The Bible's Teaching on Baptism: Contradictory or Complementary? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

 

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=806

The Bible's Teaching on Baptism: Contradictory or Complementary?

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

According to numerous skeptics, the Bible is inconsistent regarding whether or not water baptism is necessary (e.g., Drange, 1996; Morgan, 2003; cf. Wells, 2001). In Dennis McKinsey’s book, Biblical Errancy (2000), he lists several verses that teach the need for one to be baptized in order to be saved (Matthew 28:19; Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38; 1 Peter 3:21; etc.), but then he lists four verses (John 4:2; 1 Corinthians 1:14,16,17) which allegedly teach that baptism “is not a necessity” (p. 61). According to these men, Jesus and Paul were confused regarding the purpose of baptism.

There is no doubt that Jesus and His apostles taught the essentiality of being immersed in water for salvation. After Jesus commissioned His apostles to “go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature,” He stated that “he who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned” (Mark 16:15-16; cf. Matthew 28:19). The Jews who had murdered Christ, and to whom Peter spoke on the Day of Pentecost when he ushered in the Christian age, were told: “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38). Before becoming a Christian, Saul of Tarsus was commanded to “arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16). The biblical solution to the problem of soul-damning sin is that the person who has heard the Gospel, who has believed its message, who has repented of past sins, and who has confessed Christ as Lord must then—in order to receive remission (forgiveness) of sins—be baptized. [The English word “baptize” is a transliteration of the Greek word baptizo, meaning to immerse, dip, plunge beneath, or submerge (Thayer, 1958, p. 94).] According to Peter, “baptism,” corresponding to Noah’s salvation through water, “now saves us…(not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 3:21). Although baptism is no less, nor more, important than any other of God’s commands regarding what to do to be saved, the New Testament clearly teaches that water immersion is the point at which a person is saved by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

If it is the case then that baptism is essential for salvation, then why did the apostle John write: “Therefore, when the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John (though Jesus Himself did not baptize, but His disciples), He left Judea and departed again to Galilee” (John 4:1-3, emp. added)? And why did the apostle Paul write to the church at Corinth: “I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name…. For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel” (1 Corinthians 1:14-17, emp. added)? Do these statements indicate that baptism is not necessary for a person to be saved as skeptics allege? No, they do not.

First, John did not indicate that Jesus thought baptism was unnecessary; he merely stated the fact that Jesus did not personally do the baptizing; rather, His disciples did (John 4:2). The phrase in 4:1 regarding Jesus “baptizing” more disciples than John is simply a figure of speech where a person is represented as doing something when, in fact, he merely supplies the means for doing it. For example, Joseph indicated on one occasion that his brothers sold him into Egypt (Genesis 45:4-5; cf. Acts 7:9), when actually they sold him to the Ishmaelites (who then sold him into Egypt). This is a well-known principle in law—a person who acts through another to break the law (e.g., paying someone to commit murder) is deemed by authorities to be guilty of breaking the law himself. Similarly, Jesus did not personally baptize anyone. 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. Thus, this passage actually implies that Jesus commanded that His listeners be baptized. It in no way contradicts teachings found elsewhere in the Bible.

Second, Paul’s statements in his letter to the church at Corinth must be taken in their proper context in order to understand their true meaning. In 1 Corinthians 1:10-17, Paul was dealing with the division that was plaguing the Corinthian Christians. He had heard of the controversy in Corinth, and begged them to stand united, and resolve their differences.

Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloe’s household, that there are contentions among you. Now I say this, that each of you says, “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Cephas,” or “I am of Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name. Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas. Besides, I do not know whether I baptized any other. For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect (1 Corinthians 1:10-17).

Later, Paul added:

For where there are envy, strife, and divisions among you, are you not carnal and behaving like mere men? For when one says, “I am of Paul,” and another, “I am of Apollos,” are you not carnal? Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers through whom you believed, as the Lord gave to each one? I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase. So then neither he who plants is anything, nor he who waters, but God who gives the increase (1 Corinthians 3:3-7).

When a person reads 1 Corinthians 1:14-17 in view of the problem of division in Corinth that Paul was addressing in chapter one and throughout this letter, he or she has a better understanding of Paul’s statements regarding baptism. He was not indicating that baptism was unnecessary, but that people should not glory in the one who baptizes them. Some of the Corinthians were putting more emphasis on who baptized them, than on the one body of Christ to which a person is added when he or she is baptized (cf. Acts 2:41,47; Ephesians 4:4). Paul was thankful that he did not personally baptize any more Corinthians than he did, lest they boast in his name, rather than in the name of Christ (1:15). Likely, this is the same reason why “Jesus Himself did not baptize, but His disciples.” As Albert Barnes surmised: “[I]f he [Jesus—EL] had baptized, it might have made unhappy divisions among his followers: those might have considered themselves most worthy or honoured who had been baptized by him” (1956, p. 213, emp. in orig.). Paul understood that the fewer people he personally baptized, the less likely they were to rejoice in his name. [In 1 Corinthians 1:13, Paul implied that the only way to be saved is to be baptized into the name of Christ, saying, “Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?”] Paul’s desire was for converts to tie themselves to the Savior, and not to himself. He knew that “there is salvation in no one else” but Jesus; “for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men, by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). Paul concerned himself with preaching, and, like Jesus, left others to do the baptizing.

When Paul stated: “Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel,” he meant that preaching was his main work, and that others could immerse the converts. He did not mean by this statement that baptism is unimportant, but that the baptizer is inconsequential. Consider this: If Paul did not baptize, but preached, and, if others baptized those who heard Paul’s teachings, what can we infer about the content of Paul’s teachings? The truth is, at some point, he must have instructed the unsaved to be baptized (which is exactly what occurred in Corinth—read Acts 18:1-11; 1 Corinthians 6:11). Similar to how we logically infer from the Ethiopian eunuch’s baptism (Acts 8:36-39), that when Philip “preached Jesus to him” (8:35), he informed the eunuch of the essentiality of baptism, we can truthfully affirm that Paul taught that baptism is essential for salvation. The allegation that Paul and Jesus ever considered baptism non-essential, simply is unfounded.

REFERENCES

Barnes, Albert (1956), Notes on the Old and New Testaments: Luke and John (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).

Drange, Theodore M. (1996), “The Argument from the Bible,” [On-line], URL: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theodore_drange/bible.html.

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

Morgan, Donald (2003), “Biblical Inconsistencies,” [On-line], URL: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.shtml.

Thayer, J.H. (1958 reprint), A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark).

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

The Bible Versus the Book of Mormon by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

 

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=863

The Bible Versus the Book of Mormon

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

Similar to the insecure person who hangs around the rich and famous for the sole reason of establishing himself, the Book of Mormon has attempted to make a name for itself by “cozying up to” the Bible. The very first line in the “Introduction” to the Mormons’ revered text states: “The Book of Mormon is a volume of holy scripture comparable to the Bible.” Even the Book of Mormon’s subtitle (“Another Testament of Jesus Christ”—emp. added) lends credibility to the Bible. Obviously, the Mormons have attempted to give credence to their scripture by comparing it to the Bible. Furthermore, a crucial element of the Mormon religion found in their Article of Faith #8 says: “We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God” (emp. added). If both the Bible and the Book of Mormon are inspired by God, then reason demands that they must never contradict one another. No book from God’s hand will contain factual mistakes because He does not make mistakes. By definition, He is omniscient and perfect in all His ways (cf. Psalm 139:1-6; 1 John 3:20). The truth is, however, they do contradict one another.

The Book of Mormon contains numerous passages that contradict what the Bible says. The following examples are conspicuous instances of such contradictions.

• Rather than God confusing “the language of all the earth” at the tower of Babel as the Bible records (Genesis 11:9), the Book of Mormon contends that the language of Jared, his brother, as well as their friends and family members “were not confounded” (Ether 1:33-37).
• Contrary to the Bible prophecy concerning the Lord’s birth in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2), and the fulfillment of that prophecy in Matthew 2:1, the Book of Mormon reads: “And behold, he (Jesus) shall be born of Mary at Jerusalem” (Alma 7:10, parenthetical comment and emp. added). The writer of the Book of Mormon was simply wrong.
• The Bible tells us that at the crucifixion of Jesus, darkness covered the land for three hours (Matthew 27:45; Mark 15:33; Luke 23:44). However, the Book of Mormon states three different times that there was darkness “for the space of three days” (Helaman 14:20,27; 3 Nephi 8:3, emp. added). Of course, this is a big difference.
• Finally, whereas the Book of Mormon has people wearing the name Christian in about 73 B.C. (Alma 46:13, 15), the Bible clearly reveals that the disciples of Christ “were called Christians first in Antioch” (Acts 11:26, emp. added). This was in approximately A.D. 40, and thus represents a difference of over 100 years. Which account are people to believe? After all, according to Mormons, both books are inspired.

The fact that there are numerous disagreements between the Bible and the Book of Mormon does not disparage the Bible in any way. In fact, a Bible believer would expect there to be contradictions between the two, since the Bible never gives any legitimacy to the Book of Mormon, but actually condemns it (cf. Galatians 1:6-9, Revelation 22:18-19, 2 Peter 1:3, and Jude 3). On the other hand, the Book of Mormon easily is exposed as fiction when compared to and contrasted with the Bible, which Mormons claim is “the word of God.”

Simply put, if both the Bible and the Book of Mormon were inspired by God, then they never would contradict each other. However, since they do disagree with one another (in a number of places), the Book of Mormon is obviously a fraud, written by con men, not inspired men.

How To See Through The Darkness by Ken Weliever

 

https://thepreachersword.com/2020/04/02/how-to-see-through-the-darkness/#more-15829

How To See Through The Darkness

Norma Jean and I are blessed to be “sheltering in place” in the Smoky Mountains. Since my April meetings have been postponed and my current preaching appointments cancelled we’re going to remain here for the month of April.

As I write in the early morning darkness I look out my balcony window and it’s pitch black. There’s a beautiful mountain view, but I can’t see it. Yesterday we awoke to rain. The clouds and fog covered the mountains, so we could hardly see.

Later in the morning when the clouds lifted I looked and exclaimed, “Norma Jean, look, there’s snow on the top the mountain.” It obviously snowed during the night. But I couldn’t see it. Not until the weather cleared a little bit.

It occurred me that it’s a metaphor for our current situation. Right now we’re living in one of the darkest times most of us have ever experienced. The cloud of COVID-19 is limiting our sight.

If you are home-bound, you can only see what is around you. Of course, you can turn on the TV and see the latest numbers of those who’ve contracted COVID-19. You learn how many have died. You hear about the latest orders from your governor or the President about social distancing. And find out from the experts predicting that the cases of the Coronavirus haven’t yet reached their peak, as well as the resulting deaths.

Focusing on all of that can be dark. Discouraging. And depressing. However, when “the eyes of our understanding are enlightened” (Eph. 1:18), we can see the unseen. We need 20/20 Vision. Spiritually speaking. We need to restore our focus. We need to look with the eye of faith.

Just like the mountain is there, even though I can’t see it, God is there. Jesus is Lord. And the Holy Spirit dwells in my heart through faith.

Yesterday, Norma Jean and were reading Psalm 143 as a part of our daily Bible reading. David is appealing to the Lord for guidance and deliverance from his enemy. He’s in desperate danger. Whether it speaks of the time when he was chased by Saul, hiding in a cave, or fleeing Jerusalem during his son Absolom’s rebellion, we don’t know.

But this was a dark time for David. He’s hurting. Dismayed. And distressed. You can feel his anguish when he cries:

The enemy has persecuted my soul;
He has crushed my life to the ground;
He has made me dwell in darkness,
Like those who have long been dead.
Therefore my spirit is overwhelmed within me;
My heart within me is distressed.

Ever felt that way? Overwhelmed? Crushed? In darkness? Distressed?

In addition to the present distress of this unseen, spreading virus, some are facing financial difficulties. Others sickness. Some have lost loved ones. We can’t go anywhere. Not even to a public worship assembly. It’s tough.

But like David, we need to “remember the days of old.” Remember your blessings. God’s goodness. His grace. Mercy. And love.

We need to meditate on all that He has done. Not just in our lives. But in the lives of others. The spiritual blessings we enjoy, even in difficult times.

We need to ponder the work of His hands. Go outside. Talk a walk. See the sun? The moon? The stars? The beauty of nature? It’s a vivid reminder, in the words of A. W. Discus, “When we behold the wonders of creation, The flow’rs that bloom, the raindrops as they fall; The spacious skies and life’s perpetuation, We cannot doubt that God controlled it all.” And He still is.

In the Psalm David pled, “Hear my prayer, O Lord.” “Give ear.” And “answer me.” Like David, we need to believe that God hears us. Feels our pain. And will respond to our cries.

We see David’s faith, hope and reliance on the Lord’s providential care when he prayed, “Deliver me.” “Teach me.” And “revive me.” He believed that God was more powerful than his enemy. And trusted Him to relieve his affliction. Like the Psalmist, we too, need to open our eyes to God’s greatness. Grace. And merciful deliverance from our affliction.

Well, guess what? As I finish writing, the darkness has dissipated. The fog has dissolved. There are no clouds covering the mountains this morning. The sun is shining.

I’m reminded that this current crisis and present distress will soon be lifted.

Open your eyes to see the unseen. Have faith. Live in hope. Trust God. And be faithful.

–Ken Weliever, The Preacherman

THE RAPTURE by David Vaughn Elliott

 http://steve-finnell.blogspot.com/2017/02/the-rapture-by-david-vaughn-elliott.html

 

THE RAPTURE

 

by David Vaughn Elliott

 

 

   They tell us planes will fall out of the sky. Automobiles will careen and crash. Surgeries will be halted mid-way. Communications systems will be in shambles. Husbands will frantically search for their wives. Why? Because all believers instantly and mysteriously vanished. In spite of such chaos, they tell us life on earth will continue for years. They call it the rapture.  

    Some people emphasize that the word "rapture" is not found in the Bible. This is true; but it is not the real problem. First Thessalonians 4:17 says that believers "shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord." "Caught up." The dictionary gives one meaning of rapture as "the carrying of a person to another place or sphere of existence." If by "rapture" one simply means that Christians will be carried up to be with Christ, then there is little objection to the word "rapture." 

THE REAL PROBLEM

    However, "rapture," as used by religious teachers today, means far more than the simple definition given above. Indeed, there is a whole body of doctrine wrapped up in today's word "rapture."  

    One obvious problem with the modern rapture theory is the portraying of dramatic scenes of plane crashes, missing babies and all such. There is not one verse in the Bible that hints at such a scenario. No verse teaches that after the "rapture," regular life will continue in this world. One of the most cited texts, 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, is totally silent about conditions on earth when the saints are lifted up.  

    Another frequently cited text is Matthew 24:37-42. But did Jesus have the modern rapture scenario in mind? Let the context decide. Starting just 5 verses earlier, Jesus said, "Heaven and earth will pass away... but as the days of Noah [were]... the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. Then two [men] will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left." Jesus' return will be like Noah's time. The flood was the end of that old world. Either you were safe in the ark or you perished under the wrath of God. That is how it will be when Jesus returns.  

    The context of "one will be taken and the other left" is "as the days of Noah [were], so also will the coming of the Son of Man be." The rapture will be like Noah's time. Did Noah mysteriously disappear? When Noah entered the ark, did the world continue with normal daily life? We all know better. "The world [that] then existed perished" (2 Peter 3:6).  

    Jesus did not have the modern rapture doctrine in mind. Rather, He said that when He returns, the earth will pass away.  

WHAT JESUS "SHOULD" HAVE SAID

    If the popular rapture theory were correct, Jesus would have used totally different examples. Jesus would have said, "As the days of Enoch were," "as the days of Elijah were." Righteous Enoch disappeared out of this world and the world continued on. Elijah's case is even more striking. After the whirlwind took him up into heaven, 50 men went searching for him for three days. Now there is the flavor of today's rapture doctrine! There is only one problem. Jesus never said, "as the days of Elijah were"! Jesus said, "as the days of Noah [were]."  

    Jesus never said, "As the days of Enoch were." However, He did say, "Likewise as it was also in the days of Lot... it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed [them] all. Even so will it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed" (Luke 17:28-30).

    The comparisons that Jesus made are with Lot and Noah. Both involved the immediate destruction of the wicked, while the righteous were saved. Both canceled out any possibility of second chances. Both were the end. The case of Sodom, of course, was not the end of the world; but it certainly was the end of Sodom and Gomorrah. Those cities have never been found. Those people never lived long enough to wonder what happened to Lot. There were no chariot wrecks or search parties. God simply blotted them off the face of the earth with fire and brimstone. Jesus said His coming would be like that. 

"COME AS A THIEF"

    The "secret rapture" theory uses as a proof the statement that Jesus will come as a thief. Yes, but what does this mean? Figures of speech can be tricky. Both Jesus and Satan are likened to lions. A red flag goes up: "Interpret with caution." Jesus is called both a lion and a lamb. Another red flag. We dare not wring every possible meaning out of any figure of speech. To do so is to make the Bible a plaything for our every imagination.  

    How do thieves come? Consider two ideas. A thief may come and go secretly, without being detected at the moment. On the other hand, a thief may come openly, but suddenly, without warning. Which of these two ideas does the Bible teach regarding Jesus' coming? If the figure were never explained in the Bible, your guess would be as good as mine.  

    Out of six New Testament texts that use this figure, only one does not state which meaning is intended. In the other five, the idea is always lack of warning. Secrecy is never an issue. Example: "If the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched and not allowed his house to be broken into. Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect" (Luke 12:39,40). The message is clear: Jesus will come as a thief, when you least expect Him. Be ready at all times. 

    Notice 2 Peter 3:10: "The day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up." "Thief... great noise... earth... burned up." Hardly secret. It is the end of the world!  

    No Bible text hints that "coming as a thief" contains the idea of secrecy. No Bible text hints that Jesus' coming will be hidden from the eyes and understanding of the masses. When Jesus comes, there will be no secrecy and no second chances. Eternity will have arrived. Everyone will know it. 

"SHOUT... VOICE... TRUMPET"

    The well-known text that speaks specifically of being "caught up" (raptured) makes it clear that it is anything but a covert operation. "For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive [and] remain shall be caught up" (1 Thessalonians 4:16,17). Shout! Voice of an archangel! Trumpet of God! Jesus coming certainly will not be secret.  

    In fact, Jesus specifically warned us not to believe those people who claim His return is a private, secret, hidden affair. "Therefore if they say to you, 'Look, He is in the desert!' do not go out; [or] 'Look, [He] [is] in the inner rooms!' do not believe [it]. For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be" (Matthew 24:26,27).  

    If someone tries to explain to you that Jesus has come again, don't believe it. If he tries to convince you that Jesus came in 1914, don't believe him. If he tries to convince you that Jesus will secretly rapture away the believers and the world will not know what happened, don't believe him. No TV newsperson will have to tell anybody of the return of Jesus. Neither will any self-appointed prophet have to explain it to anybody when Jesus returns. It will be like the lightning from the east to the west. All will see for themselves. Everyone will know.  

TWO "SECOND" COMINGS?

    Today's rapture theory says that Jesus is going to return to earth two more times: once before and once after "the tribulation." Some refer to the supposed two future events as "the rapture," followed by "the second coming." Others prefer to teach "two phases" to the "second" coming. None seem willing to openly admit that they really believe in: a "second" and "third" coming. 

    Various arguments are used to sustain the concept of two future comings. For example, it is said that two comings are required because the Word says that Jesus will come "for the saints" and also that He will come "with the saints." They say "for the saints" refers to the next time He comes, to take Christians to heaven. They say that "with the saints" refers to seven years later when He returns with those same saints. 

    Although no text uses the exact expression "for the saints," there is no problem here. All believers have as their hope that Jesus will return to receive us unto Himself.  

    But 1 Thessalonians 3:13 talks about "the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ WITH all His saints." Jude 14 also says, "Behold, the Lord comes WITH ten thousands of His saints" (upper case emphasis supplied). The problem is to understand what coming "WITH His saints" means. Does it mean that Jesus will first come to get His saints and then bring them back with him seven years later? Or, is there some other explanation?  

    With the Souls of the Dead Saints. Some believers find in 1 Thessalonians 4:14 the explanation of Jesus coming "with" the saints. "Even so God will bring with Him those who sleep in Jesus." They believe Jesus will come to earth bringing with him the souls of the departed saints in order to unite those souls with their bodies in the resurrection. 

    Some, however, object to this view of "bring." The Thessalonians text does not say that "Jesus will bring with Him to earth." It says, "God will bring with Him." "Bring" depends on the viewpoint involved. Jesus, not the Father, returns to earth. The Father will bring the resurrected saints with Jesus to heaven. Just like John 14:3: "And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, [there] you may be also." Both expressions--"bring" and "receive"--are from the viewpoint of heaven. 

    With the Holy Angels. This may be a better explanation of "with the saints." In 2 Thessalonians 1:7, Paul speaks of "when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels." Mark 8:38 says, "when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels." Clearly Jesus will come with the angels and the angels are "holy." 

    For the benefit of "the common man," I seldom appeal to the original Greek. In this case, however, it is especially helpful for English readers. Spanish, by the way, requires no Greek explanation here, because the Spanish closely follows the Greek. The Greek word "hagios" is always translated into Spanish "santo(s)." But in English, it is sometimes translated "saint(s)" and sometimes "holy." In other words, the two English words, "saint" and "holy" come from just one Greek word. 

    Angels are "holy." Thus, they are saints (same word in the Greek). Therefore, when Scripture says that Jesus will come WITH the saints--the holy ones--we have a book-chapter-and-verse clarification that this may well refer to His holy angels. 

    It is debatable whether Jesus will come "with the souls of the dead saints." It is not debatable whether Jesus will come "with the holy angels." Whichever view seems the best, Jesus' coming "for" and "with" the saints in no way necessitates two more comings. "For" and "with" easily harmonize with just one future second coming of Christ.  

    No verse of Scripture says that Jesus will come a third time, bringing "with" Him human saints whom he came "for" some seven years earlier. The Bible clearly says of Jesus, in Hebrews 9:28, that "He will appear a second time." No verse says he will appear a third time.  

TWO RESURRECTIONS?

    According to the rapture theory, there will be several future resurrections of the body from the grave. They claim 1 Thessalonians 4:16 teaches that Christians will be raised long before the wicked are. Paul indeed wrote that "the dead in Christ will rise first." But, "first" what?  

    If I tell you, out of the clear blue sky, "I am going to the mall first," you have no clue about where I will go next. But put some context to it. Such as, "Are you going to the post office?" "Yes, but I am going to the mall first." Now "first" has meaning.  

    So with Paul's text. Do not try to guess what is second unless you look at the context. "The dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive [and] remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds." "First. Then... " Paul is not talking about dead saints and dead sinners. He is talking about dead saints and live saints. He is saying that before the live saints are caught up in the clouds, the dead saints will first be raised. Nothing whatsoever is said about two resurrections. 

    Jesus did speak of two resurrections, but not in reference to time. He spoke of the condition of two groups. Some participate in "the resurrection of life," while others experience "the resurrection of condemnation." However, these two resurrections will take place at the same time. "The HOUR is coming in which ALL who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth--those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation" (John 5:28,29; upper case emphasis supplied). 

    Revelation 20, on the other hand, does speak of "the first resurrection." However, since no text speaks of a "second resurrection," care must be exercised in determining the identity of the "first." (Space does not permit a full discussion of Revelation 20:1-7. Watch for future article(s) on the millennium.) Suffice it now to point out the following: 

    1) Revelation is highly figurative. Who takes literally the dragon, the key, the chain or the seal? 

    2) Futurists believe that the resurrection of Revelation 20 will occur after "the tribulation." According to them, that is seven years after the resurrection of "the rapture." Therefore, by their own doctrine, this "first" resurrection is actually the second. 

    3) A better explanation seems to be found in New Testament first principles. "Buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were RAISED with [Him] through faith in the working of God... If then you were RAISED with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is" (Colossians 2:12; 3:1; upper case emphasis supplied). "Raised"--past tense. See also Romans 6. Just as conversion is "a new birth," so is it also "a death, burial and resurrection." For the Christian, this is the first resurrection. 

"THE DAY OF THE LORD"

    The rapture theory holds that "the day of the Lord" (or "day of Christ") is neither the Second Coming nor the Third Coming. Rather, they say, it is something in between the Second and Third. As in many other matters, they lean heavily on Old Testament usage to uphold their claim. In the New Testament, however, how did the apostle Peter use the term? "But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up" (2 Peter 3:10). Clearly, "the day of the Lord" to Peter was the end of the world. 

    Follow Peter's argument throughout chapter 3. He warns of "scoffers" who will mock Jesus' return by saying: "Where is the promise of His coming?" Peter replies by arguing that these men "willfully forget" all about the flood in Noah's day. Then Peter affirms that the earth will next be consumed by fire on "the day of judgment." Peter further says that "The Lord is not slack concerning [His] promise." What promise? In the context (verse 4), it's "the promise of His coming."  

    Peter continues (verse 10): "But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise." Since this is so, we should be prepared for "the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat." You see, Peter builds his argument about the "coming" of the Lord by discussing "the day of the Lord," which is the end of the world. 

"THE LAST DAY"

    The expression "the last day" appears six times in Scripture, all in the Gospel of John. Four times in the sixth chapter, Jesus says of the believer, "I will raise him up at the last day" (John 6:40,44,54, and with slight variation in verse 39). In 11:24, Martha affirms her belief in this truth: "I know that he [Lazarus] will rise again in the resurrection at the last day." The resurrection of the righteous clearly will take place "at the last day." 

    According to the modern "rapture" doctrine, the resurrection of the righteous is followed by the tribulation and the millennium. Only after that, so the theory goes, will there be a resurrection and judgement of the wicked. 

    However, the remaining "last day" verse in John denies such a scenario. Again Jesus is speaking--this time, not of the righteous but of the wicked. He says, "He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him--the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day" (John 12:48). Thus Jesus taught that both the resurrection of the righteous and the judgment of the wicked would take place in "the last day." 

    The parable of the tares in Matthew 13:24-30, 36-43, teaches the same truth. Notice in verse 38 that the field is the world. This parable is not a contradiction of Jesus' teaching on church discipline. It is a parable about the entire world. It is a parable about good people and bad people living together until the end: "the harvest is the end of the age" (verse 39). 

    "Let both grow together until the harvest, and at the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, 'First gather together the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn' " (verse 30). Saint and sinner are in this world together until the end. I do not understand it all; but did you notice who is taken out first? The popular rapture theory says, "First gather the wheat." However, Jesus said, "First gather together the tares."  

    We may not understand it all, nor may we be able to explain the exact sequence and timing of all the events. Nevertheless, if the parable of the tares teaches anything, it teaches that the righteous and the wicked live together until the end of the world. At that time, the wicked are cast into "the furnace of fire." Their judgement has come; they are finished forever. It is truly "the last day." 

THE BEGINNING OR THE END?

    According to the modern rapture theory, Jesus' next coming will just be the beginning. According to the theory, most of the book of Revelation and large amounts of both Old and New Testament prophecies cannot be fulfilled until after the rapture. They say the rapture is just the beginning of at least 1007 years of world history. 

    A careful look at Scripture, however, presents a totally different picture. Jesus' next coming (there is only one more coming) will be the end of this world, the end of history, the end of time, the end of "life as we know it," the end of the wicked living unpunished, the end of tears and death, the end of the battle between God and Satan, the end of the antichrist, the end of opportunity to get right with God. 

    On the other hand, His return will be the beginning--the beginning of eternity. "Prepare to meet your God!" "Watch and pray!" 

    (Scripture in the preceding article is taken from the New King James Version. Copyright (c) 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. All rights reserved.)

 

Is My Natural Force Abated? by J.C. Bailey

 

http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Bailey/John/Carlos/1903/Articles/ismynatu.html

Is My Natural Force Abated?

I was 88 on my last birthday. It was said of Moses at 120 that his natural force was not abated. On the other hand, Paul was probably not 70 years of age when he referred to himself as Paul the aged (Philemon 9).

No one knows what it was, but Paul said there was given him a thorn in the flesh to buffet him. Although we do not know what it was, we do know that he asked the Lord three times to take it away. The Lord said, "No!" The Lord laid down here a very important thing for us to remember: "My grace is sufficient for thee, for my power is made perfect in weakness" (2 Corinthians 12:9).

Paul had very important work to do. He was confident that he would have help to do that work. The Lord had called Paul to His work. Paul says, "For which cause I suffer these things; yet I am not ashamed, for I know him whom I have believed and I am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day" (2 Timothy 1:12).

For years I have had a thorn in the flesh. One of the arteries that feeds blood to the brain is partially closed. I do not know why, but it gets more closed. It causes me deep trouble. It has put me in the hospital many times. I have besought the Lord, many others have besought the Lord, but apparently, with Paul, I can say His strength is made perfect in my weakness.

One of the worst spells I have had was the last week in August. They took me to the hospital in an ambulance. I was still in the hospital on my birthday, September 13.

About this time, my brother developed pains in his head. The x-ray showed a brain tumour. It was cancerous. On November 22, he passed to his eternal reward. I was able to attend his funeral.

I eat well, I sleep well, but my head bothers me all the time. There is no pain, but I get up with difficulty and I have a sensation of falling at all times.

For quite a number of years, people have said that I should not try to make the trips to India. Some years ago I asked the local church for money for my travel, but they refused and said they did not think I was able to make the trip. Some years ago, brother Trotter was so sure that I should not make the trip that he said to me, "That ticket can still be cancelled."

Last August, when I was lying on the floor waiting for them to come and load me in the ambulance, I concluded that the Lord has said "no" enough times to the request to take this trouble away from my head.

So, my dear brethren, you must look to the Lord for help. Others will come and are coming, but the important thing is that they can say, "I can do all things in Him that strengtheneth me!" We are told of that great cloud of witnesses that by faith triumphed (Hebrews 12:1). Will you be one of that triumphant band?

J. C. Bailey, 1992, Bengough, Saskatchewan

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

The sign does not change by Gary Rose

 

I liked this sign because of the simplicity of its message; namely, The GOD who made us has given us the opportunity to be cleansed from the sin that deforms us, and be transformed into a new creature.

GOD FORMED US

Genesis 1 ( World English Bible )

26 God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the sky, and over the livestock, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

27 God created man in his own image. In God’s image he created him; male and female he created them.

28 God blessed them. God said to them, “Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, and subdue it. Have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the sky, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”

29 God said, “Behold, * I have given you every herb yielding seed, which is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree, which bears fruit yielding seed. It will be your food.

30 To every animal of the earth, and to every bird of the sky, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food;” and it was so.

31 God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. There was evening and there was morning, a sixth day.

The world says that we came from monkeys, but, the Bible says that we are a creation of GOD. One of the reasons that I believe GOD is that I once asked myself the question: where are the newly advanced apes? I never have seen one and am absolutely convinced I never will.

Many people say that humans are born evil, but I ask you, take a look at a newborn baby and ask yourself: Has this child ever done anything wrong? Why it doesn’t even know its left from its right hand!

I say: God doesn’t make junk! Human beings are a marvelous creation. In verse 26f. HE says that we are made in his image and according to HIS likeness. We are born to be like GOD, but it is sin that deforms us!

SIN DEFORMED US

Romans 7 ( WEB )

7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? May it never be! However, I wouldn’t have known sin, except through the law. For I wouldn’t have known coveting, unless the law had said, “You shall not covet.”

8 But sin, finding occasion through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of coveting. For apart from the law, sin is dead.

9 I was alive apart from the law once, but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

10 The commandment, which was for life, this I found to be for death;

11 for sin, finding occasion through the commandment, deceived me, and through it killed me.

12 Therefore the law indeed is holy, and the commandment holy, and righteous, and good.

13 Did then that which is good become death to me? May it never be! But sin, that it might be shown to be sin, by working death to me through that which is good; that through the commandment sin might become exceedingly sinful.

14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am fleshly, sold under sin.

15 For I don’t know what I am doing. For I don’t practice what I desire to do; but what I hate, that I do.

16 But if what I don’t desire, that I do, I consent to the law that it is good.

17 So now it is no more I that do it, but sin which dwells in me.

18 For I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, dwells no good thing. For desire is present with me, but I don’t find it doing that which is good.

19 For the good which I desire, I don’t do; but the evil which I don’t desire, that I practice.

20 But if what I don’t desire, that I do, it is no more I that do it, but sin which dwells in me.

21 I find then the law, that, to me, while I desire to do good, evil is present.

22 For I delight in God’s law after the inward man,

23 but I see a different law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity under the law of sin which is in my members.

Only the most depraved among us wake up each day with a heart determined to do evil. In fact, most people think they are “good” even though they do what they know to be wrong. What happens is that THEY HAVE SET THEIR OWN STANDARD and ignored GOD’s STANDARD for their life. However, with some reflection most people will see that it is not THEIR STANDARD that will result in eternal life, but GOD’S STANDARDS. Since even the best of us realize that we sin from time to time – What do we do? God has given us the answer in the life and sacrifice of God’s only son – Jesus Christ.

CHRIST TRANSFORMED US

2 Corinthians 5 ( WEB )

1 For we know that if the earthly house of our tent is dissolved, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal, in the heavens.

2 For most certainly in this we groan, longing to be clothed with our habitation which is from heaven;

3 if so be that being clothed we will not be found naked.

4 For indeed we who are in this tent do groan, being burdened; not that we desire to be unclothed, but that we desire to be clothed, that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life.

5 Now he who made us for this very thing is God, who also gave to us the down payment of the Spirit.

6 Therefore we are always confident and know that while we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord;

7 for we walk by faith, not by sight.

8 We are courageous, I say, and are willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be at home with the Lord.

9 Therefore also we make it our aim, whether at home or absent, to be well pleasing to him.

10 For we must all be revealed before the judgment seat of Christ; that each one may receive the things in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad.

11 Knowing therefore the fear of the Lord, we persuade men, but we are revealed to God; and I hope that we are revealed also in your consciences.

12 For we are not commending ourselves to you again, but speak as giving you occasion of boasting on our behalf, that you may have something to answer those who boast in appearance, and not in heart.

13 For if we are beside ourselves, it is for God. Or if we are of sober mind, it is for you.

14 For the love of Christ constrains us; because we judge thus, that one died for all, therefore all died.

15 He died for all, that those who live should no longer live to themselves, but to him who for their sakes died and rose again.

16 Therefore we know no one after the flesh from now on. Even though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now we know him so no more.

17 Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old things have passed away. Behold, * all things have become new.

18 But all things are of God, who reconciled us to himself through Jesus Christ, and gave to us the ministry of reconciliation;

19 namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not reckoning to them their trespasses, and having committed to us the word of reconciliation.

20 We are therefore ambassadors on behalf of Christ, as though God were entreating by us: we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.

21 For him who knew no sin he made to be sin on our behalf; so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

Christians are transformed human beings; people who have set their heart and mind on obeying God. HIS will becomes our will, HIS heart our heart, HIS life in this world is the one we wish to imitate. The next time you attend church, look around you and realize that true Christians go there to become BETTER. Yes, sometimes we fail in our efforts to be like JESUS, but God gives GRACE to us and F-O-R-G-I-V-E-N-E-S-S!

That sign does not change, be WE CAN– FOR THE BETTER!

ONE QUESTION REMAINS-

WILL YOU CHANGE AND OBEY GOD’S GOSPEL MESSAGE OR NOT?