June 2003

The Old Paths

J.C. Choate, Winona, Mississippi

In the long ago, God’s prophet said, "Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein" (Jeremiah 6:16). During those times, as has been true in all times, even up to this day, there were literal paths or roads that were treaded out, used, and worn, that people in general traveled in getting from one point to the other. These were known, accepted, and they were safe. Likewise, on the spiritual side there were paths that God had given his people and he expected them to follow them. They were old and plainly marked. They were good and safe. It was not only wise to follow them but God asked his people to do so. Another prophet of God said, "And an highway shall be there, and a way, and it shall be called The way of holiness; the unclean shall not pass over it; but it shall be for those: the wayfaring men, though fools, shall not err therein" (Isaiah 35:8). But instead of heeding God’s wishes, they said, "We will not walk therein." How unwise this was, but again it is not unlike our own times.

Jesus Christ is the way for us today (John 14:6), and he has left us an example that we should follow in his steps (1 Pet. 2:21). Again, he has set before us the broad and narrow ways, leaving it to each of us to choose the way we will travel (Matt. 7:13-14). One is broad, with many traveling upon it, and it leads to destruction. The other is narrow, strait, few are upon it, and it leads to eternal life. On which road are you traveling?

Let’s further identify the Lord’s way for those of our time. It is a way that is clearly revealed in the pages of the New Testament. Any and all who will take the time to read and study God’s word will know exactly what He requires. He wants us to know his will so that we may believe it and obey it. For instance, as we read and study his word we will find that Christ not only died for us that we might be saved (Rom. 5:8), but he has given certain conditions or commands that we must comply with if we are to be saved. Christ said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned" (Mk. 16:16). Now that’s the path we must take if we are to be saved. It’s an old path, but it’s the Lord’s path, and there can be no other way.

As we continue to read and study the scripture we are told that on obeying the gospel of Christ, and being saved, that the Lord adds us to the church (Acts 2:47). This is his church (Matt. 16:18), the one church that belongs to Christ (Eph. 4:4), the one he died for (Eph. 5:25), the one he is savior of (Eph. 5:23), and the one that wears his name (Rom. 16:16). When we follow the Lord’s path, His way, then we will be members of this church and no other.

When we follow the Lord’s way we will worship Him each first day of the week (Acts 20:7), by assembling with other Christians to study (2 Tim. 2:15), to pray (Acts 2:42), to sing (Eph. 5:19), to partake of the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor. 11:23-25), and to give of our means (1 Cor. 16:2). Not only that, but the word of God reveals the true path concerning all we should do and say in the name of religion (1 Pet. 4:11). This makes it possible for us not only to know God’s will on these matters but also to do the things that would be acceptable to him (Jam. 1:25).

Sad, but true, but all do not love the truth. There are any number of people who are satisfied to remain ignorant. They don’t want to be bothered. They are what they are religiously and they want to remain where they are. As a result of their indifference and unconcern, they will be lost.

We ought always keep an open mind and ever desire to know the Lord’s will on all things that pertain to life and godliness. We should never be satisfied with anything less than the truth. It is only by knowing God’s way that we can obey his will and travel upon that road that leads to that heavenly city, the New Jerusalem.

We invite you to join us as we return to the old paths that are set forth in God’s word. In so doing, you will not be following us and neither will we be following you, but together we will be following the Lord. We will be walking in His ways, doing those things that He wants us to do, what He would have us to be. Let us ask for the Lord’s way, for His will in all things, being satisfied with nothing less. Why follow anyone, why be religious, unless we are going to follow Christ, unless we are going to be right? There is a way that is right and cannot be wrong, but remember also, "There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death" (Proverbs 14:12). Keep in mind that the right way is the Lord’s way, the one and only way to heaven. Only those who travel on that path or way can go to heaven.

Correspondence About Immersion

Part 3 of 4

Chuck Webster, Editorial

In the last two editorials I have included a portion of my correspondence with a member of our community who disagreed with a newspaper article suggesting that biblical baptism is immersion. I include the third of four parts of that correspondence in this issue.

Dear Chuck:

This is an answer to part of the paragraph where you asked me to address the meaning of the word baptizo. I shall address Romans 6:3-5 and Colossians 2:12 as a burial later. I haven’t forgotten, and there is so much in your previous letter that I must address, but I will deal with the burial next, and then come back to the remainder of your correspondence dated [date].

I strongly disagree with your statement that baptizo was the word that God chose to use, as well as that it was the Holy Ghost inspired apostles’ words of their native language.

The King James translation was made by forty-seven scholarly members of the Anglican Church who had been baptized by the mode of immersion; therefore they favored that particular mode and used the word baptizo. I do not say that immersion is not one mode of baptism; however, I do contend that it is not the only mode of baptism. That would be like saying that rain is the only form of precipitation.

I do believe that the Greek scholars were a bit more honest than Dr. Billy Graham who published a soul winners’ New Testament, and used the word "immersion" each time the word "baptize," etc., was used. I certainly would not want to be as brazen as Dr. Graham.

Baptizo is the strongest point of argument that the immersionists have. As you so well know, they use the words "burial," "much water," "down into," "come up out of," "straightway up out of," and baptizo. Every one of these are circumstantial evidence, not one of them prove beyond any doubt the mode of immersion. This being true they must rely upon the Greek Lexicons that lean toward their line of thinking. Luther, Zwingli, and their contemporaries had no lexicons nor dictionaries. In fact, they had not been made. These came later from the pens of noble scholars by the study of the classical writings who used pagan meanings which is not what an honest Bible student wants. Since they were heathens and though very learned in Greek philosophy and literature utterly ignorant of the Bible and not acquainted by experience with the God of the Bible then we should not be so much concerned about how Plato, Socrates, and Xenephon used the words, but how Jesus, John, Mark, and the people of that day used.

The New Testament is not written in classical Greek, from whence comes the word baptizo, but it is written in what is known as Koine, or the language of the common people.

I will give you a number of instances in the New Testament where the use of the word baptizo clearly proves that the word does not mean immersion. In fact these passages prove that in many cases it either means pour or sprinkle.

Matthew 3:11: "I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance . . . he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost." Mark 1:8 is the same as Matthew 3:11, Luke 3:16, and John 1:33: "...but he sent me to baptize with water... the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.

You said "the apostles were the only ones that received the baptism," and then in the same paragraph said that these people - I’m assuming the 120 - were immersed or overwhelmed in him.

I’m sure you are familiar with Strong’s Concordance, and he points out concerning the word baptizo (#907): "to make whelmed, fully wet, or ceremonial ablution (which means to wash, cleanse, purification, wash." These 120 received a pure heart by the baptism with the Holy Ghost.

I took notice how you quoted Luke 24:49. Jesus did not say you will be clothed, but he said, "you shall be endued with power from on high." This power is a different power than that of Matthew 10. This power is power to be rather than to do. This power is the cleansing power of the Holy Ghost.

What was the spiritual condition of the 120 before Pentecost? Were they born again?

Please explain the difference between the birth of the Spirit and the baptism of the Spirit. Are they one and the same thing?

Thanks for exchanging thoughts. I’m enjoying our discussions. Someone much smarter than I said, "Controversy sharpens the wit," and I surely do need a sharper wit.

Your friend,

P.S. - Here are three pictures of water supplies for Jerusalem.

[Note: The gentleman included two pictures of the pool of Siloam, located inside the ancient city of Jerusalem, and one picture of the pools of Solomon, situated about eight miles south of Jerusalem, with the handwritten inscription at the top of one page: "Pictures speak louder than words. I need not comment." Since the water supplies pictured are fairly narrow but extremely deep, he appears to be suggesting that it would have been impossible to have used them as baptisteries because of their depth - cw.]

----------

Dear Mr. [Name]:

I am also enjoying our discussion and pray God blesses us as we seek His Word.

You wrote: "I strongly disagree with your statement that baptizo was the word that God chose to use, as well as that it was the Holy Ghost inspired apostles words of their native language." I first thought that you must believe the New Testament was not written in Greek, but then later you wrote: "The New Testament is not written in classical Greek, but it is written in what is known as Koine, or the language of the common people." It seems these two statements are contradictions. The Bible was, as you say, written in Koine (which was the common form of the Greek language), and the New Testament writers did use the Greek word baptizo. Though we do not have the original autographs, we are confident that the Greek manuscripts upon which we base our translations are extremely accurate (i.e., they represent very well the books written by Paul, Peter, etc.). In these New Testament books the writers used the word baptizo. Since you disagree with my statement that baptizo was the word God chose to use, are you saying that God did not inspire the New Testament writers in their word choice? If so, and you do not believe in the verbal inspiration of the Bible, then we have another entirely different set of disagreements which we need to address. If you do believe that the Bible is inspired of God, then how could you say that God did not choose the word baptizo?

Your contention that the translators of the King James Version were biased does not seem to be consistent. If they were biased toward immersion, why didn’t they simply translate the word baptizo as "immerse"? What they did was transliterate the Greek word baptizo into the English word "baptize" (i.e., they simply changed the Greek letters into English letters and created a new word). Their transliteration (instead of translation) would seem to be a better argument for their being biased toward its not being immersion.

You stated: "Baptizo is the strongest point of argument that" we have. I would tend to agree with you, because the very argument centers around the meaning of the word baptizo! The only way we can translate the Bible today is by going back and studying the way the words were used, which is what the lexicographers did. These men did not lean toward our "line of thinking"; instead, they studied the language to find out what the words meant and concluded that the word baptizo meant to dip, submerge, or immerse. You said that we should be concerned about "how Jesus, John, Mark, and the people of that day used" the words, which is right, and that is exactly what the lexicographers did; they studied the language to find out how the words were used and came to conclusions.

You referenced Matthew 3:11, "I indeed baptize you with water...", implying that the preposition "with" implies sprinkling or pouring. But the Greek word (en) there translated "with" is used 2,782 times in the New Testament, and is translated "in" 1,874 times and "with" only 134 times. The use of this preposition doesn’t prove anything one way or the other. It could just as well have been translated, "I indeed baptize you in water..." The same is true of Mark 1:8 and John 1:33 (the same preposition is used). No preposition is used in the Greek in the first part of Luke 3:16, and en is used in the latter part ("...he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost...").

Strong’s Hebrew and Greek Lexicon defines baptizo (907) as "1) to dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge (of vessels sunk); 2) to cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water, to wash one’s self, bathe; 3) to overwhelm."

Concerning Luke 24:49, the English word "endued" means to "put on" or "be clothed" (American Heritage Dictionary). Likewise, the Greek word translated "endued" in the King James Version means "1) to sink into (clothing), put on, clothe one’s self" (Strong’s) and is translated in the King James Version in the following ways: "put on" (18 times), "clothed with" (2 times), "clothed in" (2 times), "have on" (2 times), "clothe with" (1 time), "be endued" (1 time), "arrayed in" (1 time), and "be clothed" (1 time), for a total of 29 times. I quoted the verse using the word "clothed" because the word "endued" is somewhat outdated, and the word "clothed" adequately communicates the meaning. Incidentally, it’s translated "clothed" in most modern translations. These words were spoken to the eleven apostles in reference to the Holy Spirit’s coming on them on the Day of Pentecost and their being baptized in Him. My point was that when the apostles were baptized in the Holy Spirit in Acts 2 they were "endued" or "clothed" with Him. They didn’t just have the Spirit sprinkled or poured on them; they were immersed in Him. If you’ll follow the pronouns carefully in Acts 1 and 2, you’ll notice that only the twelve apostles received the baptism of the Holy Spirit. This outpouring did not save the apostles, but rather it gave them the ability to do what they did in that chapter and in the early days of the church when they were communicating God’s truth to the world (speaking in languages they had not studied, working miracles, etc.).

All must be born of the Spirit (John 3:3ff.), which is synonymous with accepting Jesus by being baptized in water for the remission of one’s sins (Acts 2:38; 22:16; Gal. 3:26,27; 1 Pet. 3:21; et al.). The baptism of the Spirit was given to the apostles to ensure the accuracy of their preaching of the word (John 16:13) and to confirm that their word was from God (Mark 16:20). It was also given to Cornelius and his household (Acts 10) to prove to the Jews that Gentiles could also become Christians. The baptism of the Holy Spirit was never commanded; it was a promise.

Thanks for the photographs. Archaeologists have confirmed that there were myriad water sources in Jerusalem (as previously shown), but for argument’s sake, let’s say there was only one suitable place in Jerusalem for immersing individuals in water, and that this place was wide enough for twelve men to baptize simultaneously. 3,000 people could be immersed by twelve men in a little over four hours. Do you not believe that there was such a place? Or that there were not several places of smaller width but adequate depth? Or that there were, in a city as big as Jerusalem, twelve places where a person could be immersed?

I am likewise enjoying our discussion.

In Christ,

Chuck Webster

Gifts "From Above"

Hugo McCord, Vancouver, Washington

"Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights" (James 1:17): Some of his gifts are absolutely free, while others in his wisdom await human obedience.

I. Unconditional gifts:

The first of the Father’s gifts, freely bestowed, is our marvelous physical universe. "The heavens tell of God’s glory, and the skies proclaim the works of his hands" (Psalms 19:1). Joseph Addison (1672-1719) wrote a meaningful poem, "The Creation," which closes with the words "all the stars" are "forever singing as they shine, ‘The hand that made us is divine.’" Mr. Haydn set his poem to music, and grateful human beings love to sing "The Spacious Firmament of High":

In reason’s ear they all rejoice,

And utter forth a glorious voice,

Forever singing as they shine,

"The hand that made us is divine."

Mr. Conrad Kocher was moved to write:

For the beauty of the earth,

For the beauty of the skies,

For the love which from our birth

Over and around us lies,

Lord of all, to Thee we raise

This our sacrifice of praise.

Long before Addison or Haydn or Kocher the prophet Isaiah (B.C.759-690) exclaimed: "Lift your eyes and look to the heavens; who created these? He who brings out the starry host one by one, and calls each by name; because of his great power and mighty strength not one of them is missing" (40:26).

A second free gift was the result of God’s saying, "Let us make man" (Gen. 1:26). Adam and Eve were not only physical (as were the animals), but also spiritual, yes, made in the image of God, who is a spirit being (Gen. 1:27; John 4:24). The "Father of spirits" formed "the spirit of man within him" (Zech. 12:1; Heb. 12:9).

"He made us, and not we ourselves. We are his people and the sheep of his pasture" (Psalms 100:3). We did not even know that we would exist, and so we thank him for the gift of life. And since the Creator "is not the God of the dead but of the living," we are now as eternal as God himself (Matt. 22:32).

A third unconditional gift "from above, coming down from the Father," good and perfect and "indescribable" was Immanuel (Isa. 7:14; 2 Cor. 9:15). Happy are they who "have tasted of the heavenly gift" (Heb. 6:4).

Out of the ivory palaces

Into a world of woe,

Only His great eternal love

Made my Savior go ("Ivory Palaces," Henry Barraclough).

A fourth free gift is a guide-book, for it is not "in man that walketh to direct his steps" (Jer. 10:23). And what a book! "Thy word is a lamp unto my feet," sang the psalmist, "and a light unto my path" (Psalms 119:105). His "perfect" law is so comprehensive "the man of God" is "furnished completely unto every good work" (Psalms 19:7; 2 Tim. 3:17; Jam. 1:25).

There’s a book which surpasses the ages,

A volume of wisdom sublime;

And the glory that gleams from its pages

No splendor of earth can outshine. ("There’s a Book," Tom C. Neal)

II. Conditional gifts

God’s plans are "for our good always" (Deut. 6:24). In his wisdom He does not think that it is "for our good" that all of his gifts should be free. Some valuable presents from him are held back dependent on our obedience. Often he has inserted the little word "if" in his book of instructions (Gal. 6:9; Col. 1:23; Heb. 3:6, 14; 1 John 1:7, 9). "If" we "do" what He says certain gifts come down "from above" (Jam. 3:17).

1. Bread: We ask God to "give us this day our daily bread," and he does it if we "maintain good works for necessary uses" (Matt. 6:11; Tit. 3:14). "If" (another "if") any will not work, neither let him eat" (2 Thess. 3:10).

2. Wisdom: The dictionary defines wisdom as the ability or faculty to make "the best use of knowledge" and "experience." It is "applied knowledge;" it is "good judgment" (cf. Eccl. 7:12). Its parallel word in Scripture is "understanding" (Prov. 1:2, 5; 3:13, 19; 4:5; l4:6; 21:30), the ability to separate, to distinguish, to discern, to discriminate, to consider (bin and sophidzo).

Solomon as a young man prayed for wisdom, which "pleased the Lord" (1 Kings 3:10). By a direct, miraculous implantation God gave him "a wise and an understanding heart" (1 Kng. 3:12). Some first century Christians, by the laying on of the hands of an apostle, were given miraculous wisdom (Acts 8:18; 19:6; Rom. 1:11; 2 Tim. 1:6; 1 Cor. 12:8). But the need for such a miraculous gift passed away when the "perfect" (complete, teleion) revelation came in 96 A.D. (1 Cor. 13:10; Rev. 1:1-3).

Now we are to pray for wisdom (Jam. 1:5) as we pray for our daily bread (Matt. 6:11), but the non-miraculous laws of God in bestowing both wisdom and bread are in operation. Wisdom is withheld until we obey his law of listening to teachers: "Hear, my son, and be wise, and guide your heart in the way" (Prov. 23:19). "The sayings of the wise are like goads, and masters of these collections are like well-driven nails" (Eccl. 12:11).

"Reverence for Yahweh is the beginning of wisdom" (Prov. 9:10), and also its continuity: "Behold, reverence for Yahweh, that is wisdom, and to depart from evil is understanding" (Job 28:28). Children are not born with reverence for Yahweh nor respect for parents, which things they are to "learn first" (1 Tim. 5:4).

Jesus, like other children, was not born with wisdom. In that virtue he "grew" (Luke 2:52, prokopto, increased, advanced). Moreover, even though he was the Son of God, he, like the rest of us, had to learn "obedience" (Heb. 5:8). As we grow and mature a "multitude of years should teach wisdom" (Job 12:7). A meaningful prayer is: "Teach us to number our days that we might gain a wise heart," or, more literally, "that we might enter the heart of wisdom" (Psalms 90:12).

Daily prayer for wisdom "from above" (Jam. 3:17) is all the more important since there is an "earthly, sensual, devilish" wisdom "of this world," with victims "wise to do evil" (Jer. 4:22; 1 Cor. 1:20; 2 Cor. 1:12; Jam. 3:15). But the wisdom that is "from above" is all that matters; it is "the principal thing" (Prov. 4:7). So Solomon advised, "Get wisdom, yes, and with all your getting, get understanding" (Prov. 4:7).

3. Salvation: "He who believes and is baptized shall be saved" (Mark 16:16). From one viewpoint, you "save" yourself when you believe, repent, and are baptized (Acts 2:40), but from another viewpoint, no one can save himself. Jesus would never have gone through the ordeal of the cross if a sinner could save himself. Salvation is "not of yourselves; it is the gift of God," dependent on a sinner’s "faith," a faith that leads him to repent and be baptized (Eph. 2:8-9; Acts 2:38).

4. The Holy Spirit: The "gift" of Christ is universal and unconditional, yes, "for the whole world" (John 4:10; 1 John 2:2). But no one in "the world" can receive the Holy Spirit (John 14:17). The Spirit is a "gift," but only to those who have been baptized (Acts 2:36-38; 5:32).

Oh! What a difference before baptism and after! Before, a physical body; after a physical body with a plus: "the gift of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38). After baptism, a being created a "little lower than the angels" (Psalms 8:5; Heb. 2:7) ascends to a status higher than the angels, becoming a host for a guest "from above"! After baptism, a physical body is "the temple of the Holy Spirit" (1 Cor. 6:19), a secular body instantly made sacred! Jesus claims as "his own possession" the person in whom the Spirit lives, but "if" (another "if") any man has not the Spirit" that man "is none of his" (Tit. 2:14; Rom. 8:9).

As the coming of the Holy Spirit into a person is conditional on his having believed, repented, and having been baptized, so the continued indwelling of the Spirit in that person is conditional on his living a clean life: "flee fornication" (1 Cor. 6:18). If he does not cleanse himself "from all defilement of the flesh and spirit," he grieves (vexes, insults, lupeo, Eph. 4:30) the "Holy Spirit of God." He will leave that person, as he left the Laodicean Christians (Rev. 3:14-22).

And not only does the new Christian, while he is still wet from his baptism, become a host for the Holy Spirit, but also of the other two beings in the Godhead! Jesus promised, "If anyone loves me, he will keep my message, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and we will dwell with him" (John 14:23).

5. A continuous cleansing: What about sins after baptism? The Father has overlooked nothing. If the newly-created Christians walk "in the light" and "continue to confess" their sins, "the blood of Jesus Christ his Son keeps on cleansing" them "from every sin" (1 John 1:7-9). For the rest of their lives they are living in the spiritual shower bath of "the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ" (1 Pet. 1:2), and so are ready at any moment, day or night, in a car wreck or in bed, to meet their Maker. 

6. Spiritual strength: The Holy Spirit (who lives in a Christian’s heart, Gal. 4:6) does not by His indwelling strengthen the Christian, else all Christians would be strong. Those whom the Spirit indwells can be "weak and sickly" (1 Cor. 6:19; 11:30).

But they do not have to be weak and sickly, for the Spirit through his words, not through his indwelling, teaches them how to be strong (Eph. 6:10-18). "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says" (Rev. 2:7,11,17,29; 3:6,13,22). But if he pays no attention to the Spirit’s words, Christ’s strength will never be his (cf. Phil. 4:13). He has deprived himself of a gift "from above." The command krataiousthe (1 Cor. 16:13) usually is translated "Be strong," but (being in the Greek middle voice) would be better translated "Strengthen yourselves."

7. The fruit of the Spirit: Just as the Spirit’s words teach a Christian to strengthen himself, so the Spirit’s words teach about nine excellent virtues: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control (Gal. 5:22-23).

Those virtues are gifts "from above," but no Christian has them because of the Spirit’s indwelling. They are "the fruit of the Spirit" (Gal. 5:22), the result of human cultivation. Just as our "daily bread" (a gift "from above") is ours only through human farming, so "the fruit of the Spirit" is ours only through human farming.

Christians are "God’s garden" (georgion, cultivated land, farm, field that is worked, 1 Cor. 3:9), but it is Christians who must do the gardening. The garden of Eden belonged to God, but it was up to Adam "to till and keep it" (Gen. 2:15).

8. Contentment: One of the most elusive gifts "from above" is to "have no anxiety (worry, merimnao, Phil. 4:6) about anything." But such a happy frame of mind God does not give directly. His ground rules are "prayer and supplication with thanksgiving" (Phil. 4:6).

The ability to accept, to be "contented with one’s lot, with one’s means, though the slenderest" is Thayer’s definition of autarkes (Phil. 4:11). That blessed gift "from above" is not injected into a Christian, but something he personally must learn: "I have learned," said Paul, "regardless of my circumstances to be content" (Philippians 4:11). That inward "it is well" feeling is not enjoyed by everybody, but all Christians (with their resources in Scripture) can learn the Lord’s law of contentment and then enjoy it evermore (Phil. 4:12).

9. A providential shield: The Lord’s general providence (sunlight "on the evil and the good," the "rain on the just and the unjust," Matt.5:45) is for all mankind, but a special provision is reserved for "them who believe" (1 Tim. 4:10).

For them who love God, he makes "all things to work together for their good" (Rom. 8:28, NAS, NIV). Some translations (KJV, ASV) state an impossibility, saying that "all things work together for good" to them who love God. "Things" are inanimate and mindless, and good happening to Christians by "things" is accidental.

But God Almighty, who particularly loves his people, his "own possession," and whose eyes "are in every place," is able to overrule all of life’s circumstances to make good come out of them (1 Pet. 2:9-10; Rev. 4:8; Prov. 15:3). We with limited vision cannot see how any good could come from a Christian’s tragedies, but the God who sees "the end from the beginning" is not near-sighted (Isa. 46:10).

Therefore, Christians, knowing that the Father can see farther down the road than they, learn to trust him, walking "by faith, not by sight," and they respect his warning "Be not faithless but believing" (2 Cor. 5:7; John 20:27).

By human sight Christians now cannot know that heavenly angels even exist, but by faith Christians know that angels not only exist but also that they are God’s helpers in special providence. "Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?" (Heb. 1:14). Thus angelic help is another of gifts "from above."

The Father’s providential shield is custom made for each individual Christian according to his strength to resist Satan’s temptations. "God is faithful, for he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way so that you can stand up under it" (1 Cor. 10:13).

10. Hope:

If no hope comes down "from above,"

The boast of heraldry, the pomp of power,

And all the beauty, all that wealth e’er gave,

Await alike the inevitable hour,

The paths of glory lead but to the grave ("Elegy in a Country Church Yard," Thomas Gray).

With only this world as a sphere of hope... , man is a prisoner, even though in a palace... For with all that science and art can do for him, he is still a pilgrim and a stranger on the earth. He is the sport of accidents! victim of disease; the plaything of the elements... What an enigma, then, is man! ...Judge of all things - feeble earth worm! Depository of truth - mass of uncertainty! Glory and butt of the universe! (G. Frederick Wright).

On the other hand,

If the Father . . . stoops to give to the rosebush, whose withering blossoms float upon the autumn breeze, the sweet assurance of another springtime, will He refuse the words of hope to the sons of men when the frosts of winter come? (William Jennings Bryan).

...in the night of death hope sees a star and and listening love can hear the rustle of a wing (Robert G. Ingersoll).

Only one has had the courage and the credentials to say:

I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me. though he dies, shall never die... I will come again and receive you to myself... I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father except through me (John 11:25-26; 14:3,6).

That One is "the author of eternal salvation" to all who "obey him" (Heb. 5:9). "Blessed is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to his plentiful mercy has begotten us again to a living hope," a gift "from above" (1 Pet. 1:3). "The salary of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life" (Rom. 6:23).

Support the Sponsor

Mike Benson, Evansville, Indiana

Last fall, ESPN and B.A.S.S. [i.e., Bass Angler’s Sportsman’s Society] mailed out an information packet to all of the BassMaster fishing pros requiring them to wear a patch endorsing Anheuser-Busch beer.

When pros initially learned of the new mandate, many were angered and contacted ESPN/B.A.S.S. to voice their opposition. At first the partner companies assured fisherman that they would not have to wear the patch after all. But following a discussion with Busch, the pros were told that they must exhibit the patch on their clothing or forfeit their points in pursuit of the "Angler of the Year" [AOY] award as well as the $100,000 prize money.

The ramifications of this new policy were profound. No Busch patch meant no points, no AOY award, no participation in the BassMaster classic, and therefore no requalifying for the following year’s fishing tour. In other words, no patch - no bass fishing career.

Oddly enough, the information packet mailed out to pros also stated, "B.A.S.S. does not expect any angler to endorse a B.A.S.S. sponsor... Participating in the NASCAR Winston Cup, Busch or Craftsman truck series does not obligate or imply that one uses or endorses those series sponsor’s products. It is, however, expected and logical

that one would be appreciative of and supportive of their involvement in the sport" [emphasis mine - mb]. A number of anglers saw the obvious inconsistency. They asked, "How do you not endorse alcohol, but then simultaneously display the toxic brew on the sleeve of your shirt?"

Lendell Martin Jr., a popular fishing professional, dropped out of the BassMaster tour late last fall when the new rule went into effect. He noted, "[B.A.S.S.] took a whole new direction... To me it’s a family sport, and we have programs like ‘Get hooked on Fishing, Not Drugs.’" Martin refused to wear the AOY patch because he had experienced a problem with alcohol earlier in life.

Observations:

1. I applaud Mr. Martin for his high moral stance. He was willing to sacrifice his career with BassMaster because of the principle involved. Money was secondary to his influence and character [Prov. 22:1]. Family was more important than finance.

2. How will BassMaster fishing pros encourage teens that are grappling with a drinking problem to abstain from beverage alcohol? How can you tell a kid to avoid drugs with a colorful patch depicting the most popular drug in America on the side of your shirt? One pro, Ish Monroe, commented, "I’m [fishing] to make money¼ You can’t even see the beer on the patch it’s so small." [Actually, the AOY patch measures 2 7/8" x 2 1/2" and must also be displayed in larger sticker-form in a visible position on the side of the angler’s boat]. Dear reader, whether the patch is no larger than a postage stamp or is the size of the Grand Canyon is irrelevant. It is IMPOSSIBLE to tell a youngster to abstain from drugs and then advocate their consumption on your attire [Mark 8:15; Luke 12:1].

3. I can’t help but wonder if these fisherman fully appreciate the devastating effects of drinking on the youth of our nation [Matt. 18:6]. Consider the following statistics:

Money is important [1 Tim. 5:8], but not to such a degree that it ruins our influence, harms our bodies, and destroys our lives. One day, those in corporate America—including ESPN, B.A.S.S., and Busch—will learn this lesson in a very painful way [1 Thess. 1:6ff].

Questions and Answers 

Question: My question is about the word "corn" in the Old Testament. In Genesis 41:47 and 42:11111,2,3,5, the word is used. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica corn was brought to Europe by Columbus and other explorers, and it was indigenous to North America. I was wondering if the Bible is referring to another type of crop other than corn.

Answer: Words are funny things. Sounds or letters are used to represent a thought or thing. It's an amazing way to communicate. There are difficulties, however, and in this question we see one of those difficulties brought to light. Words change meaning. They carry new connotations, thoughts, or implications depending upon the time and situation in which they are used. In regard to this question the word translated "corn" has taken on a different meaning than was intended when it was used in 1611 by the translators of the King James Version of the Bible. When we think of "corn" today the word brings up the image of a stalk of corn with many yellow ears, but such has not always been the image invoked. Consider these definitions of corn: "A word used for cereals generally and may be taken to include (1) barley, (2) wheat, (3) fitches (vetches), (4) lentils, (5) beans, (6) millet, (7) rye - the wrong translation for vetches, (8) pulse - for all these see separate articles (from International Standard Bible Encyclopedia). In previous generations the word "corn" was used much as we use Kleenex to describe all forms of facial tissue, and Xerox to describe all forms of photocopying.

Also, it is interesting to note that the scientific world is not united in the belief that the Old World was without Maize Corn. Bonafous, the director of the Royal Garden of Agriculture at Turin in 1836, has shown that maize is figured in a Chinese botanical work as old as the middle of the sixteenth century - a time when the discoveries of Columbus could scarcely have penetrated to China. Also, and more conclusively, in 1819 M. Rifaud discovered under the head of a mummy at Thebes not only grains, but leaves of Indian corn.

So, in summary, the word "corn" is often used in a biblical context to refer to all types of grain, and the idea that corn was unknown to biblical characters might not be the case. - Brandon Jackson (Jasper, Alabama)

 

Question: To what extent, if any, should Christians participate in inter-denominational prayer or other religious services?

Answer: Examining the question itself will help us answer it. First, the question pertains to the liberty of a Christian. Second, the activities under consideration are 1.) inter-denominational prayer services, or 2.) services that are religious in nature.

In connection with the question, there have been local, public observances of the National Day of Prayer. Generally, a meeting is held near the courthouse or city hall, and area preachers representing a multitude of denominational bodies are asked to participate by leading the assembly in prayer. Some men associated with the Lord's church have not only participated, but have served as the organizers and coordinators in these events. What does the Bible say about this matter?

A reexamination of the query and the use of the word "Christian" will help us answer the question. A Christian is one who belongs to, or is a follower of Christ. As Christians, we are members of the Lord's church. "Church" is translated from the Greek ekklesia, which literally means "called out." Accordingly, God commands His children to "come out" and "be separate" from the world (2 Cor. 6:17). This would include separation from denominational bodies, as such are not of God. Denominationalism is the work and fruit of the devil. Christians are also forbidden to have fellowship with "the unfruitful works of darkness," but are rather to "reprove them" (Eph. 5:11). In the immediate context of Ephesians 5, we are commanded to shun the "children of disobedience" (vv. 6-7), "walk as children of light" (v. 8), and "prove what is well-pleasing to the Lord" (v. 10). Thus, denominationalism and fellowship with the same must be rejected in all forms.

Furthermore, the right of prayer is reserved exclusively for the Christian. Those who have not submitted to the gospel by being baptized for the remission of sins are not in Christ (Mark 16:16; Gal. 3:27). Having failed to obey God's will, they are neither disciples (Matt. 28:19) nor Christians (Acts 11:26). All spiritual blessings are found in Christ (Eph.1:3). Prayer is most certainly a spiritual blessing, for the Spirit makes intercession only for the saints (Rom. 8:26-27). God rejects the worship prayers of those who refuse to submit to His will: "The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the LORD: but the prayer of the upright is his delight" (Prov. 15:8). The word "sacrifice" has reference to one's worship. Note how the worship of the wicked is contrasted with the prayer of the righteous. The author notes similarly in 28:9: "He who turns away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer shall be abomination." Understanding these truths, the man whom Jesus had healed of his blindness correctly noted, "Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth" (John 9:31).

Consider also our influence. What message does the Christian's participation give to non-Christians present in an "inter-denominational prayer service"? Does it not at the very least imply that the Christian believes all those present are in equal standing before God? And by encouraging non-Christians to pray through Christ, does he not encourage them to engage in an activity God identifies as an abomination? Utilizing the words of the chief priests in Matthew 21:23, we ask those who practice such, "By what authority do ye do these things? And who gave you this authority?"

Some might ask, "What's the difference in this situation and a gospel preacher's taking part in a funeral with a denominational preacher?" This is a fair question. One difference is the purpose of the gathering. A funeral is not a worship service, but a prayer service is. While one may read from the Bible, and even preach the gospel during a funeral, this still does not make it the equivalent of a worship service. In Acts 17:16-31, Paul preached the gospel to the philosophers of Athens. He did not, however, worship with or in any way engage in fellowship with these people. Rather, he "practiced what he preached" to the Ephesians in Ephesians 5:11, he reproved their unfruitful works of darkness. The purpose of a funeral is not to worship God; it is to comfort the bereaved. The purpose of an interdenominational prayer service is for those present to temporarily ignore the barriers separating the various religious bodies and with one voice to raise their petition in prayer to God. This is not scriptural, and no Christian should ever be a part of such a service. -Todd Clippard (Hamilton. Alabama)

The Second Religion of America

Lynn Parker, Spring, Texas

Sporting activities have been called the "second religion of America." Whether it is the fast-break, jump-shooting, and three-point shots, or the 55-yard pass for the winning touchdown on the last play of the game, we love sports. It can be ice hockey, hockey with horses (smart horses), or air hockey, but it still has its appeal. Hunting moose, elk, deer, quail, doves, and varmints (the four-legged kind) attracts a following. Fishing holes are sometimes marked by nearly as many fishers as fish! They can be the "boys of summer" that win it in the last inning or the sprinter who wins by a nose, but it makes no difference. Football, fishing, baseball, hunting, basketball, track - our society loves it all.

But may we call a "time out" to consider a fairly common problem in light of the Bible? Sporting activities are not the "second religion" of some - the collective sporting activities are the first. Some view sports as of the utmost value and concern in life. Sadly, even some professing to be children of the Heavenly Father implicitly tell the God of heaven to "take a number (other than one) and we’ll be right with you after the last quarter." Sports can be wholesome and good for all that participate and all that watch, but Christians are careful to keep such activities in their proper place.

The Bible still teaches, "But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you" (Matt. 6:33) and, "Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching" (Heb. 10:25).

One brother, speaking to a preachers’ workshop, "justified" his son’s missing Wednesday evening services to play ball by asking the teen if he would be willing next week to attend both the regular Wednesday evening services and an area gospel meeting on Thursday night. Of course, if it is right for a Christian to miss worship assemblies and Bible classes to participate in sports, does it not follow that all the brethren can miss the assemblies and classes to watch the ball game or other sporting activity? And if we can "make up" forsaken assemblies like a student makes up a missed test, then surely we can justify shutting down the church building during the hottest part of summer and do "make-up" work every night for a few weeks this autumn.

Bible classes and worship assemblies in some places take a tremendous nosedive in attendance because some brethren worship at the idol of sporting activities. We cannot help but wonder, though, how important our sporting achievements will seem when we stand before God in judgment. Suddenly, the "one that got away" will be insignificant, and the state championship trophy will provide as much comfort as a crash helmet to a kamikaze pilot.

I like sporting activities. I have played in organized sports. I try to instruct my children in sports. But when the church is working, meeting in assemblies, or studying in the Bible classes, my family needs to be present—learning the Bible, promoting the work, exhorting the brethren, and receiving exhortation. "For bodily exercise profiteth little: but godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come" (2 Tim. 4:8).

Back