September 30, 2001

After He foretold the destruction of Jerusalem in Matt. 24:2, Christ's disciples asked him for further enlightenment. Through verse 14 of that chapter, He mentions several things that will take place during the next 40 years, leading up to the destruction. Then, in verse 15, He begins to tell of more specific "signs" that will show that the destruction is about to occur. "Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation spoken by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (whoever reads, let him understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let him who is on the housetop not come down to take anything out of his house. And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. But woe to those who are pregnant and to those with nursing babies in those days! And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved, but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened. Then if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or 'There!' do not believe it. For false christs and false prophets will arise and show great signs and wonders, so as to deceive, if possible, even the elect. See I have told you beforehand. Therefore if they say to you, 'Look, He is in the desert!' do not go out; or 'Look, He is in the inner rooms!' do not believe it. For as the lightening comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. For wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together" (Matt. 24:15-28).

Note that Jesus told His disciples to watch for "the abomination of desolation" foretold in Dan. 9:26-27 and Dan. 12:11. Matthew's Jewish readers would understand that because of a similar event that occurred earlier in their history when the temple was defiled by pagan invaders. Luke explains Jesus' words in a way better understood by Gentile readers: "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near" (Luke 21:20). The "abomination of desolation" would be the Roman armies that would destroy and plunder the Holy City and its Holy Temple. When Jesus' listeners saw the Roman armies gathering around the city, this would be the signal for them to leave, abandoning homes and property. Hopefully their escape would not have to be on a Sabbath day. Scholars tell us that the city gates remained closed on the Sabbath and that travel was severely restricted. Hopefully, they would not have to flee during the winter time. Anything that delayed their escape would be an added problem. Tribulation (trouble) would be indescribable for any who remained in the city. Luke's account says, "There will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people. And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled" (Luke 21:23-24).

All of us have been shaken by the attack on our nation Tuesday, September 11, 2001. As a people we can hardly ever feel the same again. All of us have doubtless seen and heard more than we have wanted to see and hear, but it may be helpful to try to sort out some things as Christians.

We must not try to take personal revenge or develop a lynch mob mentality. This is contrary to the teaching of our Lord and passages in the epistles. Note especially Romans 12:17-19 - Repay no one evil for evil. Have regard for good things in the sight of all men. If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men. Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath; for it is written "Vengeance is Mine, I will repay," says the Lord. Some with a knee jerk reaction want to lash out against all people who may bear some similarity to the perpetrators.

Does this mean we should not encourage our government to take action to punish those who are responsible for this atrocity? One person writing in the Houston Chronicle Viewpoints advocated that as a nation we should turn the other cheek. Jesus gave this instruction to His disciples in Matthew 5:39. He was teaching disciples not to return personal insult for personal insult, he was not laying down the principle that should regulate government. Even disciples, who when reviled are not to revile, do not have an obligation to turn the other cheek to someone who is trying to kill them. Instead of this principle regulating nations, Paul teaches government exists to punish evil doers. Romans 13:3-4 says - "For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God's minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil". Because governments have been lax in punishing evil doers, forces of evil have been encouraged. Instead of passively turning the other cheek, our government has a clear responsibility to punish those guilty.

We should be reminded of the brevity and uncertainty of life. Think how death came so suddenly to so many people who were innocent victims of some crazy fanatics.

We see, that contrary to popular opinion, it does make a difference what one believes. It is hard for us to see how at least eighteen men could willingly go to their certain death and feel good, not only about it, but even rejoice that they would be responsible for so many murders, such mass destruction of property and disruption of lives and commerce. What makes people like this tick? They have been taught by religious fanatics that it will provide them a short cut to paradise where seven virgins await each one. By those like-minded, they are viewed as heroes in a holy war. If they would only think straight, they should see that they are cowardly murderers who will face a just Judge who will not send them to paradise! If they could use logic, they should be able to see they are being duped and brainwashed by their leaders. If what they are doing is so good, why aren't their leaders leading the way?

This terrible ordeal should show us how much we need each other and how we ought to have a concern for others. Paul wrote "Let each of you look out not only for his own interests, but also for the interests of others". (Philippians 2:4) Our hearts go out to the loved ones of the firefighters, police and others who were helping when the building collapsed on them. They had a real love and concern for others.

We should be reminded also of our need to pray for all in authority. Paul wrote "Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions and giving of thanks be made for all men, for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence". (1 Timothy 2:1,2)

[Editor's Note: The following article from 1959 may seem somewhat "dated" but we believe its message is still pertinent. --CRJ]

Some of the "so-called" deep thinkers of the present digression like to propound what they evidently think are unanswerable questions. I don’t know what their motives are, but if the motive is to confuse the thinking of people, then that has been accomplished.

Brother Reuel Lemmons criticizes those of us who talk about taking care of "our own" and once again brings forth the worn-out question of, "Who are our own?" He indicates that it is an impossibility to arrive at the answer to that question. I suggest this: if it is impossible to answer then it is impossible to serve God in harmony with 1 Tim. 5:8, for there Paul says, "If any provide not for his own, and especially for them of his own household, he hath denied the faith and is worse than an infidel." We readily see that a part of "our own" is included in "his own household." But this isn’t all. He is just specifically or "especially" mentioning them.

Of course, 1 Tim. 5:8 has to do with the individual’s responsibility and we are talking about "our own" as it pertains to the church. But every one of us, I think, knows what our individual responsibility is. We may not meet that responsibility, but we know what it is. If you don’t know how far our individual responsibility goes, just read, in addition to 1 Tim. 5:8 -- Gal. 6:10; 1 John 4:17; and James 1:27.

Now if you want to see how far "our own" reaches in speaking to the church, read every account of a church dispensing help and you will find it has to do with "poor saints." And there is no authority in the Book for a contribution [alms, relief, crj] to be taken or for a contribution to be sent, or for a contribution to be spent, except for "poor saints."

Destitute members of the church were the only objects of church benevolence. To include others is to go beyond that which is authorized and in so doing violates 2 John 9 and 1 Cor. 4:6 (ASV).

Now I know the objections, the main one being, "What if a brother or sister with children too young to be members of the church needs help. Shall we feed them and let their little ones starve?" Of course, usually that question is only asked to arouse prejudice, but sometimes a sincere person really wants to know. Well, here’s the way it is. Should a brother or sister become an object of church benevolence it would be because that person could no longer meet his obligations. We help that person take care of his obligations. If he has children or a non-Christian wife, they are not objects of church benevolence, but they ARE obligations of the father. That man is helped until he can take care of his obligations, whatever they may be. Someone says, "but the children or the wife would be helped with church money, would they not?" That’s true. Just as the gas company would be helped if he paid his gas bill; his obligation to the gas company. Not because the gas company is an object of church help, but because the church is helping the man meet his obligations.

The "poor saint" is THE object of church benevolence. He is among the "poor" because he cannot take care of his obligations, whether to care for himself, or others who are objects of his care. When once again he is able to assume his own obligations, then he is no longer a charge of the church and thus the support stops.

UPCOMING GOSPEL MEETING SCHEDULE
Dates	Congregation	Speaker
October 1-2 & 4-5, 2001	Susquehanna	Scott Smelser
November 12-16	Annandale, Virginia	different speakers

In This Issue