More on Willful Sin—Can Anyone be Saved?

While I have written on this subject, willful sin, in the past, I thought it worthwhile to write a follow-up as this is a subject that troubles many Christians. There is material here that was not in the first article.

The passage that troubles people is Heb. 10:26-31 but more specifically verses 26 and 27. "For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries." (NKJV) I want you to hear the words of Albert Barnes, perhaps the best-known of all English Bible commentators, in his comments on the willful sin of this passage. He says:

"It is not to be construed here strictly, or metaphysically (here Barnes is talking about the word 'willfully'), for all sin is voluntary, or is committed willingly, but must refer to a deliberate act, where a man means to abandon his religion, and to turn away from God. If it were to be taken with metaphysical exactness, it would demonstrate that every Christian who ever does anything wrong, no matter how small, would be lost."

You will be hard-pressed to find a commentator anywhere who would disagree with Barnes’ statement. Virtually every commentator will tell you that the passage has reference to one whose intent is to leave the faith altogether. That person willfully chooses to go another direction.

I do not think this person is one who necessarily ceases to believe. I say that because of verse 27 where there is with this individual "a certain fearful expectation of judgment." (NKJV) However, I grant that the phrase could be taken to be merely descriptive of the judgment and how awful it will be and that is Barnes’ take on it for he says, “The ‘fearful apprehension’ or expectation here does not refer so much to what would be in the mind itself, or what would be experienced, as to what must follow.” Philip Schaff in his commentary agrees for he says, “It describes not what is expected, but what will certainly be, and in truth what is already in reserve—‘a reception of judgment.’” They may well be correct.

We all know Christians who have fallen away simply because they enjoyed sin more than righteousness. They preferred "the pleasures of sin for a season" (Heb. 11:25 KJV) over an eternity of bliss. They did not go into another religion but into a sinful life.  

Here are some words from Neil Lightfoot's commentary on the passage. "He speaks not so much of an act of sin but of a state of sin, for the force of the verb is repeated action—'if we go on sinning,' 'if we continue to sin,' 'if we persist in sin.'" That this is true can be seen from some of the newer Bible translations of the passage. "For if we willfully persist in sin after having received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins." (Heb. 10:26 NRSV) "Dear friends, if we deliberately continue sinning after we have received knowledge of the truth, there is no longer any sacrifice that will cover these sins." (Heb. 10:26 NLT) The passage is not talking about a single act of sin but a determination to live a life of sin after becoming a Christian.

The New Testament never envisioned Christians ever reaching the point in this life where they would never sin. Yes, that is the goal but the apostle John said, in talking to Christians, "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." (1 John 1:8 NKJV) Well, then, what is the Christian to do about his sin? John tells us in the very next verse where he says, "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." (1 John 1:9 NKJV) Finally, he says, "If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us." (1 John 1:10 NKJV)

The Christian who sins needs to confess their sins to God after having become penitent. "Now I rejoice, not that you were made sorry, but that your sorrow led to repentance. For you were made sorry in a godly manner, that you might suffer loss from us in nothing. For godly sorrow produces repentance leading to salvation, not to be regretted; but the sorrow of the world produces death. For observe this very thing, that you sorrowed in a godly manner: What diligence it produced in you, what clearing of yourselves, what indignation, what fear, what vehement desire, what zeal, what vindication! In all things you proved yourselves to be clear in this matter." (2 Cor. 7:9-11 NKJV) The Corinthians were Christians who had sinned and considering the sins they committed as we read about them in the book of First Corinthians one has to think "they knew better" before committing some of them.

John says he wrote to his little children, as he calls them, "that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous." (1 John 2:1 NKJV) I assure you a penitent Christian can be forgiven of sin. Not a doubt in the world about it as far as scripture goes and Jesus will be your advocate. Before the Christian era began, we all recall from scripture that Peter denied Christ and lied about being his disciple and even said he did not know the man (Matt. 26:72). Was this a willful sin? Did Peter not know he was lying? Was Peter forgiven? Could Peter be forgiven but you can't be? Who can believe it?

"Let us therefore come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need." (Heb. 4:16 NKJV) There is grace and mercy for the Christian. Grace and mercy are not just reserved exclusively for the alien sinner who comes to God.

It is true we may always feel sorrowful about what we have done and have long lingering regrets but I am not so sure that is a bad thing if it helps us to determine to never ever again even entertain the thought of doing such things. I often think of David and Absalom which is a heart-wrenching story. Where did David go wrong with his son who he loved so deeply? This whole thing with Absalom tore David's heart out. Then think about what he had to live with in having had Bathsheba's husband murdered and his adultery with her. Many of us are men and women of sorrows but we have to lean on the only hope we have, a true hope, one that will forgive—Jesus. Yes, Jesus will forgive you and save you.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

Inside Outside Christ

One cannot overemphasize the importance of being “in Christ.”  “In” is a reference to location.  Wherever I am, it automatically excludes me from being anywhere else.  I cannot be physically present in your house and in someone else’s house at the same time.  In Christianity, one is either “in Christ” or outside him.  There are no other possible alternatives.

To be in Christ means:

1)  Forgiveness.  The apostle Paul, speaking to the Ephesian Christians, says, “God in Christ has also forgiven you.” (Eph. 4:32 NKJV)  “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” (Rom. 3:23 NKJV)  “There is none righteous, no, not one.” (Rom. 3:10 NKJV)  If you desire forgiveness of your sins you must be “in Christ.”  “Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12 NKJV)

2)  Redemption.  Paul, in Romans 3:24, speaks of “the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” (NKJV)  We are redeemed from sin and its consequences.  “In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins.” (Eph. 1:7 NKJV)  Jesus purchased us with his blood, the price for the forgiveness of our sins.  “You were bought at a price.” (1 Cor. 6:20 NKJV)  Peter tells us the price, “You were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold … but with the precious blood of Christ.” (1 Peter 1:18-19 NKJV)  Things are redeemed at a cost.  Redemption is “in Christ,” not outside him.

3)  Salvation.  In 2 Tim. 2:10, Paul speaks of “the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.” (NKJV)  Isn’t that the thing we all long for?  It is found “in Christ,” not outside him.

4)  Promise of Life.  Paul speaks of “the promise of life which is in Christ Jesus.” (2 Tim. 1:1 NKJV)  Even if death were simply a state of unconsciousness, which it is not, do we not all desire life?  The promise of life is in Jesus, not outside him.

5)  Eternal Life.  “The gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Rom. 6:23 NKJV)  In Christ, there need be no more fear of death, or of sickness, or illness, or of separation.  “And God shall wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying; and there shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away.” (Rev. 21:4 NKJV)  But this is “in Christ,” not outside him.

6)  No Condemnation.  “There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.” (Rom. 8:1 NKJV) It is a wonderful thing not to have to carry around the burden of sin, but this is only “in Christ,” not outside of him.  We are not condemned “in Christ.”

7)  Alive to God.  We are “alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Rom. 6:11 NKJV)  Man cannot come to God in any way other than through Christ.  Jesus’ own words were, “No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6 NKJV)  “In Christ” we are alive to God. Outside Christ, we are dead to God.  This verse means a life living for God.  You cannot live for God outside Christ.

8)  A New Creation  “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.” (2 Cor. 5:17 NKJV)  “New creation” is “new creature” in the New American Standard translation.  Do you want a new start in life?  Do you need one?  It is only found “in Christ.”  A new life, a new beginning, is found “in Christ,” not outside him.

9)  The Love of God.  In Rom. 8:38-39, Paul tells Christians there is no outside power that “shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (NKJV) Yes, sin separates us from God (Isa. 59:2) but in Christ those sins are forgiven.  God loves us even as sinners (John 3:16, Rom. 5:8) but in Christ the floodgates of God’s love are wide open toward us.  You can rest assured of God’s love for you “in Christ.”

10)  God’s kindness.  “That in the ages to come he might show the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.” (Eph. 2:7 NKJV)  “Through Christ Jesus” is the same as “in Christ Jesus” (see the ASV, ESV, NAS, NIV, NRSV, etc.).  God’s kindness comes to us “in Christ,” not outside of him.

11)  Sanctification.  Paul in writing to the church at Corinth begins his letter “to the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all who in every place call on the name of Jesus Christ our Lord … .” (1 Cor. 1:2 NKJV)  We are sanctified in Christ which means we are made holy.  We become consecrated to God in Christ.   One cannot be made holy outside Christ.  Holiness is found “in Christ,” not outside Christ.

12)  Grace.  Do you want to be saved by grace?  It is the only way any of us can be saved.  If so, grace is found “in Christ,” not outside him.  “You therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus.” (2 Tim. 2:1 NKJV)  If grace is found there, that is where you and I need to be, “in Christ.”  If you are told where riches are to be found for the taking the wise individual goes to that location.

13)  Every spiritual blessing.  “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ.” (Eph. 1:3 NKJV) Spiritual blessings are found “in Christ,” not outside him.  What are these blessings?  That is the very thing we are discussing in this article, incomplete as it is.

14)  The righteousness of God.  “For he has made him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in him.” (2 Cor. 5:21 NKJV)  “In him” is clearly a reference to Jesus.  In Jesus we find our righteousness, “in Christ,” not outside Christ.

Surely any open-minded person who believes the Bible to be the word of God can see the absolute necessity of being “in Christ” for salvation and to obtain the many blessings associated with being “in Christ.”  Thus, the only question remaining is how one enters into Christ?  The Bible plainly tells us.  “Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?” (Rom 6:3 NKJV)  “For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” (Gal. 3:27 NKJV)

No, baptism will not bring you into Christ without faith and repentance, but baptism is the final step one takes to enter into Christ.  How do I know?  The Bible just told me so in the passages just quoted.

  

Few in Christendom believe baptism is essential.  They think they can get “in Christ” some other way, although the passage that teaches that way has never been provided.  We, as human beings, are heavily influenced by what the majority thinks.  If your own thinking contradicts the thought of the majority it seems natural to question yourself.  How can I be right and everyone else be wrong?  In addition to that, there are negative consequences for bucking the consensus of thought.  There is pressure to conform.  Who wants to be ostracized?  Who wants to alienate friends and family?  It is easy to tell yourself baptism does not matter because that seems to be what the majority of Christendom has concluded. 

However, I am reminded that Peter and the apostles said, “We ought to obey God rather than men.” (Acts 5:29 NKJV)  They were speaking for themselves but no doubt the same principle applies to us as well.  One is also reminded of Paul’s statement to the Galatians, “Do I seek to please men?  For if I still pleased men, I would not be a servant of Christ.” (Gal. 1:10 NKJV)

To be “in Christ” or to be out of Christ, that is the decision all persons of accountable age must make.  I will close this with words from an old hymn often sung, “trust and obey, for there’s no other way to be happy in Jesus, but to trust and obey.”  If you have not obeyed Jesus in baptism it is past time.  Today is the day of salvation.  Today is the day to enter Christ.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

 

The Washing of Water by the Word--Baptism and Salvation

Baptism is essential to salvation but there are many non-believers, people who do not believe that. I want to deal with one passage today that affirms this doctrine but which is seldom used because the word baptize or baptism is not found in the passage. The phrase used is “washing of water” as found in Eph. 5:25-27.

Eph. 5:25-27 reads as follows: “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that it should be holy and without blemish.” (NKJV)

The phrase “washing of water” is a direct reference to baptism. “By the word” signifies the reason for the baptism--God’s word. God’s word directs one to be baptized.

Some think they can be saved outside the church. That cannot happen. Why? Because, as the text plainly tells us, that is what Christ gave himself for. Because Christians are the church, and it is Christians who will be saved.

The Bible teaches the church is the body of Christ, Eph. 1:22-23 and Col. 1:18, and “he (that is Jesus--DS) is the Savior of the body.” (Eph. 5:23 NKJV) Nowhere does the Bible teach that one can be outside the Savior (his body, the church) and be saved. If you can be outside the Savior and be saved, then you can be outside the church and be saved, but not until then. Is there anyone who thinks they can be saved outside the Savior? If you could be, the Savior would not be needed.

One must be “in Christ” to be saved. We are baptized into Christ (Rom. 6:3, Gal. 3:27). It is “in Christ” where “all spiritual blessings” are found (Eph. 1:3 KJV). Other translations use the phrase “every spiritual blessing.” If you are not in Christ, you are outside the realm where these spiritual blessings are found.

Eph. 5:25-27 teaches that Jesus sanctified the body and cleansed it by the washing of water (baptism)--that is what it says; read it for yourself. Since you and I are the church, the body, that is how we are sanctified and cleansed. The word sanctify means to make holy; thus, several modern-day translations use the word holy rather than sanctify in the Ephesian passage (see the NIV, CSB, NLT, and the NRSV). For example, the NIV reads “to make her holy” in Eph. 5:26, with reference to the church.

We are told to “pursue peace with all men, and holiness, without which no one will see the Lord.” (Heb. 12:14 NKJV) It is essential to be made holy, and that is done by the Lord when we obey him by being baptized based on our faith and repentance. When we do we become “a holy priesthood.” (1 Peter 2:5 NKJV) Of course, holiness must be maintained. We are not to become backsliders and fall away.

Jesus cleansed the church, you and I, by the washing of water--baptism. To argue with that is to argue with an inspired apostle--Paul. If you are thinking that possibly the phrase “washing of water” might mean something else other than baptism then take a look at 1 Cor. 12:13, “For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body.” (NKJV) “By one Spirit” is the same as “by the word” in Eph. 5:26 for the word is the mind of the Spirit, the Spirit speaking to us, leading us to faith and obedience.

Paul also tells us elsewhere how we enter this body of Christ, how we enter Christ himself spiritually speaking. “For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” (Gal. 3:27 NKJV) See also Rom. 6:3.

Eph. 5:25-27 teaches that baptism is essential for note some things that are true if we fail to be washed of water. If you are not washed by water, then you are not sanctified, not made holy. True, the Bible teaches we are sanctified by a number of things, not just the washing of water, but which one of those number of things given in the Bible by which we are sanctified will you cast aside as of no account on your own authority? Will it be the washing of water? If so it is, indeed, on your own authority.

The wise man says if God said it I believe it, and it is essential to believe and obey to the very best of one's ability. We do not have an option of picking and choosing. We cannot legislate for God. Can you be sanctified without the washing of water, be made holy? Our attitude ought to be that everything that is said concerning sanctification and how it comes is true and essential.

But let us move on for there is more in the text. If the washing of water is the way Jesus cleansed the church, meaning those who became Christians, and that is what the text says, then if I have failed to be baptized I have not yet been cleansed. Cleansed of what? What is there to be cleansed of? Sin.

But there is much more to this washing. In 1 Cor. 6:9-10, Paul lists a number of sins and says that those who do those things will not inherit the kingdom of God. He then goes on and says, “And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.” (1 Cor. 6:11 NKJV) “By the Spirit of our God” means the Spirit was involved but we are not told how he was involved, not here. We are told in the passage that is the subject of this article--Eph. 5:25-27. It was by means of the Spirit working through the word. The word of God is the sword of the Spirit (Eph. 6:17). It leads a man to faith and obedience. In their washing, the Corinthians were cleansed as much so as the Ephesians.

Of Christians, the Hebrew writer says, “Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.” (Heb. 10:22 NKJV) If a person has not had his body washed with the water of which the Hebrew writer is speaking (baptism), then he is not qualified to draw near. He may well attempt to do it anyway and tell himself he is being successful but he is at odds with the Hebrew writer.

Peter speaks of how to deal with this evil conscience and rid oneself of it. He says, “there is also an antitype which now saves us – baptism,” which he says is “the answer of a good conscience toward God.” (1Peter 3:21 NKJV) That is the man who can “draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith” (Heb. 10:22 NKJV) having his heart sprinkled from an evil conscience. That is the man who has had his body “washed with pure water.” It is the man who was led by the Spirit.

[As an aside, the Heb. 10:22 passage, reread it above, answers those who are always saying, because they do not want to accept baptism, that the word "water" is symbolic and is thus not a reference to water baptism. If they are correct then in Heb. 10:22 the physical body was washed with pure symbolism. When one rejects the truth they will believe about anything.]

There is more. In Acts 22:16, Ananias told Saul to “Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins.” (NKJV) What was Saul going to be baptized in? Water. What was going to happen as a result? The washing away of sins.

I have heard people who do not understand baptism say things like there is nothing in water that can wash away sins, the idea being that sin is like dirt on the body that can be washed off. Well, no sin is not like dirt on the body where a little water, soap, and a wash rag will take care of it. But, there is something in the baptismal waters that will take care of sin. What? The promise of Jesus, “He who believes and is baptized will be saved.” (Mark 16:16 NKJV) If a man is saved, he has had his sins remitted. The promise of Jesus is in the water.

Naaman, in the Old Testament, had a promise in the water. He found out if you want the promise of cleansing, you must get in the water. You can read about his experience in 2 Kings 5.

In America today, among those who call themselves Christians, not many believe what Jesus said. They believe, “he who believes and is not baptized will be saved” just as well as he who believes and is baptized. They say they are going to be saved by faith but have no faith in what Jesus said. I find deep irony in that.

Baptism is essential to salvation just as much so as faith and repentance and the confession of Jesus but there are non-believers who will neither believe nor obey. They are in God’s hands. “It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.” (Heb. 10:31 NKJV) When you will not obey what God has clearly commanded it is indeed a fearful thing to fall into his hands.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

What Is Baptism—Sprinkling, Pouring, or Immersion

It may be that no Bible subject has caused more confusion among people than the subject of baptism. What is baptism? What is its purpose? Who should be baptized? Why? I would like to look at all of these questions, but for the present, for the purpose of this article, I will confine myself to the question, what is baptism?

Most people assume that the words found in our New Testaments are English words translated from the original Greek. You may be surprised to learn that the word "baptize" and its derivatives are not English words at all, not at first. They are Greek words that were transliterated.

What does that mean?  Dictionary.com online defines transliterate as follows: “to change (letters, words, etc.) into corresponding characters of another alphabet or language.” Thus, those men who translated our New Testaments from the Greek into English decided not to translate the Greek word "baptize" at all. They just made it a new English word. Forget translating it, forget translating the Greek word. To translate is to give the meaning of the Greek word in English. That they refused to do.

Why would they do that? That is a good question. It is a question with an easy answer. The Greek word means to immerse completely. My hardback copy of Vine's, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, says of baptism, "consisting of the processes of immersion, submersion and emergence." If the reader will do a little of their own research they will quickly see that most all Greek scholars readily admit that in the first century the word was used of immersion only, that is what the Greek word meant to those people.

The Bible confirms this to be the case for Paul says, "Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death." (Rom. 6:4 NKJV) Baptism is a burial, a burial in water when used in a religious context. Paul says again in Col. 2:11-12 (NKJV), "In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead." One is not and cannot be buried by pouring or sprinkling.

The truth of the matter as to why the Greek work was transliterated and never translated is to be found in the fact that by the time the Bible came to be translated into English man had decided on his own initiative that sprinkling would do just as well as immersion. If you translate the Greek and are honest in your scholarship you will have to use the word immerse, or dip, or submerge. If you do that, what will that do to your doctrine of sprinkling? It will destroy it. That cannot be allowed to happen. What is the solution? Don't translate the Greek, transliterate it, producing a new English word that because it is new you can make it mean what you want it to mean.

The first time after the establishment of the church in Acts 2 that anyone was sprinkled or had water poured on them rather than be immersed was approximately 250 years later. In about 250 AD, a man named Novation became ill and fearing for his life wanted to be baptized. Too ill for immersion his friends poured water on him. By that point in time there was not an inspired man alive to cause problems over this substitution. Inspiration had ended. The apostles were dead.

One had to go outside the pages of the New Testament to get pouring (affusion) or sprinkling, showing little respect for what was written. What was written was not sufficient for a man (or his friends) who felt he was at the point of death, and knowing he had not been obedient to the command to be baptized (immersed), was desperate. What he needed was a change in the ordinance. He needed pouring as a substitution and if he or his friends had to add a new law or change an old one to get it in then so be it. Evidently, they had never read the passage, “There is one Lawgiver.” (James 4:12 NKJV) Either that or they were just going to ignore it.

Thus, we see the kind of attitude that brought sprinkling and pouring into what the world calls "Christianity." One ought to be able to see the evil of that kind of attitude toward God's word; if I can't find what I want in the word I will do whatever.

In 1311, the Roman Catholic Church at the Council of Revenna officially adopted pouring (affusion) and sprinkling (aspersion) of water as valid baptism. The Greek Catholic Church would not accept this but the Roman Catholic Church did and it exercised dominance in the West where the English-speaking people resided and where English Bibles were to be produced. This was more than 100 years before the printing press was invented making mass production of Bibles possible. Tyndale’s New Testament of 1526 was one of the first to use the word baptism or baptize consistently in an English Bible.

The long and short of it was that the doctrine of sprinkling was, by subterfuge, brought into the Bible by a deliberate failure to translate a Greek word and giving the transliterated word any meaning you wanted since it was a new word to the English language. That is why if you look up the word "baptize" or "baptism" in a modern-day dictionary it will give you meanings related to the way the word is used today, thus giving you options--sprinkling, pouring, or immersion.

Even so I was surprised to see that my Webster's New World Dictionary Third College Edition, the last copyright listed being 1988, while listing 3 common meanings of the word "baptize" as used today, gives before those listings the Greek meanings and I quote here from it--"to immerse," "to dip." Honesty in scholarship is a great thing.

Most all scholars will agree on the meaning of the original Greek word baptize, immerse or dip, but you will probably never see again a major translation that will translate the Greek word baptize that way. Why? With the vast multitude of people who have now come to wholeheartedly embrace sprinkling how many Bibles do you think they would sell? You can still learn the truth on this topic through your own study but you will get no help from most Bible translations. One exception is the Literal Standard Version translation but how many people do you know who have this translation? It is not a major one.

What is sad is that some will read what I have written here, they will then go and do their own research, find out that what I have said is the truth, and yet it will not make a bit of difference in their view of the subject if they have by tradition had pouring and sprinkling handed down to them in their particular faith.

Pouring and sprinkling for baptism came to us from man, not God. It has now become a tradition of men. Jesus once said to the scribes and Pharisees, "Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?" (Matt. 15:3 NKJV) God's commandment to us is to be immersed. Everyone agrees that was the original commandment and historically was done exclusively for a couple of hundred years after the church was established. When I substitute pouring or sprinkling for immersion how can I say anything other than I have done the very same thing these scribes and Pharisees did?

I have transgressed the commandment of God because of my tradition preferring to keep my tradition (pouring and/or sprinkling) over his word (immersion). I have made the commandment of God of no effect by my tradition handed down to me by those who came before which I have accepted wholeheartedly.

Then Jesus also does a comparison and contrast in talking to the scribes and Pharisees. He says God says (Matt. 15:4), then says "but you say." (Matt. 15:5). Again, it is hard to not see a parallel. I, God, have said immersion, but you say sprinkling.

Then we also have to ask, since pouring and sprinkling came from man being 200 to 1300 years after the writing of the New Testament, depending on whether you want to start your count with Novation or the Council of Ravenna, how it can be said that God had anything to do with bringing affusion or asperion into the faith? How can it be anything other than "teaching as doctrines the commandments of men"? (Matt. 15:9 NKJV)

The only way one can get around the difficulties associated with accepting pouring and sprinkling is to say the New Testament is insufficient as a guide for man today. It must be amended. This smacks of the utmost arrogance. It is to say God was not able, not capable, of producing a guide that could stand the test of time and stand on its own two legs. It is to say that we men of dust need to help God stay updated. It is to say we still have inspired men able to amend the teachings of the New Testament.

The Catholic Church accepts both—its inspiration through the Magisterium and the Pope and the need for God's word, the New Testament, to be amended and added to from time to time. If you believe that, then it is not hard to abandon the written word or replace it with your own, your teaching and tradition. Just combine it all and claim the totality to be “God’s word.”

But the truth is this is the approach the vast majority of those who call themselves Christians take whether they are Catholics or Protestants. They are putting their trust in men rather than in what is written. The idea seems to prevail that their tradition (or practice if you will) regarding baptism, whether begun in 250 AD or in the Middle Ages, or even more recently somehow trumps the New Testament and amends it. And, yet, they think it is of God.

I don't know whether you ever thought about it this way or not. What we are saying when we add to God's word is that it alone is insufficient to save men. We now need more. Yes, there was a time when immersion alone was sufficient but not so today. Men need options God did not give. It is too hard to have to do what he said way back then. Getting all wet is too big an inconvenience. What was once sufficient is no longer so. Who said so? We did. Who could fairly question us who have made ourselves the authority?

Hear the words of Jesus, "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 (NKJV) The word of Jesus in the New Testament is be immersed.

Today we need to make a choice. Will we believe and practice those things that came into our midst religiously hundreds of years after the establishment of the church and which, as a result, came obviously from man, not God, or will we return to the New Testament as our sole guide in our faith and practice? We need to choose. We ought to say as for me and my house I will follow the words of the Lord as recorded in the New Testament and leave the ideas, opinions, and innovations of man to those for whom the New Testament is not good enough.

[To download this article or print it out here.]

Spiritual Mirages

It is so easy to be misled in life. Things appear to be a certain way, but the reality is they are not at all what they seem to be. They are a mirage. Ask any young man or woman or husband or wife who has been deeply in love and then found out to their utter dismay that the love they felt sure was mutual between them and their beloved was all just an illusion and the object of their affections was in reality ready to desert them. The first reaction is one of shock and disbelief. Only later are they able to look back and perhaps pick up on some signs that should have clued them in all along, signs which at the time were hidden from their eyes. Sadly, this sort of thing happens all the time and when one comes to the knowledge of the truth in such matters it is never pleasant.

In the realm of religion, just as in the realm of personal relationships, there are mirages. People think they see things that are in reality only illusions. One such example is found in the book of Jeremiah. Jeremiah, God's prophet, had been prophesying for years to Judah to repent and amend their ways lest God send a foreign force to their country for their destruction and ruin. They never listened and so God did indeed send the Babylonians resulting in death for many and Babylonian captivity for those that were left alive. Only the very poorest of the land were left in Judah to till the land under the leadership of a man appointed by the king of Babylon, Gedaliah.

Due to some outside intrigue by the king of Ammon men were sent to assassinate Gedaliah which mission they accomplished.  This put great fear into the Jews left in the land fearing that the king of Babylon would return and punish them over the affair even though they were not involved in it. The desire was to flee to Egypt for safety. (Read the account in Jer. 40:13-41:18.) Before leaving for Egypt, however, they consulted with Jeremiah asking him, on their behalf, to seek God's will in the matter. Having done so and received from God an answer they were instructed and warned not to go to Egypt.

"Then hear now the word of the LORD, O remnant of Judah! Thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel: 'If you wholly set your faces to enter Egypt, and go to dwell there, then it shall be that the sword which you feared shall overtake you there in the land of Egypt; the famine of which you were afraid shall follow close after you there in Egypt; and there you shall die. So shall it be with all the men who set their faces to go to Egypt to dwell there. They shall die by the sword, by famine, and by pestilence. And none of them shall remain or escape from the disaster that I will bring upon them.'" (Jer. 42:15-17 NKJV)

The people did not believe Jeremiah, accused him of lying (Jer. 43:2), and left for Egypt dragging Jeremiah along with them. Once there, they continued their idol worship (Jer. 44:8) and continued ignoring Jeremiah's prophetic warnings (Jer. 43:8-Jer. 44:14). We now get to the lesson I want to emphasize for this article. The people respond to Jeremiah's prophecy by saying:

"As for the word that you have spoken to us in the name of the LORD, we will not listen to you! But we will certainly do whatever has gone out of our own mouth, to burn incense to the queen of heaven and pour out drink offerings to her, as we have done, we and our fathers, our kings and our princes, in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem. For then we had plenty of food, were well-off, and saw no trouble. But since we stopped burning incense to the queen of heaven and pouring out drink offerings to her, we have lacked everything and have been consumed by the sword and by famine." (Jer. 44:16-18 NKJV)

Here is the spiritual mirage, the illusion, the incomprehension, the self-deception, and herein lies the lesson we all must learn and take to heart. There is a great tendency on man's part to believe that if he is actively involved in spiritual affairs, sincere in its belief and practise, and if his life as it pertains to this world seems to be going relatively well that is an indication God is pleased with him and his religion and that God is with him blessing him as a result of his spiritual life.

Just because things are going reasonably well for us in our lives does not mean things are well with us spiritually. Just because we have a spiritual life, one we are actively involved in, does not mean it is the right religion or pleasing to God. As far as I am able to tell from reading the New Testament the Pharisees of Jesus' day were doing just fine as far as the blessings of this world were concerned but they were experiencing their own spiritual mirage as much as those Jews in Jeremiah’s day.

The Jews with whom Jeremiah was dealing could not have been more wrong than they were with regard to their concept of cause and effect. While they may have "had plenty of food, were well-off, and saw no trouble" the cause was not because they were worshipping "the queen of heaven" to whom they attributed it. They were involved in a spiritual illusion, a spiritual mirage, and one which man is very easily led into even today. We easily deceive ourselves just as was the case in Jeremiah's time.

The God of heaven is generally patient with man although no man should sin thinking God will give him time to repent. God is under no obligation to give man time to repent from sin. One can readily come up with many examples from the Bible where sinners were struck down immediately upon committing sin.

Nevertheless, it seems most are given time as God "is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance." (2 Peter 3:9 NKJV) One sees this not only in the book of Jeremiah where Jeremiah urged repentance and a turning back to God for years before tragedy finally struck but it is a common Old Testament theme as apostasy was common among God's people throughout most of Old Testament history and the prophets were continually calling for repentance with God giving time and opportunity.

Romans two, verse four, helps us see God's patience and longsuffering with sinful man. I quote it here from the New Living Translation. "Don't you see how wonderfully kind, tolerant, and patient God is with you? Does this mean nothing to you? Can't you see that His kindness is intended to turn you from your sin?" (Rom. 2:4 NLT) The NKJV reads, "Or do you despise the riches of His goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leads you to repentance?" (NKJV)

The Jews of Jeremiah's day were attributing God's goodness and longsuffering, meant for their repentance and salvation, to blessings from the idol they were worshipping--the queen of heaven. While we do not worship idols today, save for a few places in the world, aren't we in danger of doing something very similar to the Jews with whom Jeremiah was dealing? Everything is going well; we see no need to repent thinking our life is pleasing to God and we are being blessed because of our godly life all the while knowing we cannot read specific Bible passages without them condemning us--our life, our faith, our conduct. We like the Jews of old will not listen to God's specific word. We convince ourselves, in one way or another, that things have changed today and the passage or passages that prick us are no longer relevant to modern-day life and religion.

We feel Christianity has evolved and things that once were are no longer true or binding on us. God has changed, seems to be the thinking, even though he has specifically said, “I change not.” (Mal. 3:6 KJV) We either do that or we twist passages to make them mean what we wish they said.

The church at Laodicea can serve as an example of how we can delude ourselves and see mirages. They were saying to themselves, "I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing." (Rev. 3:17 NKJV) However, what does Jesus say about them? He says they do not know that they “are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked." (Rev. 3:17 NKJV) His message to them ends up being "be zealous and repent." (Rev. 3:19 NKJV) Yet, that was the very thing they saw no need of, for they were saying among themselves, “I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing.” (Rev/ 3:17 NKJV) They were pleased and satisfied and yet Jesus says their eyes needed to be anointed with eye salve so they could see (Rev. 3:18). They were seeing a mirage.

I am convinced people today are just as easily misled into erroneous thinking about their status with God as they were back in Bible times. A person can look at their life and see all kinds of blessings and think God is being so good to me and therefore he must be pleased with my religious life. That is not necessarily the case at all. One’s financial and social status, one’s blessings in this life, tell us nothing about how God sees us. The beggar in the account of the rich man and Lazarus had no money, no status or standing in this world of men, but went to paradise upon his death.

That kind of reasoning that correlates this world’s blessings with godly approval would lead to the conclusion that Paul was displeasing to God and living an ungodly life for he spoke about what he had experienced when he said, "From the Jews five times I received forty stripes minus one. Three times I was beaten with rods; once I was stoned; three times I was shipwrecked; a night and a day I have been in the deep; in journeys often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils of my own countrymen, in perils of the Gentiles, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; in weariness and toil, in sleeplessness often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness … ." (2 Cor. 11:24-27 NKJV)

Blessings from God do not necessarily equate with God being pleased with you and the way you are living your life. It is a spiritual mirage to think God is pleased with me because of all I have, all I have done, and accomplished. Jesus himself, while living on earth, had little to nothing of this world's goods. He once said he had no place to lay his head (Matt. 8:20).

The same point that is being made about individuals can also be said of religious groups. Do not be misled by size and appearances. If one wants to please the masses, it can be done. There are ways to tear down the old building and build bigger and fill the parking lot up (how this is done is no secret) and then say God blessed you as a religious body. If you have been observant, you know how it is done as well as I do. The question that has to be answered, however, is what brought them in—God or the appeal to the fleshly man? Was it an appeal to faith and duty or an appeal to that which satisfies the natural man?

The conclusion of the matter is this—while all blessings come from God and we should be thankful for every one of them, we ought not to jump to conclusions about why we received them. Many a man blessed abundantly in this life will be found in hell in the next one for the goodness of God in his case did not lead him to repentance while the poor widow (Luke 21) having given up even her two mites along with the beggar Lazarus (Luke 16) will be there in heaven. (One assumes the poor widow continued faithful until death.)

It continues to trouble me greatly how people just assume, make assumptions, all of the time in the realm of religion. All seems to be well with them and God, in their mind, just because they feel it is so. Their religion is based on emotion, on feeling, and is purely subjective. It is a matter of how I feel about it (just as in Jeremiah's day) versus book, chapter, and verse from God's word. When the choice is between the actual word of God as can be quoted versus their emotions, God's word will take second place. That is living life based on a spiritual mirage, an illusion that will be shown up for what it is on the last day. Jeremiah spoke the word of God. The Jews should have heard it. They paid the penalty for doing it their way. We will pay the penalty for doing it our way unless our way has the word of God behind it.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

 

Was Cornelius Saved Before Baptism

I have written a series of articles on the subject of obeying the gospel in the first century based on the history given in the book of Acts. This is another dealing with the same subject. Why do so? Because there is absolutely no possibility that Holy Spirit inspired men, some apostles, could have gotten the gospel message wrong.

The case of Cornelius is somewhat unique in the respect that he appears to have been a very godly man even prior to his conversion. In Acts 10:2, the Bible says of him that he was "a devout man, and one who feared God with all his household, and gave many alms to the Jewish people, and prayed to God continually." (NAS) Of course, there were others like him in that regard – Saul of Tarsus and the Ethiopian eunuch come to mind. A man may be devout and yet ill-informed, in religious error.

As for Cornelius, if there was ever a man so good as to be saved on his own merits we suppose Cornelius would have been that man. And yet God's angel instructs him to send for Peter. Why? Might it not be that even a good man like Cornelius needed the gospel? If a man can be saved without the gospel why bother to preach it to him, why did Jesus die on the cross, why the great commission? You can read 2 Thess. 1:8-9 to see what will happen to those who do not obey the gospel. It is a serious matter to not obey the gospel. Cornelius needed the gospel. He was a man in need of salvation from his sins for no man is so perfect as to have never sinned.

Peter, in reporting what had happened at Cornelius' house, once he arrives back in Jerusalem, throws more light on why Cornelius, by the angel's direction, had been instructed to send for him. The angel had told Cornelius that "he (a reference to Peter - DS) shall speak words to you by which you will be saved." (Acts 11:14 NAS) So, there were words Cornelius needed to hear to be saved? What were those words?  

Were they not the same words Peter had preached on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2? Were they not the same words spoken by Philip in Samaria and before the Ethiopian eunuch? Were they not the same words spoken to Saul by Ananias? Is there more than one gospel that will save? Is it this gospel in one place, another gospel in another location? The gospel is the gospel. It does not differ day by day, from city to city, or from person to person.

It has already been shown in previous articles, as taken in chronological order, that in every instance the preaching by the apostles and inspired men of the first century immediately led to baptism by those who accepted the preaching. Baptism was a part of the message. Is it any different this time with Cornelius? No!

Hear Peter, "Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized" (Acts 10:47 NAS) then "he ordered them to be baptized." (Acts 10:48 NAS) What is another word for "ordered?" If you check other translations you will see the word "commanded" rather than "ordered." But why command baptism?

The answer is because you cannot obey the gospel and thus cannot be saved, not in the first century and not now, without being baptized "for the remission of sins." (Acts 2:38 NAS) What Peter preached in one locality he preached everywhere. Was Peter an apostle? Did he know what he was talking about? How about Philip? How about Ananias? Remember that Cornelius was to be saved by the words Peter would speak to him (Acts 11:14) and that word ended with the command to be baptized.

Cornelius and his companions had the Holy Spirit descend upon them prior to their baptism leading many to think they were saved at that point. Not so. Why not? 

Because Cornelius was to be saved by the message he received from Peter (Acts 11:14) and not by a miraculous manifestation from heaven. Peter had not gotten a good start on delivering that message when the Holy Spirit fell on Cornelius for he says in Acts 11:15 "as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them." (NAS) It was necessary for Peter to complete that message which included baptism.

But let us look at it from another point of view. What if Cornelius had told Peter, "No thanks, I have been saved by faith and grace. I believe in Jesus. I think I will just pass on baptism." Would he have been saved? Many preach today that he would have been for the gospel they preach has no water in it unlike Peter's gospel. 

He would not have been saved by grace and faith for the simple reason that he would have lacked faith in the message Peter preached. He would not have believed the Holy Spirit by which Peter spoke for Peter by the Holy Spirit commanded baptism. It would have been as if he said, “I know you were to speak words by which I might be saved but I do not believe this word.”

I would also remind the reader of what he already knows if he will think about it. The fact the Holy Spirit is upon one does not mean he is God-approved as he is in his present state. If so Caiaphas, the high priest and one of the ringleaders in bringing about the crucifixion of Jesus, was a saved man. Read about his prophesying in John 11:49-51. Add to that the fact that even inspired men could and did sin, even Peter. (Gal. 2:11-12)  

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

 

Moses and the Waters of Marah--A Lesson For US

When the children of Israel left Egypt, led by Moses, the first major event one reads about in the book of Exodus after the Red Sea crossing is found in Exodus 15:22-26, the crisis at the waters of Marah. I say crisis for that was how the children of Israel perceived it. They had been traveling three days in the wilderness and had found no water to drink during that time.

Was that a crisis? It was when you consider how much water was required for this exodus. In Ex. 12:37-38 we get some idea of the numbers. It reads as follows: "And the people of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children. A mixed multitude also went up with them, and very much livestock, both flocks and herds." (ESV) There may have been over 2 million men, women, and children needing water, as well as all the flocks and herds of livestock. You do not carry that kind of water in canteens.

After this three-day journey without finding water, they come to Marah, a place that has water, but water so bitter it cannot be used for drinking. In fact, according to the notes in the NET Bible, the Hebrew word "Marah" means bitter. The Bible says, "The people complained against Moses, saying, 'What shall we drink?'" (Ex. 15:24 NKJV) One has to understand Moses was only God's representative; thus, to complain against Moses was to complain against God (see Ex. 16:8). Moses individually had no power to provide them with water; they knew that, so the complaint was against God.

This manifested a lack of faith in God. How? Back in Ex. 3:16-17 before the plagues, before Moses ever entered Egypt after his personal exile, God told Moses at the burning bush incident to, "Go and gather the elders of Israel together, and say to them, 'The Lord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, appeared to me, saying, 'I have surely visited you and seen what is done to you in Egypt; and I have said I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt to the land of the Canaanites and the Hittites and the Amorites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites, to a land flowing with milk and honey.' ' " (NKJV)

After entering Egypt, Moses did this according to Ex. 4:29-30 with Aaron being his spokesman. He was also directed to perform miracles before the elders as you read about in Ex. 4:1-9, and according to Ex. 4:30 he did so, as signs of confirmation that it was God who was behind this affair. Afterwards, we know of the plagues that hit Egypt which were further confirmation that God was intent on bringing the children of Israel out of Egypt into "a land flowing with milk and honey." Add to these miracles the Red Sea encounter where the waters were parted for the children of Israel but collapsed on the Egyptians and the children of Israel should have seen God's determination to hold fast to his promise to them.

Why then would the children of Israel believe that God would allow them to perish for want of water at Marah after seeing all he had already done on their behalf? Did they not believe God? Did they not trust him after all they had both heard and seen? According to the footnotes in the NET Bible the Hebrew word translated "complained" or "murmured" or "grumbled," depending on your translation, "is a much stronger word than 'to grumble' or 'to complain.' It is used almost exclusively in the wilderness wandering stories, to describe the rebellion of the Israelites against God … They were not merely complaining--they were questioning God's abilities and motives. The action is something like a parliamentary vote of no confidence."

That they needed water there was no doubt. That they were in want there is no doubt. What should they have done rather than rebel? Well, I can think of several things--trust in God for deliverance, pray to him, ask Moses not in a complaining or murmuring way but in a supplicating way to intervene with God on their behalf. God had told them he would bring them into a land flowing with milk and honey. If they believed in the goodness of God, that he would not lie to them, then surely they should have seen he was not about to let them die of thirst. But, the Psalmist had this to say about them, "They did not believe in God, and did not trust in his salvation." (Psalms 78:22 NKJV) That was said of them at a later date in their history but was true of them basically from the beginning as their first rebellion, based on a lack of faith, was at the Red Sea (Psalms 106:7).

A lesson for all Christians in this is the need to trust in God in our own personal crises. If we are faithful God is on our side and if we will trust and obey and be patient he will work things out for us. This does not mean he will allow us to live eternally upon the earth. It is appointed for man once to die (Heb. 9:27 NKJV). Nor does it mean we will be blessed in the ways we might like--say fame, fortune, and prestige--but it does mean he will see us through our life’s struggles and help us through the valley of the shadow of death (Psa. 23:4).

However, that is not the main lesson I want to get from this Old Testament story. God did come to the rescue of the children of Israel and provide water, but how did he do it? The Bible says he told Moses to cast a tree he showed him into the bitter waters at Marah which having done so the waters were made fit to drink (Ex. 15:25 NKJV). However, it is my understanding that the Hebrew word denotes "wood" and not necessarily a tree, although either is possible; thus, the English Standard Version translates the word as a "log" rather than a tree while other translations say "a piece of wood." (CEV, GNB, NLT)

I want to ask the reader some questions to get to the main point of this article. What power was there in that tree or piece of wood to transform a body of water from bitter to pure sufficient to quench the thirst of perhaps as many as 2 million people with all their livestock? Not one bit of power--none at all. However, what would have happened had Moses not thrown the tree or wood into the water? Would the water have become drinkable had he not?

What power was there in the rod Moses had in his hand to part the Red Sea? God told him, "Lift up your rod, and stretch out your hand over the sea and divide it." (Ex. 14:16 NKJV) None! But what if he had not done it?

What power was there in the rod Moses used to strike the rock, in a later incident where water was needed, to bring forth water out of the rock to provide for the people's thirst? (see Ex. 17:5-6) None! But what if he had not done it?

What power was there in the fiery serpent that God told Moses to make and put on a pole (he made it out of bronze) to heal those who had been bitten by poisonous serpents to save them from death if they would look at it? (see Numbers 21:8-9) None! You surely do not believe your doctor would treat you that way if bitten by a poison scorpion or rattlesnake do you? But, what about those who did not look at Moses' bronze serpent?

What power was there inherent in marching around the walls of Jericho, blowing trumpets, blowing a ram's horn, and shouting to get the walls of the city to fall down? (Joshua 6:2-5) None! But, what if they had not done it?

What power was there in the water of the Jordan River to cleanse Naaman of his leprosy? (2 Kings 5) None! Could all lepers have been cleansed of leprosy by doing what Naaman did? Was the power in the water? What if Naaman had not gone and washed 7 times as directed? (We know, don't we, for until he did so, having refused for a time, he remained leprous and was not cleansed.)

In John 9, Jesus meets a man blind from birth. The Bible says, "He spat on the ground and made clay with the saliva; and he anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay. And he said to him, 'Go, wash in the pool of Siloam' (which is translated, Sent). So he went and washed, and came back seeing." (John 9:6-7 NKJV) What power was there in the water of the pool of Siloam to cure blindness? None at all! But what if he had not gone to the pool of Siloam?

Are you seeing a pattern? The God that spoke the universe into existence and who needs but speak and it is done does not need rods, or bronze serpents, special water treatments, or marching, or horn blowing, or anything else to achieve the end he desires. All he needs to do is speak and it is done but sometimes he chooses to work by means of agency. When he chooses to do so it becomes a matter of faith on our part--faith to believe and do or faithlessness to disbelieve and not do.

Naaman was a person who had a hard time believing and doing. He just could not see the sense in it or the reason for it. Be that as it may, he was not healed until he believed enough to obey.

Let me drive the point home. It does not matter in the least whether you or I see a reason in a command God gives. Sometimes he gives commands just to test our obedience (Abraham being a case in point with the sacrifice of his son Isaac). Paul, writing by the Holy Spirit, said to the Corinthians, "For to this end I also wrote, that I might put you to the test, whether you are obedient in all things." (2 Cor. 2:9 NKJV)

Many, many people who consider themselves to be Christians (the reality is they are not) cannot bring themselves to be baptized. Is it a command of God? They know it is (Mark 16:16, John 3:5, Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16, Gal. 3:27, 1 Peter 3:21, Rom. 6:3-4, etc.) but they cannot believe it is necessary for they cannot see any reason behind it. How often has one heard the phrase that "the water does not have anything to do with salvation?" It does if God says to be baptized. It fits into the same category of things we have discussed here.

I have asked the question before and never received an answer but I will ask it again. If Jesus (God) wanted you to know baptism was for the remission of your sins how would he have had to phrase it to get the message across to you, if you do not believe that to be the case? He actually said that exact thing, speaking through Peter via the Holy Spirit in Acts 2:38, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins." (NKJV) Then, in Acts 22:16, the Holy Spirit spoke of being baptized to wash away sins. Peter states it again as if we could not understand him in Acts 2:38 when he says, "there is also an antitype which now saves us, namely baptism." (1 Peter 3:21 NKJV) Jesus himself said, "Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God" (John 3:5 NKJV) and he said the man that would be saved would be the man that "believes and is baptized." (Mark 16:16)

People all over the world are convinced Jesus was in error when he said "he who believes and is baptized will be saved" (Mark 16:16 NKJV) believing the truth to be "he who believes and is baptized or not baptized, either way, will be saved." That is adding to the word of God and is just as dangerous as if a man were to say, "he who believes and is not baptized will be saved." Add to God's word or contradict it, either one, and face God in the judgment.

The lesson we need to learn from the event at the waters of Marah is that if God decides to use agency or means to save us, then so be it. We must either conform and throw that log or tree into the water, or forget about receiving the blessing. We either believe and obey, or disbelieve and do not obey and forfeit the blessing. The spiritual application is valid until the earth no longer exists. One must respect whatever agency or means God so desires to use to bring blessings and salvation to man. To fail to respect that is to show a lack of faith in God despite all protests to the contrary.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]