Sixth century Arabia

Arabia—“the island of the Arabs”—is the world’s largest peninsula bounded by the Red Sea on one hand, the Persian Gulf and the Euphrates on the other; while the southern side protracted toward the Strait of Ormuz is washed by the Indian Ocean. Along the western side, a chain of lofty mountains follows the coastline at times, receding to form a broad margin of lowland called the Teharra. Between the sea and the crest of this range is the mountainous region of the Hejaz in which lies the two cities of Mecca and 280 miles north of it Medina. A large amount of trade passed through the peninsula and across the Steppes of Arabia. These trade routes were long and perilous, hence the necessity for caravans traveling at fixed periods and by determined routes. The Arabs themselves had little knowledge of or interest in anything beyond their own merchandise and their own deserts. The people lived in widely scattered tribes with no form of central government. The distinctive feature has ever been the independence of the tribe, the family, the individual. Personal hostilities and tribal wars occurred incessantly. Blood feuds were frequent; even when united by blood or interest they seemed ever ready on some insignificant thing to separate and abandon themselves to implacable hostility.

Ancient Arab religion

Arabia was as unfavourable to religious reform as to political cohesion or union. The foundation of the Arab faith was a deep rooted idolatry. They worshipped crude stone idols and heavenly bodies, practising a vast amount of superstition. They were polytheists but believed in one supreme God. Other gods were considered to be lesser deities and mostly female in character. The focal point of this pagan worship was an annual pilgrimage even long before the time of Mohammed. The modern Islamic ceremonies of pilgrimage are substantially the same as in Mohammed’s time only with some modifications introduced by Mohammed himself. In Mecca there was located the Kaaba (Cube), a cubical building known as the house of Allah (in Arabic, allah means God). When Arabs came to Mecca to trade at the annual fairs, they performed the customary rites of pilgrimage at the Kaaba, which contained some 300 idols. To kiss the black stone or touch it in the eastern wall and walk round the “sacred edifice” seven times was regarded as meritorious at all times and all seasons.

There were two pilgrimages that could be made: the lesser pilgrimage in addition to the acts already mentioned included the going back and forth seven times with quick steps between the peaks of two little hills, Safa and Marwa. It could be performed with merit at any season of the year, but especially in the sacred month Rajab. Before entering the ‘holy territory’ surrounding Mecca, they assumed a pilgrim garb and at the conclusion of the ceremonies shaved their head. The greater pilgrimage could only be performed in the Holy month Dzul-Hijj. In addition to the ceremonies of the lesser pilgrimage it included a tour of a small granite hill by the name of Arafat, about 10-12 miles east of Mecca. The country for several miles round Mecca was considered as sacred. Four months of the year were universally sacred, Dzul-Cada, Dzul-Hijj, Moharram and Rajab. During these periods there was a truce, and tribes refrained from warring. Hostile feelings were suppressed and amnesty reigned throughout Arabia. Pilgrims were then free to visit Mecca. Moslem legend ascribes the building of the Kaaba to Abraham. The story goes that Hagar, wandering in the desert with her son reached the valley of Mecca. Ishmael left crying on the ground kicks around in childish passion when from a spot beneath him there bubbles forth a stream of water. It is the well, Zem Zem. This water was considered holy. Arab tribes from the Yemen attracted by the water settled there. Ishmael grew up amongst them and married the daughter of their chief. In fulfillment of a vision, Abraham is about to offer his son when his arm is stopped and on a subsequent visit to the place the patriarch, assisted by Ishmael, erected the Temple where it now stands and reconstituted the rites of pilgrimage. The custodians of the Kaaba were the Koreish tribe who consequently held a position of some authority, and their importance was added to by the fact that they provided water and food for the pilgrims at Mecca. Mohammed the founder of Islam was a member of the Koreish tribe.

Mohammed

He was born in the Arabian city of Mecca—45 miles inland from the Red Sea port of Jedda—into the pagan Koreish tribe which claimed descent from Abraham through Ishmael. Many of the tribe were traders whose caravans made journeys to Syria and other places. Mohammed was a name rare among the Arabs, but not unknown, derived from a root signifying ‘the praised’. His father Abdullah died six months before his birth; having set out on a trade expedition and on the way back, he took ill at Medina. Mohammed’s mother Amina, died when he was 6 years old. Infancy and part of the childhood of Mohammed was spent with a nurse Malima among the Bani Saad. It was in his sixth year that his mother took him to Medina and he was consequently cared for by his grandfather, Abd Al-Muttalib, who was the acknowledged chief of Mecca, and in charge of the Kaaba. After his death, Mohammed’s uncle, who was a poor trader called Abu Talib, looked after him. During his early teens, Mohammed is known to have accompanied his uncle upon at least one trading journey and may well have joined in others.

While on such journeys, he came into contact with different faiths. Ceremonies and words from these he later incorporated into Islam; fasting and regular set prayers being examples of this. That he did gather such a knowledge is supported by the Koran. At one period he was employed in tending sheep and goats on neighbouring hills and valleys around Mecca. He used, when at Medina, to refer to this employment and say that it fitted in with his prophetic office. Many authorities ascribe to the young Mohammed a correctness of deportment and manners which was rare among the people of Mecca. He lived in the family of Abu Talib and was prevented because of limited means from occupying any prominent position in Mecca. When he was 25 years old, he married a wealthy widow named Khadija, for whom he was working as a caravan manager. She was a member of the Koreish tribe. Of the early years of his married life little is known. He appears to have had a growing revulsion to the paganism of his tribe and particularly to the plural deities they worshipped. It may have been during these years that he sought to probe into Jewish and Christian teaching. As a result of his marriage, he became a person of importance and owing to his wife’s wealth , he no longer had to work and had leisure for uninterrupted meditation in the mountains adjacent to Mecca.

It is said that Mohammed and others used to go from time to time to a cave 3 miles from Mecca to meditate and worship. One night in the month Ramadam, he and his family were at this cave and there he received his first “revelation”, given to him by the angel Gabriel. According to tradition, the angel came to him with a thrice-repeated command, “recite”. Since Mohammed was thought to have been unable to read or write, many say that this first revelation was Sura Chapter 96 which has the title, “al-Alaq” which means the clot/embryo (coming from the Arabic word Alaqub as it is used in the Koranic account of man’s creation) and it reads as follows—“read in the name of thy Lord who creates, creates man from a clot (congealed blood), read and thy Lord is most generous who taught by the pen, taught man what he knew not”.

After some 2 years other revelations came in various forms. Sometimes he saw the angel and on other occasions he heard a voice, even the sound of a bell, through which the words of an angel came. There were times when the revelations came in a dream and at other times they were in the thoughts of his mind. When these revelations came his whole frame appeared agitated. With perspiration pouring down his face, his emotions were deeply stirred and at times he seemed in a trance falling to the ground foaming at his mouth. The revelations always came in the arabic language and he spoke the words that he received and they were written down by people who heard them coming from his lips. After his death, these revelations were collected and formed the Koran. Mohammed was convinced that the words that came were not his own, but the very word of God: he being only a reciter. What Mohammed taught, and the system of belief that he founded, suggests very clearly that he was not controlled by the Holy Spirit but by another spirit. The heart of the message which Mohammed received was that there is no God but Allah, the one true God. Man is God’s slave and it is his first duty to submit to God and obey him. God’s goodness and mercy are seen in his provision for all needs. He will reward with the pleasures of a sensual paradise those who worship him and do good deeds.

The Hegira, Medina and significant changes

When Mohammed made the claim that he was a prophet sent by God there were only a few who at once believed him – his wife, Khadija, a young cousin Ali, and his adopted son Zaid. Then a merchant later known as Abu Bakr professed faith in Mohammed. There were others who later joined but the leading people of the city whom Mohammed was eager to win, ignored him and soon began ridiculing him. They accused him of sorcery and fraud, yet he continued with his teaching, strongly condemning their idolatry. Opposition became more intense and because of the opposition of the Meccans it was decided that the Meccan Moslems should go to Medina where Mohammed had relations from his mother’s side. Accounts record that over 100 of his followers left Mecca by night, leaving Mohammed, Ali, and Abu. Finally they escaped and hid in a cave until the Meccans who were determined to kill gave up the search. Mohammed’s flight from Mecca to Medina on 20 June is known as the Hegira or Hijrah. The Moslem calendar is dated from that year—AH 200 means 200 years after the Hegira—since it is believed that Islam only began when the prophet and his followers established their community in Medina. Today in Moslem lands, documents etc are dated from the Hegira.

During his years in Mecca, Mohammed never claimed that he had performed a miracle to prove that he was a prophet. When asked for a sign to convince the people that God had sent him, he replied that his miracle was the Koran. Mohammed considered the scriptures of the Jews and Christians to be true, but he said that the followers of these religions had misinterpreted them. In leading his followers in worship he faced towards Jerusalem as he was eager to win the allegiance and support of the Jews. When he rode into Medina on his camel many urged him to become their guest. Not wishing to offend any by a refusal, he allowed his camel to decide for him. When the camel sat down to permit the rider to dismount it was at that spot Mohammed established his residence and built the first mosque. It is said that his first sermon was preached on a Friday with the result that Friday became the day for congregational worship. The political situation in Medina was confused. There was no central authority to keep the peace among the various tribes. Soon Mohammed was able to become the civil as well as religious ruler in the city. It was in the second year of the Hegira that his break with the Jews became complete. He had at first observed their day of atonement, but then instituted in its place the Ramadan month of fasting. He also instituted a feast of sacrifice in memory of Abraham, sacrificing the ram instead of his son. It was at this time having broken with the Jews and referring to them as hypocrites, that a revelation came to him to change the prayer direction to Mecca. Tradition has it that as he was standing in front of followers in a mosque leading in their prayers and facing Jerusalem he suddenly turned about and completed the worship facing Mecca. This turn about meant launching forth on a new course. Islam was now being established as an independent religio-political system.

The struggle for Mecca

Although Mohammed had advanced his course in Medina, his real target was Mecca. He knew the opposition of the Meccans stemmed from political and commercial considerations. If they would not believe they must be made to believe. He had tried peaceful means and failed. He began harassing them and making raids on their caravans and blocking roads to Mecca. Mohammed sent out a party in the ‘sacred months’ when it was the custom of the Arabs to refrain from war. The violation of these months was justified by a revelation that came to him. At the battle of Badr (AH 2) about 300 Moslems attacked and defeated a thousand Meccans. The booty was divided, 1/5 being kept by Mohammed to be used by him in helping the needy. This became a precedent to be used in the spoils of war. The victory convinced his followers that they were on the winning side. It also induced many pagan Arabs to come to Medina and submit to Mohammed as ruler; thus many previously unconvinced people from Medina turned to Islam. In the following year, the Meccans attacked Mohammed at Uhud and defeated him and his Moslem forces. He himself was wounded and 70 Moslems killed. This disaster for the Moslems lost Mohammed the support of many of his allies, including the Jews. The Jews had been unhappy over Mohammed’s victory at Badr and some of them composed and recited verses in which they ridiculed the people of Medina for submitting to a man who had slain his own people in battle. Moslem historians tell of at least 4 Jews, one of whom was a woman, who were assassinated by the zealous followers of Mohammed for this crime—they were not even rebuked by Mohammed for what they had done. In AH 5, the Meccans sent an army estimated at 10,000 men, against Medina; the battle that ensued has become known as the battle of the Ditch or War of the Trench because of a trench which Mohammed had dug around the town. The siege ended in failure for the Meccans and the Koreish never again tempted to oppose Mohammed by force.  He made a treaty with the Meccans and signed a 10 year truce which would permit him and his followers to make a pilgrimage to Mecca. The following year, Mohammed entered Mecca as a pilgrim with about 2000 followers. Mohammed destroyed the images to the various gods and made the Kaaba the focal point of the Islamic pilgrimage.

Mohammed died in 632 AD as he was making preparations to organize an expedition against Syria. This planned expedition outside Arabia was the first indication that Islam was to extend beyond its borders to become a force to be reckoned with in the world. It is said that a grave was dug at the very place where he died. Later, a mosque was built there and his grave became a place of pilgrimage. At the time of Mohammed’s death, the whole of Arabia had been subdued and the tribes were paying taxes to him. Abu Bakr succeeded Mohammed as Caliph for 2 years. Some of the tribes refused to continue paying taxes and to accept his leadership. He sent armed forces to subdue them and to collect the taxes. After his death, Umar Ibn al-Khattab, ruled as Caliph until his assassination 10 years later. During his reign and as a result of his initiative and drive, Islam expanded to Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Libya and Iraq. Many Moslems considered him to be second in importance to Mohammed himself. The above countries were under Byzantine domination (Byzantine was the Eastern Roman empire centred at Constantinople) and did not offer any real resistance to the Moslem forces. They were regarded more as liberators than invaders. They welcomed the Islamic forces and the whole Nile delta was captured by about 10,000 men. The Moslems built garrison towns on the edge of the unoccupied desert which became centres of Arab government. The people in the areas were obliged to go to them for trade and business and thus to learn Arabic. Non-Moslems had to pay a tax and to avoid payment, many transferred their allegiance to the Moslem faith. They felt themselves to be in a better position than when under the Byzantine rulers. Uthman ibn Affan succeeded Umar as Caliph at the age of 70. Ali, a cousin and son-in-law of Mohammed (being married to Mohammed’s daughter, Fatima) was elected the next Caliph.

SECTS IN ISLAM

The main sects base their divisions upon their descent from the grandsons of the prophet or his close followers.

1. The Sunnis.  This is the largest group in Islam and their name derives from a word that means “principle” or “path.” The sunnah, or example of Muhammad is described as a main pillar of Sunni doctrine. Sunnis recognize four major legal traditions: Maliki, Shafi’i, Hanafi, and Hanbali. All four accept the validity of the others and a Muslim might choose any one that he/she finds agreeable to his/her ideas. The more recent Salafi movement among Sunnis, which refuses to categorize itself under any single legal tradition, claims to derive its teachings from the original sources of Islam.

2. The Shiites (Shiahs). These form the second largest group within Islam and are the followers of Ali who insist that Mohammed appointed him as his successor by a divine revelation from God and that the Caliphate should, therefore, descend through his sons. The Shiites believe that there were 12 rightful “Imams” (their term for Caliph) who all descended from the family of Ali. They are strong in Iran where the “twelvers”, a particular branch of them hold sway. This sect is the state religion of Iran. The twelvers are descendants of the twelve Imams of the Ali-Fatima line which ended with Mohammed al-Mahdi (al-Mahdi means the guided one). It is believed that this last Iman did not die, but disappeared as a child. He will one day return to earth to establish his rule. The Shiites as a general body of Moslems feel that they are denied their rights by other branches of Islam. Other branches of this sect are:

a) The Zaidis—they exist for the most part in the Yemen and formed the main bulk of the royalist supporters in the 66-67 civil war. The Imam who was also the King of the Yemen was a Zaidi. This sect have their own law books.

b) The Ismailis also known as the Seveners. They form more of a secret society and have a large following mainly in Pakistan. They are also found in Syria and Lebanon.

3. The Kharijites. This is the earliest sect of any importance and exists today in North Africa under the name of Ibadiya. They maintain that any Moslem can become Caliph if he is elected by the whole community. They opposed Ali because he submitted his claim for arbitration before a select committee instead of before the whole community. They also contend that because it is the duty of Moslems to constrain men to do right and restrain them from doing evil, they have a solemn duty to kill apostates and unbelievers. Under this first principle, they sought to constrain Ali, but when he failed to heed their advice, they murdered him under the second principle.

4. The Murjia. Their name is derived from the word Irja meaning ‘to postpone’. They refused to condemn any Moslem in the belief that all judgment would be postponed till the last day. They are almost non-existent, but their beliefs remain within Islam. This teaching has led to tolerance of sin in all forms within Islam.

5. The Ahmadiyya. They are a Moslem missionary force that have made great headway in some countries. Their adherents are educated and keen propagandists. They would readily discuss differences between the Moslem and Christian faiths at any time. Their followers study the Bible and know it well. The movement was founded about 1880 by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. He was born in the village of Quadian in north-eastern Punjab. He had a good education as a young man, but from his youth was subject to strange visions and dreams. He could see weaknesses in the customary interpretations of the Koran. About 1880 he concluded that God had called him to a special mission. Ten years later, he openly declared this, saying that God had instructed him to initiate followers. He expounded new doctrines basing a great deal on the Moslem belief in the Mahdi—a future Islamic Messiah. He then claimed that he was the coming “great one” of whom other religions foretold. He went on to teach that in him Mohammed had made his second advent in his capacity of Mahdi (the guided one). He was branded by the orthodox Moslems as a heretic, blasphemer, imposter and enemy of the faith. When he died in 1908, he was succeeded by a follower instead of by his son which led to a split in the movement. One branch founded their headquarters at Lahore and called themselves Ahmadi. The second branch also called themselves Ahmade but are known as Qadiani. Mirza Ahmad said of himself: “I am the light of this dark age; he who follows me will be saved from falling into the pit prepared by Satan for those who walk in the dark. I have been sent from God to lead mankind to the true God…”. The main teachings of the Ahmadiyyah are as follows:

a) No verse in the Koran can be abrogated (apparent inconsistencies are due to faulty interpretations).

b) Mohammed as “seal of the prophets” only testified to his genuineness and not to the finality of his office.

c) Hell is not everlasting.

d) Apostacy is not punishable by death.

e) Mirza Ahmad was the Mahdi (guided one).

f) Jesus is dead and did not ascend into heaven. This conflicts with the Koranic teaching. Ghulam taught that Jesus merely swooned on the cross and was taken down and revived by the application of a special ointment to His wounds. He taught that Jesus recovered so completely after 40 days He was able to make the long journey to Afghanistan and Kashmir whose people were the descendents of the 10 lost tribes of Israel. After living among them and ministering to them, Christ died a natural death at the age of 120. Ghulam later claimed to have discovered the tomb of Jesus in a street in Srinagar in Kashmir and that he had been given divine instructions for making the miraculous ointment which had revived Jesus and he sold it as a treatment for many illnesses. Orthodox Moslems deny the death of Christ and they quote Sura 4:157, “And they killed him not, nor did they cause His death on the cross, but made to appear to them as such”. The orthodox Islamic interpretation is that God substituted another in Christ’s likeness so that it was not actually Jesus who died on the cross but another. This implies that Jesus is alive but denies His vicarious death and resurrection. Ahmadiyya missionaries and adherents cleverly take texts out of context and by their apparent knowledge of the Bible leave many defenceless and wavering.

THE MOSLEM CREED

Islam has two sections – Iman meaning “faith” and Din, the religious practice which should be the result of that faith. Iman has been defined by orthodox Islam as confession with one tongue to one truth, and belief with one heart of one Moslem religion. There is one formal declaration of belief (Iman Mufassal) in the articles of the Moslem Creed which require a Moslem to believe in:

1. God.

2. The angels of God.

3. The books of God.

4. The prophets of God.

5. The day of resurrection and judgement.

6. Predestination to good and evil.

Moslems are also required to have a simple expression of faith in the teaching of the Koran and Traditions (Iman Mujmal).

1. Belief about God (Allah)

The pagan Arabs at the time of Mohammed worshipped many gods and goddesses, the images of whom were in the Kaaba in Mecca. They believed there was a supreme god called Allah who was lord of the Kaaba, but they were more attached to the other gods. Mohammed proclaimed that Allah alone was god and that the others were only idols which should not be worshipped. The name Allah refers to God’s essential being and is known in Arabic by a phrase that translates as the “essential name of God”. The name of God dominates the speech of many Moslems. When one promises to do some thing, he conditions his agreement by saying “if God wills”. When he sneezes, he is to say “praise god”; if he wanted to quicken the pace of his weary beast, he may call out “Ya Allah” meaning “O God”. It is the boast of Moslems that they are monotheists. All other names given to God are known as attributes of the divine being. According to tradition, these names number 99 and whoever recites them shall enter into paradise. The rosary (subha) is used by Moslims to assist them in reciting these names. The subha is a necklace of 99 beads separated into 3 sections containing 33 beads each. The sections are separated by two transversal beads with a much larger bead at the end acting as a kind of handle. The basic dogma in Islam is  “no God whatever but Allah”. Of his attributes (sifat) they hold that there are 7 principle ones”

a) Life (Hayat) by that they mean his existance has neither beginning nor ending.

b) Knowledge (llm) he knows all things visible or invisible, past or future. He never forgets, is never negligent and never makes an error.

c) Power (Qudra) Allah is almighty; his power is everlasting.

d) Will (Irada) He is able to do what he wills, he need not act, good and evil exist by his will. If a man is pious, it’s because of the will of Allah and if a man is an unbeliever, it is due to the will of Allah.

e) Hearing (Sama) He can hear every sound whether high or low.

f) Seeing (Basr) He sees all things even the steps of a black cat on a black stone at night.

g) Speech (Kalam).

A. His Unity. Belief in the unity of God really forms the corner stone of the Islamic faith. Moslems place the greatest possible emphasis on God’s unity. From the Koran, Sura 112:1-4, they say “He, Allah, is one; Allah is he on whom all depend; he begets not neither is he begotten ; and none is like him”. These are words most commonly quoted by Moslems to Christians. The association of other gods with God is the greatest sin possible to a Moslim.

B. His Greatness. “The Takbir” is the name given to the Arabic expression “Allahu Akbar” which means ‘God is great’. The Moslem repeats this name constantly and means no matter what a man can think of, God is greater than that.

C. His Revelation of his Wealth and Law (Tanzil). By the expression Tanzil (sending down), is meant the revelation or sending down of God’s message. It denotes the object of God’s revelation the Koran.

D. His Transcendance (Tanzih). The Moslem believes that God is really unknowable. He holds himself aloof from man and he cannot be really known by man, whatever man thinks of him, he is something different.

2. The Angels of God

The Koran has much to say about angels. The pagan Arabs thought that some of the angels were the “daughters of Allah” and this was sternly rejected in the Koran. From the Koran, we find concerning angels,

a) Angels have life, speech and reason,

b) Angels have no carnal desire or anger—It is said that their food is celebrating God’s glory, their drink proclaiming God’s holiness, their conversation is commemorating God and their pleasure is worshipping God. They are said to be inferior to human prophets because they were commanded to prostrate themselves before Adam.

c) Every believer is attended by 2 recording angels, one of whom records his good reactions, the other his evil reactions.

d) Four are archangels, Gabriel, the angel of revelation, Mik’al the patron of the Israelites, Iprofil who is to sound the trumpet at the last day and Azrail, the angel of death.

e) Eight angels support God’s throne.

f) There are 2 angels by the name of Munkar and Nakir who examine the dead in their graves on the night after burial.

g) The angels intercede for man and celebrate the praises of the Lord.

h) The angels act as guardian angels to men.

Then there are the angels known as “Jinns” (the ‘genie’ of Arabian tales) and it is said God created them 2000 years before Adam. They were created from smokeless fire like the devil and their chief abode is in the mountains of Qaf which encompass the whole earth and the devil is said to be their father.

Concerning the devil, Mohammed taught that the devil enters into a man as blood in his body; that every man has an angel and a devil appointed over him; that every child of Adam except Jesus and Mary is touched by the devil at his birth and it is the devil’s touch makes the infant cry out at birth. The devil was created from fire and had the name “Azazil”, the Arab name is Iblis. He is also known as Ash Shaitan or the chief devil. Iblis is said to have possessed authority over the animal and spirit kingdom before the creation of Adam. He was expelled from Eden because he refused to make submission to Adam. See Sura 7:11-18. v11 says “make submission to Adam so they (the angels) submitted, but not Iblis. He was not of those who submitted”.

3. The Books of God

Islam is a religion of revelation. God has spoken and has given his word to his prophets and to some of them he has also given books. It is said that the number of books given to the prophets is 105 so there are 105 books deemed as sacred, having been delivered by God to mankind. To Adam -10, to Seth – 50, to Enoch – 30, to Abraham -10, to Moses – 5, and they are referred to as “Taurat”. The books from Adam to Abraham are said to be lost, but all that is necessary for Moslems to know of these books is to be found in the Koran. Moslems claim that Christians have altered the books in the Scripture and that the Koran corrects previous scripture because it was given last. Moslems assert that the books of the prophets contain a mixture of truth and error and the Koran was given to correct these errors.

4. The Prophets of God

Tradition states that Mohammed said there were 124,000 prophets and 315 apostles or messengers. Of these, 9 are said to be “possessors of power and constancy”. They are Noah, Abraham, David, Jacob, Joseph, Job, Moses, Jesus and Mohammed. Three women are said to be prophetesses, Sarah because she received the news of Isaac’s birth by revelation, the mother of Moses who also received a Divine message and Mary who received news of the birth by an angel.

5. The Day of Resurrection and Judgment

The last day has many names in the Koran.

a) YAUM AL QIYAMA – day of uprising.

b) YAUM AL FASL – day of separation or decision.

c) YAUM AL HISAV – the day of reckoning.

d) YAUM AL BATH – the day of sending forth or awakening.

e) YAUM AL DIN – the day of judgment.

f) YAUM ALAKHIR – the last day.

g) YAUM AL MUHITH – the encompassing day.

h) AS SAAH – the hour.

At the resurrection, the body will be raised and united to the soul. One bone of the body – ‘Os Sacrum’ will be preserved uncorrupted until the last day at which time, the rest of the body will grow from it. Other teaching about the last day states that it will be preceded by 3 blasts of the trumpet – at the first blast, all creatures on heaven and earth will be struck with terror, at the second blast, all creatures on heaven and earth will die, at the last blast 40 years later, all will be raised for judgment. It will be a general resurrection of men, angels and animals; when all are assembled for judgment, the angels will keep them waiting for 40 years. After this, God will appear to judge them and Mohammed will intercede for them, after Adam. Noah, Abraham, Moses and Jesus have declined, feeling themselves unworthy of so great a task. Each person will be examined from his own book of deeds which will have all his words and actions recorded. The righteous will be forced to take their book in their right hand, but the unrighteous will be forced to take their book in their left hand which will be bound behind their backs. All deeds and words or, according to some, the books containing the records of these deeds and words will be weighed in a balance. One balance being over paradise, the other over hell.

The book of deeds

There is no way of salvation in Islam other than by works. When a Moslem is asked “Where are you going when you die?”, he will usually reply  that if his works are good, then he believes he will go to heaven. The book of deeds is kept for each person by two recording angels. An angel on man’s right side records his good deeds, an angel on his left side to record his bad or evil deeds. (In arabic these angels are called Kiram al-Katwin). In this book, every spoken word and every action great or small is written down. There are also to be books of nations read at this time – Sura 45: 28 “And thou shalt see every nation kneeling down, every nation shall be called to its book, today you shall be rewarded for what you did”.

Heaven

According to the Koran, life after death means progress and advancement far beyond anything conceivable in this world. In some passages of the Koran, Mohammed’s paradise can be summed up as a place where there are couches covered with rich brocades, glowing cups and luscious fruits. In the Moslem idea of heaven there is no relationship with the Christian teaching of a saved believer being changed into the likeness of Christ and worshipping the Lord. There are said to be 7 divisions to heaven – the highest being paradise (Al-Firdaus).

Hell

The Moslem hell has 7 divisions. ‘Jahannan’ refers to the sections of hell prepared for Moslems – a type of purgatory meant for purification. In this respect, it is like Roman Catholic teaching. The orthodox teaching is that all Moslems will go to hell. The degree and duration in hell is dependent upon the enormity of the sins committed by the person. For Moslems who have not committed great sins, hell will be cool and pleasant.

Predestination (sometimes referred to as Taqdir or Qadar)

This 6th article of the Moslem creed means that God is absolute in His decree of good and evil. Nothing comes to pass whether good or bad except by the divine will according to what God has engraved upon a preserved tablet by His pen of fate. A Moslem believes that God is not limited by any consideration whatsoever, whether moral or otherwise. It is Kama Yashau, ‘as he wills’—the phrase constantly used in the Koran. A tradition states God’s attitude thus, “These to heaven and I care not and these to hell and I care not”. No real responsibility is upon the person for what he does, all responsibility for his actions is laid upon God. On the basis of that teaching, man is judged for his deeds for which he is not responsible!  Some Islamic sects believe that man is  responsible for his actions to a certain extent.

The Koran

The Koran is the sacred book of Moslems written in Arabic and considered by them to be the inspired Word of God. The word Koran, means ‘the collected things’ according to some; others say it means ‘the reading’. The word itself is used several times in the book. The Koran contains 114 chapters or Suras of varying length which were received piece by piece by Mohammed. The first revelation was given in the month of Ramadan, now the Moslem fast month. Mohammed related the Koran verbally to his followers who memorized it. Tradition says that some parts were written on palm leaves, on stones, on shoulder blades of animals. A number of versions of the revelations were in circulation, but when several of the reciters were killed in the battle of the garden, Olhman, one of Mohammed’s principle followers ordered an official version to be compiled in AH 30. He instructed Zaid ibn Thavit and others to prepare a copy in the Koreish dialect. This version became official and copies were sent to all the principal Moslem cities. Some Moslem writers say the first copy was made by Abu Bakr and that Zaid commanded copies be made from it. The fact that several persons had a hand in the compilation of the written form is claimed by Moslem teachers to be a proof of its divine origin and preservation. The Koran is written in poetic style. Every chapter other than the 9th which, some say, was once part of the 8th, begins with the words “In the name of God, the merciful, the compassionate…”.

How Moslems View the Koran

Every Moslem child is taught to memorize the Koran or at least the most relevant verses in it. Hence the Moslem can always bring these memorized passages to the defence of his faith. They believe the Koran to confirm the books of the former prophets and to complete them, Mohammed being the final prophet. They believe the Koran is eternal and uncreated having existed in heaven—a miracle from God. Since it is believed that the Koran was brought form heaven in its original arabic form, this language is considered an essential part of it. It cannot, therefore, be translated like other books and till recently, Moslems have been reluctant to publish translations of their holy book for the millions who do not know Arabic. In a translation, the Koran is a difficult book to read, lacking continuity and abounding in repetition. However, when read aloud in Arabic by a good reader in a Mosque or on radio, it makes a tremendous impression on those who listen, even when they do not understand the meaning. Moslems consider the Koran to be the unique miracle of their prophet since no one has been able to produce the equal of it. Believers treat their copies of the Koran with reverence, often keeping them wrapped in beautiful covers and never placing anything on top of them. They dare not touch it until they have washed and purified themselves, nor do they hold it below waist level, such is their reverence of this book. In the eyes of the Moslem, the pages of the Koran are pure and their directions are right.

Moslem practice

The religious duties of a Moslem can be summed up under five categories generally called the five pillars of Islam. Since God is the Master and man is His slave, God has appointed certain tasks which believing men and women must perform. They should perform these tasks not only because God requires it, but also out of gratitude to God for His goodness. The doing of these deed is very meritorious. In the day of judgment, they will be weighed in God’s balance and will help to cancel the evil deeds which are placed on the other side of the balance. These five pillars of faith are usually held to be : prayers, fasting, alms-giving, pilgrimage to Mecca and holy war. They are all described by the Arabic word IBADAT (worship). It is derived from the word ABAD meaning slave.

1. Prayers. Wherever one goes throughout the Moslem world, he will see Moslems at prayer. Every adult believer, male and female, is duty bound to perform the ritual of prayer five times every day – at daybreak, at noon, in the afternoon, in the evening after sunset and in the early part of the night. The call to prayer is sounded out from minarets and housetops in thousands of towns and villages. Before praying, a Moslem must remove his shoes, wash his feet, hands, parts of his face and turn towards the Kaaba at Mecca. When he cannot go to a mosque to pray, he may pray wherever he may happen to be – at work, on a journey or in the middle of other duties. He will carry a bottle of water with him for the ablutions and if water is not available, he will use sand or earth symbolically. In prayer, he recites the appointed phrases in the Arabic language. He first says, “Allahu Akbar”, meaning “God is great” and then he recites from the Koran. He bows, kneels and touches his forehead to the ground twice. This completes one rakah meaning or, bow. In the five times of prayer or worship during the day, 17 rakahs must be performed. The worship is acceptable to God if performed properly even if the worshipper does not understand the Arabic words he is repeating. On Fridays, a sermon is preached in the mosque as part of the prayers (a sermon may also be included in the last prayers of the day in larger and more central mosques). Friday noon prayer is the only congregational one. In large mosques a special area is reserved for women worshippers. The worshippers arrange themselves in rows and follow the leader (imam) in their physical postures. This serves to promote a sense of brotherhood in the Moslem community. The inside of the mosque is conspicuous by the absence of pews and pictures. The nearest substitute for pictures or icons is calligraphy using passages from the Koran and names of the prophet and his caliphs – all in Arabic characters which lend themselves to decorative purposes.

2. Fasting. Mohammed commanded that the 9th month of the year which is called Ramadan be observed as a time of fasting. Of the several Moslem fasts, this is the most important one and its observance is obligatory. Since the Moslem calendar is not solar, but lunar, Ramadan comes each year about 10 days earlier that the previous year. It comes sometimes in winter when the days are short and also in summer when the days are long and in some countries very hot. Moslems believe, based on a reported saying of Mohammed, that during Ramadan, the gates of paradise are open and the gates of hell closed and that all who keep the fast will be pardoned of all their past venial sins.

Regulations Governing the Fast:

a) The fast cannot start until some Moslem is able to state he has seen the new moon. This leads to frequent diversion of opinion.

b) The fast must be kept by young people from the age of 10 or 12. Certain classes of persons are exempt from fasting such as the sick, the infirm and travelers on a journey of more than 3 days, but even these are expected to make up the fast from the days they have missed as soon as they are able.

c) The fast commences from the first light of dawn, as soon as a white thread is distinguishable from a black thread and it continues until sunset. During this period not even one’s own saliva should be swallowed. If the fast is broken by letting a drop of water go down one’s throat while he is cleaning his teeth, he must atone by keeping another fast. For the rich who can rest in their homes and can sleep through the day, Ramadan is not so difficult, but for working people the day without food or drink is long and exhausting as they wait for the signal to let them know they can break the fast. All night they are free to eat. It is said there is more feasting in this month than any other time of the year. There is also much sickness because of the irregularity of the diet and much quarrelling because of short tempers.

d) During the month of Ramadan, an additional twenty rakah are performed at the night prayer.

3. Alms giving. Since Mohammed was once an orphan and poor, it is natural to find an emphasis in the Koran on the duty of helping the poor and orphans. Each Moslem adult is required to give alms if he possesses property as described in the law. Property for this purpose includes camels, bulls, cows, sheep, goats, horses, gold, silver, articles of merchandise, the fruit of the earth; household property, weapons, tools etc. are not included. The alms-giving or taxation was designed to help the poor and a collector was appointed for this purpose. The most common time for collectors of taxes seems to be on Fridays and this is the time when the poor and beggars multiply on the streets to receive alms. The following classes of people are entitled to receive help from the officially collected alms: people whose property is below taxable value; people who have no property at all; the collectors of alms; people who are in the path of service of God; those engaged in religious warfare; travelers.

4. Pilgrimage to Mecca. Mohammed himself made the pilgrimage to Mecca and performed all the customary rites and his example became law for his followers. Every Moslem who has the means to make the journey to Mecca should do so at least once in his or her life. Accordingly, every year in the month of the pilgrimage which is the 12th month of the Moslem calendar (being Dhu al-Hijjah) hundreds of thousands of pilgrims from around the world make their way to Mecca. A person who has completed the pilgrimage takes the title Hajj (meaning pilgrimage) or Hajji, i.e. Hajji Mohammed Farra. The dying of the hair, beard or both with the reddish-brown dye, henna, is a sign that a person has been on the Hajj.

Duties of the Pilgrim:

Three actions in the pilgrimage are obligatory and thought to be instituted by God Himself.

a) To wear no other garment but the IHRAM which consists of two seamless sheets of white cotton, each 6 feet long by 3 1/2 wide. One is thrown over the back exposing the right arm and shoulder and knotted on the right side. The other is wrapped around from the waist to the knees and knotted in at the middle.

b) To stand on the mountain of Arafat.

c) To make a circuit around the Kaaba 7 times.

Five other duties in the pilgrimage are said to be also obligatory, but the omission of which does not constitute an unpardonable sin:-

a) To spend a night between the 9th and 10th of the pilgrimage month at Al Muzdalifa – a place half way between Mina which is a valley and Arafat.

b) To run the distance between the mountains of Al-Saffa and Al-Marwa.

c) To perform the Rama or Rujaa of the throwing of stones—originally at three stone pillars, but now three stone walls—in order to stone the devil. The ritual is aid to commemorate Abraham’s pilgrimage to Mecca when he threw seven stones at the devil at Gabriel’s command!

d) To make an extra circuit around the Kaaba if the pilgrim is a non-Meccan.

e) To shave the head after the pilgrimage is over.

A tradition attributed to a saying of Mohammed is, “He who makes the pilgrimage for God’s sake and does not talk loosely nor act wickedly shall return as pure from sin as the day he was born. Verily the pilgrimage puts away poverty and sin, like the fires of a forge remove the dross”.

5. The holy war (Jihad)

We learn from the Koran that a revelation came to Mohammed that he should make war on the idolaters of Arabia and force them to submit and become Moslems. The followers of Mohammed used the sword to extend their empire throughout the Middle East, N. Africa and Spain. In more recent times, pagan people have been forcibly brought into the fold of Islam. Some Moslems have always looked forward to a time when they would be able to conquer non- Moslems and establish Islam as the religio-political system of the world. The Holy War is regarded as a divine institution and its purpose is to advance Islam. People against whom the Jihad is directed are to be invited to accept Islam. Those who accept will be given full citizen rights of the country. Those who refuse will be made to pay a tax and will be looked upon as inferior citizens. Theses who will neither embrace Islam nor pay the tax, they have their families and property taken from them. Moslems who die fighting in a Holy War are assured of paradise and special privileges there. Some Moslems interpret Jihad in a spiritual manner and say it means a striving for the cause of God which must be advanced, not from the sword, but by peaceful means such as missionary effort. Such an effort is being actively promoted in many lands and large numbers of converts are being made to the religion of Islam.

CT – What is the ideal strategy for the church?

RW – Working with moderate Muslims.

Below is an extract from an interview with Rick Warren and published by Christianity Today online on April 5th, 2013.

CT – There’s fresh debate among experts over the influence of religion on foreign policy. Some see religion as part of the problem. How do you see it?

RW – There’s a religious root to every single problem on the planet. Poverty has a religious root. Conflict has a religious root. Disease. All of these problems involve behavior, and behavior involves religion.

One of the problems we’ve had in American foreign policy is the unwillingness to actually name the ideology opposing us. During the cold war, there were clearly two ideologies: communism and capitalism. Today there is a radical wing of Islam that is a clear ideological enemy of America, and nobody wants to say it. So they talk about a “war on terror.” You can’t win a war on terror, because terrorism is a tool, a method. We don’t have a war on a method. We have a war on an ideology that wants to destroy either Israel or America or Western culture.

What these radical Islamists believe is not the same thing as the typical Muslim. The radical Islamist views no more represent all of Islam than the KKK represents Christianity.

CT – What is the ideal strategy for the church?

RW – Working with moderate Muslims. This is the whole idea of the Peace Plan: Promoting reconciliation [means] to find a man of peace. I have found men of peace who do not at all hold to what I believe about Scripture and certainly aren’t Christians, but we can work together.

Rick Warren’s observations about working for peace in co-operation with “moderate Muslims” are in the context of his scheme to reach the unreached of the world with the gospel. In the name of advancing the gospel in obedience to Christ’s great commission, he is prepared to work for reconciliation with Islam. In fact this is his ideal! In other words, this is the best possible scenario. In practical terms this entails finding common cause with Islam – just as he and many other evangelicals in the SBC and elsewhere have already done with Rome. This is the religious influence he sees as being an “ideal strategy for the church”.

In Biblical terms, this is simply apostasy at work. To reconcile with the enemies of God in the name of advancing the gospel is a betrayal of the gospel itself. It is a denial of the truth of Christ and all that the gospel means. In stark contrast to Rick Warren’s philosophy the Scripture plainly teaches that there is no common ground between truth and idolatrous error like Islam!

“And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in [them]; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean [thing]; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.” (2 Corinthians 6:15-18 AV)

 The increasing boldness of those advocating disobedience of God within evangelicalism must stir God’s people to recognize these wolves in sheep’s clothing and separate themselves from them and from those who support or fellowship with them.

Many today do not give any consideration to this question they merely assume it to be so. The child of God should never make assumptions about spiritual matters, I John 4:1. This being the case the question is a valid one and one which should be carefully considered by every Christian. For the answer we have only one objective standard to make reference to — the word of God. The answer must not be a matter of personal/denominational prejudice; we must get to the truth of the matter by getting the mind of God. The opinions of men are utterly irrelevant, it is the verdict of Holy Writ that we must find. What saith the Scriptures? Having determined what the Bible teaches then we are to act accordingly or else be guilty of willful disobedience. To find the answer to this question we must consider:

I A Biblical picture of a Christian Church.

1. One of the senses in which the word ‘church’ is used in the Bible refers to the visible, public assembly of the saints of God on the earth — either generally on locally. Does the Church of Rome belong to this category? When its congregations meet together is it an assembly of God’s people? To answer this we must discover what it is that makes a church Christian. The answers to this all important question may be deduced in this portion. Here is an assembly referred to as a Church, an assembly composed of Christians, v26.

2. The term Christian is one which God bestows, v26. The language indicates that that the use of this term to describe those who met at Antioch was by direct Divine revelation. Cp Luke 2:26, Acts 10:22. The name Christian is one which God revealed and required these people to use. The significance of this fact is that the term is one which must only be used where God’s criteria are met — i.e. it lines up with the teaching of Scripture.

3. The term Christian describes an assembly where the word of God is preached and believed. Cp v19. The message that was preached from the word is also clear, v20. The Lord as He is revealed in the Scriptures is the focus of this Christian Church, v21, 23, 24. Cp 26:22-23. When Paul taught at Antioch this is what he taught — always only all of the Bible. The use of the words believed, v21; disciples,v26, indicates their attitude to the word. It was one of believing loyalty and devotion. They learned from the book and followed the Lord as their Master and this is what qualified them for the Divine description as Christians.

II How does the Church of Rome compare with this Biblical model of a Christian Church?

As an organization the Church of Rome is to be seen in stark contrast to this model. The following statements are taken from the Roman Catholic catechism and each statement is linked back to the page on which it appears online on the Vatican website.

Rome’s attitude to the Bible itself.

The written word of God has long been hated by the Church of Rome. In 1229 the Bible was placed on the Index of Forbidden Books — a list still maintained today in a modified form. This Authorized Version of the Scriptures is still officially banned; the text of the original languages is banned; every translation or commentary that is not officially sanctioned by the Church of Rome is a banned book. History proves Rome’s hatred of the Bible especially the Bible in the vernacular. J Wycliffe (132?-1384) produced the first English translation. His Bible was condemned and his followers burned as heretics. Tyndale (1500s) was hounded in England and on the continent. Every Tyndale New Testament (pub. 1525) Popish authorities could find was burned and eventually Tyndale was martyred (1536). The Bible may be found in and used by the Church of Rome in a limited sense yet its contents are still locked up by the Church.

Rome’s attitude to the teachings of the Bible.

• The Church of Rome takes to itself the role of sole infallible interpreter of the Bible. Catechism #100 states: “The task of interpreting the Word of God authentically has been entrusted solely to the Magisterium of the Church, that is, to the Pope and to the bishops in communion with him”.

• Her traditions are placed on an equal footing with the word of God. Catechism #82: “As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, “does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honoured with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence.”

• In reality Rome’s traditions are given more prominence and authority. Catechism #113: Read the Scripture within “the living Tradition of the whole Church”. According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church’s heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God’s Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture (“. . . according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church”. No private individual therefore has the right to read and discern the meaning of Scripture for themselves.

Rome’s system of doctrine perverts the central doctrine of Scripture. In contrast to those believing disciples God called Christians in Antioch, The Church of Rome has introduced her own methods of salvation. The sufficiency of Christ’s work of atonement is the single theme of God’s word, 26:22-23. Rome’s teachings all pervert the once for all finished work of atonement that Christ did on the Cross

Rome’s teaching on Baptism

1. Catechism #405:  Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin – an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence”. Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.

2. Catechism #1262: The different effects of Baptism are signified by the perceptible elements of the sacramental rite. Immersion in water symbolizes not only death and purification, but also regeneration and renewal. Thus the two principal effects are purification from sins and new birth in the Holy Spirit.

3. Catechism #1263: By Baptism all sins are forgiven, original sin and all personal sins, as well as all punishment for sin. In those who have been reborn nothing remains that would impede their entry into the Kingdom of God, neither Adam’s sin, nor personal sin, nor the consequences of sin, the gravest of which is separation from God.

4. Catechism #1265: Baptism not only purifies from all sins, but also makes the neophyte “a new creature,” an adopted son of God, who has become a “partaker of the divine nature”, member of Christ and coheir with him, and a temple of the Holy Spirit.

All of the above destroys the Bible’s teaching on regeneration as a work of the Holy Ghost quite apart from visible signs and symbols. Sin is removed by the atoning work of Christ and is experienced by the regenerate sinner as he acts in faith and repentance.

Rome’s teaching on the Mass

A. As a sacrifice:

1. Catechism # 1330: The memorial of the Lord’s Passion and Resurrection. The Holy Sacrifice, because it makes present the one sacrifice of Christ the Savior and includes the Church’s offering. the terms holy sacrifice of the Mass, “sacrifice of praise,” spiritual sacrifice, pure and holy sacrifice are also used, since it completes and surpasses all the sacrifices of the Old Covenant.
2. Catechism #1350: The presentation of the offerings (the Offertory). Then, sometimes in procession, the bread and wine are brought to the altar; they will be offered by the priest in the name of Christ in the Eucharistic sacrifice in which they will become his body and blood. It is the very action of Christ at the Last Supper – “taking the bread and a cup.” “The Church alone offers this pure oblation to the Creator, when she offers what comes forth from his creation with thanksgiving.” The presentation of the offerings at the altar takes up the gesture of Melchizedek and commits the Creator’s gifts into the hands of Christ who, in his sacrifice, brings to perfection all human attempts to offer sacrifices.
3. Catechism #1414: As sacrifice, the Eucharist is also offered in reparation for the sins of the living and the dead and to obtain spiritual or temporal benefits from God.

B. As the body and blood of Christ

1. Catechism #1333: At the heart of the Eucharistic celebration are the bread and wine that, by the words of Christ and the invocation of the Holy Spirit, become Christ’s Body and Blood. Faithful to the Lord’s command the Church continues to do, in his memory and until his glorious return, what he did on the eve of his Passion: “He took bread….” “He took the cup filled with wine….” the signs of bread and wine become, in a way surpassing understanding, the Body and Blood of Christ; they continue also to signify the goodness of creation. Thus in the Offertory we give thanks to the Creator for bread and wine, fruit of the “work of human hands,” but above all as “fruit of the earth” and “of the vine” – gifts of the Creator. the Church sees in the gesture of the king-priest Melchizedek, who “brought out bread and wine,” a prefiguring of her own offering.

2. Catechism #1374: The mode of Christ’s presence under the Eucharistic species is unique. It raises the Eucharist above all the sacraments as “the perfection of the spiritual life and the end to which all the sacraments tend.” In the most blessed sacrament of the Eucharist “the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ and, therefore, the whole Christ is truly, really, and substantially contained.” “This presence is called ‘real’ – by which is not intended to exclude the other types of presence as if they could not be ‘real’ too, but because it is presence in the fullest sense: that is to say, it is a substantial presence by which Christ, God and man, makes himself wholly and entirely present.”

3. Catechism #1376: The Council of Trent summarizes the Catholic faith by declaring: “Because Christ our Redeemer said that it was truly his body that he was offering under the species of bread, it has always been the conviction of the Church of God, and this holy Council now declares again, that by the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation.”

4. Catechism #1378: Worship of the Eucharist. In the liturgy of the Mass we express our faith in the real presence of Christ under the species of bread and wine by, among other ways, genuflecting or bowing deeply as a sign of adoration of the Lord. “The Catholic Church has always offered and still offers to the sacrament of the Eucharist the cult of adoration, not only during Mass, but also outside of it, reserving the consecrated hosts with the utmost care, exposing them to the solemn veneration of the faithful, and carrying them in procession.”

This is in defiance of the clear doctrine of Scripture. “But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God…For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.” Hebrews 10:10-12, 14.

Rome’s doctrines of Confession, Penance, Indulgences, Justification by works; Mary and the Saints and every other Romish perversion destroy the teachings of God’s word.

III What should the attitude of every Christian be toward a false church?

1. Recognize that where an individual or organization does not adhere to the word of God as the only rule of faith and practice, that person or organization has no right to use the name Christian.

2. Separate! No Christian can engage in fellowship with a false church. It is possible to have friends and acquaintances who are Roman Catholic or who belong to one or other of the many unchristian religions today but it is not possible to have fellowship in spiritual matters.

3. Speak out against Rome’s errors. The modern way seems to be to speak of Rome in such a way as to avoid direct criticism and seek out ‘common ground’.

4. Every true Christian is to pity those who are carried away with the false doctrines of Popery and every other false religious system. Our duty does not end in recognizing the error and separating from it in protest. Our duty includes every possible means endorsed by Scripture to recover sinners ensnared in error by exposing error and teaching the truth.

By tweeting what he did, Warren indicates that he believes – and wants the world to know he does – that he desires God’s blessing to rest on the Church of Rome; that the Pope who emerges will be God’s man; that he can join with the Cardinals in spiritual fellowship and seek God together with them in prayer. He is serious enough in these convictions to pray with fasting! This is the ecumenical movement at work – back to Rome!

Rick Warren spoke at John Piper’s Desiring God conference in 2010.

See: Is the Church of Rome a Christian Church?

Yet there is a savage cruelty about compromise. Departure from the standards of God’s word causes division (Romans 16:17); tears apart close friendships and causes untold suffering to the individual believer or the organisation that desires to be true to the call of Christ.

The implications of the Saviour’s words
“If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:26-27 AV)

These are words that are very pertinent to this issue. The Saviour speaks of taking up the cross and following Him. As in His case, so in the disciple’s case, bearing the cross will indicate a voluntary desire to please God at any price. However, we must never forget that the cross was also imposed upon the Saviour by the opposition of His enemies. The pain and anguish of body and soul that He suffered on the cross was in one sense caused directly by the refusal of men to obey God’s revealed word. Those who desire to follow Him faithfully will discover that they are opposed in that desire by friends and family as detailed in this passage. The consequence of determining to be faithful to Christ will mean that those friendships have to be broken and the pain of that is symbolized in the cross that has to be carried. The anguish of heart and soul that severing such friendships involves, is directly caused by the opposition of those people to a faithful pursuit of Christ.

Close relationships and dear friendships are torn apart by compromise. The Saviour speaks of father, mother, wife and children being involved. Of course He also includes the working of the disobedient desires of the flesh within which also has to be crucified. These relations are not put second to obeying Christ without deep anguish of soul on the part of the disciple who desires to follow Christ faithfully. Resisting the pressure to compromise on obeying the clearly revealed commands of Christ involves the pain of crucifixion. In a remarkable sense, those whose agenda is one of compromise and disobedience, actually occasion this pain to the faithful disciple.

Compromise introduces the destructive influences of Satan and sin among God’s people.
Often under the guise of godliness and Christian love, compromise opens a door to the ruinous effects of sin. We can see this in various Biblical pictures associated with the work of false teachers in the church.

The wolf in sheep’s clothing is perhaps the most familiar. The blood-thirsty, cunning cruelty of the wolf lies beneath the masquerade of a servant of Christ. In the name of serving the Saviour disobedience and a sinful agenda is adopted and promoted. But all this leads to the destruction of the flock of God as certainly as the wolf destroys sheep. The Saviour describes the work of such men in the church as thieves and robbers (John 10:8). Elsewhere in the Scriptures the work of such men are described in similar terms. Cp Ezekiel 13:18, 20, Micah 3:1-3, Zephaniah 3:3. Compromise with sin opens the door to such blood-thirsty predators of the sheep.

God’s servants are called to serve as watchmen in the Church of Christ and warn against sin and the encroachments of the enemies of God. When they fail in this duty they become complicit to some degree in the advance of the enemy’s attempts to destroy the work of God. This is compromise at work! The horrors of a city being overrun and plundered result from the failure of the watchman. This ought to alarm every true servant of God to vigilance and to blow the trumpet of alarm in the ears of God’s people.

The Bible gives multiple pictures of Satan’s destructive nature and his agenda for the people of God. He is the savage lion prowling to devour (1 Peter 5:8); he is the biting serpent that lurks unseen by the unwary; he is the blood-stained dragon waiting to devour (Revelation 12:3-4). Allowing his entrance to any degree into the Church is fatal to its safety and health.

Yet, like Peter (Matthew 16:23) many a servant of God is persuaded that there is a better, easier course to follow and so end up doing the work of Satan – the ‘adversary’ of the Church. Peter’s folly on this occasion was to propose a kinder alternative to the cross. His words to Christ literally were “Be kind to thyself”. The proposal of a less rigourous path of Christian service adopts the same spirit. A diminution of the Biblical standards because they are deemed too severe, too harsh is to follow in Peter’s steps and to warrant the same rebuke from Christ. Unwittingly Peter had introduced the cruel work of the devil among the sheep by his proposal.

To ignore the savage implications of departure from God’s word and the accommodation of compromise, is to  act in the cruelest and most hard-hearted fashion. There are many who adopt the attitude of the ostrich about these matters and hide their heads in the sand. The ostrich “… leaveth her eggs in the earth, and warmeth them in dust, And forgetteth that the foot may crush them, or that the wild beast may break them. She is hardened against her young ones, as though [they were] not hers: her labour is in vain without fear;” (Job 39:14-16 AV)

Very often the first response to any public witness against sin, or the public censure of a Christian who has sinned publicly, is an accusation that to make such a public denunciation is contrary to the Saviour’s teaching in this passage. Usually it is asserted that there cannot be a public censure of sin until private overtures have been made to the offender. This has the effect of diverting attention from the original error and focuses attention on the one trying to protest against it. But what does this passage teach? Is it addressing the matter of public sin at all?

There is a number of important observations to be made about this text:

1. This is an instance of a private offense. A brother has sinned against a fellow-believer. There is sin involved but it is seen to be of the nature of a private offense or hurt. In the area of personal interaction wrong has been done. Though an individual may feel offended by a fellow Christian’s defiance of God in the public arena, and be stirred to speak out against it, this is far from being merely a matter of private offence. Offence is taken for the Lord’s sake, for the sake of His cause, for His truth’s sake.
2. The two individuals in view are under the same oversight in a local congregation. The church here is a reference – according the synagogue model – to the local eldership/oversight of the congregation. Both the offender and the offended party are under the same disciplinary structure. It is part of proper order and procedure in the Church to work within the established governmental structures in such cases.
3. In such a case private overtures by the offended party to the offender must precede any public action. The various levels of private response detailed in v15-16 must be followed before their is an elevation of this matter to official church involvement. To by-pass this initial private response to private sin is to disobey God.
4. Clearly, this passage does not address the procedure to be followed in a case of departure from God’s word in the public realm. The rebuke of a Christian who has acted unScripturally in a public way is not in view here at all! When a man has sinned before all, that sin warrants a rebuke before all. This is especially necessary where a public example of disobedience is being set and is in danger of being followed by others in the Church.
5. It may be that in certain instances of public sin private overtures may be helpful initially. Yet it is patently not true to say that they are required by God in advance of any public rebuke of sin.

It is also clear from God’s word that public defiance of God’s word by a professing Christian merits a public rebuke without the necessity of first following this ‘private approach’ protocol. “Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.” (1Timothy 5:20 AV) Here Paul is addressing the sin of elders in the Church.

Several examples of this public rebuke of sin may be cited:

• Matthew 16:23 – The Saviour denounced Peter immediately and publicly for his foolish words. It was important for the other disciples to see immediately that what Peter was suggesting was of the devil! The Saviour acted quickly and publicly because of the serious danger that lay in the attitude that had spoken these words.
• 1 Corinthians 5:3 – Paul denounced the notorious offending believer in Corinth, even instructing the elders of that congregation to hand the man over to the devil for the destruction of the flesh. This was a very high level and public censure by the Church. Yet Paul was not even present when he wrote these words. There was no private approach followed by Paul nor did he instruct the elders to take such an approach. Public sin required immediate public action.
• Galatians 2:14ff – Paul denounced Peter publicly and immediately for his hypocrisy and folly. Barnabas and others were caught up in this foolishness that was instigated by those who came as the emissaries of the Apostle James. These were ‘high powered’ offenders! Two Apostles were directly or indirectly involved in this sin. Yet although all were within the same Presbytery structure and although Paul recognized the purview of the court of the Apostles and elders (Acts 15:2) in deciding such questions, he immediately and publicly rebukes Peter. Clearly, he does so to prevent the spread of this erroneous practice which was a threat to the very basis of the gospel – though Peter obviously did not see it that way initially. 
• 2 Chronicles 19:2 – Jehu the prophet sternly and bluntly addresses King Jehoshaphat in a public rebuke of his sinful alliance and fellowship with the wicked King Ahab. There is no private approach, no sparing the feelings and sensibilities of the godly Jehoshaphat. He had done wrong publicly and because he was an influential leader of the people of God, in danger now of leading them deeper into fellowship with apostasy, he must be rebuked openly by God’s man.

It is not wrong to rebuke the public sin of a Christian without recourse to the private approach first protocol. When there is public defiance of God’s order by an elder, a minister, etc then public rebuke is in order and necessary for the sake of defending the cause of God from harmful influence.

Text: Matthew 7:15-20

In these verses there is a practical example of the discernment that the disciple of Christ is to have and exercise. Here is a kind of judgement (7:1) that is not only not forbidden but is positively commanded. The last days are such that false prophets proliferate. Cp 1Tim 4:1-5. This is an important aspect of the perilous or ‘fierce’ times at the end.

It is no coincidence that the Saviour speaks of the false prophet and his ministry at this juncture. He has just spoken of the character of the road to heaven and the easy alternative in the broad road that is often proposed. Men like to widen what God has made narrow to make it more accommodating for their sinful desires. It is precisely at this point that the false prophet is most likely to make his voice heard. He proposes a different way to God. It is ever the character of the false prophet’s ministry that he preaches ease, liberty and broadness.

I THE DANGER POSED BY THE FALSE PROPHET.

1. This is a danger that arises even in the most blessed circumstances. The false prophet is one who makes his evil presence known in the most sublime environments. The Son of God is preaching and yet must warn of these liars. The question might arise, When Christ Himself is to be heard, who would listen to the devil’s men? Cp 2 Pet 1:21-2:1. The situation envisaged is also one of the most blessed — a man right at the gate of life! The narrow gate and the narrow way to Heaven are targeted by these false prophets.

2. This danger is of the most serious kind. This danger is of such a nature that the Saviour Himself issues a warning against it. The context makes it clear that this is a deadly danger. Cp v13 – the eternal consequences of being influenced to make the wrong choice, destruction; v15 – the analogy of the ravening wolf among sheep; v19 – the fire that destroys all that do not bear the fruits of grace. It is clear that the false prophets make no such demands either of themselves or of their hearers!

3. The danger could well be overlooked. The false prophet does not immediately appear to be so. In v15 even though he is a ‘wolf’ at heart he has donned sheep’s clothing. On the exterior he looks like a sheep. In this he demonstrates the subtilty of Satan, 2 Cor 11:13-15. Some short-sighted Christians are ready to decry the warnings against the wolf.

4. The false prophet is aggressively dangerous. The false prophet is one who makes the approach to the sheep, v15 – come unto you. Cp Jude 4. The disciple can expect to be the target of the false teacher, just as the wolf targets sheep. Cp Ezekiel 13:18.

II THE FALSE PROPHET IS TO BE DETECTED AND REJECTED AS AN EVIL THREAT TO THE SOULS OF MEN.

1. It is of the utmost importance for the well-being of men’s souls that the wolf in sheep’s clothing is detected and action taken to preserve the sheep from the wolf. He must be exposed! A cry of alarm must be raised. This church takes a stand against the lying false prophets of today because we have a desire to see the sheep spared from wolves in sheep’s clothing who will only bring them to ruin.

a. The disciple can only detect the false prophet by the diligent and careful application of the principles of Christ’s teaching. There is no other means of identifying these men. We must measure every preacher against the standard of God’s word and determine him to be true of false according to how he compares with that standard.

b. There is to be a testing that goes beyond the superficial. Cp v15, 1 John 4:1 — his words to be tested, v2, 5-6. It is essential that what a man is inwardly is known. It is true that man cannot look on the heart yet the nature of a man’s heart is seen in his life. Christ’s teaching is to be known and applied to the life.

c. The Saviour gives an infallible rule, v16-20. The fruits of a man’s life indicate his real nature and whether or not he is on the narrow way. The false prophet is known by evil fruit which demonstrates the corruption of his nature. Cp Deut 13:1-4, Is 8:20, Ezek 13:6, 22, II Pet 2:13-15, 18-19. This rule is one which may be applied specifically to determine a false prophet but it also applies in every case, v17-18, I John 3:7. It is a rule the Lord Himself applied, 12:33-34. Cp Matt 3:8-10.

d. Such testing may take more or less time according to the case. In the example of the fruit bearing tree this point is clear. Some time may elapse before the fruit can be really examined. Cp Matthew 13:26. Sooner or later the difference will be seen and it will be seen in the critical matter of bearing fruit.

2. When that which is false and fruitless is detected it is to be rejected.

a. This applies to the false prophet. He is dangerous! Having determined that the man produces thorns we are not to go searching for grapes there etc, v16. Even common sense tells us as much. Such action will only lead to wounding and hurt! The Lord uses the thorn/thistle as if to highlight these are fallen and depraved men by nature and the absolute lack of benefit to the hungry souls of men. The analogy of the wolf indicates just how urgent it is that we discern and flee from false teaching.

b. This also applies to the false professor. Where there is no fruit of grace in your own life then you must recognize that there is something radically wrong. A fruitless profession of faith is dead, James 2:20 — faith without works is dead.

 In these days, God’s people seem to lack this discernment. False prophets creep in unawares and have brought ruin to many souls. A militant, vigorous exposure of these men is necessary to the continued existence and health of God’s people.

“It is today as it was in the Reformers’ days. Decision is needed. Here is the day for the man, where is the man for the day? We who have had the gospel passed to us by martyr hands dare not trifle with it, nor sit by and hear it denied by traitors, who pretend to love it, but inwardly abhor every line of it . . . Look you, sirs, there are ages yet to come. If the Lord does not speedily appear, there will come another generation, and another, and all these generations will be tainted and injured if we are not faithful to God and to His truth today. We have come to a turning-point in the road. If we turn to the right, mayhap our children and our children’s children will go that way; but if we turn to the left, generations yet unborn will curse our names for having been unfaithful to God and to His Word.”

- (C. H. S., Sermons, 1888, 83-84; cited in Iain Murray, The Forgotten Spurgeon, 192).

God’s people are to separate from apostasy and the uncleanness of the world. This is the standard of personal holiness that Scripture demands. “Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,” (2Corinthians 6:17 AV)

Those who refuse to separate from apostacy and worldliness become spiritually unclean. They become contaminate with the apostasy they refuse to separate from and are held guilty of the same sins in those they associate with. “If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.” (2John 1:10-11 AV)

The brother who will not separate from apostasy and error must himself be separated from and be treated as an heathen man and a publican, Matthew 18:17.

Some objections that may be raised to this view

It is important to remember that no such personal considerations are to interfere with an objective application of the commands of God. This is best illustrated in the words of the Lord Jesus as He outlined what faithful following of Him meant. “If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:26 AV) Many have wrongly argued that separation to Christ that demands such a price cannot be right!

It is also important to think carefully about the description of a man as good, or godly. These terms are relative. No man is without sin! Good men are capable of great sin and their past record of service for God cannot be used as a reason to ignore present sin. The man who is a useful preacher of God’s word is to be separated from if he acts in a way that supports apostasy and error. Nathan may well have argued that David’s previous service record meant that he could avoid denouncing his sin with Bathsheb, 2Samuel 12:7, but did not. Paul could have argued in a similar fashion concerning Peter and Barnabas in Galatians 2:11ff, but did not.

The vital thing here is to establish what Scripture teaches and act in simple obedience no matter who it means aving to leave – even father or mother – in order to be faithful to Christ.

Certainly separation brings division to the surface and makes it visible. Yet the Biblical reality is that it is the entrance of error that causes the division – not the faithful, obedient response of separating from it. “Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.” (Romans 16:17 AV) It was the false teacher who initiated the division.

Undoubtedly Christ has called His people to unity. Yet the basis of that unity must ever be the truth itself. The Lord Jesus does not command unity for unity’s sake. The application of the doctrine of separation is a vital part of this. “Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach.” (Hebrews 13:13 AV) Christ is the focus of all true unity. The advance of that unity requires separation from the camp. In this instance as the Apostle wrote to the Hebrews, the camp represented those who insisted on an erroneous methodology in the worship of God – i.e. those who insisted on the continuing relevance of Levitical practice.

Certainly, no Christian is without sin. Yet each of us has a duty to strive after perfection in this life. We have a duty to obey God. Even knowing that our obedience will always be imperfect in this life does not negate the duty. “Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.” (Philippians 3:12 AV) This rather foolish objection would destroy the basis of all Church discipline. It would destroy the basis of all preaching and denounciation of sin – since such a thing should only be done by the perfect.

This objection ignores a crucial fact. Denunciation of sin, and the required action against it, proceeds on the objective authority of God’s truth which is perfect and not on the basis of personal holiness. When a Christian speaks against sin and their life does not support such censuring of another that person is a hypocrite and they undermine any criticism they make of sin in another because they lack moral authority. Yet, such failure on the part of the critic of sin does not undo the legitimacy of the condemnation if the criticism is valid in the light of Scripture.

The Christian has a duty to apply the teaching of Christ in Matthew 7:3-5 – “And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.” The duty is seen to be two-fold:

a. first cast out the beam out of thine own eye if it exists, then;

b. cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

Every Christian must approach the matter of denouncing sin with the spirit of humility, grace and a real consciousness of personal liability to sin. This is evident in Paul’s words in Galatians 6:1-2. “Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted. Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.” In the context (Gal 2:11ff) he has recorded how he denounced Peter’s folly and error. No doubt this is how Paul had dealt with that matter in Peter’s life as he had withstood him to his face.

The concept of ‘platform fellowship’, as defined by many conservative evangelicals, allows them to justify in their own minds the freedom to associate with, worship with, preach with and lecture with those that, on a strictly Biblical basis, they should distance themselves from. It is in many ways an attempt to find a way for men to bring together what God has put asunder!

Often this ‘platform fellowship’ involves participating in an event with those who are in the apostasy or professing Christians who are disobediently compromised with apostasy. While association on a platform does not necessarily mean a personal agreement with every speaker in every non-fundamental issue of the faith, it must at a minimum, entail the recognition of any differences as being within the pale of Biblical orthodoxy and that nothing prohibiting a joint exercise in worship exists.

An act of worship

It has to be stated that it is not possible to deal with any aspect of Biblical truth, in any scenario, without an act of worship taking place, at least on the part of the one faithfully presenting the truth of God. Does a presentation of truth not involve an exhortation to submit to and worship the God who is its source? Biblical truth can never simply be an academic matter, nor can the truth of God be reduced to spiritually-neutral academic jargon. The faithful servant of God will want the help of the Holy Ghost to glorify Christ in presenting the truth of God’s word regardless of the type of conference in view. To preach at a conference, to read a paper at an academic gathering or a theological society, and deal with some aspect of the word of God cannot fail to involve worship and service of God – both as a speaker and a hearer. Every time I handle the truth of God in any context I must do it with reverence and with godly fear, which the essence of acceptable worship. To do otherwise is, for the moment at least, to handle Scripture as the Pharisees and Sadducees did – they made the commandment of God of none effect, Matthew 15:6.

The speaking participant in a conference must actually be seen as a leader in the activity of that conference. He is there to lead the thoughts of his hearers in a certain direction. He is therefore a leader in any worship activity that is inherent in the handling of Divine truth. Far from being an insignificant thing, this is a position of prominence and leadership with reference to all in attendance. Yet, by engaging with others involved in that conference, he becomes a joint-leader of worship with them, yoked together in common purpose for that time. So often there is an instance of the forbidden unequal yoke because his fellow conference speakers are such as to be separated from, rather than joined with in a leadership role in joint worship activity.

Every act of worship must be regulated by Scripture. It is never left to the individual to define what is acceptable or not in terms of the worship of God. Aaron learned that God will not be worshipped by altered means when he made the golden calf but retained the use of the name of Jehovah, Exodus 32:5; Nadab and Abihu his sons learned this to their destruction, Leviticus 10:3. To engage in that worship with those who are directly involved with apostasy or those who support it by compromised associations with it, is sin. It is a pollution that destroys worship that must be in spirit and sincerely according to truth if it is to be accepted by God.

Is the concept of platform fellowship Biblical?

Is it possible for a servant of God to participate on equal terms in a conference with an apostate, a modernist, a Bible-denier, a preacher with compromised associations? Is he obeying God by doing so? The fact is that Scripture does not justify such fellowship but emphatically forbids it.

The practice of the Christian in every area of life is to be regulated by the word of God. Especially in the area of worship, there must be a clear Biblical precedent or command to justify such fellowship. The fact is that there is no such command or precedent to justify fellowship in a conference setting with those ordinarily prohibited from joint-worship activity. There is no command in Scripture that warrants the relaxation of the Biblical standards of separation that are to govern the life and worship of the Christian simply because of a conference situation. There are no exemptions to the Biblical rules on separation of life and worship for the Christian given to conference preachers, seminarians, or academics.

The ministry of the Lord Jesus affords numerous examples of how He dealt with religious ‘academics’ with whom He had a great deal in common. “Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.” (Matthew 23:1-3 AV) The Saviour and these scribes had the entire body of Moses’ revelation in common but the perversions of the Law introduced by the scribes, and especially their practice of the Law, was such that the Saviour rarely lost an opportunity to preach against them. He certainly never engaged in ‘platform fellowship’ to address spiritual matters.

The Apostles also practiced separation of this kind. Paul, when he met with the philosophers in Athens, did not fellowship with them – though a brilliant academic himself – but preached against their devilish superstitions and empty worship. His attitude to fellow-believers who erred and fell into sin is also striking. The incident of Galatians 2:11ff is a case in point. Peter allowed himself to be influenced by some who came from James in the church at Jerusalem – an apostolic delegation who were advocating wrong Christian practice. Barnabas and others were caught up in the hypocrisy. Yet Paul stood against their error in an open, forthright, public fashion. He did not and could not continue to preach with Peter, though both were Apostles; or Barnabas, though he had preached with him many times previously; while this error remained. Peter at this point was acting contrary to Paul, building up what they through the gospel had sought to tear down, v18. Fellowship between them was ruptured for a time till this matter was dealt with.

An earlier incident is also recorded in Galatians 2:5 when false brethren had come into the church in Antioch. At least initially they had appeared as brethren but their doctrine had quickly proved this to be a false claim. Paul did not tolerate their doctrine which was a perversion of the gospel – no, not for an hour. It is interesting that he specifically says that he did not give them place by subjection. In other words he did not sit in the attitude of a listener being taught by them. Yet many conservative evangelicals sit in this very subjection at conferences listening to that which is presented by a perverter of the precept and practice of God’s truth.

Biblical separation

The doctrine of Scripture on this subject is remarkably simple. It is a doctrine that is seen everywhere in Scripture. In the Old Testament, Levitical regulation emphasized the necessity of maintaining a vigilant state of separated purity unto the Lord. It is against the background of these regulations that Paul writes as he does in 2 Corinthians 6:17. Touch not is one of the summary statements of the Levitical legislation used in Col 2:21. The spiritual application of the Levitical laws of cleanness and purity is made to Gentile believers in Corinth.

1. Touch not the unclean thing. There is no agreement between Christ and Belial; no spiritual harmony or joint-activity between light and darkness and the Christian by his behaviour is not to give the impression that there is! The Corinthians were guilty of doing so by their attendance at the heathen temple on social grounds.

By using the words touch not Paul indicates that there is to be a care taken to avoid the least contact with that which is defiling. This Divine ordinance rules out joint conference activity between a believer and one involved in apostasy. It is not possible for a servant of God to appear on the same conference bill as a priest of Rome, for example, and do so in obedience to God. The command of God to touch not the unclean thing does not provide for exception to embrace such at a conference.

2. Those who touch the unclean thing become unclean. Those believers who disobey God’s injunction to separate from the unclean make themselves unclean by contact with them. That which is holy is always defiled by contact with the unclean, rather than the reverse. Cp Haggai 2:11-13. Evangelicals who endorse Rome as Christian such as those who signed the Manhattan Declaration or the Evangelicals and Catholics Together (ECT) documents, make themselves as unclean as Rome! The unforeseen implication of the activity Paul was rebuking in Corinth was that those believers were in fact drinking the cup of devils – there was an unavoidable spiritual/sacramental link to devilish apostasy, even though they sought to distinguish themselves from it by claiming liberty to act as they did. Their distinctions were artificial and utterly wrong no matter how loudly they may have been insisted upon! By engaging in this behaviour they ruled themselves out from drinking the Lord’s cup in a worthy fashion. That is, they lost fellowship with God.

A measure of the contracted uncleanness is seen in that Scripture teaches very clearly that the persistently disobedient believer is in fact to be treated as an unbeliever – an heathen man and a publican in the words of Matthew 18:17. While acknowledging that they are not in fact an unbeliever or an enemy (2Thess 3:15), they are dealt with as if they were because of their sin. This is simply because by refusing to separate from, and by maintaining fellowship with the wicked, they are held to be guilty of the sin of that wicked associate. “If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.” (2John 1:10-11 AV)

The Christian who enters fellowship with the spiritually unclean has become a willing accessory to, and proponent of their wickedness. Those who are contaminated by apostasy contaminate all who associate with them in spiritual activity. The conference floor or platform does not sanitize this pollution, render a man immune to the transfer of this uncleanness, or prevent its spread.

3. A brother who has made himself unclean is to be separated from. God says: Withdraw from him. There is no exception clause given in the case of a conference! The servant of God who participates in a conference with a brother who maintains compromised associations is disobeying the clear command of God to withdraw from such a disorderly brother. By doing so he is only encouraging defiance of God and refusing God’s command to discipline sin. This has the additional effect of also making him complicit in the original offence. By preaching with, lecturing with, a brother who is worthy of discipline by the command of God, he supports that brother’s sin. There is no getting away from this.

The supposed meaningless nature or negligible effect of platform fellowship is often used as an argument to avoid bearing the cross which is involved in separating from error and all who support it. It is a specious distinction without Biblical basis. God’s laws on the separation of His people apply in every context.