~ Psalm 32 Revisited ~

I acknowledge that there was something inappropriate about my relationship with this woman before our marriage. I realize that my silence coupled with my previous statements may concern you. My assertion that I did not have sexual relations with my wife before our marriage was technically correct (for she was not my wife before our marriage). I was also correct when I affirmed that when Uriah was killed in battle I had nothing to do with it, because the battle orders were issued by General Joab. I, however, did not volunteer to reveal any information. You may feel you have been misled.

There are reasons for my silence and my previous statements. For one thing, I did not see any reason why I should suffer public embarrassment by revelations about one of my personal relationships. I have also been concerned about the impact of this information on my other wives and children. And I did not feel it proper for anyone to cast a shadow over my latest marriage or the sorrow of a recently widowed woman I have tried to comfort.

But there is another reason, and it is the cause of the anger you discern in my voice and demeanor tonight. I have had enough of that meddling investigative and judgmental prophet Nathan. What happened between Bathsheba and me should have remained a private matter to be handled within the royal family—and it would have if Nathan had not burst uninvited into my palace and tricked me, by taking advantage of my compassionate nature, into saying things better left unsaid.

You need to know that this prophet Nathan is mean-spirited. In addition to exposing my private life, he has heartlessly announced "judgments," short-term and long-term, for my mistake. You won’t believe this, but he says the death of our son was the result of what he calls "my sin." Can you imagine the anguish this has caused grieving parents?

He also has the audacity to predict that, while I may be forgiven, I must live with the consequences of my actions the rest of my life. He says my family will always experience conflict and that I will be humiliated "in broad daylight" for what I did "in secret." All this after I replaced a failed king, united the country, defeated its enemies, and moved the ark to Jerusalem. What kind of man is this?

Enough is enough. This matter is between me and my family and our God. It is not the business of the prophet or anyone else. It will be settled in the privacy of our personal consciences.

I am sure you agree. Which of the elders of Israel or which of you could stand up under the scrutiny of a prying prophet like Nathan? Citizens, and yes, even kings, have the right to privacy.

It is time to move on. My family and I need the time to heal from the tragedies we’ve experienced and from the unmerciful probing of this prophet. As a nation, we need to deal with the current threats of the Philistines and Ammonites, to deepen our national unity, and to build on the prosperity I’ve brought you during my reign.

I am confident of your understanding and support. You and I are flawed people. What we need is not confrontation and condemnation by priggish prophets. Let us forgive each other, feel each other’s pain, and sympathetically help each other deal with the many arbitrary and unwelcome providences that disturb our personal peace.

Good night. And God bless us, as we so richly deserve.

World Magazine, Oct., 1998

By David J. Riggs

Occasionally, some of our brethren ask, "Where do you find authority for your Bible classes?" They say, "You claim to have a 'thus saith the Lord' for everything you do, but where does the Bible say anything about having classes?"

We have authority for Bible classes in two ways. First, we have authority for them in the general command for the church to teach and edify (Eph. 4:15-16; 1 Tim. 3:14-15). The classes are simply one of the expedient methods of getting this done. There are several expedient ways the church can do this work - preach over the radio, print a bulletin, etc., and although they are not specifically mentioned, they are authorized in the general command to the church. The classes do not need to be specifically mentioned to be authorized. Preaching over the radio and printing a bulletin are not specifically mentioned, but they are lawful because of the general command for the church to teach and edify.

I know of a church in South Alabama which insists that having Bible classes is unscriptural and wrong because they are not mentioned in the New Testament. However, that same congregation has a baptistry and uses song books neither of which are mentioned. They have these things because they are necessary aids or expediencies in carrying out the commands to baptize and sing. So it is with the Bible classes. One cannot fulfill the commands of God without using some type of aids or expediencies to accomplish them. Our English versions of the Bible are aids in fulfilling the commands to study the word of God. Those who insist on only those things "specifically mentioned" must use only the Greek text.

Second, Bible classes are authorized because in the New Testament there are examples of disciples meeting in groups smaller than the whole church. If there were only examples of the gospel being taught when the whole church was together, that would be all that is authorized. However, part of the church met for special purposes (Acts 12:12,17; 20:17-18). They met at times other than the Lord's day (Acts 2:46;19:9); they taught in situations other than the whole church (Acts 18:26; 20:20). This gives us authority to meet in groups smaller than the whole church at a time other than when the Lord's Supper is observed. If part of the church could meet for a specific purpose, the rest of the church could do likewise because that which God authorizes for one group equally applies to the other.

If one takes the position that the teaching of the church must be done only when the whole church is together, all teaching of the church must be done at that time. If he says that the teaching may not be done in groups smaller than the whole church, it follows that all the teaching must be done only when the whole church is together.

Bible classes are an expedient method for the church to fulfill its obligation to teach and edify. They are not additions, but aids in carrying out the commands of God.

"The setting: church sanctuaries and synagogues.

"The period: the past.

"As the curtain opens, individuals are filing into the church pews, clad in their finest…the women are clothed in dresses complemented with matching high heels and handbags. The men are decked out in suits and ties. Children follow behind their parents, wearing formal outfits.

"The curtain closes.

"As it reopens, the setting remains the same, but the time has changed to the present.

"People are again filing into church pews, but most of them don’t have on their nicest clothes. They’re wearing casual clothing. Women are wearing long, flowing skirts—sans hosiery—and open-toe sandals. The men have on twill slacks and short-sleeved open-collar shirts. Children are wearing shorts, sneakers, and loose-fitting summer shirts. As the church doors are opened for services today, ‘dressing up in your Sunday best’ has a whole new meaning."

The preacher for the United Methodist Church said he has witnessed a general ‘dressing down’ in his congregation. The preacher for the East Side Baptist Church said, "We look at God as more approachable and not so distant. That whole thing represents how we feel about God. We feel comfortable with God. He’s not someone we’re trying to impress."

You could have fooled me! I thought our entire lives, including our worship, was trying to impress and please God. Mine is. That’s the heart of the

issue; people wanting to live, dress and worship to please themselves—and God will just have to tolerate it! People may feel "comfortable with God" but is He comfortable with them? That should be their greatest concern.

Could It Be You In 1999?

What do Frank Sinatra, Grandpa Jones, Lloyd Bridges, Roy Rogers, Robert Young, Jerry Clower, Gene Autry, Flip Wilson, and former Governor George Wallace have in common? Entertainers? Renown in politics? Perhaps! The point: They all died in 1998. Lest you think, "They were older, had health problems, etc., John Holliman, CNN correspondent died at the age of 49 in an automobile accident. With no forewarnings, my brother-in-law died this past year from what some think was a massive heart attack. He was 29. Several others here at Jackson Dr. have lost family members this past year. Truly, "Boast not thyself of tomorrow; For thou knowest not what a day may bring forth."(Prov. 27:1) This should impress upon us the urgency of being right with God at ALL times! Have you obeyed the gospel? You are not promised tomorrow. As a Christian do you need forgiveness of a sin or sins you have committed and haven’t repented of, confessed, and prayed about? Don’t delay! You may not have tomorrow. The ones we listed above don’t! -- p.a.o.