Depending upon whom you talk to, you are going to hear varying views of Mary. Is she divine? Should she be worshipped? Are we too dismissive of her as a woman in God’s word? Was her conception immaculate? What was she really like? These and many other questions, some even of a conspiratorial nature, are commonly asked. However, one of the most important facts about Mary is often overlooked in the face of all of these other queries—Mary was the mother of our Lord Jesus Christ!

In and of itself, this simple fact merits praise and adoration. Such veneration should not rise beyond that or be on par with that place only the Lord can hold in our hearts, nevertheless, even the angel of the Lord said, “Rejoice, highly favored one, the Lord is with you; blessed are you among women!” (Luke 1:28). On earth, there is no greater, no more noble of a profession for a women to proclaim than that of being a mother. All that motherhood entails should remind us of this. Yet sadly, we so often relegate the celebration of motherhood to a mere annual activity. Yet, when we think of motherhood, how can we escape thinking for a moment about she who bore Jesus, the Christ, into the world. “Then the angel said to her, ‘Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring for a Son, and shall call His name Jesus” (Luke 1:30-31).

The Bible is undeniably divided into two key sections — the Old Testament and the New Testament. This division is described in the Bible in a variety of different ways, some literally and some figuratively. One such contrast is seen when the Bible refers to the Old Testament as the “Law of Moses” (cf. John 7:23, et al) and the New Testament as the “Law of Christ” (cf. Gal. 6:2).

For many, considering the idea of the New Testament as “a law” is a challenge. Such terminology flies in the face of those who prefer to view the New Testament as more of a history, or a set of guidelines and principles, and not as a binding law or set of obligations to be adhered to and followed. This idea is so abhorrent to some that those who would consider any of the New Testament as a law are often derided as “legalists.”

Therefore, we ask the question, is the New Testament a divine law given by the Lord that must be followed and obeyed?

For years I have been in the habit of using a little "c" when writing "church of Christ". I am not dogmatic about this in any way. I do not think lesser of those who use a big "C" when they write the same phrase. I have conscientiously made an informed decision to use a little "c". Would you like to know why?

As I understand the phrase "church of Christ" in Scripture, it is more descriptive than designative. In other words, I see it as a way to describe the churches as belonging to Christ, and not as a proper noun "Churches of Christ." Of course, some might disagree with that or see it as "trivial" (which is fine with me), but my reason for this specific understanding runs a little bit deeper than the simple explanation I have just offered.

This statement, taken from 2 Corinthians 3:17, was recently used in a discussion on the topic of Bible authority to suggest that the silence of God does not restrict, but sets us at liberty to do whatever we want. The argument is that the only thing that constrains us is a command or direct statement from God, and that we do not have to have authority for all that we say and do as Christians (Col. 3:17). Is this an appropriate application of this passage or is it possible that this statement really proves just the opposite of what this person argued it proved?

My purpose with this article is not a thorough treatise on the topic “the silence of the scriptures.” My aim is to consider the statement “…where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty…” (2 Cor. 3:17) both generally and in its specific context, to demonstrate that it in no way was intended to intrude upon the silence of God’s word as was suggested.

Fundamental to the topics of Bible hermeneutics (the study of the theory and practice of interpretation) and Bible authority, there are many who would question whether or not we are bound to follow approved examples in the New Testament. This article seeks to answer that question. While this will by no means be an exhaustive treatise on the matter, it will be sufficient to prove that we are obligated to follow approved examples in the New Testament.