Proverbs 23:23 tells us, "Buy the truth and do not sell it." Does this mean it is wrong to sell books containing truth?
No. If that is what the verse meant, then it would mean that only sinners sell the truth, and therefore the only way we could buy the truth is to purchase it from sinners--and by our purchase, we would be involved in their sin! This is not the meaning.
This verse is a proverb, explaining a principle in figurative language. It means, Value truth highly, and never let it go. Today's English Version says, "Truth, wisdom, learning, and good sense--these are worth paying for, but too valuable for you to sell." The Bible in Basic English says, "Get for yourself that which is true, and do not let it go for money."
It is not wrong to charge for books, lectures or classes in which truth is taught.
Does Matthew 10:8 tell us that it is wrong to advertise products for sale?
No. Moreover, this verse doesn't even say it is wrong to put a subscription price on a magazine. At present, we plan to continue offering our magazine free of charge. However, this is a policy decision and not a doctrinal or biblical necessity. Let's see what the verse says.
In Matthew 10, Jesus sent his disciples out on their first mission. He told them to heal the sick, drive out demons and preach that the kingdom of God was (then as now) near. He also told them that they did not need to take any supplies with them, not even a money bag. And they were not to accept payment for their services: "Freely you have received, freely give" (verses 5-10).
The disciples on those early missions were not to carry money or accept money. However, they could accept room and board, "for the laborer is worth his keep." Wherever they went, they were to look for hospitable persons and stay with them as long as they preached in that area (verses 10-11). The disciples were able to preach, heal and cast out demons, and the people gave them what they needed.
Shortly before he was killed, Jesus asked his disciples, "When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?" And they answered, "Nothing" (Luke 22:35). The experience had been a practical lesson for the disciples' faith.
However, Jesus then told his disciples, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag" (verse 36). Jesus told them to change the way that they went on missionary journeys. They were to carry a purse. They would need money, presumably because there would be no hospitable persons in some areas. The money would presumably come from those who did accept the message.
Many years later, the apostle Paul wrote that those who preach the gospel have a right to be supported by it (1 Corinthians 9:4-14). Although he did not use that right with the church at Corinth, it was nevertheless a right. Traveling preachers could ask one area to subsidize a missionary journey into another area. Paul commended the church at Philippi for giving him financial support even when he was preaching in another city.
This principle may be applied to ministry today: We may ask believers to pay the expenses of preaching the gospel. This is what we do when we ask members for tithes and offerings. We are asking them to pay the expenses of local churches, the magazines and our other literature--all of which are used to preach the gospel not only within the church but also to many nonmembers.
Our services are open to the public. Those who wish to hear the gospel may do so without charge. The church makes the gospel available for free. In church services, people are sometimes told that Christians have a financial responsibility to support those who preach the word of God to them. They may be asked for money seven times a year, but no one will ask them to leave if they do not give anything. The gospel is being freely given even though requests for money are made and people are exhorted to give.
There is no prohibition on the church charging for anything it produces. Christ did not mean that Bibles, for example, should not be sold. It is scripturally permissible for publishers to sell Bibles (and other books and magazines containing the gospel) to those who can pay the production costs. Of course, Bibles are often available for free, but that doesn't change the fact that they may be sold. Before printing was invented, for example, Bibles were extremely rare and expensive; there was no obligation to give them away. It is not wrong to sell religious books and Bibles or to ask for a donation.
Nor would it be wrong for us to include advertisements of Christian books and Bibles for sale. Our subscribers would be under no pressure to purchase any of the products. Moreover, advertisers would be helping us to continue offering the magazine free of charge. For that reason, Media Operations is investigating this possible source of income.
Does Deuteronomy 12:30-31 mean that it is sinful to have Christian celebrations on days that used to be celebrated in honor of false gods?
God, through Moses, tells us: "Be careful not to be ensnared by inquiring about their gods, saying, `How do these nations serve their gods? We will do the same.' You must not worship the Lord your God in their way, because in worshiping their gods, they do all kinds of detestable things the Lord hates. They even burn their sons and daughters in the fire as sacrifices to their gods."
Do these verses mean that we cannot do anything pagans did in worship? Of course not, for pagans prayed, sang hymns, played musical instruments and drank wine, and some baptized by immersion. They also had priesthoods, special garments, temples, altars and sacrifices. They had annual festivals in conjunction with the agricultural seasons. None of these practices are wrong. Some are even an essential part of Christianity.
Since Deuteronomy 12 does not forbid all pagan worship practices, then what does it forbid? The context clarifies the concern when it gives the reason for the prohibition: "because in worshiping their gods, they do all kinds of detestable things the Lord hates." The problem isn't worship--the problem is detestable worship practices. The example cited in verse 31 is child sacrifice; temple prostitution would be another.
If we go back to the beginning of the chapter, we will see the context. The primary concern throughout the chapter is the location of worship. God instructed the Israelites to destroy all Canaanite high places and altars and idols. Instead, the Israelites were to make all their sacrifices at one site. This would make it difficult for anyone to worship other gods. This emphasized the fact that there was only one God, not dozens of deities each having power over small areas.
In Canaanite religion, and in many other pagan religions, the people thought that various gods had power in various places. The god that was most influential in one area might not have as much influence in another. So people made sacrifices in their own areas to appease the local gods.
If the people offered acceptable sacrifices, they expected the gods to respond by giving them whatever they wanted. In effect, their worship was an attempt to tell their gods what to do. That's why they sacrificed sons and daughters in the fire--a costly sacrifice like that would guarantee that they would get what they desired from the gods.
Canaanite religion also included cultic prostitution. If the people wanted fertility, they performed sex acts in their worship. They thought that if they did their part, then Baal would do his. Anthropologists call it a system of sympathetic magic. It was really an attempt to control and manipulate the gods.
The Canaanite concept of gods was defective, and their concept of worship was also defective. Their theology led to detestable practices, and that is why God wanted the Israelites to destroy the pagan altars and not to copy their worship methods.
Deuteronomy 12 clearly does not apply to every worship practice. The context connects it with places of sacrifice and with child sacrifice. It is concerned with things that are detestable or abominable--things that God hates. There is no hint in the text that the day of the year was of any concern.
Actually, since OT worship days were connected to agricultural seasons, and Canaanite worship was also based on agricultural seasons, it is likely that there were some similarities in the days being observed. God's condemnation of pagan worship practices was based not on dates, but on whether the customs were detestable irrespective of dates.
Canaanite religion was superstitious about worship locations and the effectiveness of sacrifices and rituals. But on the other side of the coin, it would be superstitious for us to avoid everything that pagans did simply because they did it--because that would include prayer, hymns and marriage ceremonies. We cannot let centuries-dead pagans dictate what we do or what we avoid.
It is not wrong to rejoice that Jesus was born, but it is superstitious to think that we should avoid this subject on one particular day. It would also be wrong to think that we must celebrate a particular day the Bible does not require. It would also be a mistake to restrict our joy concerning Christ's birth to one season of the year.
It is not wrong for families and friends to exchange gifts whenever they wish, but it is superstitious to think that it is OK to do this on 364 days a year, but wrong on one. If a practice is detestable, it is detestable in any time or place. If wrong things are done on Dec. 25, for example, then we should criticize whatever is wrong, not the date on which it is done.
Is it wrong to do things that were once part of pagan worship customs?
Pagan worship practices included prayer, music and offerings. Those practices are not sinful in themselves, and we see biblical examples of them being used in worship of the true God. Pagans conducted marriage ceremonies and used wedding rings, but we may also have them even though the Bible does not command them.
Pagans also had many funeral customs, such as embalming, ceremonies and giving of flowers. Even though these common customs were shaped by non-Christian ideas about the afterlife, and these customs continue to be used by non-Christians, we may, and do, use them in Christian ceremonies without indicating any agreement with the originating beliefs.
Pagans dedicated certain days of the week to their gods, and we use these names today without implying idolatry on our part. Pagans created statues of people and animals, but that does not mean that we cannot. These customs have lost their pagan connotations and have become religiously neutral. It is not sinful, for example, for an architect to copy the pillars found in Greek and Roman temples. Things that were once "pagan" do not necessarily remain pagan.
In the United States, no one would think it odd for a Christian to have a small ornamental figurine of a bird or animal. In Moses' day, however, such statues may have been seen as inappropriate. Whether something has pagan connotations is often cultural. What is acceptable in one nation or century may be frowned upon in another. But we do not have to be restricted by erroneous concepts of the past.
We can make decisions about embalming, burial, caskets, crypts, cremation and flowers without having to investigate which of these customs originated in paganism. It is even possible to use these things in religious ceremonies without fear of contamination or compromise.
Of course, some people are uncomfortable with customs such as wedding rings and cremation. Others are not. Different people draw their "lines" in different places, but they need to respect each other's beliefs.
The advice of Romans 14:6-13 applies to such matters: "He who participates does so to the Lord. He who abstains does so to the Lord. So then, why do you judge your brother? Each of us has to give our own account to God. Therefore, do not pass judgment on one another, and do not put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way."
The principles given in 1 Corinthians 8:4, 7 are also adaptable: "So then, about participating in customs that were once associated with the worship of idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one. But not everyone knows this. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they participate they think of an idol, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled." Paul explained that Christians had freedom in this matter, but he cautioned them to be careful with their freedom (verse 9).
Basically, we can live without worrying about what pagans did or did not do. If the behavior is wrong, it is wrong for us to do it whether or not pagans did it. If it is not wrong, we may do it whether or not the pagans did it first.
Hebrews 8:11 says, "No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, `Know the Lord,' because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest." Doesn't this verse prove that the new covenant isn't established, since not everyone knows the Lord?
First, we must understand the context of the verse. Hebrews is a book that compares and contrasts an old order with a new order. It shows that Jesus Christ is superior to the angels, Moses and the Aaronic priesthood, and he is the mediator of a better covenant.
After drawing these comparisons and contrasts, the author shows that something was wrong with the old order, the old covenant (Hebrews 8:7). The flaw of that covenant was with the people (verse 8). In light of this, God announced that he would establish a new covenant. This covenant would include better promises.
In verses 8-12, the author quotes Jeremiah 31:31-34, which is a prophecy about a new covenant. This covenant focuses on three things: God will write his laws on our hearts (Hebrews 8:10), knowledge of the Lord will be available from the least to the greatest (verse 11) and our sins will be remembered no more (verse 12). Verse 13 ends the section by stating that the first covenant is obsolete. We are now under the new covenant.
The author quotes part of Jeremiah's prophecy again in Hebrews 10:15-18. In this passage he clearly believes that the forgiveness of sins has been effected, implying that the other aspect of Jeremiah's prophecy has been fulfilled, too.
In using Jeremiah's prophecy, the author shows that in the old covenant, people did not personally know the Lord because they had to be taught about him. Human mediation accompanied the old covenant. Knowledge of God was made possible through the priesthood. Instead of the law being internalized or written on the "inward parts," the people memorized the law as an external code. This resulted in a knowledge about God but not a personal relationship with him.
Under the new covenant, believers know the Lord through a personal relationship with him. Jeremiah's new covenant prophecy says that those who know the Lord, from the least to the greatest, will know the Lord in a superior way. Believers know the Lord without a required human mediation or the memorization of an external code.
In the new covenant there is no privileged class who alone could teach others to know the Lord, no class distinctions by age or sex or race, but the knowledge of God is available to everyone across the whole range of humanity. All in the Body of Christ are on an equal footing through a common and personal knowledge of God (see Donald Guthrie, Hebrews, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, volume 15, page 177).
The church still looks forward to the fulfillment of all the promises of the new covenant. Many blessings do await, and they are new covenant blessings. It is important to remember that covenants, like promises, are made before they are fulfilled. For instance, part of the Abrahamic covenant began to be fulfilled centuries after it had been made.
The prophecy that the new covenant would be made has been fulfilled, for the new covenant has been made. The new covenant has begun to be fulfilled, but it has not been completely fulfilled yet, for not all the promises have been completed. But it is still correct to say that the new covenant has been made, even though many people do not yet know the Lord.
[ Worldwide Church of God | Worldwide News | December 5, 1995 ]
Copyright © Worldwide Church of God, 1995