Positively Optimistic

by Rick Liggin
www.cvillechurch.com





By definition, a "pessimist" is one who is in the habit of or (at least) tends to "expect the worst" (Webster's, p. 1063); he tends to see everything in a negative light. A "cynic" is one who believes "that people are motivated in all their actions by selfishness" (Ibid, p. 353); he tends to "deny the sincerity of people's motives and actions," and so he denies "the value of living" (Ibid). A "fatalist" is one who believes "that all events are determined by fate and are hence inevitable" (Ibid, p. 509).



Obviously, all three of these personality traits are negative, and any individual possessing even one of them is bound to be a negative person. But when you have a group that includes people with all three of these traits (a group that includes a cynic, a fatalist, and a pessimist) or (even worse) when you have one person who is characterized by all three (he is a pessimistic, fatalistic cynic), watch out! You surely have a recipe for disaster!



Such negative people not only hurt themselves, but also those around them. They're especially a menace to any team effort. Their negativity tends to break the spirit of those trying to press forward and accomplish something good. The fatalist hurts the group by injecting the idea that: "It's no use to try; you can't change things anyway!" The pessimist hurts the group by seeing everything in the most negative way possible--"We've tried that before and it didn't work" or "that's too hard; we'll never be able to do that!" And the cynic hurts the group by questioning the motives of everyone else--"You're just trying to get your own way" or "you're just trying to put yourself forward!" Indeed, such negative people can really "throw cold water" on almost any project and break down team efforts to work together.



Now, it ought to be obvious that such negativity cannot characterize Christians. A Christian cannot be a fatalist, since all events are not determined merely by fate, and therefore are not simply "inevitable." God--not fate--controls our world (Jas. 4:15), and He has given men the power to make choices that can change the course of events. The Christian also cannot be a cynic, because cynicism--thinking the worst of everyone else--is just unloving. The New Testament teaches that love "believes all things" (1 Cor. 13:7), and so it always believes the best about others--especially about other Christians. And Christians most assuredly have no reason to be pessimistic. Because we love God and seek to serve Him, we have every reason to believe--to "know that God causes all things to work together for good" (Rom. 8:28). And "if God is for us, who is against us?" (Rom. 8:31).



In contrast to being so negative, the Christian is supposed to be an optimist! "Optimism" is exactly the opposite of cynicism and fatalistic pessimism. "Optimism" is defined as "the tendency to take the most hopeful or cheerful view of matters, or to expect the best outcome"; it is the "practice of looking on the bright side of things" (Webster's, p. 999). Such a positive attitude ought certainly to characterize us as Christians. In fact, as Christians, we are to be so optimistic that we can even face the difficult trials of this life with a positive, joyful attitude--"knowing that the testing of your faith produces endurance" (Jas. 1:2-3; cf. Rom. 5:3-5; 1 Pet. 1:6-7).



Let me ask you: are you a positive, upbeat kind of person who always tries to look on the bright side of things, or are you one of those negative pessimists who tends to only see the dark side? In local churches, as we try to work together to achieve something good in the cause of Christ, we need positive people--people with an optimistic vision for the future. We don't need negative old "sticks in the mud" who tend to "throw cold water" on all our efforts. If God is for us, who can be against us? Surely He can--and will--cause all things to work together for good. Vision for the future requires us to be positively optimistic.

Dial-A-Bible-Study(Recorded Messages)
(434) 975-7373
Free Bible Study Materials
Call Anytime!
www.cvillechurch.com
E-Mail: larryrouse@cvillechurch.com

The Traditional Party Line

by Larry Rouse
www.cvillechurch.com

Years ago, a man from a neighboring church came to the city where I was located, walked into my office and immediately said, "OK, what is your position on the marriage question?" I said, "...whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery." His response? "Yeah, the traditional party line!"

I said, "Wait a minute. All I did was quote Matthew 19:9; I've just repeated the words of Christ!" He said, "Well, but is that all the truth?" Almost as he said that, he heard what he had said! "I mean ... I mean, I know Jesus taught the truth ..." His words had already betrayed him. Rather than submit to the clear teaching of Jesus he had chosen to hurl an accusation that impugned my beliefs. But what did he mean by the phrase "traditional party line?" Behind this charge may be at least one of four attitudes:

1. I don't like what you teach, wont accept it so Ill distract you from discussing the Bible by making this charge. This was certainly the case with the man above. If I spent time defending myself and why I believed what I believed that was time not spent discussing what Matthew 19:9 means. Clever tactic, yes? If I have close friends or relatives who want to marry, naturally I don't like to hear someone teach something that would question that union. And without any doubt, if I am contemplating a relationship, and you tell me I shouldn't, I wont like that. But instead of just saying, "I don't like what you are teaching," it is much easier (and sometimes more effective) to charge "Well, you are just repeating the traditional party line."

2. There are many others who have taught this for many years. So what? The fact that a teaching has been held for years does not necessarily prove it is wrong. Being traditional is not always bad. 2 Thessalonians urges us to hold the traditions of the apostles. There are thousands of brethren who have taught the necessity of repentance and baptism for many generations. This says nothing about the validity of repentance and baptism. The number of preachers and/or writers who have taught a proposition does not minimize its validity, or prove it. Likewise, the number of years something has been taught neither diminishes its truthfulness, nor makes it true.

3. You haven't really studied, and you don't really have your own convictions; you have blindly accepted the word of others. I would guess this is what is behind the "traditional party line" charge most of time. The charge then is a way of saying that I can read your heart and know your motives. It also says that I know that you are not sincere, nor a truth seeker. The only person qualified to make such a charge is the one who is able not only to know what we teach, but why we teach it. If you are able to know (have real evidence) that someone has put himself under the dominion of others; if you are certain that a man prefers "popular brotherhood thought" (whatever that is) to personal Bible study, then perhaps you are equipped to make this charge.

4. I don't have any real arguments or response to what you are teaching. Here is the real problem the man described above had. He had nothing to say in response to Matthew 19:9, knew what he was doing was wrong, but wanted to do it anyway. So, he threw charges around to try to save face. When I tell people my belief that the only man (with a living mate) free to remarry is the one who has put away his spouse for fornication I want them show me the error of my position (if it is error). Don't make mindless charges - come to the scriptures and teach me the truth. Help me to see where I've been deceived or made a mistake in my study. Lead me through the passages that pertain to this. Give me something substantial instead of just charging me as a slave to human opinion or party pressure. Often, though, when a disputant makes the charge of "traditional party line," he is reacting in frustration over his or her lack of substantial biblical arguments.

I am not prepared to ignore a real danger here. There is a temptation to preach what others are preaching; there is the sin of listening to men and ignoring God; and there is such a thing as a Pharisaic, party-spirit mentality. But when you teach what the Lord said in Matthew 19:9, or anywhere else, because you believe in the Lord and want to stand where He stands, don't be intimidated by the charge of submitting to the "party line." And the fact that 95% of the preachers you know and respect teach the same thing is never a reason to throw it out. What do you think?

My good friend Harold Turner wrote about this a few years ago in a journal. His conclusion fits well here: "Personally, I don't give two hoots about traditional or nontraditional in the whole thing, and would like to make an appeal to anyone who might be feeling the pressure of the nontraditional use of the word traditional these days. Don't be too quick to apologize for preaching and teaching that which has characteristically been taught, for there is at least an outside chance that the reason that bit of teaching is traditional is because it is so."

Dial-A-Bible-Study(Recorded Messages)

(434) 975-7373

Free Bible Study Materials

Call Anytime!

www.cvillechurch.com

E-Mail: larryrouse@cvillechurch.com

Meditation: "Under the Fig Tree"

by Charles G. Goodall

www.cvillechurch.com

When Jesus revealed to Nathaniel that He had seen him in the privacy of a fig tree, he exclaimed, “Thou art the Son of God ... [and] the king of Israel” (John 1:48-49). The Scripture doesn’t say what Nathaniel was doing there, but he had taken enough precaution to be alone that he felt only God could have known about his solitude. On one occasion, Isaac sought seclusion when he went out to meditate in the field at eventide (Genesis 26:63).

These instances stir our curiosity about meditation, its merit and its relationship to prayer. It seems we hear about prayer and supplication but little about meditation. It is a kind of prayer, but is of a higher nature than a petition. Meditation is the putting aside of the world and ourselves to focus upon God.

For a moment, let us not use our imaginations to bridge the Fantasy Islands in this world, but use our will to make resolutions to bring us closer to the throne of God. We can do so by suspending for the time being the outward struggle against worldly forces in order to experience the inward realization of the presence of God. We must seek first to be alone. A good way to do this is suggested by the familiar song penned by Will Slater:

Walking alone at eve and viewing the skies afar,

Bidding the darkness come to welcome each silver star,

Sitting alone at eve and dreaming the hours away,

Watching the shadows falling now at the close of day.

We often make the same blunder with God that we do with our friends, we do all the talking. The heathen mistakenly thought they would be heard for their much speaking (Matthew 6:7). We can disrespect God by changing the Scriptures from “Speak Lord, thy servant hears” to “Listen Lord, thy servant speaks!” Why can’t we learn to be still? The psalmist wrote in Psalm 4:4, “Stand in awe and sin not: commune with your own heart upon your bed, and be still...”
Meditation helps us with maintaining the proper perspective. When we are busy, it seems harder to keep our priorities straight. By meditating we see ourselves as we really are, and not as we think we are. It affords us an opportunity for genuine self-examination. When we work hard, our friends tend to praise us highly and perhaps sometimes it is deserved. However, after a time we have a tendency to put more stock in the adulation than we should.

During meditation, we are not as prone to deceive ourselves. Paul said, “We dare not ... compare ourselves with some that commend themselves: but they, measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves are not wise” (2 Corinthians 10:12). Alone with the Lord, we are face to face with reality. No one is there for us to impress. Our soul is laid bare and open in the presence of the eternal God.

In meditation we cleanse our souls in much the same manner that the sanitation workers clean our streets of trash and filth in the quietness of the night. Have you ever awakened during these hours and had the experience of dearly assessing your spiritual condition? Reflection of past sins is so painful at those hours. Insomnia strikes those who have a sense of guilt more often than those who have found peace with God. When that inner peace is found, the distractions are gone and our conscience is clear before God.

During the daytime we can see our neighbor’s faults so well because we have failed to meditate on our own. The more we meditate the more our neighbors faults look minute in comparison with our own. Isaiah once said, “All our righteousness are as filthy rags” (Isaiah 64:6). Through meditation, we can remove the mote and obtain new spiritual heights. For example, the Lord taught that the one who had been forgiven the most should be all the more grateful. The humbler we are in meditation, the higher we can climb the spiritual mountain.

But sometimes we destroy or neglect what we are working for while we over pursue our own selfish interests. What good are luxurious possessions if we have no companion with which to enjoy them? For example, why labor and provide for children if they rise up to condemn us because they’ve been neglected?

Thus, it is important that we find time to meditate on who we are, what we are doing and whether or not we are putting our energy in the right places. To accomplish these objectives we must find time to be alone with God. If, with the knowledge of His word in our hearts, we will reflect on our lives, we can momentarily escape the relentless demands of this world to firmly determine the proper course to take.

Meditation is a time for digesting God’s law by calling into service our memory, our intellect and our will. David said that the righteous man “delights in the law of the Lord and meditates on it day and night” (Psalm 12). In our study of the Bible we often soak up factual knowledge, but sometimes fail to make the proper application to our daily lives. The difference between studying and meditating is like the difference between knowledge and communication. When we meditate, we want to commune with God.

As a child, I remember the cow we milked each day would quickly clip grass and later in the day lie in the shade of a tree to chew and digest it. There is a time for intense study, but there is also a time for considering its application to our lives. James said pondering past Bible lessons was like looking into a mirror to see if we are really all we are striving to be (James 1:23-25). We use our memory to recall God’s blessings and His infinite goodness. We use our intellect to recall what we have learned about His life, truth, and love. By our will we strive to follow Jesus’ instructions: “Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, with all thy soul, and with all thy mind” (Matthew 22:37).

For us to meditate we would need to find a place to comfortably be alone with the Lord. One could find his “fig tree” or “field at eventide.” “Take time to be holy,” the poet has said. The Lord “which seeth in secret...shall reward thee openly.”

Dial-A-Bible-Study(Recorded Messages)
(434) 975-7373
Free Bible Study Materials
Call Anytime!
www.cvillechurch.com
E-Mail: larryrouse@cvillechurch.com

False Teaching 101

by Stephen Harper
www.cvillechurch.com

In the religious realm, there are some men who would have us believe they are speaking the truths of God's Word but would be more properly identified as the “false teachers” they are. I know that is a 'label' that some individuals do not like to hear, but it is a Scriptural one (cf. II Peter 2:1). It seems the problem some have in calling anyone a 'false teacher' comes from an apparent misunderstanding about what makes one a 'false teacher,' but it is rarely a problem of identifying the content of what he is teaching. Right now, some are arguing that we can only know a 'false teacher' if we know his motives, but if that were true then we mere humans could never identify one as a 'false teacher' since no man can know the motives of another unless they reveal it themselves. [And when is the last time you heard anyone stand up and say, "Before I begin, I just want everyone to know I have ulterior motives behind the words I am about to say"?]

I believe honest men will admit that a “false teacher” is not so hard to identify as some might think, but that will not be the point of today's study. Today, I would like us to consider some of the tactics of those who are propagating error. I believe this is an important study because it seems many unbelievers and even brethren are being led astray by some of the tactics we will discuss today, and are apparently unaware they have been deceived or, more correctly, duped. Some are unwittingly helping foster and propagate error, believing it to be truth!

The apostle Paul warned the Corinthian brethren to forgive and reaffirm their love for the brother whom they had chastened for wrongdoing, as Paul himself had already done, “lest Satan should take advantage of us; for we are not ignorant of his devices” (II Corinthians 2:6-11). Something as 'simple' as discipline can be used by Satan to divided brethren unnecessarily and, if that is true, how much more when he uses false teaching to divide brethren unnecessarily? We would do well to know how he and his ministers operate so we can more easily recognize them, expose them, and take precautionary steps to avoid them.

Device #1: Redirect attention to the one who questions what is being taught. [This can be done in several ways.] If the false teacher's doctrine is being questioned, he might say, "You are only teaching the traditional teachings, not Scripture," or [stated another way], "That's church of Christ doctrine." He will call truth [Bible teachings and Bible passages quoted verbatim] "tradition" to try to get people to believe it is of human invention and does not come from God, diverting attention away from the fact his teaching is without Scriptural basis. This is a common fallacy of argument [diversion] and provides an easy way out of having to explain and defend one's own teaching [get the audience to look at someone else]. I have noted from my own experience that this is a favorite tactic of those who teach errant positions on marriage, divorce and remarriage. I also find it very revealing that they only make that accusation on this subject and not on any other, such as baptism, stealing, or murder. I can't recall anyone accusing another man of teaching "the traditional position on murder" but I have seen several men accused of teaching "the traditional position on marriage, divorce, and remarriage" [whatever that is]. Often, they will not even give a straight answer or a defense for what they are teaching — just accusations about what others are teaching. That is no way to find truth!

Another way attention may be diverted to the questioner is by the false teacher impugning the motives of the questioner and attacking his character. This, too, is a fallacy of argument [ad hominem] which diverts attention away from the subject of dispute and prevents anyone from reaching a reasoned understanding of truth. Often, at the same time the false teacher is impugning motives and calling names, he complains about the questioner impugning his motives [when only the doctrine he teaches is mentioned] and calling him names [even when it is his actual name]. To see brethren resort to these strategies is an outright shame and should be disgusting to true believers!

Device #2: Call the opposition 'extremists.' This is a favorite tactic in political circles, and one being used more frequently among brethren. Why? Again, it is an easy way to divert attention away from the subject of dispute or the false teacher himself, and onto those questioning the content, application, or consequences of his teachings. If someone disagrees with a teaching or practice and sound reasons are given, those who teach the false doctrines [knowing they cannot defend their teaching or practice from Scripture] will simply label the opposition as 'extremists' who are on the outer fringes of sanity and reason. This was used by brethren 40-60 years ago when they tried to defend church-supported institutions and I have found that some brethren today are now using the same tactic when they seek to defend privately-supported human institutions that are doing the work of the local church. Why can't we simply discuss the issue and leave the name-calling out of it? That will never help anyone to reach a sound and reasoned conclusion! It is a source of division and bitter feelings between brethren, though!

Device #3: ‘I'm still studying it.’ If I teach on any subject, I would expect that some might disagree with something I have taught. I might even mistakenly teach error, though I do not intend to do so or plan on it ever happening. But if someone ever challenged me about what I was teaching, I would imagine no one would be satisfied with the response, "Well, I'm glad you asked, but I'm not going to get into a discussion on this subject because I'm still studying it." Sadly, I have heard this very response on a couple of occasions by men who had been propagating error but who also did not want to take responsibility for what they were teaching, or didn't feel they owed anyone an explanation about what they had taught; they simply wanted to teach their errors and go about their merry way, moving on and refusing to answer any further questions.

Friends and brethren, this is nothing but a "cop out." It is deception, pure and simple, because while they have been "studying" for decades, they continue teaching their doctrines the whole time as if they were convicted it was truth. Only when they are questioned do they suddenly feel unsure, and then claim the high ground of "not wanting to cause division." Meanwhile, the men who question them are maligned as "divisive" for simply trying to get a straight answer. For shame!

Friends and brethren, the tactics we have covered today are not new, and they will not go away anytime soon. As often as truth is taught, there will be someone to preach error right alongside it, but the false teacher [God's label, not mine] will always try to present himself in a favorable light while simultaneously trying to slander, malign, and impugn those who question him. Micaiah was called a “troubler of Israel” by King Ahab — the real troublemaker (I Kings 18:17, 18); the Sanhedrin accused the apostles of wrongly blaming them for the death of Jesus, when they gladly welcomed it at the time (Acts 5:28; Matthew 27:25); and Paul and his cohorts were accused of turning the world upside down and rebelling against the Roman government by envious and unbelieving Jews (Acts 17:5-7). Please note that in all cases mentioned, the false teachers and persecutors were not interested in sitting down and having a rational discussion so all could come to a reasoned conclusion and discover the truth!

We should not be surprised at the tactics of false teachers because Peter has revealed some of their ways (II Peter 2). Our duty is to expose them for what they are and keep standing for truth.

Dial-A-Bible-Study(Recorded Messages)

(434) 975-7373

Free Bible Study Materials

Call Anytime!

www.cvillechurch.com

E-Mail: larryrouse@cvillechurch.com