"THE GOSPEL OF MARK" A Teacher With Authority (1:21-28) by Mark Copeland

 

                          "THE GOSPEL OF MARK"

                    A Teacher With Authority (1:21-28)

INTRODUCTION

1. Up to this point in Mark's gospel, everything has been preliminary...
   a. The ministry of John the Baptist, sent to prepare the way of the Lord
   b. The baptism of Jesus, introducing Jesus to Israel as the Lamb of God
   c. The temptation of Jesus, preparing Him to face the difficult tasks ahead
   d. The theme of His preaching, concerning the coming kingdom of God
   e. The calling of His disciples, who would eventually carry on His work

2. But now we begin to read of Jesus' actual ministry...
   a. Things He did
   b. Things He taught

[When people saw and heard Jesus, they immediately noticed something
different.  Especially in regards to His teaching, for He was "A Teacher
With Authority."  In the text (Mk 1:21-28), note first His...]

I. TEACHING AS ONE HAVING AUTHORITY

   A. THE SETTING OF HIS TEACHING...
      1. Capernaum - on the NW shore of Galilee where Jesus lived - Mk 1:21; Mt 4:12-13
      2. On the Sabbath, teaching in the synagogue - Mk 1:21
         a. The Law of Moses was still in effect, so as an observant Jew Jesus kept the Sabbath
         b. The synagogue on the Sabbath provided a ready audience
      3. Luke gave a detailed description of what it was like when Jesus
         spoke in the synagogue at Nazareth - cf. Lk 4:16-22
      -- Teaching in synagogues became a feature of His itinerant ministry - cf. Mk 1:38-39

   B. THE MANNER OF HIS TEACHING...
      1. Astonished the people - Mk 1:22; cf. Mt 7:28-29
      2. Note this later reaction:  "No man ever spoke like this Man!" - Jn 7:46
      3. Because He taught as one having authority, not like the scribes - Mk 1:22
         a. Scribes would quote well-known rabbis as their authority for what they taught
         b. But Jesus would say things like "But I say to you..." - cf. Mt 5:27-28,31-32; 19:8-9
      -- Jesus spoke that way because He had authority (even to forgive sins)! - cf. Mk 2:10

[But it wasn't just the manner of His teaching.  Jesus complemented His
teaching with miraculous signs, thus...]

II. TEACHING AS ONE SHOWING AUTHORITY

   A. THE POWER OF HIS AUTHORITY...
      1. Demonstrated by casting out an unclean spirit - Mk 1:23-26
         a. In a man who was in the synagogue
         b. That knew Jesus' true identity as the Holy One of God!
         c. Whom Jesus rebuked, then cast out
      2. What were unclean spirits (demons)?
         a. Their origin not clearly stated in Scripture, but their reality acknowledged
         b. Some believe they were spirits of wicked men (Josephus, Alexander Campbell)
         c. Others view them as fallen angels (though bound to Tartarus)
            - 2Pe 2:4; Jude 1:6
      3. Demonic activity in the Bible appears in waves
         a. There is more recorded demonic activity during Jesus' life
            than any other time in biblical history - Baker's Evangelical Dictionary
         b. If fallen angels, perhaps temporarily released during such
            times so God's true servants could be identified by their
            authority to cast them out of those who were possessed
      4. Jesus later explained His casting out of demons was evidence of
         the coming rule or reign of God - cf. Mt 12:28
      -- Jesus proved He had authority by casting out the unclean spirit

   B. THE REACTION TO HIS AUTHORITY...
      1. The people in the synagogue are amazed - Mk 1:27
         a. They wonder what new doctrine is being revealed
         b. Which was the purpose of such signs, to reveal and confirm
            the doctrine was from God - cf. Mk 16:17-20; He 2:3-4
         c. They understood that He not only spoke with authority, He acted with authority!
      2. His fame spread throughout all Galilee - Mk 1:28
         a. A natural reaction to such an amazing event
         b. One that would later make it difficult for Jesus - cf. Mk 1:33,45
      -- The people were amazed, but they understood the significance of
         the miracle:  this Man must be bringing a new revelation (doctrine)!

CONCLUSION

1. Thus Jesus was "A Teacher With Authority"...
   a. He taught as one having authority (Grk., exousia:  power, right)
   b. He did signs (miracles) that proved His authority

2. It is tempting to be distracted by the miracles themselves...
   a. But as the people deduced on this occasion, there was new doctrine
   b. So we should focus our attention on what Jesus taught, not on what He did

3. Later, Jesus would claim to have "all authority...in heaven and on earth"... - Mt 28:18
   a. Then command His apostles to make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them - Mt 28:19
   b. And that such disciples should observe all things He has commanded - Mt 28:20

4. Later, the apostles would preach Jesus as "Lord"...
   a. Commanding repentance and baptism in His name (by His authority) - Ac 2:36-38
   b. That He has the authority to one day judge the world - Ac 10:42; 17:30-31; 2Co 5:10

Those who gladly accept the authority of Jesus as Lord are baptized (Ac
2:41) and continue steadfastly in His apostles' doctrine (Ac 2:42).

Are we willing to accept Jesus as our Teacher today by submitting to His authority in the same way...? 

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2016

Why Christianity? Why the Bible? by Kippy Myers, Ph.D.

 

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=1362

Why Christianity? Why the Bible?

by	Kippy Myers, Ph.D.

Are religions of the world simply different expressions of the same thing? Is Christianity the counterpart to Hinduism, Islam, or Buddhism, and do these religions merely “complement” one another? Is Allah the same deity as Jehovah, and is Jehovah the same as the Hindu god, Brahman? There are some who think that we are all trying to get to the same place, and simply call God by different names or approach Him in different ways. Thus, in the final analysis, the different approaches are coequal, and therefore equally acceptable to God.

The brief answer to these questions is a simple “no.” These religions are not the same truth in different wrappings. We can discern why by noting some of the radical distinctions at the very heart of these religions that show how completely distinct and unrelated they are. Of course, they have things in common (they are religions, they have deities, they have holy books, etc.), but this does not mean that they are equally efficacious, any more than a book with blank pages is equal to a book filled with good information.

Let me introduce an important term—“ontology.” Ontology refers to something’s being, essence, or nature. It has to do with what makes it what it is even after being stripped of all its unnecessary elements. Hinduism, Islam, and Christianity are different ontologically. When you strip them of their coincidental characteristics and focus on what makes them distinct as religions, they are radically divergent. They are different by their very nature, even in their most basic elements. Their books, their concepts of salvation, and even their deities are wildly different from one another. Let us make a simple beginning by noting a few of their essential differences.

THE BOOKS OF WORLD RELIGIONS
DISASSOCIATE THEMSELVES FROM ONE ANOTHER

Individuals who claim to be members in good standing of one religion (whether Christian, Moslem, or Hindu) sometimes extend the hand of fellowship to those in other religions. That is, some express a willingness to accept people who remain in other religions as if they have their deity’s blessing. But for the most part, these open-armed well-wishers are viewed as heretics by the faithful followers because the holy books themselves, which form the very center of the religions, are not so accepting of one another. Can the follower be better than the “inspired” book from which he gains faith?

The Bible—For example, the New Testament clearly claims to be the only way by which a person can come to God (specifically, one must come through Jesus—John 14:6; 2 John 9; et al.). This establishes solid barriers against all who disagree with the person of Jesus depicted in the gospel accounts. Prior to New Testament times, Judaism carried the same policy. In the Old Testament, God always spoke against pagan religions and their followers. The religions of Egypt, Babylon, Assyria, Canaan, Greece, and others are roundly attacked, condemned, and described in great detail as false and devilish.

Obviously, simply calling something “god” and worshipping it does not mean that it is acceptable to the God of the Bible. Jesus said that they who worship God must do so in spirit and in truth (John 4:24). Amazing as it may seem to those who think that the God of the Bible approves of other religions, the apostles of Christ even condemned those in the Christian age who were going backward, trying to be saved by the Mosaic law, a religion that unquestionably centered on the same God as Christianity (Galatians 5:4). In addition, they even condemned their own Christian brethren if they were living wrongly (Acts 8:18-23; Galatians 2:11).

Thus, even if the different religions did comprehend the same God, worshipping the same God does not legitimize one’s religion or religious practices according to the Bible since the one true God must be worshipped properly, that is, as the Bible prescribes (Colossians 3:17). The Bible claims to be the uniquely acceptable religion before God, and specifically condemns any other as illegitimate. Whatever we say about Islam and Hinduism’s relationship to Christianity, we cannot say justifiably that biblical Christianity has any affiliation with them. Any superimposition of fellowship between them would be forced and unnatural.

The Koran—The Islamic holy book, the Koran (or Qur’an), claims to be the final word from God. It claims that the Bible was just a step in its direction, so the Koran is further and final revelation (Sura 4:161). Whereas the Bible says that the apostles would be led into all Truth, and although it condemns additional and different alleged revelations as false (e.g., John 16:13; Galatians 1:6-9), the Koran teaches that if a person has only the Bible, it is not enough because then he rejects the greatest prophet of all, Mohammed. Since the Islamic holy book condemns unbelievers, it condemns those who accept only the Bible.

Whereas the Bible says that Jesus was and is God, and is the only way to heaven (Philippians 2:5-11; Hebrews 5:9), the Koran exalts Mohammed above Jesus. Mohammed explicitly says several times that Jesus was not God, but a prophet and apostle (Sura 5:79; 4:169, et al.). The apostle John, however, calls the teacher of this doctrine “the antichrist” and has a lot to say about his spiritual condition (1 John; 2 John; 3 John).

Speaking of misbelievers (which would most definitely include Hindus) who turn others from the path of God, the Koran says in Sura 13:34, “For them is torment in this world’s life; but surely the torment of the next is more wretched still—nor have they against God a keeper” and “the recompense of misbelievers is the Fire!” (13:35). Also, “Whosoever craves other than Islam for a religion, it shall surely not be accepted from him, and he shall, in the next world, be of those who lose” (Sura 3:79).

Mohammed claimed that his revelations came from God via a Heavenly Book from which all Zoroastrian, Jewish, and Christian revelations came. The Bible, however, teaches that God is not a God of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33), which would be contradicted if all of these conflicting religions came from the same source. The Koran says that Moslems believe what was revealed to Jesus and the prophets, but this is incredible in light of the aforementioned facts in addition to hundreds of others left unmentioned here (Sura 3:78-79). Amazingly, Richardson says in his introduction to the Koran, “the Qur’an often contradicts itself as well as other scriptures. Allah, then, changes his mind and alters the text of the Heavenly Book accordingly (Surah 13:39).” Compare this with Jesus’ statements, “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my word will not pass away” (Matthew 24:35), and “The Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35).

Hindu Writings—Contradictions between the most basic doctrines of the Bible and the Koran could be multiplied, and the Hindu Vedic literature is widely divergent from these two. As different as they are, the Bible and the Koran have more in common than either has in common with Hindu writings. Vedic materials are something altogether different. The point here is that if the major religious books condemn and contradict one another on such fundamental issues, where does anyone get the idea that they belong together? If we believe any one of them, we must disbelieve the others. They cannot be related unless severely mutilated. They clearly are mutually exclusive. Since they so clearly do not affiliate, which, if any, is the right one?

HISTORICAL EVENTS AND INDIVIDUAL EXPERIENCES

The Koran—Islam is based entirely upon the secret, private experiences of one man. Mohammed regularly went alone to a cave and said that a Revealer delivered visions to him there. He later identified this person as the angel Gabriel. Only one person allegedly saw the angel. Only one person allegedly heard a voice. Only one person allegedly saw the visions. The only way to become a Moslem, then, is to take this one man’s word for it. We must believe a man who was kicked out of his home town, became a robber baron, led a pack of thieves in attacks on caravans, and then later returned to the city and took it by force. Compare the lifestyle and character of this man with that of Jesus Whom he claims to supersede, and see who is more worthy of belief.

The Bible—In vivid contrast to this approach of having to take one man’s word for an entire religion and basing one’s eternal destiny on one person’s private visions, the Bible is rooted and grounded in objective historical events—things many thousands of people beheld. Its specific times, places, people, and events can be located in history. Archaeology, ancient history, geography, literature, etc., corroborate its details. These give the Bible the ring of authenticity, and tie it to reality outside the mind of any single person or any group of people.

Because of this, the Bible has a beginning, middle, and end. It has a flow, a progression, a unity. It is very orderly and systematic. The Koran, however, is a very disjointed collection of many small apothegms called Suras. This is because Mohammed could not write and did not intend for his revelations to be compiled into a book. Richardson’s introduction to the Koran says, “It was addressed to the ear, not to the critical eye....” However, after Mohammed died and many began to question the legitimacy of his visions, believers gathered together the leaves, potsherds, etc., on which his sayings allegedly had been copied by some of his hearers. Someone later edited them and put them in a book format. Richardson says, “Apart from its preposterous arrangement, the Qur’an is not so much a book as a collection of manifestoes, diatribes, harangues, edicts, discourses, sermons, and such-like occasional pieces. No subject is treated systematically....” It certainly does not appear to be related to an alleged Mother Book from which the Old and New Testaments also were derived. The Koran’s sum and substance is very different from Scripture as Christians know it.

Hindu Writings—The holy literature of Hinduism encompasses many volumes, and is referred to as the Vedic literature. The most widely known is the Bhagavad-Gita, a small section of the much larger section, the Mahabharata—a huge work that has influenced Hinduism profoundly. It allegedly was composed over a period of eight hundred years (400 B.C. to A.D. 400), and supposedly tells the Sanskrit history of the ancient world. But as A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada says in his translation, the Gita is “the essence of Vedic knowledge.”

The high god in Hinduism is Brahman. In a sense, Brahman is the All, the infinitely embracing Everything—ultimate reality. In another sense, Brahman is a god composed of Brahma, Shiva (the one often pictured with four arms), and Vishnu. Each of these three has a basic personality and work. Brahma creates, Shiva destroys, and Vishnu preserves. Each has wives, sons (one of Shiva’s sons is the elephant-headed Ganesha), daughters, and a series of folklore-type adventures. Their consorts also are worshipped, so there is actually an indefinite number of gods. A Hindu expert will tell you that they often use the number 330,000,000 as a convenient way of describing how many are worshipped. The boundaries and eccentricities of Hinduism, therefore, are very loose, and there are many types and sects of Hindus. What ties them together seems to be their belief in Brahman and the pantheon of gods, reincarnation (the idea that after you die you are reborn into another life on Earth), karma (the law which says that if you were bad in this life you will have a difficult life in the next), and the Vedic teachings.

One of Vishnu’s avatars (incarnations) was named Krishna. He has been described as “an impetuous, violent, and erotic figure.” Krishna is the speaker and the hero of the Bhagavad-Gita, in which he is prince of a great dynasty. The Gita’s setting is a battle in which he is involved with relatives who are enemies of his kingdom. There is no way of checking whether these events actually occurred or if this is pure legend, since we have no record of the events outside the Gita itself.

Someone might respond, “But why is it better to be historical and checkable (like the Bible) than to be non-historical (like the Koran or Vedic writings)?” The real issue, of course, is that we believe we must be rational in regard to religion. Does anyone seriously suggest that we be irrational about it? If we are to be irrational, then what is the use of arguing rationally that we must be irrational? Why worry about persuading people that the major religions are all the same if it does not really matter? Actually, all of the world religions attempt to use reason and (with the possible exception of Buddhism) teach their adherents to use their minds in religion. Even though Buddhism tries to get its adherents to a point in meditation where they lose thought and feeling, it uses reason to teach them, to explain itself, and to get them to that point. The point is, should reason and proof be the “engine that pulls our train of life” or not? Should we not require proof for what we believe? If not, that would put us in the position of accepting every person who claimed a divine vision. The Bible both demands proof and provides it (Deuteronomy 18:20; Isaiah 41:21-24; 1 Thessalonians 5:21, et al.).

UNIQUENESS OF INCARNATION

The Bible—The Christian system centers on the fact that God has come to Earth in a physical body and made a one-time sacrifice for sin (John 1:1-14; Philippians 2:5-9). The Bible says that the salvation of mankind was accomplished only through this act and that apart from it, man would be hopelessly lost in sin (John 3:16; Ephesians 1:7, et al.). The incarnation of the Word, along with His death and resurrection, combine to form the fundamental essential truth that defines Christianity (1 Corinthians 15:1-4). Without it, Christianity would not exist.

Hindu Writings—In Hinduism, there is no requirement to escape from sin before judgment comes (Hebrews 9:27) because for the Hindu, there is no final judgment day. Rather, the Universe is eternal; we live here forever in different personalities, one lifetime after another. The goal is to gain release from being reincarnated. The incarnation and sacrifice of someone in Jerusalem plays no role at all in Hinduism. Hindus gain release from this cycle through individual observance of ritual, right thinking, and right acting. Everything we get in this life is what we deserve because of the way we lived in past lives (even though we cannot remember our past lives so as to learn to do better in the next one, we still suffer for them). If we are better in each successive life, we will climb the ladder of goodness until we finally achieve release and oneness with divinity and the Universe.

Thus, there is also no unique one-time incarnation of God because the Hindu god, Vishnu, has come in the flesh many times in a number of guises. Vishnu has visited Earth ten times as a deliverer (as Rama, Krishna, et al.). For example, the one to whom the Gita is directed is a warrior named Arjuna. One day Krishna is driving his chariot, and Arjuna says to him, “You are the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the ultimate abode, the purest, the Absolute Truth. You are the eternal, transcendental, original person, the unborn, the greatest” (10:12-14). In the section “Knowledge of the Absolute” Krishna says, “as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, I know everything that has happened in the past, all that is happening in the present, and all things that are yet to come” (10:26). He elsewhere comments, “This material nature is working under My direction.” Hence, he was allegedly deity in the flesh several times.

The Koran—Islam teaches that Jesus Christ was not deity, but rather one of the great prophets (see previous quotes). His death is not necessitated for redemption, and if He died on the cross at all, its purpose was definitely not to wash away our sins. Moslems believe that salvation is obtained through observance of the “five pillars” of Islam: recite the creed (which is basically, “There is no God but Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet”); pray five times daily while facing the holy city of Mecca; give alms to the poor; fast for an extended period each year; and once in your life make a pilgrimage to Mecca.

RADICALLY DIVERGENT DIVINITY

Hindus do not believe the Universe was created by God out of nothing. It is simply an eternal emanation from Brahman. It is illusory and must be escaped so that we may gain what is real, viz., oneness with the Universe and oneness with Brahman. Islam and Christianity think of this as blasphemy, for Jehovah is perfect in every way, and infinite in every attribute. A created being never could attain such a degree of being and certainly never could become God.

Hindu gods in their many thousands of representations are commonly worshipped by means of figurines and “idols” that are condemned by both Old and New Testaments (e.g., the first two of the ten commandments—Exodus 2:3-4). One of Mohammed’s primary goals was to condemn and destroy this practice.

Islam also says there is only one member of the godhead, Allah. Christianity preaches a trinity: God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:18). Obviously, Christianity and Islam are as opposed to Hinduism on this matter as it is to them.

DECIDING WHICH IS RIGHT

From this brief introductory study it can be seen that these three religions and their books cannot be equated. But the question remains, which one should we accept? I maintain that we should accept the Bible over other religious books because no book can amass the evidence for supernatural origin that the Bible can. No other book exhibits such profound evidence for inspiration. We should accept the Bible because:

1. It claims to be from God. That in itself does not prove its claim, but the claim is something we should look for. Would God send His revelation anonymously?
2. It is based in history, not in the subjective experience of one individual. That opens it to being tested. It can be proven or disproven.
3. It contains the highest and purest moral teachings. They remain unsurpassed for their simplicity, applicability, and profundity.
4. It contains prophecies that are made and fulfilled. They surpass the possibility of human or natural powers to foresee or bring about.
5. It has a sublime unity about it in every way—doctrine, progression of thought, story line, theme, details, structure, etc.
6. It is accurate in every way—historically, geographically, scientifically, etc. As diligently as skeptics have tried for centuries, there never has been one flaw or contradiction proven to be in the Bible that would establish that it is not what it claims to be. Yet, “to err is human.”
7. It contains medical and scientific knowledge ahead of its time. The Bible did not partake of its contemporary medical and scientific ignorance.
8. It has had an immeasurably profound impact on the world and always in a positive way whenever faithfully practiced.
9. It has the best textual sources of any ancient book. That is, we can trace its history back to its beginnings more accurately, and with greater corroboration, than any major writing of the ancient world.
10. It contains a reasonable view of God, man, and truth.
11. It is indestructible. Its most powerful, rabid, and scholarly opponents have failed to do away with it.
12. It always is current. Last year the Book of the Month Club asked 2,000 of its readers what book most influenced their lives. The Bible was number one.
13. It addresses our fundamental questions about why we are the way we are, why suffering exists, where we came from, what our destiny will be, how the Universe began and how it will end, etc.
14. It fulfills our spiritual, social, psychological, and emotional needs.
15. It is incredibly brief, although it is set forth as a seminal book from the Creator. Men are notorious for their verbosity in such matters.
16. It is based on the testimony of thousands of witnesses throughout its history.
17. It portrays its heroes, flaws and all. It is unbiased in its treatment of history, unlike works of men praising their heroes.

On the other hand, the evidence for the inspiration of the Koran is based solely upon the testimony of one man, Mohammed. The same kind of “evidence” would make you a Hindu. Why accept Mohammed’s testimony and reject the Hindu testimony? Or, why accept the Hindu writings and reject the Koran? Both have essentially the same evidence in their favor. One cannot be proven to be any more legitimate than the other.

However, the preceding list includes just a few of the many very significant avenues that should be considered if a person is truly seeking to be open-minded about searching for truth among the world’s alleged books from God.

All religions are not the same. Their most basic doctrines readily contradict the others. However, there is one religion that is based upon a book that provides good reasons to be believed—unity and consistency of thought, high standards of thought and conduct, etc. Which should we believe?

[EDITOR'S NOTE: Kippy Myers holds an M.A. in philosophy and Christian apologetics from Harding Graduate School, an M.A. in philosophy from the University of Dallas, and a Ph.D. in philosophy from the University of Tennessee at Knoxville. He is an assistant professor of Bible at Freed-Hardeman University in Henderson, Tennessee.]

Who was Guided into all Truth? by Kyle Butt, M.Div.

 http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=1252

Who was Guided into all Truth?

by	Kyle Butt, M.Div.

Just before Jesus was betrayed and killed by the hands of lawless men, He informed His apostles that there were many things that He did not have the opportunity to teach them before His death. Because the apostles could not “bear” those teachings at that time, Jesus promised them that the Spirit of truth would come after His departure. Concerning the Spirit, Jesus said: “…when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth.” Some have read this verse, and assumed that all people who become Christians, and who have the Holy Spirit living in them (1 John 3:24), will be guided into all truth. A closer look at the situation, however, shows that the promise to be “guided into all truth” was given only to the apostles and first-century prophets, not to all Christians in general.

Consider, first, that in the context of John 16, the Lord was addressing the apostles exclusively. In John 16:32, Jesus informed them, saying, “Indeed the hour is coming, yes, has now come, that you will be scattered, each to his own, and will leave Me alone”—an exact prediction of what the apostles did in Gethsemane the night of the betrayal. This verse can be closely connected to Mark 13:11, where Jesus spoke to the apostles, saying, “But when they arrest you and deliver you up, do not worry beforehand, or premeditate what you will speak. But whatever is given you in that hour, speak that; for it is not you who speak, but the Holy Spirit.” Here, Jesus detailed the process by which the apostles would be inspired to preach God’s Word without having prepared a sermon or researched their topic.

In the New Testament books following the gospel accounts, we read about how Jesus’ promise to the apostles came true. Acts 2 informs us that the Holy Spirit came upon the apostles and gave them miraculous powers, thereby inspiring them to preach the Word. Acts 2:42 explains that the converts continued in the “apostle’s doctrine,” which would be the case because that doctrine was given to them by the Holy Spirit. Paul, in writing to the brethren at Ephesus, described the Gospel of Christ, “which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men,” as having “now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets” (Ephesians 3:5). And just a few verses prior to this statement, he told the Ephesian brethren that they were members of the “household of God, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone” (Ephesians 2:19-20). The apostle Peter wrote to remind his readers of “the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and the commandment of us, the apostles of the Lord and Savior” (2 Peter 3:2). In writing to the Thessalonians, Paul rejoiced that the brethren received his words “not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God” (1 Thessalonians 2:13). He also reminded the Christians in Corinth: “If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord” (1 Corinthians 14:37).

After the ascension of Christ, the Holy Spirit came upon the apostles, and brought to their minds all the things that Jesus had said (John 14:26), in addition to further revelations that entailed “all truth.” When the apostles was brought before rulers or councils, they did not have to premeditate their speech, because the Holy Spirit provided the substance of it for them. The inspired apostles and prophets recorded those inspired thoughts in the various books of the Bible. The revelation recorded in the Bible was so complete that the apostle Peter wrote to his readers that God “has given us all things that pertain to life and godliness” (2 Peter 1:3). Jude recorded that the faith (meaning the body of teaching) was “once and for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3). And the apostle Paul wrote that even if an angel of heaven preached another Gospel than that which was delivered by the apostles, that angel was to be accursed (Galatians 1:6-9).

The apostles and first-century prophets were led into all truth, which was recorded in the Bible and faithfully passed down to us. The promise of being guided into “all truth” was never intended for every Christian, and it is clear that it does not apply to Christians today. If any Christian wants to speak the Word of God, he or she cannot refuse to study God’s Word, and simply assume that the Holy Spirit will directly put God’s Word on his or her heart. In fact, Christians today, instead of being promised a miraculous knowledge endowed by the Holy Spirit without thought on their part, are commanded “to study” or “be diligent” to know God’s Word (2 Timothy 2:15), and to “give attention to reading” the Word of God (1 Timothy 4:13). There is no truth pertinent to the salvation of the lost that the apostles and first-century prophets did not receive. We, therefore, can conclude that Jesus’ promise that the apostles would be guided into all truth was fulfilled. We further can conclude that no one living today has been given that promise, and that God’s Word has been definitively delivered to the saints once and for all.

Who Hardened Pharaoh's Heart? by Dave Miller, Ph.D. Kyle Butt, M.Div.

 

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=1205

Who Hardened Pharaoh's Heart?

by	Dave Miller, Ph.D. Kyle Butt, M.Div.

In their perpetual quest to find discrepancies in the Bible, to undermine biblical ethics, and to find fault with the actions of God, skeptics have charged that God mistreated Pharaoh by overriding his free will and forcing him to resist the demand of Moses to allow the Israelites to exit Egypt. The skeptics focus on the verses about Pharaoh’s heart, demanding that the God of the Bible is an unjust, cruel being. Steve Wells, the well-known skeptic writer, said: “God begins the process of ‘hardening Pharaoh’s heart’ (see also Exodus 7:3,13, 9:12, 10:1, 20,27, 11:10, 14:4,8), thus making it impossible for any of the plagues that God sends to have any beneficial effect. But according to 1 Samuel 6:6, God didn’t harden the Pharaoh’s heart; the Pharaoh did it himself” (Wells, 2001). Kendall Hobbs, in an essay titled “Why I Am No Longer a Christian,” added Pharaoh’s story to a list of alleged atrocities committed by the God of the Bible. “There are plenty of other atrocities committed by God or at his command,” Hobbs comments, then lists “the Exodus story when the Egyptian Pharaoh was repeatedly ready and willing to let Moses and his people go, until God hardened his heart, and then God punished him for his hardened heart by sending plagues or killing children throughout all of Egypt” (Hobbs, 2003).

The Protestant Calvinist response to the skeptic is simply to say that God can do what He chooses to do, and that humans have no right to question God. To him, the answer is “not to retract the sovereignty of God’s election, or to try to give a rational explanation to doubting men” (Palmer, 1972, p. 33). Since Calvinism has largely dominated the Protestant landscape for the last five centuries, most skeptics have dismissed Christianity as absurd, and have turned away in utter disgust in order to embrace atheism. The smug Calvinist declares, “So be it! You have the problem!”

But why would many otherwise right-thinking people reject the Calvinistic brand of Christianity? Must their rejection necessarily be due to a desire to be free from the moral and social restraints that come with the acceptance of the Christian religion? Must the unbeliever’s unbelief inevitably be the result of an unwillingness to accept truth? While it is true that most human beings in history have rejected the correct pathway in life due to stubborn pride, selfishness, and a desire to gratify fleshly desires (cf. Matthew 7:13-14; 1 John 2:15-17), there are exceptions. Some people reject Christianity because they have been presented with pseudo-Christianity—a Catholic or Protestant version of it—what Paul called “a different gospel” (Galatians 1:6), that is, a diluted, distorted form, rather than pure, New Testament Christianity.

The reason rational, honest people would reject Calvinism’s claim that God arbitrarily (i.e., for His own sovereign reasons) rejects some people, or overrides their free will, is because they recognize that a perfect God, i.e., One Who is infinite in all of His attributes (including justice, fairness, and impartiality), would not do so. God cannot be just, while unjustly rejecting some people. God cannot be God, and yet conduct Himself in an ungodly manner. Even the biggest sinner, who has violated his conscience repeatedly, and has dulled his spiritual sensibilities, has enough sense to comprehend the principle of being fair—even if he chooses not to treat people fairly.

Turning to the book of Exodus, most Bible readers must admit that they were at least slightly startled the first time they read about God hardening Pharaoh’s heart, and then His punishing Pharaoh for that same hard-heartedness. In dealing with these allegations, three distinct declarations are made with regard to the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart. First, the text states that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart (7:3; 9:12; 10:1,20,27; 11:10; 14:4,8), and the hearts of the Egyptians (14:17). Second, it is said that Pharaoh hardened his own heart (8:15,32; 9:34), that he refused to humble himself (10:3), and that he was stubborn (13:15). Third, the text uses the passive form to indicate that Pharaoh’s heart was hardened, without giving any indication as to the source (7:13,14,22; 8:19; 9:7,35). The questions that arise from this state of affairs are: (1) did God harden Pharaoh on some occasions, while Pharaoh hardened himself on others? (2) Did God do all the hardening of Pharaoh, with the references to Pharaoh hardening himself being the result of God forcing him to do so against his own will? (3) Are all three declarations given in the text actually parallel expressions that mean the same thing? (4) Are the three declarations distinct from one another in their meaning, but all true in their own respects? Is the God of the Bible an unjust, cruel Being?

Two excellent explanations are available that account for the Exodus declarations, each perfectly plausible and sufficient to demonstrate that both the skeptic and Calvinist interpretations are incorrect. Both explanations pertain to the fact that every language has its own way of using certain types of words and phrases that might appear odd to a person not familiar with the language. For instance, suppose a person commented that his boss became angry and “bit his head off.” Would anyone think that the speaker actually had his head bitten off? Of course not! English-speaking people understand this example of figurative speech. Or suppose a person went looking for a job, and someone said that she was “hitting the streets.” She was not literally hitting the streets with her fists. Most English speakers would understand the idiom. In the same way, the biblical languages had idioms, colloquialisms, Semitisms, and word usages peculiar to them, which those familiar with the language would understand.

In his copious work on biblical figures of speech, E.W. Bullinger listed several ways that the Hebrew and Greek languages used verbs to mean something other than their strict, literal usage. He listed several verses that show that the languages “used active verbs to express the agent’s design or attempt to do anything, even though the thing was not actually done” (1898, p. 821). To illustrate, in discussing the Israelites, Deuteronomy 28:68 states: “Ye shall be sold (i.e., put up for sale) unto your enemies…and no man shall buy you.” The translators of the New King James Version recognized the idiom and rendered the verse, “you shall be offered for sale.” The text clearly indicated that they would not be sold, because there would be no buyer, yet the Hebrew active verb for “sold” was used. In the New Testament, a clear example of this type of usage is found in 1 John 1:10, which states, “If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him [God—KB/DM] a liar.” No one can make God a liar, but the attempt to deny sin is the equivalent of attempting to make God a liar, which is rendered with an active verb as if it actually happened. Verbs, therefore, can have idiomatic usages that may convey something other than a strict, literal meaning.

With that in mind, Bullinger’s fourth list of idiomatic verbs deals with active verbs that “were used by the Hebrews to express, not the doing of the thing, but the permission of the thing which the agent is said to do” (p. 823, emp. in orig.). To illustrate, in commenting on Exodus 4:21, Bullinger stated: “ ‘I will harden his heart (i.e., I will permit or suffer his heart to be hardened), that he shall not let the people go.’ So in all the passages which speak of the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart. As is clear from the common use of the same Idiom in the following passages” (1968, p. 823). He then listed Jeremiah 4:10, “ ‘Lord God, surely thou hast greatly deceived this people’: i.e., thou hast suffered this People to be greatly deceived, by the false prophets….’ ” Ezekiel 14:9 is also given as an example of this type of usage: “ ‘If the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the Lord have deceived that prophet’: i.e., I have permitted him to deceive himself.” James MacKnight, in a lengthy section on biblical idioms, agrees with Bullinger’s assessment that in Hebrew active verbs can express permission and not direct action. This explanation unquestionably clarifies the question of God hardening Pharaoh’s heart. When the text says that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart, it means that God would permit or allow Pharaoh’s heart to be hardened.

A second equally legitimate explanation for the Exodus text is that the allusions to God hardening Pharaoh’s heart are a form of figurative speech, very closely associated with metaphor, known as “metonymy,” where one name or word is employed for another. For example, when we speak of “reading Shakespeare,” we mean that we read his writings or plays. God hardening Pharaoh’s heart would be “metonymy of the subject,” that is, the subject is announced, while some property or circumstance belonging to it is meant. Specifically, under this form of the figure, “[a]n action is sometimes said to have been accomplished, when all that is meant by it is that an occasion was given” (Dungan, 1888, p. 287; cf. Bullinger, 1898, p. 570).

The Bible is replete with examples that illustrate this figure of speech. John reported that “Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John” (John 4:1). In reality, Jesus did not personally baptize anyone (John 4:2). But His teaching and influence caused it to be done. Jesus, the subject, is mentioned, but it is the circumstance of His influence that is intended. His teaching was responsible for people being baptized. Repeatedly in the book of 1 Kings, various kings of Israel are said to have “walked in the way of Jeroboam…who had made Israel sin” (e.g., 1 Kings 16:19,26; 22:52). But Jeroboam did not force either his contemporaries or his successors to sin. Rather, he set an example that they chose to follow. Judas was said to have purchased a field with the money he obtained by betraying Christ (Acts 1:18). But, in reality, he returned the money to the chief priests and then hung himself. The blood money was then used to purchase the field (Matthew 27:5-7). By metonymy of the subject, Judas was said to have done that which his action occasioned. Paul warned Roman Christians: “Do not destroy with your food the one for whom Christ died” (Romans 14:15). What he meant was that they should not set an example that lures weaker brothers into doing what they consider to be wrong. Paul told Corinthian Christians that they were in a position to “save” their unbelieving spouses (1 Corinthians 7:16). He told Timothy that he was in a position to “save” those who listened to his teaching (1 Timothy 4:16). In both cases, Paul meant that proper teaching and a proper example could influence the recipients to obey God’s will for their lives.

Another instance of metonymy of the subject, closely aligned with the example of Pharaoh in Exodus, is the occasion of the conversion of Lydia, the businesswoman from Thyatira. The text states that the “Lord opened her heart” (Acts 16:14). However, the specific means by which God achieved this action was the preaching of Paul. God’s Word, spoken through Paul, created within her a receptive and responsive mind. In like fashion, Jesus is said to have preached to Gentiles as well as to the antediluvian population of Noah’s day (Ephesians 2:17; 1 Peter 3:19). Of course, Jesus did neither—directly. Rather, He operated through agents—through Paul in the first case and through Noah in the latter. Similarly, Nathan accused king David: “You have killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword” (2 Samuel 12:9). In reality, David sent a letter to his general ordering him to arrange battle positions where Uriah would be more vulnerable to enemy fire. On the basis of metonymy of the subject, David, the subject, is said to have done something that, in actuality, he simply arranged for others to do.

In the case of Pharaoh, “God hardened Pharaoh’s heart” in the sense that God provided the circumstances and the occasion for Pharaoh to be forced to make a decision. God sent Moses to place His demands before Pharaoh. Moses merely announced God’s instructions. God even accompanied His Word with miracles—to confirm the divine origin of the message (cf. Mark 16:20). Pharaoh made up his own mind to resist God’s demands. Of his own accord, he stubbornly refused to comply. Of course, God provided the occasion for Pharaoh to demonstrate his unyielding attitude. If God had not sent Moses, Pharaoh would not have been faced with the dilemma of whether to release the Israelites. So God was certainly the instigator and initiator. But He was not the author of Pharaoh’s defiance.

Notice that in a very real sense, all four of the following statements are true: (1) God hardened Pharaoh’s heart; (2) Moses hardened Pharaoh’s heart; (3) the words that Moses spoke hardened Pharaoh’s heart; (4) Pharaoh hardened his own heart. All four of these observations are accurate, depicting the same truth from different perspectives. In this sense, God is responsible for everything in the Universe, i.e., He has provided the occasion, the circumstances, and the environment in which all things (including people) operate. But He is not guilty of wrong in so doing. From a quick look at a simple Hebrew idiom, it is clear that God did not unjustly or directly harden Pharaoh’s heart. God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34), He does not act unjustly (Psalms 33:5), and He has always allowed humans to exercise their free moral agency (Deuteronomy 30:19). God, however, does use the wrong, stubborn decisions committed by rebellious sinners to further His causes (Isaiah 10:5-11). In the case of Pharaoh’s hardened heart, God can be charged with no injustice, and the Bible can be charged with no contradiction. Humans were created with free moral agency and are culpable for their own actions.

REFERENCES

Bullinger, E.W. (1898), Figures of Speech Used in the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1968 reprint).

Dungan, D.R. (1888), Hermeneutics (Delight, AR: Gospel Light).

Hobbs, Kendall (2003), “Why I Am No Longer a Christian: Ruminations on a Spiritual Journey out of and into the Material World,” [On-line], URL: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/kendall_hobbs/no_longer.shtml.

MacKnight, James (1954 reprint), Apostolic Epistles (Nashville, TN: Gospel Advocate).

Palmer, Edwin (1972), The Five Points of Calvinism (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).

Wells, Steve (2001), Skeptic’s Annotated Bible, [On-line], URL: http://www.Skepticsannotatedbible.com>.

Does Sin Negate the Christian Faith? by Ken Weliever, The Preacherman

 

https://thepreachersword.com/2015/06/04/does-sin-negate-the-christian-faith/

Does Sin Negate the Christian Faith?

Last night Norma Jean and I watched Megyn Kelly’s exclusive interview with Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar as they discussed the child molestation charges against their son, Josh.

Leading up to the interview we saw clips of the intense criticism toward the Duggar family from various news outlets. They have been called “hypocrites” and much worse. The vitriolic venom emanating from some sources has been excoriating.

To be clear, the purpose of today’s post is certainly not to condone Josh Duggar’s sinful behavior when he was a teenager. It is not to pass judgment on the response of his parents. It is not to defend the Duggar family per sae. I’ve not been a fan or follower of their reality show on TLC “19 Kids and Counting.” And it’s not to critique their interview with Megyn Kelly!

However, I am concerned about the reaction by the main-stream media and secular progressives when it is discovered that someone with professed Christian values has committed a sin, or is dealing with sin in their family.

For instance, the Duggars have been outspoken regarding their moral beliefs. Like many Christians, they are opposed to abortion, homosexuality and same-sex marriage. Does this revelation about their son, Josh, suddenly invalidate their Faith? Are their beliefs proven false due to the lapse in moral judgment by a family member? Does it make them hypocrites for condemning sin when one of their own has sinned?

As you contemplate these questions, consider this passage from 1 John 1:5-10.

This is the message which we have heard from Him and declare to you, that God is light and in Him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth.

But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.

If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us.

Here are 6 facts I learn from this text.

(1) We all sin.

(2) To deny that we sin makes us liars.

(3) However, God does not want us to live in sin. Walk in sin. Continue in sin.

(4) God requires confession of our sins.

(5) When we confess our sins, God will forgive us.

(6) Walking in the light of Christ creates an atmosphere of righteous living and provides cleansing, when we confess.

While our sin may diminish our influence and damage our credibility, it does not change God’s Truth! The existence of God, the reliability of Scripture and the credence of Christianity is not dependant upon the perfection of its adherents.

Bible heroes were not infallible, but people with failings and flaws. Abraham lied, but he is called the friend of God. Moses doubted and even disobeyed, but is still hailed as a man of faith. David committed adultery, but is identified as “a man after God’s own heart.” Peter denied Jesus, yet was given “the keys of the kingdom and became a great apostle, preacher and pastor. Each one repented, returned to God and received restoration.

It is good to remember that as Christians we are not perfect, but we are pardoned. We are not sinless, but we are saved. Christ has redeemed us by His blood (Eph. 1:7).

Yes, one’s sinful actions cause hurt, shame, and sorrow, as well as long-term consequences, but they do not nullify our Faith or negate the Truth of Christianity. In fact, it only highlights our continual need for Jesus and His absolute forgiveness.

–Ken Weliever, The Preacherman

BAPTIST DOCTRINE AND WATER BAPTISM by steve finnell

 

http://steve-finnell.blogspot.com/2017/02/baptist-doctrine-and-water-baptism-by.html

BAPTIST DOCTRINE AND WATER BAPTISM by steve finnell

Is Baptist doctrine on water baptism equal to Christian doctrine?

1. Baptist Doctrine: Water baptism is not essential in order to have transgressions forgiven.  Ref. None in Scripture.   

Christian Doctrine: Water baptism is essential in order to have transgressions forgiven. Ref. Colossians 2:11-13 ....buried with Him in baptism...13....having forgiven us all our transgressions.(NASB)

2. Baptist Doctrine: Water baptism is simply for a demonstration of faith to the community, and not for forgiveness of sins..Ref. Made man opinion, no Scripture

Christian Doctrine: Water baptism is in order to have sins forgiven. Ref. Acts 2:38 ...and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of you sins...(NASB)

3. Baptist Doctrine: Water baptism has no part in salvation. Ref. Denominational doctrine, no Scripture given.

Christian Doctrine: Water baptism is part of salvation. Ref. 1 Peter 3:20-21...brought safely through the water. 21 Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you....(NASB)

4. Baptist Doctrine: Baptism does not in any way precede salvation. Ref. Baptist opinion, no Scripture given.

Christian Doctrine: Salvation follows water baptism. Ref. Mark 16:16 ....and has been baptized shall be saved...(NASB)

5.Baptist Doctrine: Men enter the kingdom of God even though they have never been baptized in water. Ref. Baptist teaching, not found in Scripture.

Christian Doctrine: You must be born of water baptism to enter the kingdom of God. Ref. John 3:5 ...unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.(NASB)

6. Baptist Doctrine: Water baptism has nothing to do with sanctifying the church and cleansing it. Ref. Baptist opinions, not found in the Bible.

Christian Doctrine: Christ made the church holy and blameless by water baptism. Ref. Ephesians 5:25-27....26 so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word,27......that she would be holy and blameless.(NASB)

7. Baptist Doctrine: Men can get into heaven without being baptized in water, however, men must be baptized in water to get into the Baptist church. Ref. Not found in the Bible. God did not say it. Jesus did not say it. The Holy Spirit did not say it. The apostles did not say it.

Christian doctrine on water baptism is found in Scripture and Scripture alone.  

ACTS by Paul Southern

 

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

 

ACTS

1. TITLE

The book is called "The Acts", or "The Acts of the Apostles" because it contains the doings of some of the apostles. The titles are misleading, however, because the book does not contain all the acts of all the apostles. The work of only two, Peter and Paul, is given in detail. A better title would be "Acts of the Holy Spirit Through the Apostles," since the Holy Spirit is the active agent (Acts 1:8, 2:1-4, etc.). The important thing is man's response to the contents of the book.

2. WRITER

The authorship of Acts is ascribed to Luke for the following reasons:

1. It is addressed to Theophilus (Acts 1:1), to whom the writer had formerly written a record of the life of Christ (Luke 1:3). The gospel of Luke is the only record that meets this condition.
2. The two books are quite similar in style, vocabulary, etc.
3. After the thirteenth chapter, the pronoun "we" indicates that the writer was a traveling companion of Paul. From Paul we learn that Luke was with him part of the time (Col 4:14; II Tim 4:11; Philemon 23). For facts concerning Luke's life the student is referred to the outline on the Gospel According to Luke.
3. THE DATE

Luke probably wrote the book of Acts from Rome during Paul's first imprisonment. It records 33 years of Christian history, reaching from Tiberius Caesar to Nero, Roman emperors. Since the story ends abruptly without giving an account of Paul's death or release, it is thought that the apostle was still a prisoner (Acts 28:30,31). The book was probably written about A.D. 63 or 64, although New Testament chronology is often hard to determine.

4. PURPOSE

Acts of Apostles is a continuation of the writer's former treatise (Luke), and records the birth, growth and development of the Christian religion after the ascension of Jesus. It shows how the apostles carried on the work commanded by Jesus of evangelizing the world (Acts 1:8). The book is the best available commentary on the great commission (Mark 16:15,16; Matthew 28:18-20; Luke 26:46, 47). It is truly a book of conversions.

5. ANALYSIS (See Acts 1:8 for the plan of evangelization)
1. Preaching the gospel "in Jerusalem" (Acts 1:1 to 8:1).
2. Preaching the gospel "in all Judea and Samaria" (Acts 8:2 to 12:25).
3. Preaching the gospel "unto the uttermost part of the earth" (Acts 13:1 to 28:31).
6. EXERCISES FOR STUDENT ACTIVITY
1. Identify each of the following: Barnabas, Elymas, Sergius Paulus, Bereans, Aquila, Priscilla, Justus, Crispus, Gallio, Eutychus, Demetrius, Agrippa, Bernice. Tertullus, Felix, Festus, Gaius, and Aristarchus.
2. Study the following events recorded in Acts, giving chapter reference for each:
1. __________ The ascension of Jesus.
2. __________ Peter's second sermon.
3. __________ Baptism of the apostles with the Holy Spirit.
4. __________ Selection of Matthias to succeed Judas.
5. __________ Defense and death of Stephen.
6. __________ First mention of the name Christian.
7. __________ Death of Ananias and Sapphira.
8. __________ Appointment of the seven deacons at Jerusalem.
9. __________ Paul's address at Antioch in Pisidia.
10. __________ Beginning of Paul's first missionary journey.
11. __________ The Jerusalem conference on circumcision.
12. __________ Paul's sermon at Troas.
13. __________ Stoning of Paul at Lystra.
14. __________ Paul's address to the Ephesian elders at Miletus.
15. __________ Paul's defense before Festus.
16. __________ Paul's speech on Mar's Hill (Areopagus).
17. __________ Paul's defense before Agrippa.
18. __________ First persecution of the apostles.
19. __________ Paul's address to the mob in Jerusalem.
20. __________ Peter's vision at Joppa.
21. __________ Demetrius and the riot at Ephesus.
22. __________ Paul's defense before the Jewish Sanhedrin.
23. __________ Paul's defense before Felix.
24. __________ The work of Apollos at Ephesus.
25. __________ The death of Eutychus.
3. Give the name identified by each of the following:
1. __________ Where the disciples were first called Christians.
2. __________ Disciple who told Saul what to do to be saved.
3. __________ Doctor of the law who taught in Jerusalem.
4. __________ Disciple who tried to buy the gift of God with money.
5. __________ Man who lied to the Holy Spirit about his money.
6. __________ The first Gentile convert.
7. __________ The first Christian martyr.
8. __________ Man selected to take the place of Judas.
9. __________ "The field of blood."
10. __________ Country from which the eunuch came.
11. __________ Disciple whom Peter raised from the dead at Joppa.
12. __________ Tanner with whom Peter lodged at Joppa.
13. __________ Disciple who introduced Paul to the Jerusalem brethren.
14. __________ Herod's chamberlain who befriended Tyre and Sidon.
15. __________ Man of Galilee who stirred up a rebellion.
16. __________ Town where Peter saw the sheet let down from heaven.
17. __________ Apostle whom Herod killed with the sword.
18. __________ Man of Damascus who lived on Straight Street.
19. __________ Jerusalem deacon whose name means "Crown."
20. __________ Place which Paul described as "no mean city."
21. __________ Writer of the book of Acts.
22. __________ Person to whom Acts is addressed.
23. __________ Word in Acts indicating the writer was with Paul some of the time.
24. __________ City in which the gospel was first preached.
25. __________ People noted for searching the scriptures daily.
26. __________ Man who forsook Paul on the first mission tour.
27. __________ Eloquent Alexandrian Jew who knew only the baptism of John.
28. __________ Capital of the Roman province of Judea.
29. __________ City in which Paul was baptized.
30. __________ A seller of purple, first convert in Philippi.
31. __________ Famous centurion who became a Christian.
32. __________ Name of the city in which the temple of Diana was located.
33. __________ Silversmith who stirred up riot against Paul at Ephesus.
34. __________ Man who was almost persuaded to be a Christian.
35. __________ Island upon which Paul was shipwrecked going to Rome.
36. __________ City in which Mar's Hill (Areopagus) was located.
37. __________ Man and wife with whom Paul lived in Corinth.
38. __________ City in which Paul first preached the gospel.
39. __________ Man who waited for a convenient season to obey the gospel.
4. Study the following cases of conversion. At the bottom, give the reference for each. Indicate with a cross (X) in each case where special mention is made of (H) hearing, (F) faith, (R) repentance, (C) confession or (B) baptism.

	Pentecost	Samaritans	Eunuch	Saul	Cornelius	Lydia	Jailor	Corinthians
H
F
R
C
B

 

CONVERSION TO GOD

1. IMPORTANCE OF CONVERSION

Conversion is a Bible theme that has to do with peace and happiness in this life, and everlasting joy in the world to come. Eternal life depends upon whether one has been truly converted to God. Jesus said: "Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 18:3). Therefore we are correct in saying that all converted persons who remain faithful unto death will be saved eternally (Revelation 3:21). All other responsible persons who refuse to obey God shall suffer eternal destruction (II Thessalonians 1:8,9).

2. MEANING OF CONVERSION

What constitutes conversion is a moot question. The word literally means a "turning." From the New Testament standpoint, conversion means a turning from sin to walk with Christ. Jesus said: "I am the way…no one cometh unto the Father but by me" (John 14:6). Conversion involves the remission of sins. It is that spiritual change which accompanies the turning of a sinner from sin to God (Acts 3:19).

3. MAN'S RESPONSIBILITY

In conversion, God has a part and man has a part. The fact that salvation is a matter of grace (Ephesians 2:8,9) does not remove man's responsibility. God supplies the grace; man becomes the recipient of divine grace when he renders obedience to the Son of God. This process of obedience consists of three definite changes in man: a change of heart, a change of life and a change of state.

4. CHANGE OF HEART

The change of heart comes first, for the heart must be right before the other changes can be effected. Obedience must be from the heart (Romans 6:17). Peter declared that faith is the divine means of changing the heart. "God - made no distinction between us (Jews) and them (Gentiles), cleansing their heart by faith" (Acts 15:8,9). Divine faith is based on testimony (John 20:30,31). It comes by hearing God's word (Romans 10:17). However, it is important to note that faith alone is insufficient, for "faith apart from works is dead" (James 2:26; Galatians 5:6).

5. CHANGE OF LIFE

In the second place, there must be a change of life. This is brought about by repentance. In the great commission, Jesus told the disciples to preach repentance unto salvation (Luke 24:46-49). This repentance is a change of mind with respect to sin. It involves godly sorrow for sin and is followed by a reformation of life (II Corinthians 7:8-11). On Pentecost, Peter said: "Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins" (Acts 2:38). God now commands all men everywhere to repent (Acts 17:30).

6. CHANGE OF STATE

Man must finally change his state (relationship) before he is converted to God according to the New Covenant. He must be born again, born of the water and the Spirit (John 3:5). Baptism is the sacred ceremony ordained by Jehovah to change the state of a penitent believer. By this means he is brought into Christ (Galatians 3:27), saved from past sins and added to the church (Mark 16:15,16; Acts 2:47). But before one can be scripturally baptized, he must confess his faith in Christ (Acts 8:37; Romans 10:9,10). The person who stops short of this divine process has not been truly converted to God.

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

 

Life is... by Gary Rose

 

The above statement is true. Grudging accepting one’s fate is not what a Christian is to be like. We have life with Christ and hope and joy and an unbelievable future awaiting us. God gives us happiness, regardless what our circumstances may be.

The United States of America is shifting away from God. Soon, it is entirely possible that we will be persecuted for our faith in God and his one and only son, Jesus. Some of us already are beginning to experience this.

Yesterday, I was reviewing “my memories” in Facebook and noticed once again that some of my posts had been deleted by those who enforce Facebook’s “community standards”. This is nothing new however, for within the past year, posts that have been acceptable to them for several years are no longer allowed. What is different is the increased percentage of censorship- my guess is about 80%. When this public forum rejects my posts based on the Bible and consistently increases their censorship, well it is time for me to leave them and go elsewhere. Currently, I am looking at “Parler” and “MeWee” as possible alternatives, but the search is far from over.

So, what do I do? I will not react in anger, but rather search for other mediums to share my reflections on life as seen through the lens of the Scriptures. More than that, I will rejoice that for a number of years I was blessed to be able to spread the Word of God as it influences my life.

I am not alone. Think of The Apostle Paul. He had obstacles, problems, difficulties, concerns and worries. I am amazed at his consistent positive attitude. His life is one of the best examples for Christians that I can think of and in some small way emulate.

Paul writes…

¹² Now I desire to have you know, brothers, that the things which happened to me have turned out rather to the progress of the Good News;

¹³ so that it became evident to the whole palace guard, and to all the rest, that my bonds are in Christ;

¹⁴ and that most of the brothers in the Lord, being confident through my bonds, are more abundantly bold to speak the word of God without fear.

¹⁵ Some indeed preach Christ even out of envy and strife, and some also out of good will.

¹⁶ The former insincerely preach Christ from selfish ambition, thinking that they add affliction to my chains;

¹⁷ but the latter out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the Good News.

¹⁸ What does it matter? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed. I rejoice in this, yes, and will rejoice.

¹⁹ For I know that this will turn out to my salvation, through your supplication and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ,

²⁰ according to my earnest expectation and hope, that I will in no way be disappointed, but with all boldness, as always, now also Christ will be magnified in my body, whether by life, or by death.

²¹ For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.

I rejoice that I have been a Christian for four decades and will continue to do so until I die. Remember what Paul said “For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.”- What a wonderful thought! May God bless you in believing and practicing your faith; irrespective of who tries to censor or confront you!