimes we think today is different, but have we served as they once did? Are we giving God our all? Then how can we know if it doesn’t work the same way today?

The Problem with Organized Religion

Jeffrey Hamilton — Thu, 29 Dec 2022 22:27:58 +0000

by Andy Sochor
via Unmasking Sophistry, January-March 2023

Many people today disparage “organized religion.” Instead, they simply desire a “personal relationship” with the Lord. However, this is not an “either-or” proposition. In our service to God, we have personal and corporate responsibilities. Notice what Paul wrote to the church in Ephesus:

“And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ … from whom the whole body, being fitted and held together by what every joint supplies, according to the proper working of each individual part, causes the growth of the body for the building up of itself in love” (Ephesians 4:11-12, 16).

“That, in reference to your former manner of life, you lay aside the old self, which is being corrupted in accordance with the lusts of deceit, and that you be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and put on the new self, which in the likeness of God has been created in righteousness and holiness of the truth” (Ephesians 4:22-24).

In the same chapter, Paul spoke of personal responsibilities (laying aside the old self and putting on the new self ) and corporate responsibilities (being a functioning part of a self-edifying body). Clearly, both are involved in the life of a Christian. In this article, we will discuss these responsibilities and notice what the real problem is with “organized religion.”

Religion Must Be Personal

Simply being recognized as a member of a congregation does not mean we are saved. Jesus described the kingdom of heaven as a field in which tares would grow among the wheat (Matthew 13:24-30). They would be left together until the harvest, then the tares would be gathered up and destroyed. The point we should learn from the parable is that not all who are recognized by men as being in the Lord's kingdom will be saved in the end – some will be lost. The church in Sardis had “a few” who were “worthy” to walk with the Lord, even though the church as a whole was “dead” (Revelation 3:1-4). They had a reputation for faithfulness, yet many of them – despite being members of that local church – were spiritually dead.

We are individually accountable before the Lord. Paul wrote, “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may be recompensed for his deeds in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad” (II Corinthians 5:10). Therefore, we must honestly examine our lives (II Corinthians 13:5) and discipline our bodies to keep from becoming disqualified from the reward of heaven (I Corinthians 9:27).

We need to be sure that we, as individuals, are doing what the Lord wants us to do. Jesus said, “Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart .from Me, you who practice lawlessness'” (Matthew 7:21-23). On the day of judgment, there will be those who believed they were serving the Lord when in reality they were not doing what was lawful in His sight. They had failed to build on the rock; therefore, all of their eﬀorts would be for naught in the end (Matthew 7:24-27).

Regardless of what others do or fail to do, we must do what we should. James wrote, “Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world” ( James 1:27). The principle behind James' instruction is that we must do good to others and avoid sin. This is our personal responsibility.

Religion Must Have a Corporate Element

Corporate means “of, relating to, or formed into a unified body of individuals” (Merriam-Webster). As it pertains to the New Testament, this means that our religion must include being part of a local congregation.

While it is true that we are individually accountable, that does not mean that we are to be isolated. We have a responsibility to be part of a local body of Christians. This is why Saul tried “to join himself to the disciples” when he came to Jerusalem (Acts 9:26, KJV). Being part of a local church is for our mutual benefit as we can “encourage one another” and “stimulate one another to love and good deeds” (Hebrews 3:12-13; 10:24-25). In the local church, we are able to build up one another (Ephesians 4:16).

There are also certain things we must do together as a local church:

Worship – Luke wrote that the church in Troas “gathered together to break bread” and hear a message from Paul (Acts 20:7). Paul told the brethren in Colossae to teach one another in song (Colossians 3:16). Togetherness is essential for these activities.
Giving – Regarding the collection, Paul wrote, “On the first day of every week each one of you is to put aside and save, as he may prosper” (I Corinthians 16:2). Why was this done on the first day of the week? That was when the church assembled (cf. I Corinthians 11:33; Acts 20:7).
Teaching – Within the church, there are “evangelists … pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints” (Ephesians 4:11-12). This equipping would primarily be done through teaching – a work that all of these would share in common. Paul told Timothy, “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” (II Timothy 2:2). Equipping and training is done within the church, not in a seminary.
Encouraging – The Hebrew writer said, “And let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds, not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near” (Hebrews 10:24-25). Giving and receiving encouragement necessarily requires togetherness.
Discipline – When Paul addressed the situation in Corinth in which one was unrepentant of his immorality, he wrote, “In the name of our Lord Jesus, when you are assembled … deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus” (I Corinthians 5:4-5). For this type of discipline to be eﬀective, it must be carried out by the group.

These things cannot properly be accomplished when one is not part of a local body of Christians. Therefore, we must be part of a group that has “organized” as a congregation of the Lord's people.

What Is the Problem?

The problem is not with “organized religion” itself. When people attack this, they are attacking the wrong problem. So what is the problem?

False religion – Often when people attack “organized religion,” it is not the Lord's church that they are targeting. Jesus built one church (Matthew 16:18), but there are many churches of men that have been created. The world does not make a distinction between them. To many, all churches are the same. Therefore, the problems that exist in man-made churches are projected onto the Lord's church. To combat this, we need to be able to show the diﬀerence between the Lord's church and all others.
Wrong expectations – There are many things that people have come to expect from churches today – social activities, political advocacy, general charity, secular education, and so on. Because of this, they judge churches based on those man-made expectations. However, these types of things are not what the Lord wants His church to do. The church is “the pillar and support of the truth” (I Timothy 3:15) and needs to be proclaiming, teaching, and defending the truth. Claiming to do things in the name of the Lord is meaningless if those things are not authorized by the Lord (Matthew 7:22-23).
Imperfect people – Christians are to be diﬀerent from the world (Romans 12:2), but no one is perfectly sinless. John wrote, “If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us” (I John 1:8). Sometimes people attack the church because of the people within the church. We need to strive to give “no cause for oﬀense in anything, so that the ministry will not be discredited” (II Corinthians 6:3). Peter wrote, “Abstain .from fleshly lusts which wage war against the soul. Keep your behavior excellent among the Gentiles, so that in the thing in which they slander you as evildoers, they may because of your good deeds, as they observe them, glorify God in the day of visitation” (I Peter 2:11-12). However, while we must strive to keep from sin and be the example to others that we ought to be, we also need to make it clear that the church is for those who are imperfect. Jesus said, “I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners” (Matthew 9:13). Even those who were guilty of crucifying Jesus could be part of His church if they would believe, repent, and obey the gospel (Acts 2:38, 41, 47).

The solution to these problems is not to abandon any sense of “organized religion.” This only creates a new problem. The solution is to dedicate ourselves – individually and within our local churches – to carefully following what the Lord has instructed.

Conclusion

As we have noticed in this article, we have certain responsibilities as individuals in our service to the Lord. We also have responsibilities collectively within our local churches. Organized religion is good when it is the organization the Lord established – His church (Matthew 16:18) – functioning according to His will (Ephesians 5:23-24).

Is Christianity a Religion or a Way of Life?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sat, 03 Jul 2021 18:10:22 +0000

by Osamagbe Lesley Egharevba
Unmasking Sophistry, vol. 1, no. 1, April-June 2021
Unmasking Sophistry, vol. 1, no. 2, July-September 2021

Many scoff at the idea that Christianity is a religion. It is very common to hear and read people speak about Christianity as not a religion but only a way of life. This sentiment is being paraded almost everywhere. In fact, one of those who hold this position penned down the following in one of the blogs;

“…if Christianity is a religion, then we could conclude that whatever God the Father, Jesus the Son and God the Holy Spirit planned for mankind is a mere religion. If Christianity is a religion, then God didn’t have to send Jesus, His own Son to establish it. The objective of the plan of salvation that began after man sinned and was cast out of Eden was not to establish a religion. No, Christianity is not a religion. Christianity is a way of life.”

In the first place, the plan of salvation did not begin after man sinned and was cast out of Eden. Rather, the plan of salvation began before the foundation of the world, and there are abundant passages of the Holy Scriptures that affirm this eternal truth (I Peter 1:20; Ephesians 1:4; Titus 1:2). To insist that the plan of salvation began after the fall of man is to insinuate that God was oblivious of the fact that man would fall and that His plan was an afterthought. This, indeed, is an attempt to jettison the omniscient nature of God (cf. I John 3:20; Isaiah 40:28; 46:10; Psalm 139:4; Romans 1:20).

Secondly, what exactly does this writer mean by religion that he contends Christianity is not? While he never gave an exact definition of religion in his writing, it seems that his idea of religion is captured in one of the paragraphs when he says:

“If Christianity is a religion, then it might be no different from the many religions in our present day world where the major aim isn’t making positive difference in the present, but following a set of rules to pass an examination for eternity.”

According to this writer’s concept of religion, “following a set of rules to pass an examination for eternity” is a major characteristic of world religions and which to him, is incongruous and not an element of Christianity. To him, Christianity is all about imitating Christ, leading good lives, doing good, loving and helping one another, etc. but has nothing to do with devotion to a set of rules as a prerequisite to reaching eternal life.

While it is admitted without an iota of doubt that Christianity requires leading godly lives, imitating Christ, and keeping oneself unspotted from the world and, thus – a way of life (Titus 2:11-12; Hebrews 12:14; James 1:27), to deny that Christianity is a religion on the basis of it not having a “set of rules” to be obeyed towards the eternal goal is untrue and an unfounded claim.

One question that comes to mind is this: has Christ not given “a set of rules”? Indeed, the Bible makes a distinction between the commandments of men (Matthew 15:8-9) and the commandments of God (I John 5:3). This same text and others point to the fact that we have no love for God if we fail to keep His commandments (John 14:15; 15:14). In the book of Genesis when God made man and placed him in the Garden of Eden, God gave him certain commandments that He must keep if the man was to remain in the garden. One of those is that he must not eat “of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil…for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die” (Genesis 2:17). The serpent came with his own commandment and circumvented God’s command (Genesis 3:1-5). Men had a choice to either follow God’s commandment or the Devil’s. Similarly, the children of Israel were given commandments to be followed in order to be pleasing to God. He said, “if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be a special treasure to Me above all people; for all the earth is Mine.” (Exodus 19:5). The Israelites had a choice to obey God or follow other gods. Even before the Law was given at Sinai, the Bible records that Abraham “kept the commandments of the Lord” (Genesis 26:5).

But what about the Christians today? Do they have a set of rules from Christ? Surely, for Christ spoke of obedience to His Father’s will as a condition to enter into the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 7:21, 24-27). The point is that God has been dealing with men right from time immemorial, in every dispensation, by giving men rules to obey. And in every dispensation, there are always counter-rules made by men to draw God’s children away from Him.

If by “set of rules,” the writer meant the commandments of men, then I insist that is not what we must follow to go to heaven. However, the Bible thus teaches that we must follow the commandments of Christ to make heaven (Acts 2:42; II John 9). James calls it “the perfect law of liberty” (James 1:25). Another obvious fact is that all of these things that are referred to as “the way of life” (such as helping the sick) constitute a set of rules that must be done without which no one can see the Lord (Hebrew 12:14). In other words, one cannot separate “the way of life” from “a set of rules.” If you are living the way of life Christ wants you to live, you are following “the set of rules” that Christ has commanded you (I Corinthians 11:1).

But come to think of it, if Christianity is merely a way of life like this author contends, what this simply means, in essence, is that a Muslim can be a Christian because he loves, does good, humbles, visits the sick, etc. Likewise, we can absolutely get as many as many people who are Christians from other religions of the world. But no! All people who are living a good life are not saved because of their morality. If it were so, Cornelius would have been saved and not be required to do anything else (Acts 10:1-3). But he had to be obedient to some other requirements despite the fact that he was even a lover and fearer of God (Acts 10:1-2, 22).

What about James 1:26-27? This passage is a killing blow to those who teach that Christianity is not a religion, and it is not surprising to see that the writer of this article never referred to it in his writing. James says;

“If anyone among you thinks he is religious, and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, that one’s religion is useless. Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their trouble, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world.”

James speaks of religion and shows how such a religion could be useless and how it could be pure and undefiled. One could make his religion useless by practicing what is not acceptable to Christ and one could practice pure religion by visiting those in affliction and then keeping oneself unspotted from the world – thus imitating Christ (I Peter 2:21-23). What religion was James talking about? It is the Christian religion! And so, Christianity is both a religion and a way of life. In the next edition, we shall give attention to other matters relating to why Christianity is a religion.

Next, we shall look at one of the incongruous implications associated with believing the idea that “Christianity is not a religion” and show why such is wrong.

Many think that it is just enough for one to live a morally upright life – be kind and generous, loving and caring, and do all manner of things that are considered “good.” Merely doing all of these already makes one a Christian in their viewpoint. Those who hold this view are invariably saying that it does not matter what religious group you associate yourself with; you can still be a Christian in any of those groups, provided you maintain a good life.

In other words, it does not matter where and how you worship God. Since you are already living a life that is admirable and in fact, pleasing to all, they conclude that with such “sacrifices,” God is well pleased. From this notion comes such statements as, “Church does not save anyone,” “Just live a good life, God will not ask you on the last day what church you belong to,” and many of that kind.

“Good” People Need Conversion

Morally upright people are found everywhere. In almost all religions of the world, you are likely to find people who possess good moral standards and exhibit great and admirable lifestyles. These individuals know that it is wrong to kill, steal, etc. They know that it is a good thing to help a person when he is in need. Jesus talks about the Good Samaritan, who was neither a Christian nor a Jewish priest, yet knows it was necessary for him to help the injured man (Luke 10:30-37). The same level of hospitality could be done by people today who do not even believe in Jesus Christ. However, does the fact that these people live good lifestyles make them Christians? Not at all! Let us consider some individuals in the New Testament:

Cornelius

Cornelius was the first Gentile man who was converted to Christianity. Before his conversion, he was described as “a devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God always…a just man…and of good report among all the nation of the Jews” (Acts 10:2, 22). In the thinking of certain individuals, Cornelius is already a Christian with all the excellent qualities that he possesses. But that was not the case! Despite all of these, there was something that was lacking that he needed to do to make himself a Christian. Listen to the voice of the Lord as He told Cornelius in Acts 10:5-6: “Now send men to Joppa, and send for Simon whose surname is Peter. He is lodging with Simon, a tanner, whose house is by the sea. He will tell you what you must do.” Notice that the word “must” suggests a necessity and shows that action is compulsory if Cornelius is really interested in his salvation. He actually sent men to Joppa and invited Peter as instructed, and when Cornelius and his household heard and believed the word, they were baptized and saved (cf. Acts 2:47).

Lydia

Lydia was a woman from the city of Thyatira; a city in the Roman province of Asia, the very place the evangelists were prevented by the Holy Spirit from going at the beginning of their second missionary journey (Acts 16:6 cf. Revelation 2:18). It happened that their first convert is from the same Asia. Lydia was a seller of purple and traded in Philippi, a Roman colony that had no synagogue (Acts 16:12-14). She was obviously devoted, and she was at the riverside on the Sabbath day with other women praying. Just like Cornelius, she was a worshipper of God, and she demonstrated this fact by praying to God. For most people, Lydia was already a Christian, and Paul did not even need to disturb them, seeing that they were praying to God. The truth is that such a lifestyle is not enough to make one a Christian. The translation of individuals from the power of darkness into the kingdom of Christ (Colossians 1:13) requires that they do certain things, and such works are not of man’s righteousness but rather obedience to all of God’s commandments. The grace of God that brings salvation actually teaches us to do certain things (Titus 2:11-14).

Does it matter if and how we worship God?

Ecclesiastes 12:13 says the whole duty of man is to “fear God and keep His commandments.” Many denominational churches today all practice different things in the name of worship, and in an attempt to find solace for the divisive practices in their worship services, they claim that it does not matter “provided God is worshipped” and provided “it is the name of Jesus that is being called upon and not the name of the devil.” Other claims include; “it is not the church that will take you to heaven,” etc. How true are these statements?

We find that in the New Testament, the early Christians worshipped God in a certain way – they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship in the breaking of bread and in prayers. They also praise God and have favor with all the people, and the Lord adds to the church daily those who are being saved (Acts 2:42,47). This continuous practice is a collective action of the people and suggests devotion. All through the New Testament, we find one church (Ephesians 4:4) and one doctrine of Christ (II John 9; I Timothy 4:16). The Christians were not told to go away after their conversion to join any group of their choice and continue living a good life; rather, they collectively continue to worship God together as a church. It was this same church that spread to all parts of the world through the preaching of the gospel (Acts 1:8; Colossians 1:23)

Indeed, it actually matters if and how we worship God. In John 4:23-24, we read, “But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. God is Spirit and those who worship Him must worship Him in Spirit and in truth.” Two things are worthy of note in this verse;

God wants us to worship Him and
this worship must be in spirit and in truth.

That implies that we must not only be devoted but also worship in accordance with His word (John 17:17). What this means is that we do not have the choice or the right to import our own thinking or style of worship. Our worship must be in conformity with what we have read in the New Testament.

In Matthew 7:21, Jesus emphasized that merely calling Him “Lord, Lord” is not enough to take one into the kingdom but one must also be obedient to the will of His Father in heaven. Does God want us to worship Him today? If yes, has He given us a pattern on how to worship Him? Yes, we must abide in the doctrine of Christ (II John 9).

Matthew 15:8-9 reveals certain people whose worship became vain as a result of teaching the commandments of men. “These people draw near to Me with their mouth, And honor Me with their lips, But their heart is far from Me. And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.” This indicates that there are certain kinds of doctrines that people teach and practice which will nullify their worship of God and render it unacceptable. In the same vein, I Timothy 4:1-3 lists some unacceptable teachings and refers to them as “doctrines of demons.” We are also informed that some individuals worshipped God ignorantly (Acts 17:23), but only true worshippers are recognized by God and such He seeks.

Dear readers, let us not be mistaken in believing the lie that merely living a good life is enough to guarantee salvation and be pleasing to God. We must also be devoted to God and be obedient to all that God has commanded us as the Great Commission instructs (Matthew 28:20). The church is like the ark of Noah in the Old Testament, and only those who have been added to it, and remain faithful till the end will be saved. Christianity is a religion; a pure and undefiled religion for that matter (James 1:27).

References

OJ. "Christianity is not a religion. Christianity is a Way of Life."

Why do some people think Christianity is a problem?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 22:09:00 +0000

Question:

Why do people think that the concept of religion and God is a problem? I understand that many evil examples by apparently religious persons have turned people away. Still, I don't fully understand why they think it's something that needs to be eliminated.

Answer:

"He who walks in his uprightness fears the LORD, but he who is devious in his ways despises Him" (Proverbs 14:2).

Few people enjoy having their flaws pointed out. They would much rather pretend there are no flaws. If that doesn't work then these people will attack what is showing their flaws to claim that the messenger is the one actually the one in the wrong.

The wicked desire to control their own lives. They don't want anyone or anything telling them what they can or cannot do. "Yet in the same way these men, also by dreaming, defile the flesh, and reject authority, and revile angelic majesties" (Jude 8). The very idea that there is a standard above them to which they are held accountable gives them nightmares. Thus, any code of belief that holds standards they find unacceptable is ridiculed and removed.

The wicked believe they are superior but Christianity teaches us to be humble and serve our fellow men. "He who despises his neighbor sins, but happy is he who is gracious to the poor" (Proverbs 14:21). Those given over to evil lie to themselves about their own importance. Thus, when they run across people who don't support their view, everything about them has to be destroyed. The confidence of righteous people in their God and His teachings is a barrier to the wicked's view of his own greatness. (Proverbs 14:26-27). Their arrogance can't allow them to ignore the righteous -- they have to destroy it so that they can continue to tell themselves they are great. Haman exemplifies this in Esther 3:5-6; 5:11-14.