Month: November 2022

            Last year when ending our study of 2 Thessalonians, I took a few minutes to explain 2 Thessalonians 3:17 in which Paul wrote, ”The salutation of Paul with mine own hand, which is the token in every epistle: so I write.” Paul needed to authenticate his letters because there were false teachers that forged letters in his name and claimed they were from him. Paul usually dictated his letters to an amanuensis which was no validation that the handwriting was his. To circumvent this problem and prove he had indeed written the letter, he would write one section in his own handwriting. This would authenticate the letter was truly from him as the addressee would recognize his writing.

            I thought about this as I sat down to write this article. Each week I write hundreds and sometimes thousands of words in my own handwriting. I find that pen and paper enable my thoughts to flow more freely rather than staring at a computer screen and tapping them out on a keyboard. In my office closet, there are years’ worth of composition books, page upon page filled with scribbled blue ink. Most of it is illegible (and probably unintelligible) to you.

            One day a few years ago, I was thinking of my mortality and getting closer to wondering how to dispose of so much I have accumulated. My oldest daughter Clarissa told me long ago that she wanted all the books in my library. I thought about the closet and the composition books and wondered if I should throw them away or ask her if she would like to have them. She eagerly replied I should not dispose of them because they would be a special remembrance and be valuable to her. I can well relate to this because one of my treasured possessions is a large box of handwritten sermons belonging to my father. Long before computers became the normal method of preserving manuscripts in readable form, my father would write them longhand and place them in a large cardboard box. Each was saved and dated with some having multiple dates because they were preached several times over his long 40-year career of pastoring churches. His handwriting was worse than mine but through years of reading it, I became an expert in hieroglyphics. Most preachers have their own preferred methods of organizing and recognizing their notes as they preach. His was at best difficult, so you will rarely hear me preach one of his sermons. The exception would be some of his notes on the Tabernacle. I considered him the foremost expert in all things Tabernacle, so I could hardly do better than emphasize his understanding of the scriptures.

            I have been told numerous times that my preaching is like my dad’s. It is a grand compliment, but I hardly see how this is determined when looking at our notes yields highly dissimilar approaches. There may be a subconscious connection because we both believed preparation is paramount. Never be content to give the people watered down versions of the word or believe the sermons are too far above the crowd’s intelligence to understand. Dumbing down the word just leaves people dumbed down.

            These thoughts are on my mind as I contemplate the sermon for this week. Consistency in the presentation of Bible subjects is paramount. Attending the services is also paramount to good understanding of the subjects at hand. Our preaching is usually in series format which requires attendance at nearly all instances of multiple sermon parts to get the comprehensive picture of the current topic. You would not have a complete understanding of nuclear fission if you missed the lecture on atoms! Often the most vital part of the sermon is the one you missed.

            Perhaps to get it all, you might want to request the written manuscript. Good luck with that—I give them away because I can’t read them either.

Pastor V. Mark Smith

            Several months ago, while preaching on the doctrine of the church, I took time to brush up and hone my skills in this critically important doctrine. I have never made apologies for being a Baptist and have often said if others who disagree are right, I will gladly abandon my dogmatism to be right as well. We should favor no doctrines or insist upon any teachings that cannot be supported by the scriptures.

            As I was studying, I was reminded of an old book I have had for years. It was passed to me by my father when I inherited his library. This book was written by one of his professors in Bible college and is entitled The Church and the Ordinances. The author was Buell H. Kazee, a well-respected churchman who was born in 1900 and passed away in 1976. I barely remember him, but I do remember visits to his home and his church. Through the years, his book has been a great help in understanding some of the nuanced issues of the church and how it was formed. I cannot say I agree with all his conclusions, but I am impressed by his willingness to arrest his dogmatism on points of scripture that are not inarguably clear. There are times he expresses an opinion from the preponderance of evidence but still admitted there is room to adjust and accept better arguments. I must be clear, however, that none of his unsure positions affect major doctrines of the faith. These are more of the sort that we cannot know as all the practices of the church were in the developmental stage in the New Testament. Not until the New Testament canon was complete was the church fully formed without apostolic oversight.

            Many who have attended Berean for years know that I have long been a student of Baptist history. While studying Kazee’s book, I did further research as I found his book was also posted on the Baptist History homepage maintained by the John Leland Baptist College. While visiting this site, I read through some of the offerings and found a link to Baptist periodicals and journals written in the 19^th century. With curiosity, I opened a link to a scanned copy of one of these journals published in the year 1810. This copy was a British journal that began with a history of Baptists in England. Prominently displayed was the outright rejection of Roman Catholicism’s claim that they were the first to bring the gospel to the British Isles. Three headings caught my attention: The First British Christians Were Baptists, The First British Martyrs Were Baptists, and The First British Protestants Were Baptists. Obviously, the early 19^th century Baptists did not believe the Reformation was the beginning of people called Baptists. Although not known by this name until the 17^th century, all notable church historians agree that Baptist doctrine is found in every century to the first. The gospel of Christ reached England before the end of the first century and thus churches of England held Baptist beliefs more than 300 years before Augustine began persecuting Baptists in the 4^th and 5^th centuries.

            When Augustine arrived, he tried to convince and convert the Saxons to Catholicism. The Saxons would not give up their pagan practices, so pragmatic popery sanctioned their idolatry. To pull the Saxons into the Roman church, Pope Gregory issued an order to Augustine. The Baptist journal quotes Gregory with alarm: “Whereas there is a custom among the Saxons to slay abundance of oxen, and sacrifice them to the Devil; you must not abolish that custom, but appoint a new festival to be kept either on the day of the consecration of churches, or on the birthday of the Saints, whose relics are deposited there; and on those days, the Saxons may be allowed to make arbors round their temples, changed into churches, to kill their oxen, and to feast as they did while they were yet Pagans!” The journal commented, “Nor do we consider it at all impossible, that Austin (Augustine), to secure his popularity, might now and then sit down with his disciples, and eat at the devil’s table.”

            The article then comments that church and state sanctioned these pagan feasts and thus Roman Catholicism became the state church. Further, as a reward for his meritorious services, Augustine was made a saint. “If anyone should observe, that at this time Popery was not arrived at the full measure of the stature of Antichrist; we reply, that in its earliest infancy, Popery was a Mystery of Iniquity.” (emphasis in the original)

            I will spend more time perusing these periodicals. We are aghast that the accepted history of the church by Protestants and Roman Catholics alike is that Rome was once the true church. Read this testimony of the early Baptist churches again. From “…its earliest infancy, Popery was a Mystery of Iniquity.” These Baptists did not buy the fantasy of imagined Roman Catholic history and still had congregations extant from the earliest days of the gospel to refute it. We Bereans steadfastly refuse to have our history defined by 16^th century Protestantism. Did we protest? Yes, but not from within Catholicism but apart from it in its earliest days as it sucked up pagans under Constantine and formed them into the murderous monstrosity of the Dark Ages and the corruption-riddled perversion of the present.

            These historical observations are pertinent to the identification of the true New Testament church. Christ promised His church would prevail—never apostatizing and never needing a complete overhaul of reformation. Not reforming, but always conforming to the doctrines of Jesus Christ, the chief cornerstone, and the prophets and apostles in whom the foundation was laid.

Pastor V. Mark Smith

Last year in April, I was quarantined at home due to COVID concerns. In the early part of this year, I was at home recovering from back surgery. I did not have the opportunity to preach although I prepared several messages for future series. Preparing outlines and manuscripts for future sermons is not the same as being prepared to step into the pulpit at any moment. When the last words are typed, the sermon is not ready as I must contemplate, meditate, adjust, and finesse what I want to say and have it settled in my mind. Too often it may not sound as if there is this much preparation, but I assure you it is quite time-consuming. In 20 years behind this pulpit, I have never preached a spur-of-the-moment sermon.

            Some years ago, I heard a pastor explain the different types of sermons. He indicated there are times when he would stand to preach that he did not need to study or prepare. He claimed the Holy Spirit would inspire him as needed and the sermon would flow from the Spirit through Him. I recognize there are times we must speak spontaneously as Peter encourages us to be ready to answer those who inquire about our faith (1 Peter 3:15). I can also imagine Paul the missionary probably did not carry a suitcase filled with sermon manuscripts for every occasion. Yet I believe spontaneous preaching should never be the normal course for a pastor in the pulpit of his church.

            In the Forum Class, I answer questions on many Bible topics without preparation but rarely is any of it organized in a structured format that fits the description of a sermon. There are some with highly organized brains that may speak extemporaneously, but I have never claimed to have such a gift. There are days I sit at my desk preparing a new sermon and thoughts flow quickly in rapid succession. The sermon goes down in minimum time. This is not normal and most require hours of reading and sifting information and organizing to bring the message to you. I admire the gift in others, but I am content to be the plodding preacher. My days at home recovering were not vacation days. When able, they were spent plowing and painstakingly hoeing the rows of future sermons. Precisely because I am not spontaneous, I must work ahead to be ready for unusual occurrences that may interrupt study time.

            I believe a preacher might be able to fake his way through a few simple subjects but eventually, lack of study will show up in the growth of his people. Paul encouraged Timothy to read and meditate on doctrine and scripture. He would profit from it and so would those who heard (1 Timothy 4:13-16). I am most pleased when I hear that what we do in Bible exposition at Berean is not common among area churches. I am pleased for us that we try to give a good in-depth analysis of scripture, while I am displeased that others receive only a few Christian platitudes that are the milk of the word and not conducive to making them skillful in the word of righteousness (Hebrews 5:12-14). This explains the lack of holiness and sanctification among most Christians.

            None of this I write is to applaud me. The Lord knows I have much to learn and have not attained the stature of many of my peers. I write to encourage you to make knowledge of every Bible subject your quest. Spend the necessary time. Our dearly departed Brother Lew often said, “Fake it until you make it.” He was not talking about the Bible! If I can assist in your spiritual journey, praise God for allowing me to have a part. “I have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in truth.” (3 John v. 4).

Pastor V. Mark Smith

Now the Lord of peace himself give you peace always by all means. The Lord be with you all.

(2 Thessalonians 3:16)

The closing words of Paul’s second letter to the Thessalonians are a final appeal to the stability of a troubled church. They are appropriate for us as these two letters are instructions concerning the Lord’s return, renewed hope in the promises of the gospel, and restoration of peace in the discouragements of living in a sin cursed world. Peace is Paul’s final plea for the Thessalonian church.

                Typically, Christians believe peace is based on our feelings at the time and is determined by the circumstances we face. With this understanding of peace, we believe we are in control by making changes to our circumstances and turning them in ways that will best accomplish our desires. Our text verse disproves the method that how we think will accomplish the peace Paul desires. In Paul’s mind, peace is not subjective but rather depends on the actions of the Lord of peace who will give peace by all means—all means He Himself provides.

                I must admit that in the past year I have struggled to find peace and contentment. Circumstances have been awful and as much as I would like to change them, I have no power over them. I fail especially when my peace is disturbed by the disappointments of politics and the declining moral values of our country. I despair with the nightly news that applauds every decadence of the culture and celebrates every insane wickedness pushed on us by this ungodly administration. It is obvious the peace Paul speaks of is much less connected to government and societal activities than our own since Christians in Paul’s time were without hope of modern democracy to affect a change (assuming enough godly people would ever be gathered to agree). Neither does our dissatisfaction have the added dimension of intense persecution.

                The peace Paul advocated is discovered in the Hebrew word shalom. It means to be whole and sound—to be safe and secure. His prayer for peace is that it would come in all the ways God alone provides for the church which are often termed His means of grace. These means are greatly diversified as we have found one of the least expected ways recently in our articles on church discipline. Peace is restored when wayward church members are brought back through the discipline of rebuking sin. The wholeness and wellbeing of peace comes to the church when all parts are in harmony with the others.

                Primarily, peace in the New Testament conveys the reconciliation made by God through the reconciling work of Christ on the cross. This is God’s action as described in Colossians 1:19-20: “For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell; And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.” When I think of this peace, I am drawn to two cherished lines in one of my favorite hymns, His Robes for Mine. This thought is striking: “He as though I, accursed and left alone; I as though He, embraced and welcomed home!” This is peace obtained by Christ being rejected by the Father so that we might take His place as the Father’s own. Truly it is peace that passes all understanding. Likewise, Stuart Townsend in his hymn, How Deep the Father’s Love wrote this compelling line: “Why should I gain from His reward, I cannot find an answer; but this I know with all my heart, His wounds have paid my ransom.” This line reflects a meaningful exposition of our theology. Christ’s reward is the promise made by the Father to give Him a people for His name. Those that are ransomed, redeemed, and reconciled to God receive from Christ’s reward the benefit of perfect peace with the Father.

                Thoughts of present circumstances and earthly disappointments fade into oblivion when the incomparable peace of God is rightly considered. Reconciliation is the fountain of our peace in which God showers many simultaneous streams. These are beyond our ability to analyze. “The Lord of peace himself give you peace always by all means.” It is the apostle’s simple ending, but no doubt carefully considered overcomes all disappointments.

Pastor V. Mark Smith