11/13/20

"THE GOSPEL OF MARK" The Preaching Ministry Of Jesus - II (1:14-15) by Mark Copeland

 

                          "THE GOSPEL OF MARK"

             The Preaching Ministry Of Jesus - II (1:14-15)

INTRODUCTION

1. Previously, we observed that "The Preaching Ministry Of Jesus" involved...
   a. Proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom of God
   a. That kingdom foretold by Daniel - Dan 2:44; 7:13-14
   b. The good news that is was "at hand", for "the time is fulfilled"!

2. In examining the nature of the kingdom, we noted that it...
   a. Involves the rule or reign of God through the person of Jesus Christ
   b. Is spiritual in nature
   c. Is manifested visibly today in the form of the Lord's church
   d. Has both present and future elements
   -- Indeed, this kingdom is now available to all who freely submit to
      the authority of Jesus

3. But Jesus did more than just announce the coming of the kingdom of God...
   a. He called on people to repent
   b. He called on people to believe

[And so as we return to our text (Mk 1:14-15), we note that in addition
to the kingdom of God...]

II. JESUS PREACHED THE NEED TO REPENT

   A. WHAT DOES REPENT MEAN...?
      1. There are two common misconceptions concerning repentance
         a. E.g., that repentance is "sorrow"
            1) But repentance is an outcome of sorrow - cf. 2Co 7:9-10
            2) Sorrow leads to repentance; sorrow itself is not repentance!
         b. E.g., that repentance is "a changed life"
            1) Thinking that repentance is a converted life
            2) But repentance and conversion are two separate things - cf. Ac 3:19
               a) Peter says "Repent therefore and be converted"
               b) If repentance means the same as conversion, then Peter was redundant
      2. W. E. Vine defines "repentance" as:
         a. A "change of mind"
         b. That which "involves both a turning from sin and a turning to God"
      3. Repentance is therefore a decision to "turn from sin and turn to God"
         a. Preceded by sorrow - 2Co 7:10
         b. Followed by a changed life - 2Co 7:11
      -- Jesus therefore called on people to make a decision regarding
         sin, because of the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God

   B. DO WE NEED  TO PREACH REPENTANCE TODAY...?
      1. Most certainly!
         a. Repentance is to be preached in Jesus' name to all nations - Lk 24:46-47
         b. God now calls men everywhere to repent - Ac 17:30
         c. Thus Paul preached to both Jews and Gentiles that they should repent - Ac 26:20
      2. Wherever there is sin, repentance needs to be proclaimed
         a. People need to be told to "change their minds" (repent)
         b. They need to "turn to God, and do works befitting repentance" - cf. Ac 26:20
      3. Whenever the kingdom of God is proclaimed, it must include a call to repent
         a. Paul spoke of preaching the kingdom of God - cf. Ac 20:25
         b. Which included telling people of repentance - cf. Ac 20:21
      -- Any preaching of the kingdom of God that does not include a
         clarion call to repent is not the true gospel!

[Of course, the decision to turn from sin involves faith.  So we are not
be surprised to note also that...]

III. JESUS PREACHED THE NEED TO BELIEVE

   A. WHAT DOES BELIEVE MEAN...?
      1. As defined by Easton's Bible Dictionary:
         a. Faith is in general the persuasion of the mind that a certain statement is true
         b. Its primary idea is trust
      2. It is a strong conviction or trust in something; as the NIV translates He 11:1...
         a. "Now faith is being sure of what we hope for..."
         b. "...and certain of what we do not see."
      3. For example, you have faith that your parents are indeed your parents
         a. Based upon your trust or conviction in the reliability of their word
         b. Such trust prompts you to respond accordingly
      -- Jesus proclaimed that people should trust in the good tidings
         concerning the kingdom of God

   B. DO WE NEED TO PREACH THE NEED TO BELIEVE TODAY...?
      1. Most certainly!  For people need to believe:
         a. In God, to be pleasing to Him - He 11:6
         b. In Jesus, to have forgiveness of sins and eternal life - Jn 8:24; 20:31
      2. But people also need to believe in the kingdom of God!
         a. Which is what Jesus was saying in our text - Mk 1:15
         b. That it was "at hand" when Jesus was preaching
      3. Thus there is the need to believe in the kingdom of God today!
         a. Just as Paul sought to convince his Jewish brethren - Ac 28:23
         b. If we do not believe, then the good news of God's kingdom
            and salvation should be taken to others - Ac 28:24-28
      4. We need to believe concerning the kingdom of God:
         a. That Jesus now reigns over all - Mt 28:18; Ep 1:20-22; 1 Pe 3:22
         b. That those who obey the gospel become members of that kingdom - Col 1:13
         c. That those who persevere will inherit the everlasting kingdom - 2Pe 1:10-11
         d. That those who persist in sin will not inherit the kingdom
            of God - 1Co 6:9-10; Ep 5:5

CONCLUSION

1. Thus "The Preaching Ministry Of Jesus" began with a proclamation regarding...
   a. The coming of the kingdom of God
   b. The need to repent and believe

2. The kingdom of God came just as Jesus (and the prophets) said it would...
   a. Jesus received all authority, and now reigns at the right hand of God - Mt 28:18; 1Pe 3:22
   b. He exercises that reign, even in the midst of His enemies - cf. Ps 110:1-2
   c. His people (the church) freely volunteer in the day of His power- cf. Ps 110:3
   d. When He returns, it will be to deliver the kingdom to His Father- 1Co 15:24-26

Do you wish to be part of that everlasting, heavenly kingdom?  Then you
must be in the kingdom of God now, freely submitting to the reign of God
in your life today!

If you have not yet done so, then repent of your sins, put your faith in
Jesus Christ, be baptized for the remission of your sins, and begin
living for Him today...! - Mk 16:15-16; Ac 2:36-38 
 
Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2016

eXTReMe Tracker

Which Spirits are from God? (1 John 4:1-3)? by Kyle Butt, M.Div.

 

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=1203


Which Spirits are from God? (1 John 4:1-3)?

by  Kyle Butt, M.Div.

The first three verses of 1 John 4 contain certain elements that, at first glance, can be somewhat confusing. Yet, when taken in their proper context and compared with the rest of the letter, their meaning becomes much clearer. The verses state:

Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God; for many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. And this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming; and now it is already in the world (NRSV).

As a brief background to these verses, it should be noted that the book of 1 John deals in an in-depth fashion with the Gnostic apostasy that divided the Lord’s Church during the later part of the first century and on into the second century. One of the main tenets of the Gnostic heresy was the idea that anything physical was, by its very nature, evil. Therefore, according to the Gnostics, if Jesus Christ actually came in the flesh, then He must have been tainted by sinful, evil flesh. This group suggested, then, that Jesus Christ never literally came “in the flesh,” but only seemed to come in the flesh.

John’s argument at the beginning of 1 John 4 is an encouragement to Christians to test the teachings and beliefs of everyone who would pretend to be speaking on behalf of God. [John used the word “spirit” to refer to the teachings, beliefs, and actions of people (in this case, true and false teachers). Lenski stated: “ ‘Spirit’ is the person as such with his inner, spiritual character. There is no need to put more into this word” (1966, p. 485).] John then suggested the criterion whereby his readers could know if the teacher was speaking from God or not. John wrote: “Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God.” This particular phrase has caused some confusion in the religious world. Looking at the phrase by itself, it seems that every person who claims that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is “from God,” regardless of any other beliefs or teachings that may conflict with the Bible. Using this verse, it has been argued that God accepts any religious group that acknowledges that Jesus has come in the flesh.

Upon further investigation, however, it can be shown that this phrase was not intended to offer blanket acceptance of all religious people or groups who simply state a belief that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh. In fact, to state that one believes that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is to do no more than the demons did during the earthly ministry of Christ. In Mark 1:21-28, the gospel writer related a story about Jesus casting an unclean spirit out of a man who lived in Capernaum. Upon meeting Jesus, the unclean spirit cried out, “Let us alone! What have we to do with You, Jesus of Nazareth? Did You come to destroy us? I know who You are—the Holy One of God!” (1:24). Obviously, the unclean spirit recognized Jesus as coming in the flesh; yet few, if any, would argue that the unclean spirit’s verbal confession would classify this demon as being pleasing or acceptable to God. Therefore, it is clear that John’s statement does not mean that every person who merely says that Jesus came in the flesh is pleasing to God.

What does John’s statement about confessing Christ mean? When looking at other parts of 1 John, several criteria for a faithful follower of God are enumerated. James Burton Coffman offered a list of at least seven things that John used in the epistle to gauge whether or not a person was faithful and acceptable to God (1979, p. 415). Among other things, John wrote that a person must: (1) confess his or her sins (1:8-10); (2) keep God’s commandments (2:3-4; 5:2); (3) practice righteousness (2:29); (4) love others (3:10); (5) provide for the physical needs of others (4:17); and (6) believe and confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh (4:1-3). As Coffman noted of these criteria:

They are not separate tests, actually, but a composite, each of the above scriptures being, in a sense, commentary on each one of the others…. [T]he unity of the tests is seen in the fact that “keeping his commandments,” “loving one another,” “doing righteousness,” “possessing the Holy Spirit,” etc., all amount to one and the same thing” (1979, pp. 415-416).

It is evident, therefore, that John’s statement about confessing Christ was not meant to be a single test of authenticity, but rather a summary statement that entailed all of the other necessary conditions found throughout the book. Charles Ryrie wrote in regard to 1 John 4:2: “From this verse, we are not to suppose that this was the only test of orthodoxy; but it is a major one, and it was the most necessary one for the errors of John’s day” (1971, p. 1022). R.C.H. Lenski likewise stated: “It would be a serious mistake to think that John speaks of confessing only the one fact or doctrine of the Incarnation…” (1966, p. 488). Thus, mental acceptance and verbal acknowledgment of the fact that Jesus Christ came in flesh will never put a person in a right relationship with God without the proper actions and obedience to God’s commands.

Additional comments are in order concerning John’s reference to the “spirit of the antichrist.” Countless people and groups have attempted to identify the antichrist. Simply type in the word “antichrist” on the Internet, and you will be inundated with suggested personalities such as the Roman Emperor Nero, Adolf Hitler, Saddam Hussein, and the Pope—which are but a few of the candidates put forth. In most cases, “the antichrist” is supposed to be connected with the end of the world, the number 666, and various other “signs of the times.” However, John is the only biblical writer to use the word antichrist(s). He uses it five times in the following verses: 1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John 7. In these five brief references, John made several things clear concerning the antichrist. He wrote in 1 John 2:18,22: “Children, it is the last hour! As you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. From this we know that it is the last hour…. Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son.”

First, let it be noted that John specifically mentioned that many antichrists had already come into the world. If his readers were looking for a single, solitary figure distinguished as the sole antichrist, John disabused them of this notion by mentioning that many antichrists had come. Any attempt to identify the antichrist as a solitary political or religious personality misses the pointed statement by John that many antichrists had already come into the world. No doubt, John was specifically referring to those of the Gnostic persuasion.

Second, John unambiguously informed his readers that during their own lifetime (i.e., the first century), these antichrists had already come into the world. All efforts to connect the antichrist with some future, end-time predictions fail to account for the fact that John specifically stated that the many antichrists were already in the world at the time of his writing.

If, according to John, there were many antichrists in the first century, what was John’s definition of an antichrist? John defined an antichrist as any person (or group) who denies the Father and the Son. In 1 John 4:3, he explained, “every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. And this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming; and now it is already in the world.” When analyzed critically, one can see that any person or group, which does not recognize that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, has come in the flesh, is a person or group that has been seized by the spirit of antichrist. As abrasive as it may seem, groups such as Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and even orthodox Jews would all fall under John’s condemnation of denying the Son and the Father.

As John urged his readers almost two thousand years ago, so we must today: “Test the spirits to see whether they are from God; for many false prophets have gone out into the world” (1 John 4:1).

REFERENCES

Coffman, Burton (1979), Commentary on James, 1&2 Peter, 1,2&3 John, and Jude (Abilene, TX: ACU Press).

Lenski, R.C.H. (1966), The Interpretation of the Epistles of St. Peter, St. John, and St. Jude (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg).

Ryrie, Charles C. (1971), Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago, IL: Moody Press).

Which Law Was Abolished? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

 

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=531

Which Law Was Abolished?

by  Eric Lyons, M.Min.

A great deal of confusion exists in the religious world concerning what spiritual law man is under today. Some say the old law still is binding—all of it. Others say that most of it has been abolished, but that some of it still is in effect. Many simply pick and choose laws out of both testaments and abide only by those that are appealing to them. Much of the confusion today about the old law and the new law is a result of the false teachings of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church. This intensely evangelistic group teaches that the Ten Commandments still are binding in the present age. Although most Christians readily agree that nine of the Ten Commandments either are stated explicitly or are implied in the New Testament (and thus binding today because they are part of the new law), Seventh-Day Adventists actively teach that the Ten Commandments (including and especially the command to observe the Sabbath day—Exodus 20:8) are part of “God’s unchangeable law” (from the Seventh-Day Adventist’s official Web site—www.adventist.org/beliefs). Whereas certain parts of the Old Testament have been abolished, they insist that God intended for the Ten Commandments to be an eternal covenant that all of His children must follow.

In response to such teachings, some Christians (like myself) quickly cite passages of Scripture that indicate the old law has been taken away. For example, the writer of Hebrews plainly stated that “if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second” (8:7). Then, quoting the prophet Jeremiah, he wrote: “Because finding fault with them, He says: ‘Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah— not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt’ ” (8:8-9; cf. Jeremiah 31:31-34). Elsewhere, the apostle Paul stated that Christ has “wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross” (Colossians 2:14, emp. added). The old law has become “obsolete” (Hebrews 8:13; cf. 7:12; Ephesians 2:14-16). Although we still can learn numerous valuable lessons and principles about how to live godly lives from the old law (cf. Romans 15:4), we are bound by it no longer.

What some like the Seventh-Day Adventists teach, however, is that that God gave two laws on Mt. Sinai. They differentiate between the Ten Commandments and the ceremonial laws, saying that one (the Ten Commandments) is the Law of God and the other (the ceremonial laws) is the Law of Moses. Moreover, they assert that all of the passages in the Bible that refer to the old law being abolished are speaking of the ceremonial laws and not the Ten Commandments, which (they stress) were written with the very finger of God (Exodus 31:18).

Those who separate the “the Law of God” and “the Law of Moses” (in an attempt to find approval for continuing to follow portions of the old law) fail to realize that the Bible does not make such distinctions. Ezra read from “the Book of the Law of Moses,” which also was called “the Book of the Law of God” (Nehemiah 8:1,18). Luke recorded that after Mary gave birth to Jesus “when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were completed, they brought Him to Jerusalem to present Him to the Lord (as it is written in the law of the Lord, ‘Every male who opens the womb shall be called holy to the Lord’), and to offer a sacrifice according to what is said in the law of the Lord, ‘A pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons’ ” (Luke 2:22-24, emp. added). The Law of Moses and the Law of the Lord were the same thing and still are. When writing to the brethren in Rome, the apostle Paul quoted from the Ten Commandments and taught that it was part of the old law to which they had “become dead…through the body of Christ” (Romans 7:4,7). In his second epistle to the Corinthians, Paul wrote:

[C]learly you are an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink but by the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of flesh, that is, of the heart…. But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away, how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious…. For even what was made glorious had no glory in this respect, because of the glory that excels. For if what is passing away was glorious, what remains is much more glorious (3:3-11, emp. added).

What was “passing away”? The law written on the “tablets of stone.” What was the law “engraved on stones” that was given to Moses on Mt. Sinai? The Ten Commandments (Exodus 20). In this passage, Paul teaches the very opposite of what Seventh-Day Adventists teach—the Ten Commandments are not an eternal covenant.

The New Testament explicitly teaches that the old law has been abolished. Whether one is talking about the Ten Commandments or the ceremonial laws, the Law of Moses or the Law of God, all are considered the old law that no longer is in effect. Jesus Christ fulfilled that law and nailed it to the cross forever (Matthew 5:17-18; Colossians 2:13-17).

Where Are You From? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

 

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=667


Where Are You From?

by  Eric Lyons, M.Min.

Although it sounds like an easy question, for a growing number of people it is becoming more and more difficult to answer: Where are you from? Ask the eighteen-year-old college freshmen who grew up in a military family where she is from, and you likely will hear her rattle off five or six different states (and perhaps even a few countries!). Ask the son of a Major League baseball player (who has played for eight different teams in his twenty-year career) where he is from, and you might hear him respond by saying, “I was reared in a lot of places.” Ask a preacher’s kid where he was reared, and you likely will hear the same response.

It seems like the longer I live, the more problems I have telling people “where I’m from.” I was born in Macon, Georgia, then lived in Tennessee for five years, back to Georgia for two, in Oklahoma for the next twelve, and then back to Tennessee (in three different cities) for the next six years. I now live in Alabama. Today, when someone asks me, “Where are you from?,” I must confess that I sometimes do not know what to say. “The last move I made was from Tennessee. I spent most of my “growing-up years” in Oklahoma. I was born in Georgia….” Where am I from? Take your pick.

Some critics actually think they have a legitimate Bible contradiction on their hands by pointing out that different passages sometimes speak of the same person being from two (or more) different places. For example, in Mark 1:21-29 Simon (Peter) and his brother Andrew are said to have lived in (or very near) Capernaum. The apostle John, on the other hand, recorded that “the city of Andrew and Peter” was Bethsaida (1:44). Are these two accounts contradictory? No. Peter and Andrew were living in Capernaum at the beginning of Jesus ministry, however, they were known as being “of” Bethsaida, which is probably where they first learned a trade, got married, and made a name for themselves. The writers are simply referring to two different times in the lives of Peter and Andrew.

A similar “controversy” surrounds whence Jesus came. Well-known skeptic Dennis McKinsey had the audacity to ask, “Why would Jesus be called ‘Jesus of Nazareth’ when He was born in Bethlehem of Judea” (2000, p. 133). Obviously, Mr. McKinsey is not willing to give the Bible writers the same freedom we have today when we talk about our “ hometown” and our “birthplace.” The fact is, Jesus was born in Bethlehem (Matthew 2:1), but grew up in Nazareth (Matthew 2:23; cf. Acts 22:8).

Remember, for something to be a legitimate contradiction, the same person, place, or thing must be under consideration at the same time in the same sense. If not, then it is impossible to know that two things are contradictory.

REFERENCE

McKinsey, C. Dennis (2000), Biblical Errancy (Amherst, NY: Prometheus).

What’s Inside of You? by Ken Weliever, The Preacherman

 


What’s Inside of You?

Jars

 https://thepreachersword.com/2014/09/23/whats-inside-of-you/

 

One Sunday a preacher took to the pulpit two jars and sat them on a table. They looked identical.  “These jars,” he told the congregation, “came from the same factory.  They were made of the same materials.  And they hold the same amount of liquid.  But they are different.” 

Then he upset the first jar and out oozed honey. It was thick, sweet and appetizing. When he turned over the second jar vinegar spilled out. It was watery thin, sour and had an unpleasant smell.

“Until the jars were turned over,” the preacher observed, “they looked alike. The difference was within. And it was unseen.  But when they were upset, their contents were revealed.”

With this simple, but powerful illustration the preacher pointed out that it is possible to put on a good front. Look good on the outside.  But, often times when we’re upset our true nature within us is revealed.

It reminds me of the Samuel’s statement when he came to the house of Jesse looking to anoint the first King of Israel. When the prophet saw Eliab he said “Surely the Lord’s anointed is before Him!”

But the Lord said to Samuel, “Do not look at his appearance or at his physical stature, because I have refused him. For the Lord does not see as man sees; for man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart.” (I Sam. 16:6-7)

As it turned out 7 sons of Jesse passed before the prophet, and none were chosen by the Lord. No doubt perplexed, the prophet asked, “Are these all of the children?”  Of course, there was the youngest, David, tending sheep in the pasture.  And he was the one God chose.  Samuel couldn’t see what was inside the boys.  But God could.

Later in Israel’s war with the Philistines, we see what was inside the boys.  Jesse’s three oldest sons were soldiers in Saul’s army.  At one point Jesse sent David to take his brothers some provisions and to return with news about how they were doing.

When David arrived, he heard the bombastic challenge of the giant Goliath. Daily the Philistine champion mocked Israel’s men with a winner take all battle. 1 Samuel 17 records how the soldiers recoiled at Goliath’s rant. They all ran.  Including David’s three older brothers.

They actions and conversations with the brothers showed what was inside them. Fear.  Doubt.  And even anger, jealousy and insolence toward David when he appeared at the battleground.  Yet, the young shepherd boy displayed courage, confidence and faith when he bravely confronted the vulgar giant and ultimately defeated him.

This one incident demonstrated what was within the sons of Jesse. Samuel couldn’t see it. But God did.

Later, David is identified in Scripture as “a man after God’s own heart” (Acts 13:22). As we get to know David through the Psalms, we understand why.  He loved God.  Mediated on the Word of God.  And worked to develop a relationship with God.

Consider these three quotes by David that show what was in his heart.

“Your word I have hidden in my heart, That I might not sin against You.” (Ps 119:11)

“Oh, how I love Your law! It is my meditation all the day.” (Ps 119:97)

“As the deer pants for the water brooks, So pants my soul for You, O God. My soul thirsts for God, for the living God.”  (Ps 42:1)

When you are pressed by the enemy, pressured by problems, and upset with others, what comes out of you?   Anger?  Sarcasm?  Unwholesome words?

Or does your faith in God flow forth with love, joy and peace?

Remember what you’re putting inside yourself, is what will come out when you’re upset!

–Ken Weliever, The Preacherman

AN ABSENCE OF A POSITIVE ALWAYS RESULTS IN A NEGATIVE OUTCOME by steve finnell

 

http://steve-finnell.blogspot.com/2017/02/an-of-positive-always-results-in.html

AN ABSENCE OF A POSITIVE ALWAYS RESULTS IN A NEGATIVE OUTCOME  by steve finnell


If your doctor tells you you will live if you have surgery, then obviously you will die if you do not have surgery. Who would deny that obvious truth?

Acts 8:34-38 ....36 As they went along the road they came to some water; and the eunuch said, "Look! Water! What prevents me from being baptized?" 37 [And Philip said, "If you believe with all your heart, you may." And he answered and said, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."].......(NASB)

The qualification for being baptized is to confess Jesus as the Christ, and the Son of God. Infants and dead people are not qualified for water baptism, because they can neither believe nor confess Jesus as the Christ and as the Son of God. (The opposite of a positive is always a negative)

1 Peter 3:20-21 .....eight persons, were brought safely through the water. 21 Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you......(NASB)

If water baptism now saves you, then rejecting water baptism obviously leaves you in a lost condition. Yes, immersion in water is essential for salvation.

Mark 16:16 He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved....(NASB)

If believing and being baptism saves, then, conversely, not believing or not being baptized leaves a person in a lost state.

Acts 2:38 Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.(NASB)

If your sins are forgiven and you receive the gift of the Holy Spirit following repentance and water baptism, then logic dictates, that before  repentance and immersion in water you are without forgiveness and do not have the indwelling gift of the Holy Spirit.[NOTE: Repentance is to turn from sin and to turn toward God, in other words make the commitment to change. Repent of your unbelief.]

Romans 10:9-10 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;10........(NASB)

Contrarily if you refuse to confess Jesus before men and do not believe that God raised Him from the dead, then you will not be saved.

An absence of a positive always results in a negative outcome.

It does not matter how many church statements of faith, creed books, Bible commentaries, denominational  catechisms, books written by popular preachers nor personal opinions contradict the terms for pardon found in the Bible, the Bible is always correct. 

LUKE by Paul Southern

 

http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Southern/Paul/1901/luke.html

LUKE

  1. THE TITLE
  2. The third gospel gets its name from the writer, Luke (light-giving), or Lucas, which is an abbreviated form of Lucanus.

  3. THE WRITER
  4. The name Luke occurs three times in the New Testament (Col 4:14; II Tim 4:11; Phil 24). Combining tradition with scripture, we have the following indefinite outline of his life: According to Eusebius, Luke was a native of Antioch in Syria, and according to Paul, he was a physician (Col 4:14). Tradition says that he was also a painter. He must have been a Gentile, for he is not reckoned among those "of the circumcision" by Paul (Col 4:11-14). The "We Sections" of Acts indicate that Luke was a companion of Paul, and writer of Acts of Apostles. Apparently, he joined Paul at Troas on the second tour and journeyed with him to Philippi (Acts 16:11-40). He remained at Philippi until Paul returned on the third tour. Luke then joined the missionary party again, accompanying Paul to Caesarea and finally to Rome (Acts 20:1-17; also chapters 20-28). We know nothing of his age and death. In his preface (Lk 1:1-4), the writer indicates that he was not an eyewitness of the Lord from the first.

  5. THE GOSPEL
    1. The date: Probably about A.D. 60-63 while Luke was with Paul at Caesarea or in Rome.
    2. Place where written: As indicated above, probably Caesarea or Rome.
    3. Addressee: Theophilus, a Gentile, and probably a native of Italy.
    4. Subject: Jesus the Savior of all men.
    5. Source of information: Luke was guided by the Holy Spirit. Whether he witnessed any or all of the facts recorded in the narrative cannot be decided with any degree of certainty.
    6. Language: It was written in Greek.
    7. Characteristics: Tidwell (The Bible Book by Book) gives the following:
      1. It is a gospel of song and praise (1:46-55; 1:68-79; 2:14, 29-32).
      2. It is a gospel of prayer (3:21; 5:16; 6:12; 9:28; 11:1;23:34,46).
      3. It is a gospel of womanhood (1:42-45; 1:46-55; 2:36-38; 7:12-15; 7:36-50; 8:1-3; 8:48; 10:38-42; 13:16; 23:28).
      4. It is a gospel of the poor (3:12; 5:27,29,30; 7:36-50; 8:43-48; 15:30; 15:11-32; 16:19-31; 14:7-24; 19:1-9; 23:39-43).
      5. It is a Gentile gospel. The genealogy traces Christ's lineage back to Adam instead of Abraham, for Adam was a representative of all humanity. Luke presents Jesus as a joy to all the people (2:10,32).
      6. It is a gospel for the Greek. Greeks were interested in perfect humanity. Thought, beauty, speech, and spirit were cultivated to the highest point. Hence Luke presents Jesus as perfect, the Savior of all men.
      7. It is an artistic gospel. Luke was the most cultured of the gospel writers. His gospel has been called the most beautiful book in the world.

  6. EXERCISES FOR STUDENT ACTIVITY
    1. Six miracles and eleven parables are peculiar to Luke. List and study them in detail.
    2. Study the following characteristic phrases which occur in Luke and list the places where each is found:
      1. "Son of Man."
      2. "Son of God."
      3. "Kingdom of God."
    3. The Gospel According to Luke emphasizes Christ's interest in the last, the least, and the lost. As you read the book, list all the illustrations of each of these groups.
    4. Study the following songs recorded by Luke and explain the Latin title associated with each:
      1. "Magnificat" (Luke 1:46-55).
      2. "Benedictus" (Luke 1:67-79).
      3. "Gloria in Excelsis" (Luke 2:14).
      4. "Nune Dimittis" (Luke 2:29-32).

Published in The Old Paths Archive
(http://www.oldpaths.com)

Encouragement by Gary Rose

 

Encouragement is the word which came to my mind when I saw this cute little picture. As the picture says… Make them smile and tell them how much they mean to you. Imagine a world filled with people like this? I remember one person actually called by this from the book of Acts...



World English Bible ( Acts 4)

36 Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas (which is, being interpreted, Son of Encouragement), a Levite, a man of Cyprus by race,

(See also… Acts 11:22-25, 30; 12:25; 13:1; 15:2, 12, 37; 1Co 9:6; Gal 2:1, 9, 13 )


The world may never be full of people who are like Barnabas but you can be one (if you try). Why not begin today???