Doctrine and Conduct Cause and Effect

Doctrine and Conduct are Related to Each Other as Cause and Effect

"This affirmation may require a little explanation because so many people think of doctrine as belonging solely to ecclesiastical circles, and as being quite unpractical even there. They think of fierce doctrinal disputes that ministered occasion for rancour and bitterness without teaching anything of real value.

The fact is that, through the weakness and yet the pugnacity of human nature, great and important truths are continually obscured by disputes regarding matters of relative insignificance. Great truths are hidden not only by falsehoods but also by little truths, just as a great mountain may be hidden from sight by a too near and intent inspection of a tiny piece of stone.

Doctrine really means teaching. The word can be used in a much wider sense than is generally recognised. The doctrines that a man holds are really the principles that guide his conduct. If his doctrines are well-balanced with a just perception as to which are the most important, his conduct will probably be well balanced too. If he holds some false doctrines, or if his strongest convictions and most persistent thoughts centre round something of little value, the ill effect will be seen in his conduct.

Beliefs may be of all shades of strength, from a slight inclination of opinion to a confidence indistinguishable from absolute certainty. If a Christian has real faith in his religion and if he attaches the proper importance to Christian doctrines, he not only has a strong hope in life but his conduct is guided at every point. As the Apostle expresses it, he "believes with the heart unto righteousness"."

- Islip Collyer
-------
The Guiding Light
From Chapter 13

Continue reading > > Holiness and expression of worship coming from inside
+ Acknowledge the majesty of the Lord’s reputation!
+ Prayer: Blessed be the name of Jehovah

Dutch translation / Nederlandse vertaling > Doctrine, gedrag, oorzaak en gevolg

Doest thou well to be Angry?

"Human nature has not changed since the fall of Adam and Eve. No one likes to be wrong. When someone shows us we are wrong, the natural reaction is to become angry at our teacher. It has ever been thus. It happened even when God was directly involved.

When Cain's sacrifice was rejected by God we are told that "Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell." In this case the LORD held a conversation with Cain and asked him, "Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?" Of course God knew the answer, but He was giving Cain an opportunity to answer for himself. Either Cain refused to answer God or else his answer is not recorded. The LORD continued speaking kindly to Cain and said, "If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door." God was giving Cain an opportunity to change. But we do not like to change. Cain did not want to change. We would think that if the LORD spoke to us that surely we would change, but Cain did not.

One of the characteristics of being wrong is being angry. Cain did not want to change. His defense was to be angry. Jonah was angry. God asked Jonah "Doest thou well to be angry? Jonah replied quite boldly to God, "I do well to be angry, even unto death." We might add that Jonah's anger was more deep seated than merely the loss of shade from the gourd. Paul was angry. He was "not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which Stephen spake." Rather than follow the wise teachings of Stephen, Paul was so angry that he cast his vote to kill Stephen, and by his own admission, later said concerning the Christians, that "he was exceedingly mad against them."

Human nature has not changed. These examples were written for our learning that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope. When we find that we disagree with someone and we feel anger welling up within us, it should tell us to stop and examine ourselves. Do we do well to be angry? We usually can convince ourselves like Jonah did that "we do well to be angry" but we might be surprised to find that we are wrong to be so angry. If we are in the right, there is no need to be angry. Instead of being angry, we should feel pity and compassion for our opponent who is wrong. Since we are in the right and they are wrong, they need our help, not our anger. If it should turn out that we are in the wrong, how foolish to have been both angry and wrong!

Wouldn't it be wonderful if people really listened and changed? Wouldn't it be grand if all followed the request of the Lord when he said, "Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool." Here God is asking us to sit down and to be reasonable when we are wrong, and certainly we should be this way when we are correct. This is why Paul exhorts us saying, "The servant of the Lord must not strive, but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient in meekness, instructing those that oppose themselves."

We need to remember this when we are trying to teach the truth to those who have held wrong doctrine all their lives. People do not change easily or quickly. Some never change. Whether they change or not, we must be gentle, patient and meek. When we are trying to teach someone that their soul is mortal, we need to be patient for they have always believed otherwise and do not unlearn wrong things quickly or easily. We need to keep on trying to teach them even though they oppose themselves We keep hoping "Peradventure God will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth."

If we adopt this principle with those who are outside the household of faith, then certainly we should be this way with those that are inside. We need to be extra loving, extra patient with those for whom Christ died. There is no room for anger here. If they are wrong we pray that God will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth. If they refuse to change then we pray that God will be merciful to them and forgive them. It is certain that we also are going to need the mercy of God or we are lost. Who is to say that their wrong is worse than some sin we have committed. We are not without sin.

Have we ever thought that there is a limit to God's mercy? We sometimes talk about how unlimited His mercy is. We often quote the Psalm "As far as the east is from the west, so far hath He removed our transgressions from us." While this is true, nevertheless the mercy of God is definitely limited. What is the limit of God's mercy? Jesus tells us. He says, "Forgive, and ye shall be forgiven." This means we are going to receive mercy only if we have been merciful; we are going to be forgiven only if we have forgiven, so each one of us is placing a limit on the mercy God is going to give us by the mercy we give to others."

"Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful."

-------
Brother Robert Lloyd
Minute Meditations

God does not change

"Let's get one thing clear; God is not changeable. He does not suffer from moods or depression. There is no "shadow of turning"; the Bible says, with Him.

That means that He does not have double standards. It also means that we cannot do things behind His back as it were. We are always in His sight. He is faithful and consistent.

There are examples, of course, of God's kindness and mercy in the Old Testament. The law of Moses, strict as it seems, was founded on very merciful principles. If it had been kept properly, it would have resulted in a clean, caring and just society. Provision was made for everyone down to the very poorest of the people. Even the humane treatment of animals was provided for.

Why then was there this idea of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth? How does this square with the very different teaching of Jesus? Did not Jesus tell us to love our enemies and do good to those who hate us?

Yes, he did. Indeed it was Jesus himself who invited us to make this comparison. He first mentioned this difference between established teaching and his own word.

We need to know first, however, what the "eye for an eye" idea meant. This is not the licence to retaliate that it sounds to be. It was concerned with the operation of justice.

Think back to the last argument you heard. It probably began with something quite trivial. Before long, however, it escalated. Something was said that evoked a retort. That provoked another comment which, in turn, led to a slightly stronger reply. Gradually the two sides forced each other further apart. Each answer became a little more extreme. Soon people were saying things that were exaggerated and which later might be regretted.

That is always the case. Human nature always has to go one better (or one worse). The tendency is to hit back harder. "He has blacked my eye, I'll black both his:"

It was exactly that which the law was designed to prevent. It was not so much a permission as a restraint. First the wrong had to be established. When that was done, punishment had to be administered. But the punishment must fit the crime. It was not literally the gouging out of eyes, but a just measure of punishment.

Jesus plainly said that he did not come to destroy the law. He did not change it to mean something else. What he did do was to take the principles of the law a step further.

For example, he pointed to the law which said a man must not murder. Jesus looked at what gives rise to murder. He considered the root cause. He said that a man should not be angry with another. If a man controls his anger he will not commit murder.

Jesus drew attention to the commandment not to commit adultery. Again, he saw that the basic failure of man in this sin was his lust. Jesus instructed that a man should control his lust. He taught that the desire and planning of such an act was wicked. It was as bad as the act itself if only the opportunity to carry it out was missing.

So with the law which permitted a punishment equal to the crime. The law restricted the retaliation. It was far better, as Jesus taught, if man could overcome his desire to retaliate altogether. He should love his enemies and do good to those who hated him. Vengeance should be left to God. He will see that true justice is done ultimately."
--------------------------
Brother John S. Roberts
The Bible, the Lord Jesus and You
God Does Not Change

Human Nature: What does the Bible teach?

This month's survey question:

Human Nature: What does the Bible teach?

- Human nature is the divine spark and is basically good.

- It is inherently immortal and will live in hell or heaven forever.

- It is mortal and corrupt with no hope of life after death.

- Although mortal and prone to sin it can be redeemed by Christ.

- Don't know.

Go to www.thisisyourbible.com to submit your answer!

There is no escaping the reality of death.
 Many people find some comfort in the idea of survival.
The inescapable fact is that since the dawn of history millions upon millions of human beings have lived, died, and been laid in the grave.
If they have in fact survived in some new form, would you not have
expected to hear from them some word of consolation for the bereaved, some information about their state, or some warning for the living? Yet we never hear anything from them.


Just think what the Bible does. It records how the human race came into being and it explains in clear terms why there is evil, suffering and death in the world. It tells us positively what happens after death.
And it also reveals the new kind of life which can be ours, if we will.

All mankind will perish, unless they repent.

Only pay attention to the Bible its message.

> After Death - What?
Death and after
Destination of righteous
Sheool or grave