No one really knows why this day started, National Pickle Day, but I think increasing pickle sales may well have been the root of it.  With the encouragement of the Pickle Packers Association it was first celebrated in 1949.  Today, Americans consume over five million pounds of pickles a year, so maybe it worked.
            We planted our first garden 46 years ago.  Even though Keith had been brought up with gardens, we were both tyros, especially considering the climate we were in, different from either of our childhoods.  He set me up with all the equipment I would need, and most of which I still use all these years later:  canners, mason jars, jar lifters, lids, rings, funnels, sieves, lime, vinegar, canning salt, and cookbooks, I had them all.
            One of the things I knew I wanted to make was a batch of dill pickles.  I love dill pickles.  I could eat a whole jar.  So I looked all over for recipes and found one that was fairly easy.  I did exactly as the recipe said and one afternoon in July lined my shelves with a dozen pints of dill pickles.  The recipe said to let them sit a few weeks, as I recall, so I did, and had not gotten around to trying them yet. 
            Finally we had company one evening and Keith grilled some hamburgers.  The perfect meal for my pickles, I thought, and proudly set them on the table.  I made a point to put the Mason jar on the table so our guests would know they were homemade.  Too bad for me as it turned out.  Keith’s pal took one bite of pickle and tried very hard to keep his face from screwing up, but not entirely succeeding.
            “Wow!” he finally choked out.  “These are DIIIIIIILLLLL pickles.”
            I took a bite myself and resolved not only to toss the recipe but every jar in the pantry.  The recipe had called for four tablespoons of dried dill seed per pint.  That’s one-fourth cup, people.  After all these years of experience, I would have looked at that recipe and immediately known something was off, but then I was a newbie and didn’t know any better.
            Ah, but we make the same sort of mistakes as Christians.  But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil. Heb 5:14.
            I learned from my mistake with the pickles and tried again, and again, and again, until I finally got it right.  But I would never have gotten it right without all that practice.  That’s what it takes with the Word.  No, it doesn’t take a college degree to understand the Bible and knowing exactly what to do to begin your relationship with Christ is pretty simple, but the Word of God is a profound book.  If all you do is read a chapter a day, you are missing 90% of its power.
            I have seen too many young people, especially those “raised in the church,” spout off simplistic definitions and explanations and think that’s all there is to it, completely missing the depths that can be plumbed with some diligent work.  I’ve seen too many older Christians who have relied on those one-dimensional catch-phrases instead of growing to the height they should have after all those decades as a Christian that they are so proud of.  And I have seen too many old chestnuts that are patently wrong passed from generation to generation. 
            If reading Hebrews 7 doesn’t send you immediately back to Genesis 14 and Psalm 110, if seeing the word “promise” doesn’t make you instantly check for a reference to the Abrahamic promise, if reading the sermons in Acts doesn’t make you realize exactly how important it is to know the Old Testament, you have not been “exercising your senses” in the Word. 
          Please be careful of anything that sounds too pat, that makes arguments based on simplistic definitions or the spelling of English words (“Godliness is just a contraction of God-like-ness”).  Do not repeat anything you did not check out with careful study yourself.  And if you are still quite young, please check out your understanding with someone who is not only older, but well-versed in the Scriptures, and be willing to listen and really consider.  Do you know who I have the worst trouble with in my classes?  People who were “raised in the church.”  They are far less likely to even consider that they might be wrong about something and to change their minds than a brand new Christian, converted from the world with a boatload of misconceptions.
         You cannot know too much scripture.  It is impossible to be “over-educated” in the Word.  The more you know, the more motivation you will have to live up to your commitment to God, the better person you will be, and the fewer embarrassing mistakes you will make when you open your mouth.  Practice, practice, practice, or making pickles will be the least of your worries.
 
…put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator. Col 3:10
 
Dene Ward

I imagine we could all sit around telling stories for hours about the misheard lyrics our children sang before they learned to read along in the songbook.  I will never forget the day Lucas asked his song-leading grandfather (Papa) to sing, "He whispers the peas to me."  Or the day I was standing in the kitchen and heard his sweet little voice singing, "When the roll is called under the water."  His little brother had his own versions of the standard hymns.  One day as we were wandering through the produce department at the grocery store he said, "Mom, sing the song about the sandals."  "The sandals?" I asked, running through familiar hymns in my head as quickly as I could.  "Yes," he said, "all other ground is sinking sandals."
            All of those are favorite stories, but I was reminded recently of one I like even better.  As usual, I was working on something while my two toddlers were playing, and just as usual, they were singing.  Lucas, at 3, could carry a tune and had a larger range than most toddlers his age, a direct product, I think, of growing up hearing a capella music several times a week.  He had been humming along and suddenly I heard, "No tears, no tears up there.  Sorrow and planes, we'll all have fun."
            I was still blinking my eyes in surprise when he asked, "Mommy, what are sorrow and tears?  They must be bad guys, right?  Because they don't get to go to Heaven."  That little guy could teach us all a lesson or two.
            First, he didn't just sing—he thought about what he was singing.  Maybe he didn't get the words right, but he got what he understood.  He knew he was singing about Heaven so "We'll all have fun," made perfect sense to him.  And evidently, he had enjoyed that plane ride he had been on a couple of months earlier, so planes in Heaven made sense too.
            Second, when there was something he didn't understand, like "sorrow" and "tears," he figured something out about them with just a little logic.  They won't be in Heaven so they must be bad, and when you are a three year old boy who loves Superman, "bad" means "bad guys."  Then he asked someone else to make sure he was right.
            And third, he was thinking about what he sang long after the worship had ended. 
            Surely, I don't have to spell out the lessons in this one.  Do you know what you are singing, which is the title of this little series I have written for several years now?  (You can find them all in the archives under Music.)  Do you think about the songs you have sung to worship God?  Do you keep on singing them, even after you leave the meetinghouse, and perhaps sing them with even more understanding?
            If a three year old can, surely we can too.
 
Sing praises to God, sing praises: Sing praises unto our King, sing praises. For God is the King of all the earth: Sing ye praises with understanding (Ps 47:6-7).
 
Dene Ward

We don't do this in our culture.  The Native Americans did it.  Who has not heard the old country song about Running Bear and Little White Dove, or seen the movie "Dances with Wolves?"  No, generally speaking, we do not name our children based upon the English language.  In fact, there are few names in our culture that actually have a meaning in our language—names like Faith, Hope, Joy, April, or Tuesday.  But Bible names meant something in the language of the day.  If we translated Joshua, instead of just transliterating it, it would be "Jehovah saves" and that is what Mr. and Mrs. Nun were saying every time they called their little boy.
            I suppose most of us know that, but we still miss a lot when we don't stop to ponder the meaning of Bible names.  Take the story of Joseph in the book of Genesis.
            Too many people are so busy trying to make Joseph into the first coming of the Messiah that they won't let him be what he was:  a slightly spoiled, rich teenager who was probably scared to death when his brothers sold him.  Still though, I am sure he had hope.  He was, after all, a rich man's son.  And his favorite son at that.  "Surely Daddy will come get me," he must have thought, looking down the dusty road day after day as he literally slaved away.
            But even Joseph, after 13 years, gave up hope.  He had no idea his father thought he was dead.  So when Pharaoh rewards him with position, wealth, and a wife, at the birth of his first son, what does he name him?  "Manasseh."  So? You ask.  Manasseh means "to cause to forget."  "For God has made me forget…all my father's house" Gen 41:51   
           Joseph gave up on a family he thought had thrown him away.  As second in the kingdom, he could easily have made the trip east to visit his family, but he never did.  When his brothers showed up, everything he did was to bring Benjamin, his only full brother and the only brother who did not somehow hurt him, down to Egypt to live with him.  He didn't know until he overheard the brothers talking that his father thought he was dead and that they were penitent of their horrible deed.  That is when he turned away from them and wept.  This is the human Joseph and you can understand exactly how he felt.
            But you can also learn this lesson.  He may have given up on his family, but he never gave up on God.  How easy would it have been to deny God because of all the hardship he endured, to enjoy the sin so extravagantly set before him by a promiscuous Egyptian woman, and to have curried favor among the pagans?  But he never gave up on God.  He never blamed God for his troubles.  Instead he continued serving to the best of his ability in whatever state he found himself. 
           Knowing the meaning of a name and allowing it to help you recognize a mindset can give you real encouragement, far more than ignoring the names and setting Joseph up on a pedestal from which he never had a negative thought or motive can.  These are real people God gave us as examples, not super-heroes.  They had real feelings and real motivations.  If Joseph can stay faithful, so can we.
 
The name of the second he called Ephraim, “For God has made me fruitful in the land of my affliction.” (Gen 41:52)
 
Dene Ward

            One of the things we said early on was to stay in the book you are studying!  The only time to compare the Gospels is when you are studying an event or phrase in particular.  Below is a good example.  Who were all those women who stood at the foot of the cross?
            Comparing the three verses below reveals a wealth of information about more than just who they were.  List them and then match them up and this is what you will find:
 
Matt 27:56                              Mark 15:40                             John 19:25
 
Mary Magdalene                    Mary Magdalene                    Mary Magdalene
 
Mary, mother of                     Mary, mother of                     Mary, wife of Cleopas
James and Joses                         James the Less and Joses                          
 
Mother of the sons                 Salome                                    His mother’s sister
   Of Zebedee
 
You now see that Mary the wife of Cleopas, was the mother of the apostle James the Less.  By comparing Mark 3:18, we find that Cleopas might also have been called Alphaeus.  Luke 24:18 shows us that Cleopas was also a disciple of Jesus, or she was possibly married twice, but it was not at all uncommon for men to go by two names. 
            We learn that James and John’s mother was named Salome, and that she was Jesus’ aunt, his mother’s sister.  This helps explain why John was so special to him (probably the baby cousin), and why James and John, and their business partner Peter, were so often by his side when the others were not.  (But it leaves us wondering why Andrew, Peter’s brother, was not!) 
It also shows that Aunt Salome wasn’t entirely out of line in expecting that her two sons, Jesus’ only blood relatives among the apostles, might be his first and second (lieutenants? Vice-presidents?) in the kingdom, and why Jesus gave the care of his mother to his youngest believing cousin.  And that points out that Jesus considered the spiritual connection more important than the physical because at that time he had at least four brothers who could have cared for their mother, but none of them yet believed.
            Try this one now:  Look up every list of the apostles you find, even partial lists.  Look up the meaning of names.  It is amazing that Matthew the publican and Simon the Zealot could tolerate one another, and that points to the unifying power of the gospel.  The apostles varied from blue collar fishermen to the more urbane Nathanael, who looked down on anyone from Galilee. 
            Almost all of them had two or even three names:
Simon, Peter, Cephas
Thomas, Didymus (“Twin,” which leaves you wondering where his brother was)
Matthew, Levi
Bartholomew, Nathanael (a presumption)
Simon, Zelotes (more a description = Zealot)
Thaddeus, Judas, Lebbaeus
            Some of those names were Aramaic, some Hebrew, some Greek (I’ll let you look that up yourself).  The Aramiac names were mostly translations from common Hebrew names.
James = Jacob
John = Jonah
Simon = Simeon
Judas = Judah
(Mary = Miriam, which explains why there were so many Marys.)
            It’s actually pretty amazing what you can list about those men when you gather the meager facts together, a whole lot more than you think, like where they came from, who their parents were, etc.  I'll leave that one to you.
 
Dene Ward   

I know you do it.  Even when you are participating in one of those “read the Bible through in a year” programs you do it.  Who in the world wants to read through So-and-so-jah begat So-and-so-iah verse after verse until you can hardly see straight?  But you need to do it once in awhile. 
            That’s how you find out that Samuel was not a hypocrite for condemning Saul’s sacrifice when he made sacrifices several times himself.  1 Samuel 1 says that his father was an Ephraimite, but the genealogy in 1 Chron 6 will show you he was an Ephraimite by location only—he was a Levite living in Ephraim.
            That’s how you find out that Joab was David’s nephew, the son of his sister Zeruiah, which probably accounts for why he put up with so much from the rascal.
            That’s how you find out that David’s counselor Ahithophel, was Bathsheba’s grandfather, which puts a new spin on that story, and probably explains why he put his lot in with Absalom when he rebelled.  And all that is just the beginning of the amazing things you can discover when you read genealogies in the Bible.
            We also tend to overlook things like Deborah’s song of praise in Judges 5.  It’s just a poem, right?  We already read the important part in chapter 4.  Read chapter 5 some time.  You will discover exactly how God helped his people overcome Sisera’s army—he sent a storm that bogged down their chariots in the mud.  Foot soldiers do much better than chariots in a storm.  You will discover that the elders of Israel were applauded for a change—they actually did their jobs and did them willingly.  You will find out that several tribes did not help with the fighting and were roundly condemned for it.  You will find God’s opinion of Jael’s actions—no more arguing about her character after He inspires Deborah to say, “Blessed above women shall Jael be.”
            And here’s one I found recently, not a genealogy but another kind of passage we often ignore—the conversation and ensuing verses in 2 Samuel 12 after Nathan uttered those scalding words, “Thou art the man,” which is where we usually stop reading.  That's all that counts, right?  Let's see.
            Verse 9--“You have struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword.”  David may have only ordered Uriah’s death, but God considered it exactly the same as doing the deed itself. 
            Verse 13--“The Lord has put away your sin.  You shall not die.”  Understand this--there was no sacrifice for adultery and murder because the sinners were summarily stoned.  That is what David expected, and the punishment God put aside.  Read Psalm 51 now.  David’s forgiveness happened immediately after his confession and repentance (v 12), but he repeatedly asks for it in the psalm which was written sometime later.  He understood the grace of God like never before.  Now that is godly repentance.
            Verse 15--“And the Lord afflicted the child.”  We keep trying to find ways out of statements like this, but they keep popping up.  Remember this:  God is in control.  He knows what He is doing.  There is a reason this child could not live, but that doesn’t mean he didn’t continue to live.  More on this in a minute.
            Verse 20—After the child died, David “went into the house of the Lord and worshiped.”  Why?  We could come up with a ton of reasons.  Ultimately I think he was showing his acceptance of God’s will, and sincere appreciation for the mercy he knew he did not deserve.  What do you think?  This one can keep a class going for several minutes' worth of discussion, and a whole lot of soul-searching.  Would your first inclination after a tragedy—and punishment--be to worship God?
            Verse 22--“Who knows whether the Lord will be gracious and allow the child to live?”  First, this proves David’s faith in prayer.  He knew it was possible for God to change His mind simply because one of His children asked Him to.  Second, it shows that faith does not mean you know you will get what you prayed for.  Who knows? David asked.  No one does, except God.  Faith knows He is able to grant your petition, not that He will.
            Verse 23--“I will go to him.”  David believed in the innocence of his child.  He did not believe that child was born with Adam’s sin hanging over his head, totally depraved and unable to get out of it without the direct operation of the Holy Spirit or some rite involving water.  His child was clean and innocent and he looked forward to seeing him again because he was also sure of his own forgiveness.
            Whoa!  Did you know all that was there?  I didn’t either, and this was at least the tenth time I have studied this story in depth (I thought).   What else are we missing? 
            The next time you do your Bible reading, think about what you are reading, even if it’s just a list of names or a poem or directions for how to build something.  God put what we needed to know in His Word.  Don’t you go deciding that you don’t need to know some of it.
 
…from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work, 2 Tim 3:15-17 .
 
Dene Ward
           

After reading them for so many years, I can skim a recipe and garner all sorts of necessary information in that quick once-over.  Not just whether I have the ingredients, but how long it will take, what I can do ahead of time, what equipment I will need, the substitutions I can make if necessary, and whether I can cut it in half or freeze half of it.  Sometimes, though, a recipe needs a closer reading.
            I made a vegetable lasagna once that turned out well, but was way too big.  I took over half of the leftovers to my women’s class potluck and it got rave reviews and several requests.  So I went home and started typing the two page recipe containing at least two dozen ingredients.  The typing required a careful reading of the recipe so I wouldn’t give anyone wrong amounts or directions, and as I did so I discovered that I had completely forgotten one ingredient and had missed one of the procedures.  Just imagine how good it would have been if I had done the whole thing correctly.
            Too many times we try to read the Bible like I read that recipe, especially the passages we think we already know.  I have said many times to many classes, the biggest hindrance to learning is what you think you already know.  Today I am going to prove it to you.
            Have you ever said, or even taught, that turning the water to wine was the first miracle Jesus ever did?  I know, it’s what all the Bible class curricula say.  Well, it’s your job to check out those lessons with your own careful reading.  Most of the time that means reading far beyond the actual lesson text.  This isn’t even hard to see, but you do have to think about what you see.  Some time today when you have the time—okay, make the time—read the following verses.
 
John 1:45-51—Jesus tells Nathanael that he saw him before it was possible for him to see him.  This was enough of a miracle that it brought a confession from Nathanael: “Rabbi, you are the Son of God, you are the King of Israel”, v 49.
2:11--“This is the first of his signs” (water to wine)
2:23--“Now when he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Feast, many believed on his name when they saw the signs that he was doing.” (Notice, this is an unknown number of signs,)
4:16-19—Jesus tells the woman at the well all about her life, a life he could not have known about except miraculously.  She would later tell her neighbors, “Come see a man who told me all that ever I did.  Can this be the Christ?” v 29.  She certainly thought she had seen a miracle.
4:46-54—Jesus heals the nobleman’s son, which John labels “the second sign that Jesus did.”  What about John 1?  What about 2:23?  What about Samaria?
 
            For years I read “first” and “second,” knowing full well about the other signs before and between them, and didn’t even think about what I was reading. I was reading it like a recipe, a quick once over because I already knew the story.  Now, having seen all the passages together, you can see that “first” and “second” in John 2:11 and 4:54 obviously do not mean the simple chronological “first” and “second” you might think at first glance.  You need the entire context of John to figure it out.
            Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name, John 20:30,31.  Right there John tells you not only why he wrote his book, but that he simply chose certain signs to discuss in detail.  If you do a careful study of the entire book, you will discover that he chose seven, each making a particular point about the power of Jesus that proves his Deity.  No, I am not going to list them for you.  You need to take up your Bibles and figure it out for yourself so you know firsthand.   
            When John says “This is the first,” and “this is the second,” he is simply referring to the list of seven he intends to discuss more fully.  Turning the water to wine was the first on his list, NOT the first miracle Jesus ever did, and all you have to do is read earlier in the book to see at least one more—Nathanael’s.  In fact, you cannot even count the number he did in between the “first” and the “second,” 2:23.
            So, be careful what you believe.  Be even more careful what you teach because that could affect many others.  Pay attention to the details and don’t pull events and verses out of context.  Do you want to know why so many false doctrines spread?  Because people read the “proof texts” like a recipe, a quick scan instead of a careful reading, if indeed they read them at all.
            Don’t skim the Word of God.  Give it the attention it deserves.   
 
And we have something more sure, the prophetic word, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, 2 Pet 1:19.
 
Dene Ward

Potlucks are a staple in the south.  As a born and bred Southerner I would be inclined to say we do it the best except for one thing—I lived in the Midwest for a couple of years early in our marriage, and they can put on a pretty good feed, too.  At nearly every potluck I beg for recipes, and I still have a few I begged from my Illinois days.  After all, pork is king in the Midwest just like it is down here in the South.  Anything with bacon is good.
            There are unwritten rules about potlucks.  We could probably go on for a page or two about that.  But the one that everyone knows, even if they won't say it out loud, is that if they come to eat, they had better bring something, too.  You know that is so because when you try to invite a visitor who didn't know about it ahead of time and, thus, has nothing to contribute, you have to practically get down on your knees and beg them to come, telling them there is always plenty, because there always is.
            We have a potluck every Sunday morning—not with literal food, but spiritual.  And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near (Heb 10:24-25).  When I hear someone say they got nothing out of the services, I want to ask if they brought anything to share.  You don't come to services and pull up to your pew like to a gas pump and expect to get filled up while you just sit by and do nothing yourself.  We are supposed to be paying attention to one another, deciding how best to encourage and edify one another, to stir one another up to perform good deeds when we leave.  Exactly how does sitting there considering yourself, and yourself only, accomplish any of that?  And why does just entering the doors give us the right to taste everyone else's meal and judge whether it meets our own preferences while giving back nothing in return for others to consider?
            I Corinthians 14 is one of the few places that discusses an assembly of the first century church.  Yes, it discusses spiritual gifts primarily, but it must be in there for us to learn something from.  Notice, when they came together, "each one" brought something—a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, an interpretation.  And because everyone brought something there were rules for how to share them, beginning and ending with this purpose:  Let all things be done unto edifying.  If you have a tongue, but there is no interpreter, keep silent, because no one will be edified.  If two or three of you have a prophecy, take turns one at a time while the others keep silent—no one can hear the message and be edified if you are all speaking at once.  It's common sense, really, but it also tells us again that everyone brought something to the assembly to share.  The vocal traffic jam proves that. 
            This week try worrying more about what you have to offer than what you think you should "get" out of the services.  Start preparing your "dish" now for this coming Sunday.  It might be a word of encouragement to the weak.  It might be service to a young mother who is overwhelmed so she can hear a sermon for once.  It might involve making a list during the announcements of all those you need to contact with cards, phone calls, or visits during the upcoming week.  It might mean sharing things you know of so others can serve as well.  You are required to take something to the potluck if you hope to enjoy the resulting feast in return.
 
Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear (Eph 4:29).

Dene Ward

I started taking piano lessons when I was about seven years old.  It was not “formal” training in a studio, but just a few lessons from a friend of my mother’s to see if I was interested.  I still remember the first lesson, the first book I had, and the first tune in it.  “C-D-E made a boat; round and round the pond he’d float.”
            A few months later this friend told my parents I needed a “real” teacher.  Frankly, I think she was just fine as a teacher.  I learned the keys, the notes, and how to count in a few short weeks, but she insisted so off we went. 
            My next teacher had recitals.  I still remember that first recital too, and I can still play my first recital piece:  “Arab Horsemen” by Hazel Cobb.  Those horsemen were a long way from the guy named “CDE” and his boat.  Instead of one hand playing three notes, I had both hands running over six octaves on the piano, and a whole page played with my arms crossed!
            As I sat in the student row waiting my turn to play I saw other students wringing their hands or wiping sweat off their palms onto their skirts or pants.  What was the problem, I wondered?  It never dawned on me that they were nervous about playing in front of people.  I wasn’t nervous.  I knew my piece and could play it flawlessly.  What was the big deal?
            A few years later we had moved and the new teacher entered me in a talent competition in the County Fair.  Once again I was mystified by the nervous entrants around me.  I had a great piece and knew it inside and out.  I had spent three hours one particular day analyzing every note, every nuance of phrase, and every dynamic marking.  I got up and played it, and won a blue ribbon. 
            The next year I entered another competition.  This time the piece was more difficult.  It was written only a year or two before by Aaron Copland, a contemporary American composer.  It did not make much sense to my classically oriented ear.  Going from this note to the next seemed totally at random to me and I had a difficult time memorizing it.  But the rules for that category said I had to play it.  
            For the first time in my life I was not comfortable waiting my turn.  Then when I got up to play, it happened--I went totally blank.  I could not even start the piece.  The judges were kind.  They let me look at the first line.  Then I walked back to the piano and my daily practice automatically kicked in.  I played it perfectly, and aced the Beethoven rondo that followed.  In fact, Beethoven felt like an old friend at that point.
            Ever since that day I have experienced what everyone else does—performance anxiety.  I played a solo professional recital once and was sick to my stomach about five minutes before I walked on.  That one time when I forgot what to play has never left me.  From then on I knew I was as mortal as anyone and I always wondered when it would happen again.  Actually it did happen once in the middle of my senior recital, a requirement for a degree in music education.  I was playing a sonata and made up about four bars on the second page of the first movement before Haydn’s music found its way back into my hands.  Good thing you get points for covering up a slip when you perform.  I still got my A.
            Can you imagine how those apostles felt when Jesus, the one they had always counted on to have the right answer at the right time suddenly left them?  He knew what would happen and gave them this promise:  And when they bring you to trial and deliver you up, be not anxious beforehand what you are to say but say whatever is given you to say, for it is not you who speak, but the Holy Spirit, Mark 13:11.  Can you imagine a more comforting promise?  I suppose that is why I have always had difficulties with those who claim that Paul misspoke in Acts 23:3, and that he had to apologize.  Don’t they believe that God kept His promise to these brave men?  Try reading what Paul said with the same tone Elijah must surely have had when he spoke to the prophets of Baal in 1 Kings 18.  It wouldn’t be the first time that God used sarcasm through the voice of a man.  Either that or He broke His promise to Paul; you can’t have it both ways.
            Wouldn’t it be great to have that promise today?  But wait a minute--in a way we do.  Those men did not have the written word.  Paul himself promised that one day the gifts that allowed one to prophesy a part and another to prophesy another part would be done away because the entire revelation would be “perfect,” complete in all details (1 Cor 13:8-12.  That is what we have—the whole shebang.
            So why do we experience performance anxiety when someone asks a question, or when it comes time to speak up in the face of false teaching?  Is it because we are just a little anxious about choosing exactly the right way to say it, or is it because we didn’t prepare ourselves with daily practice, analyzing and memorizing?  One is understandable, the other is inexcusable.  We may not have all the answers on the tips of our tongues as they did, but we have the source of those answers if we will just take the time to look.  “I don’t know, but I can find out,” may be a better testimony than acting like we do know it all.  It tells our friends, if an ordinary guy like him can find it, so can I.
            Those 13 men never knew when they would be called upon to speak up for God.  We don’t either.  Start practicing what to say; start considering all the possibilities. God has given you what you need, but it’s up to you to make use of it.
 
I will hope continually and praise you yet more and more.  My mouth will tell of your righteous acts, of your deeds of salvation all the day for their number is past my knowledge.  With the mighty deeds of the Lord God I will come; I will remind them of your righteousness, yours alone.  Psalm 71:14-16.
 
Dene Ward
           
 

Everett Ferguson could very well be the most acclaimed Biblical scholar the Lord's body has ever produced.  Last year we reviewed the new edition of his Backgrounds of Early Christianity.  A mere look through that large volume will convince you that this man knows what he is talking about, especially when it comes to black and white facts.
            Here in this older work he has attempted to examine everything he can possibly find about the musical practices of the first century New Testament church.  He leaves no stone unturned as he delves into New Testament evidence, secular evidence, and historical evidence before even considering doctrinal ramifications.  He even does his best to find "Statements Favorable to Instruments" and can only find a very few, all of which deal with non-religious private functions. 
            He spends a good deal of time quoting the writers of the period who, when even mentioning instruments, by and large use them in figurative ways such as, "The psalterion is the pure mind moved by spiritual knowledge.  The kithara is the practical soul moved by the commandments of Christ" (Origen of Alexandria).  Quotes like that are plenteous.  He also mentions that the Greek Orthodox Christians, who divided from the Roman Catholic Church and certainly knew the Greek language better than any of us, objected to instrumental music accompanying the worship and still sing a capella.  (As an aside, they also know the Greek word baptizo and will not practice sprinkling for the same reason.)  The very term a capella means "in the style of the church," an open confession to the fact that everyone knew you did not have musical instruments in Christian worship.
            Another factor he discusses is the very nature of the worship in the church.  While Jewish worship in the Temple was all about ritual and physical show, the church became the spiritual Temple and its worship a spiritual worship.  Once synagogues began, even Judaism did away with the instruments.  Their worship had become centered on the Word of God rather than spectacle and they felt it no longer had a place.  Interesting, to say the least.
            A final section on doctrine should leave you convinced.  If nothing else matters, a capella singing will not lead to division while forcing an instrument into the worship will send those who feel they can no longer worship acceptably out the door. 
            I found this book listed by more than one publisher.  It is available on Amazon, Abebooks, Thriftbooks, and Ebay, and probably others.  Be sure you get the one by Everett Ferguson.
 
Dene Ward          
 

In Thomas Wolfe's novel You Can't Go Home Again, George Webber concludes, "You can't go back home to your family, back home to your childhood, ... back home to a young man's dreams of glory and of fame ... back home to places in the country, back home to the old forms and systems of things which once seemed everlasting but which are changing all the time…"
            Whenever Keith talks about Arkansas, he says, “Back home.”  It used to bother me a little.  Home should be where I am, shouldn’t it?  Then I realized that I could never have the feelings of a place that he did.  I never lived in just one place as a child, and the place I lived longest is not the place I go to when I visit my parents.  They left that place a year after I married and have lived in nearly half a dozen places since. 
            It is ironic that one of my sons lives there now, the place I would have called home, but when I go visit him, it has been so long since it was home, and it has changed so much, that I never even think of it that way any more.  The longest I have ever lived in any one place is the place I live now, and as Keith and I head into our senior years, I can foresee a time, though I hope not too soon, when we will have to leave it.  Even as small a plot as five acres takes a lot of labor, and it is a long way from the folks we count on to care for us when we become too old and disabled to take care of it and ourselves.
            Christians should be careful about those feelings of “home.”  Home should never be about a place, but about people, and about Truth.  I have seen churches divide over doctrines, divisions that were necessary.  Yet people who should have known better stayed—they were converted to a place, a building, not to the Lord.
            And Christians in our society have another problem—one that the poverty stricken brethren in places like Nicaragua and Zimbabwe never have to deal with—we have become entirely too comfortable.  We are so “at home” in our rich lives that we don’t want to give them up.  Persecution, even simply the ridicule and criticism of others, is too much to bear.  There is always a good reason not to speak up when sin becomes accepted, and not to behave differently.   Even if there is no persecution, we have a problem singing, “This world is not my home, I’m just a passing through.”  This is home and we want to stay as long as possible.
            We must make ourselves see beyond the here and now.  We must force ourselves to realize that where and how we are living today is not our goal.  Eternity is difficult enough to comprehend without focusing on what is right in front of us as if it were the only thing that counted.  Here is the truth of the matter:  compared to Eternity our lives are not even a drop of water in the entire ocean. 
            Christians have the promise that one day we will never again be homesick.  Heaven is the home we have all been looking for, the place we will live forever.  We will never have to leave.  We will never sit pining and wishing for the good old days.  The “dreams of glory” Thomas Wolfe spoke of will be there and then.  But perhaps in Eternity “then” will no longer have a meaning.  It will be Now—a capital letter Now that never ends.
 
Being therefore always of good courage, and knowing that, while we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord; we are of good courage, I say, and are willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be at home with the Lord, 2 Cor 5:6,8.
 
Dene Ward