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.]

 

Hypocrites In The Church

Are there hypocrites in the church? Surely, there are some. Paul dealt with such in his day for he said in 2 Cor. 11:13, "For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ." (NASU) In Gal. 2:4 he speaks of "false brethren secretly brought in." (NASU) Hypocrisy is an age-old problem. There are hypocrites about everywhere you look so why be surprised or shocked to find some in the church?

The question to be dealt with in this article is what shall we do about hypocrites in the church? Some people lay all the blame for their own failure to obey the gospel on hypocrites in the church. They talk as though they want nothing to do with such a bunch of hypocrites and it is beneath them to associate with such. They are better than that.

Certainly, the Bible condemns hypocrisy. What may surprise the reader is that the actual word "hypocrisy" is found only in 9 verses of the New American Standard Bible Update edition and "hypocrite" is found in only 2 verses of the same translation. Does that mean there is not a lot written on the subject? Not at all!

One has to remember that in defining a word one learns much by studying words that are the antonyms of the word being defined. We all know that one who is guilty of hypocrisy is one who pretends that which is not true; he pretends to be what he is not; he is a pretender and deceitful. Well, what is the opposite of that? The antonyms for hypocrisy given by the Merriam-Webster Dictionary are genuineness and sincerity. Thus, every time your Bible commands honesty and sincerity of heart it condemns hypocrisy.

One needs to read no further than Matthew to get Jesus' take on hypocrisy. He calls the Pharisees and scribes hypocrites and then says to them, "You, too, outwardly appear righteous to men, but inwardly you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness." (Matt. 23:28 NASU) When Jesus calls a man a hypocrite, as he did the Pharisees and scribes in verse 27, he did not mean it as a compliment. It is a condemnation.

In Luke 12:1, he says, "Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy." (NASU) He goes on then to say they will not get by with it for "there is nothing covered up that will not be revealed, and hidden that will not be known." (Luke 12:2 NASU) What was true for them will also be true for you and me if we do not guard our hearts closely and act out of sincerity. It is easy, for example, to worship out of duty rather than sincerely from the heart, out of obligation versus desire.

Peter says to all Christians that we are to put "aside all malice and all deceit and hypocrisy and envy and all slander." (1 Peter 2:1 NASU) The words Joshua spoke to the children of Israel in Joshua 24:14 are just as applicable to us today as they were to them. He said, "Now, therefore, fear the LORD and serve Him in sincerity and truth." (Joshua 24:14 NASU)

Paul's desire for the Philippians (and for us) was that they might be "sincere and blameless until the day of Christ." (Phil. 1:10 NASU) The writer of the book of Hebrews instructs us to draw near to God "with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water." (Heb. 10:22 NASU) God demands of us honesty, sincerity, and not hypocrisy.

No one can defend a hypocrite, nor would it be right to try and do so, but to those who complain about hypocrites in the church and use them as an excuse to not obey the gospel we ask this question, can you live the Christian life better than those you criticize or will you even try? You do know, do you not, that living the Christian life is easier said than done? Do you know that the apostle Peter himself was guilty of hypocrisy for a time? Are you making a claim to be better than Peter?

Paul said of Peter, called Cephas in this passage, that "when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. For prior to the coming of certain men from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to withdraw and hold himself aloof, fearing the party of the circumcision. The rest of the Jews joined him in hypocrisy, with the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy." (Gal 2:11-13 NASU)

Did David not for a time, after committing adultery with Bathsheba and after having her husband killed, act as though (pretending) he had done nothing wrong? Was he not being a hypocrite? It took Nathan the prophet with a direct message from God to get him to face up to his own hypocrisy.

I wonder, will either of these hypocrites be in heaven? Since one does not want to be with hypocrites in the church one supposes that one feels the same about being with Peter and David in heaven. Yes, we are sure that these men repented of any and all wrongdoing doing but the point is that for a time they were hypocrites. Just because a man is a hypocrite today does not mean he will be one tomorrow or that he will never repent. Maybe if you were to become a Christian and play the role of a Nathan you could save him. Do you care enough to try?

Another point that needs pursuing is this--the fact that a man is in sin does not necessarily imply that he is a conscious hypocrite. It would be easy to look at a church like that at Corinth in the New Testament and read about all of the sins in that congregation and just say that church is full of hypocrites and sinners. I want nothing to do with them. Does that attitude save them?

What if Paul had felt that way about them--just a bunch of hypocrites that I want nothing to do with? Would they not all have been lost who were caught up in sin there? Instead, what did Paul do? He says he wrote to them in tears (2 Cor. 2:4), speaking of his first Corinthian letter, teaching, begging, pleading, exhorting them to repent. Did any of them do so?

Paul says in his second letter, speaking of the results wrought by his first letter, that "though I caused you sorrow by my letter, I do not regret it; though I did regret it--for I see that that letter caused you sorrow, though only for a while--I now rejoice, not that you were made sorrowful, but that you were made sorrowful to the point of repentance; for you were made sorrowful according to the will of God, so that you might not suffer loss in anything through us. For the sorrow that is according to the will of God produces a repentance without regret, leading to salvation." (2 Co 7:8-10 NASU)

When we say we will have nothing to do with hypocrites, we are really saying we have no concern for them; we do not love them as people; let them go to hell; I don't care. Love does not run away from people but rather toward them.

There are probably not too many Christians who have lived so faithfully for a full lifetime that they can honestly say there was never ever any hypocrisy in their lives. It may be that the public did not see it but in our inner self we have known we were not right with God. We were tempted for a time and fell. Can you do better than we have done? Great! It is time to get started.

Finally, where is the compassion? A lot that passes for hypocrisy is merely ignorance of Bible teaching. True, given time, we ought to study and gain knowledge on our own but it takes time. Many simply do not know better. I only argue for a bit of patience and compassion on all of these hypocrites that it is said the church is full of.

Yes, we all despise the idea of hypocrisy and do not have any desire whatsoever to defend true hypocrites. Much of my arguing in this piece has been for the purpose of showing that there is room for love and compassion and that even good and great men are capable of falling into hypocrisy for a time.

But are we not hypocrites ourselves when we say we are too good for all of them, when we say we are too good for the gospel, when we say we are too good for the church? Are we not pretending to be better than we really are?

In closing, I want to mention the conversation Jesus had with Peter after his resurrection when he found Peter and a few of the disciples on the sea having fished all night and caught nothing. You will find the account in John chapter 21 beginning in verse about 15. When Jesus told Peter about what kind of death Peter would die, Peter turned around and saw the disciple whom Jesus loved and said to Jesus, "Lord, and what about this man?" (John 21:21 NASU) Please hear Jesus' response. "If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you? You follow Me!" (John 21:22 NASU)

My final words in this piece--if there are hypocrites in the church what is that to you as regards your own salvation? You follow Jesus. I think that is exactly what Jesus would tell you. Don't worry about the other guy unless it is for the purpose of helping him. You follow Jesus. 

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

Faith, Works, Baptism, and Obedience

Many believe that since the Bible teaches justification by faith (Rom. 5:1) and not by works (Eph. 2:8-9, Titus 3:5) baptism is excluded as an act essential to salvation despite many passages that teach just the opposite (Acts 2:38, 22:16, 1 Peter 3:21, Titus 3:5, Eph. 5:26, 1 Cor. 12:13 compared with Eph. 5:23 [baptized into one body, Christ the Savior of the body], John 3:5, Gal. 3:26-27, etc.). It is the burden of this article to show the fallacy of this belief.

In the first place, the Bible teaches that baptism is not a work of righteousness which we have done, just the opposite, as stated in Titus 3:5, "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit." (NKJV) The washing of regeneration is a reference to baptism and is excluded by Paul as being a work of righteousness which we have done that in itself saves us apart from God’s mercy. What is baptism then? It is a part of God’s means of extending his mercy to mankind. Baptism is God showing us kindness. It is God through grace giving us a means to be saved by his mercy.

Water baptism amounts to nothing, is worthless, without God behind it in his compassion for us. When Naaman dipped seven times in the Jordan River for his cleansing from leprosy (2 Kings 5) it would not have made an ounce of difference without God being behind the command with the extension of his grace. The water did not cleanse Naaman, God did, but Naaman was not going to be cleansed without dipping in the Jordan those seven times, without obeying the command to do so. Why can’t we see the parallel with baptism in our day?

One acquainted with the New Testament cannot read Titus 3:5 without being reminded of John 3:5, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." (NKJV) Paul, in Titus, is saying what Jesus said in John. To be saved in Titus is to enter the kingdom of God in John. To be saved is to be in the kingdom of God, where the saved are.

Indeed, Paul teaches justification by faith. "The just shall live by faith." (Rom. 1:17 NKJV) "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law." (Rom. 3:28 NKJV) "Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God." (Rom. 5:1-2 NKJV)

One cannot enter the waters of baptism without faith in what God said about doing so and expect the cleansing of sin. If I do not believe what God said about it I have not acted in faith and cannot be justified by faith.

In the book of Romans, from which I have just quoted, Paul is writing to a mixed audience of Jews and Greeks. The Jews came to Christianity out of the background of Judaism and the Law of Moses. Much of what Paul writes in Romans is directed to the Jews whose inclination through much of the first century was to try and hang on to both the Law of Moses and to Christ at the same time. The Law of Moses was a law system, not a faith system. What was the problem with the Law of Moses, a works system of salvation?

Paul tells us, "For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.'" (Gal. 3:10 NKJV) James says, "Whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all." (James 2:10 NKJV) This is the problem not just with the Law of Moses but with any and all law systems God might give man. As soon as a man violates one law, justice demands satisfaction--punishment--"the law brings about wrath; for where there is no law there is no transgression." (Rom. 4:15 NKJV) To violate a law of God, any law he gives, is unrighteousness, is sin. "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law." (1 John 3:4 KJV)

Jesus was the only sinless man to ever live. Law condemns all of us for we have all broken God's law. "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." (Rom. 3:23 NKJV) Thus, "by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified." (Gal. 2:16c NKJV) The word "the" in Gal 2:16 just quoted is not found in the original but was added by the translators in both instances. When translated without the additions, it reads as follows: "By works of law no flesh shall be justified." If you check an interlinear you will find this to be true. What is the point?

The point is, while it is true Paul had specific reference to the Law of Moses because that is the law his audience had in mind, he phrases his statement in such a way as to include all law. No one will ever get to heaven by perfect keeping of works of law. Paul says the same thing in Rom. 3:28 where again the word "the" has been added by translators and is not in the original. It thus should read as follows: "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of ("the" omitted here is not in the original manuscripts--DS) law." (NKJV) Deeds are works.

A question thus arises. If I am not saved by works of law why be concerned with obedience? Paul knew this was what some would conclude and he begins to address that issue in Rom. 6:1 where he says, "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound?" (NKJV) Remember it is "by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God." (Eph. 2:8 NKJV)

Paul never meant to imply that obedience was optional. Paul responds vigorously saying, "God forbid" (ASV, KJV), "By no means!" (ESV), "May it never be" (NAS), "Certainly not!" (NKJV) He says, "How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?" (Rom. 6:2 NKJV)

He then says, "Do you not know," introducing the subject of baptism, "that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? Therefore we were buried with him through baptism into death." (Rom. 6:3-4 NKJV) Whose death? Into Christ's death but watch it closely for up pops verse 8, "Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him." (NKJV) So we are baptized into Christ's death but that is also the place where "we died with Christ." When we arise from this death we "should walk in newness of life" (Rom. 6:4 NKJV) for we have been granted a new spiritual life and we should "present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead." (Rom. 6:13 NKJV) We have been "set free from sin" (Rom. 6:18 NKJV), but when? When we died to it, "For he who has died has been freed from sin." (Rom. 6:7 NKJV, see also Rom. 6:2) When did we die? In baptism (Rom. 6:4). Thus no baptism, then no death, then no being freed from sin. This is in perfect accord with Acts 2:38 and the long list of other passages on baptism referenced in the very first paragraph of this article.

Now who is Paul talking to? To Christians who have been justified by faith, not by works. Did Paul consider baptism to be a work of the kind of which he had been talking about by which a man could not be saved? Not at all! How then did he consider it? As a part of being justified by faith.

Paul begins the book of Romans with this statement in chapter 1 verse 5 saying he had been given grace and apostleship "to bring about the obedience of faith among all the Gentiles, for his name's sake." (NAS) The NKJV says, "among all nations for his name" instead of "all the Gentiles." But what was the objective? Obedience of faith! Why? Because without obedience faith is dead and cannot save anyone and that is from the get-go, from the very beginning. "Faith without works is dead." (James 2:26 NKJV)

When Peter stands up on the Day of Pentecost and preaches the first gospel sermon ever, creates by his preaching faith in those who hear, and then tells them what to do in response to their question asking what they can do he responds by saying, "repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins." (Acts 2:38 NKJV) You cannot tell me they were justified by faith if their response was "I don't think so right now, maybe later." Nor can you tell me they were justified by faith if they failed to believe the word of God that baptism was for the remission of sins, just as Peter speaking by the Holy Spirit said, for that would not be belief but unbelief or disbelief. It would be the same as calling God a liar.

Paul closes the book of Romans the same way he opened it, "has been made known to all the nations, leading to obedience of faith." (Rom. 16:26 NAS) “Obedience of faith” is obedience led by faith or obedience because of faith or out of faith. What does that mean then? Faith must precede obedience. The justifying faith Paul was talking about in the book of Romans was a faith that led to obedience. Faith must precede obedience before you can have obedience out of faith.

There has never been a baptism acceptable to God but what it was first preceded by faith and submitted to by faith. This in itself invalidates infant baptism as the infant is incapable of having faith. Faith saves because it believes God and does not doubt; therefore, it acts. Without obedience (acts, works, call it what you will), faith never really lives and is dead from the beginning and thus never saved the man at any point in time. If dead faith saved, the demons would be saved for James says they believe (James 2:19). The same could be said of those rulers who believed in Jesus but did not confess him because they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God (John 12:42-43).

Baptism is the dividing line between living faith and dead faith. Why? Is it because I said so? No! It is because Paul said when we arise from baptism that we "should walk in newness of life." (Rom. 6:4 NKJV) We are baptized into Christ (Gal. 3:27 NKJV). In Christ we are a new creation (2 Cor. 5:17 NKJV). The old man died in baptism and we arise a new creation. If we are saved before baptism (a baptism growing out of faith) the question ought to be asked who is it that dies in baptism? Is it a saved man? Paul teaches that we die in baptism in the Romans 6:2-8 passage, but why would you want to put a saved man to death? Why kill a saved man? That is the position they put themselves in who believe we are saved by faith before baptism. This is a question that needs an answer.

I want to remind the reader once again of what Paul said of baptism in Titus 3:5, "not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit." (NKJV) God gave us baptism (the washing of regeneration) as a part of his saving mercy towards us, not as a work of righteousness which we have done that works our way to heaven.

Baptism puts us into Christ where salvation is. Paul says in this very book of Romans, where he promotes the doctrine of justification by faith, that there is "no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus." (Rom. 8:1 NKJV) In the same book he tells us how we got into Christ Jesus where there is no condemnation. He says, "Do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus …" (Rom. 6:3 NKJV).

This idea of separating faith from baptism is all man's doing. You'll not find it in the Bible. Paul says in the Galatian letter, "For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ." (Gal. 3:26-27 NKJV) How do you get into Christ? Paul tells us a second time in this passage, that is if we did not get it the first time in the Roman passage just quoted in the prior paragraph. But, Paul tells us more. What?

He tells us you cannot separate faith from baptism unless you do it on your own initiative. The word "for" beginning in verse 27 of Galatians 3 ties it to verse 26. You cannot separate the two sentences. There is more.

Can one put on Christ without baptism? Those who say you can ought to provide the passage that tells us that. According to this Galatian passage it is done by baptism. I have never found another passage anywhere that has given an alternative.

Paul says those who are sons of God were baptized and thereby put on Christ. There is a law of exclusion in play here. If you were not baptized you did not put on Christ in baptism and are therefore excluded from being a son of God.

To summarize, "the just shall live by faith" (Rom. 1:17, Gal. 3:11, Heb. 10:38 NKJV) but it is such a faith that when it hears it believes and obeys and is not indifferent to obedience. It is thus a living faith. It does not fear that obedience is working your way to heaven. Neither Peter nor Paul nor any other New Testament writer ever feared that obedience would be looked upon by God as an attempt to work your way to heaven. Baptism is God’s extension of grace to us, his means of cleansing us, chosen by him, not us, and not a part of works of righteousness that we have done that merit salvation.  

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

Jesus The Rock The Church Was Built On

The reader is likely aware that the Roman Catholic Church does not believe the church was built on Christ but rather upon Peter. In this article, we will examine what the Bible teaches and then let the reader decide whether to follow the Bible or the Catholic Church.

After Jesus' arrest he was brought before the Jewish council where he was asked, "'Are you then the Son of God?' And he said to them, 'You rightly say that I am.'" (Luke 22:70 NKJV) This fact was earlier confessed by Peter in Matt. 16 when he said, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." (Matt. 16:16 NKJV) Jesus, being the Son of God, is the rock Jesus built the church on. No one can enter the church built by Jesus who does not believe this foundational doctrine, that Jesus is the Son of God. Jesus, as the Son of God, built the church upon himself.

Jesus is described by Peter as a living stone rejected by men but chosen by God and precious (1 Peter 2:4). He goes on a couple of verses later to say, "It is also contained in the Scripture, 'Behold, I lay in Zion a chief cornerstone, elect, precious, and he who believes on him will by no means be put to shame.'" (1 Peter 2:6 NKJV) The chief cornerstone (a rock) is a reference to a man. I ask the reader to decide for themself whether this man Peter is describing, that if a man believes on him he will not be put to shame, is meant by Peter to be a reference to himself or to Jesus. The church cannot be built on both Jesus and Peter. Both cannot be that rock upon which the church is built. Who did Peter consider to be the chief cornerstone, himself or Jesus?

But let us compare 1 Peter 2:6 just quoted above with Isaiah 28:16 where God had said hundreds of years before Peter's time, "Behold, I lay in Zion a stone for a foundation, a tried stone, a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation; whoever believes will not act hastily." (NKJV) The stone God laid was Christ, not Peter. Isaiah was not prophesying about Peter.

But what does it mean when the text says "whoever believes will not act hastily"? The idea that both Isaiah and Peter present is that the rock God laid in Christ is so solid and so secure under the feet of the true believer that there is no insecurity. The rock you stand on when you stand on Christ is solid and secure, safe and reliable, and will not fail you. Some translations instead of “not act hastily” use the phrase “not be disturbed” (NAS), “never be stricken with panic” (NIV), or “will be unshakable” (CSB).

If Peter is the rock does this sound like Peter, you stand on Peter as the rock and you become unshakable. No, I think we would all rather stand on Christ than on Peter if we were to be unshakable.

Very early in the history of the church when Peter and John were taken into custody, a consequence of their teaching at the temple, and were placed before the Jewish rulers, elders, and scribes, as well as the high priest and as many as were of his family, Peter testified of Jesus saying, "This is the 'stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.' Nor is there salvation in any other." (Acts 4:11-12 NKJV) In verse 10 Peter names Jesus as being the one of whom he speaks.

“Let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole.

“This is the ‘stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.’ ’’ (Acts 4:10-11 NKJV)

Does that sound like Peter was declaring himself to be the one upon whom the church was built as the Catholics claim?

Paul said of Jesus, "No other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ." (1 Cor. 3:11 NKJV) The foundation of the faith, of the church, the spiritual body of Christ, is Jesus--Jesus not as a man per se but as the Son of God. In writing to the Ephesian brethren Paul says they were members of the household of God (Eph. 2:19) "having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief cornerstone." (Eph. 2:20 NKJV) One has his choice--he can either believe the Catholic Church that Peter is the rock upon which the church is built or he can believe the Bible which makes it plain that Jesus as the Christ, as the Son of God, is that rock.

Yes, Peter is a stone in the church but so is every other Christian. Hear Peter, "You also, (he says speaking to Christians--DS) as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ." (1 Peter 2:5 NKJV) The church is the spiritual body of Christ, a spiritual building being built up. Peter is a stone in the church just like every other Christian but he is not the cornerstone, the stone upon which the church was built.

The church is Christ's body--"his body, which is the church" (Col. 1:24 NKJV - see also Eph. 1:22-23 and Col. 1:18). "He is the Savior of the body." (Eph. 5:23 NKJV) This is the body which he sanctified and cleansed "with the washing of water by the word" (Eph. 5:26 NKJV), a reference to baptism, so 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." (Eph. 5:27 NKJV)

Paul calls the church "God's building" (1 Cor. 3:9 NKJV) and says he laid the foundation to that building. He did so by preaching Christ and him crucified. "We preach Christ crucified, to the Jews stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God." (1 Cor. 1:22-23 NKJV) If a man is going to be laid as a living stone into this spiritual building called the church, which Jesus has built and continues to build by adding new stones onto it, then he must be laid on top of this foundational rock that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, who came into the world as the lamb of God to give his life as a sacrifice for all of mankind's sins to bring salvation to all who will believe and obey the gospel message.

What kind of building is the church? Paul describes it as "the temple of God" (1 Cor. 3:16 NKJV) and says that the Spirit of God dwells in it (1 Cor. 3:16) and says it is "holy" (1 Cor. 3:17 NKJV). In Ephesians he describes it thus, "the whole building, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom you also are being built together for a habitation of God in the Spirit." (Eph. 2:21-22 NKJV)

Paul makes a statement in connection with the church being God's temple that ought to frighten all those who think they are free to tinker around with doctrine and practice in the church. He says, "If anyone defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him." (1 Cor. 3:17 NKJV) He says it is holy. One has to remember who built the church. Jesus said, "I will build my church." (Matt. 16:18 NKJV) He did this by his sacrifice on the cross making the church possible and then through the medium of the Holy Spirit in the Spirit's teaching the word (the gospel) through the apostles and New Testament prophets.

The work of building continues today and will until the end of time not by means of inspired men still living but of inspiration completed and placed in the book we call the New Testament. The Holy Spirit continues the work of preaching the gospel and building the church every time the word is read or accurately conveyed in teaching and preaching.

The church was built up by men and women and boys and girls of accountable age (old enough to be responsible) hearing, believing, and obeying from the heart the gospel of Christ. Every time such an individual obeyed the gospel another living stone was added to the building of the church and such building continues on today. Shortly after Pentecost the Bible says, "The Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved." (Acts 2:47 NKJV) Now note who was adding to the church. It was the Lord; the Lord built the church and continues to build it yet today in the manner previously described.

But I want to go back to something mentioned earlier that needs more emphasis. I speak specifically of the great danger inherent in defiling the church, the temple of God, of which Paul says that the one who does so God will destroy (1 Cor. 3:17). God (Jesus) built the first century New Testament church. Do we think we can do better than he did? Men are trying continually to change the church from what it was in the first century and modernize it. Do we think that is wise? How do you know as a mere man that the changes that seem good and right to you or me are fine with God? Jesus is a perfect builder. Can you do better than he did without defiling the church? Remember the penalty for being mistaken is severe, not a slap on the wrist.

We might respond and say I have read the New Testament and I know not all of the churches back in the first century were what they ought to be. True! The church at Corinth had all kinds of problems and then we can read about the seven churches of Asia (Rev. 2 and 3) of which most had one thing or another wrong with them. Yes, that is correct but we also see in our reading they were rebuked for their error and told what to do to get their house in order. In other words, we were given a blueprint for what the church ought to be. Who among us believes that any of those congregations could have continued in error forever without eternal consequences? The rebuking was to bring about repentance and thus salvation.

Here is our situation today. We are not going to get a letter to our church, the congregation of which we are a member, directly from the Lord or an inspired apostle. When we start deviating from the blueprint (New Testament teaching) deceiving ourselves that all is well with what we are doing there is not going to be a rebuke directly from inspiration other than from the New Testament itself. If we are or have deviated from the teachings of the New Testament we have convinced ourselves it is okay, we have justified ourselves in doing so. This makes it nearly impossible to repent, impossible because we have convinced ourselves we are doing the right thing.

No religious group knowingly goes into error. God's people in the Old Testament went into all kinds of sin and even into idolatry. When they were going down that path did they go thinking I want to commit spiritual suicide? They did what they did because they had convinced themselves it was the right thing to do and all of God's prophets could not keep them from it. They saw their error as not being an error but as being their salvation. They had gradually lost their faith in God's word until there was no faith left in it at all save on the part of a tiny remnant of believers.

How does one defile the temple of God, the church? I know of no other way other than by departing from that which governs the church -- the word of God. When a group of people (a congregation or church) begins to practice things not found in the New Testament, allows liberties God does not permit in his word, begins to teach things contrary to the direct word of God, adds to the worship things unheard of in the pages of the new covenant, tolerates sin in the church winking at it or worse begins to call sin righteousness then I would fear being a member of such a congregation. God doesn't just talk to be talking or because he is bored. He said he would destroy him who defiled the temple of God (1 Cor. 3:17) and I for one do not want to be in the vicinity when that happens, do you? Do you want it to be said that you went along with the defiling even if you did not initiate it?

Christ built the church. He is the head of the church (Eph. 5:23). The church is to be subject to Christ (Eph. 5:24). Those things being true then if I come into your worship service and you are doing something I cannot find in the word of Christ (the New Testament) I want to know why you are doing it and upon whose authority. Don't tell me it does not matter for "whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus." (Col. 3:17 NKJV) How do you do a thing in the name of the Lord Jesus when the Lord Jesus has never said a word about the thing that you are doing? Do you think you a mere man can take the authority upon yourself to initiate things into the worship service unknown to the word of God? The sad truth is yes most in Christendom believe that very thing. The church cannot be defiled by doing what the scriptures teach but it certainly can by adding things not found in scripture.

In closing, Jesus is the foundation of the church, the rock upon which the church was built but it is his church, not mine, not yours. He built it and he built it the way he wanted it and not the way you or I might like it to be. It is what it is. Our choice is to accept it, reject it outright, or defile it as many have done. The church belongs to Jesus. If we would remember that we would perhaps quit trying to make it ours. We get to be a part of it, a living stone, but we do not own it or rule it and we have no part in making rules for it unless we want to get into the defiling business.  

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

Why Men Today Cannot Be Saved Like The Thief On The Cross

I once had an individual ask the question that if baptism is essential for the forgiveness of sins, Acts 2:38, then why did Jesus not tell the rich young ruler who came to him inquiring, “Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” (Luke 18:18 NKJV) My inquirer asked the wrong question. Why? Because when Jesus was talking to the rich young ruler he was not talking to you and me. He was speaking directly to a specific individual at a specific time in history.

The only lessons in the account of the rich young ruler that could be made applicable to us today are (1) a man may be very religious but lost and (2) the danger of having a hidden idol in one's heart and putting that ahead of God.

Your salvation and mine do not depend on what Jesus did or did not tell a man living under the Law of Moses sometime before Jesus’ death on the cross. Our salvation depends on what Jesus says directly to you and me today under his law, the law of Christ, which began to be preached among men beginning on the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2. We live under God’s new covenant, not his old.

Jesus, in speaking to his disciples after the resurrection, said to them, "Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things. And behold, I am sending the promise of my Father upon you. But stay in the city until you are clothed with power from on high." (Luke 24:46-49 ESV)

Luke tells us they were ordered to not depart from Jerusalem, "He ordered them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, 'you heard from me; for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.'" (Act 1:4-5 ESV)

In Acts 2 we see the arrival of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:1-4) clothing the apostles with power from on high. Peter's sermon that day and in that chapter fulfilled Jesus' earlier proclamation found in Luke 24 "that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem." (Luke 24:46-47 ESV)

This gives us a beginning point of both the time and place of the gospel message God has for us today. Those desiring to be saved the way the thief on the cross was saved (by faith without baptism) go back too far, past Jerusalem, past the beginning, back to the Law of Moses, and in doing so end up with another gospel if their goal is to be saved that way today. The only way to have the Jerusalem gospel is to preach what Peter did that day beginning in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost. Since hardly anyone is willing to do that today their gospel is another gospel.

A person who seeks to be saved in a way some individual may have been saved while Christ lived and walked upon the earth is rejecting the Jerusalem gospel--"repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem." That individual's gospel does not originate in Jerusalem and is thus not the gospel of Christ.

A big part of the problem that causes people to misunderstand God's plan of salvation for man is a failure to discern what we call the dispensations. There are 3 as follows: (1) the Patriarchal, (2) the Mosaical, and (3) the Christian. I will deal with the last two as they are relevant to this discussion.

Jesus lived and died under the Mosaical law. Jesus was in the fullness of time "born of a woman, born under the Law." (Gal. 4:4 NAS) When we say Jesus lived a sinless life what law did he keep perfectly? The Law of Moses. In what was the second to last utterance Jesus made on the cross he said, "It is finished!" (John 19:30 NAS) What was finished? What was finished was the fulfillment of the law and the Prophets (which included, of course, his sacrifice on the cross as prophesied, his mission on earth to make himself a sacrifice for the sins of man).

Hear Jesus in Matt. 5:17-18, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished." (ESV) When Jesus drew his last breath on the cross the Law and the Prophets were fulfilled, either that or Jesus failed in his mission “to fulfill them.”

The law of Christ became binding on men as the old law was fulfilled and passed away. The old Law of Moses was nailed to the cross. (Col. 2:14) The Christian dispensation of time when men came to live under the law of Christ began when Jesus died. "For where there is a testament, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is in force after men are dead, since it has no power at all while the testator lives." (Heb 9:16-17 NKJV)

Jesus "has become a surety of a better covenant." (Heb. 7:22 NKJV) "In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one (the Law of Moses--DS) obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away." (Heb 8:13 NKJV) "For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law." (Heb 7:12 NKJV)

Many take the thief on the cross as an example for all men regarding salvation (Luke 23:39-43) and say look at him. All he needed was faith. Was Jesus talking to you (or me) or was he talking to the thief on the cross beside him that day approximately 2,000 years ago? Did the thief live under the Christian dispensation or the Mosaical? Had the gospel that was to be preached beginning at Jerusalem yet been preached? Will you disregard the Jerusalem gospel? You will have to if you attempt to be saved as the thief on the cross was.

If Jesus forgave sins in the gospel accounts before his death in a way different from that which sins are forgiven today what has that to do with me? I live under the New Covenant.  So do you.

Speaking to the apostles Jesus said, "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you." (John 14:26 NAS) Did Jesus lie? Did the Holy Spirit fail to do this with Peter on the day of Pentecost? If you ever wanted to know when Jesus taught baptism for the remission of sins then Acts 2:38 is one of your answers. Peter spoke by the Holy Spirit but the Spirit spoke the words of Jesus.

Speaking to the apostles before his death Jesus said, "I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come. He shall glorify Me; for He shall take of Mine, and shall disclose it to you." (John 16:12-14 NAS)

Today we have the completed revelation that Jesus has made to man. The law Jesus has for you and me has now been fully revealed to us. For us today to go back and say it was not always done this way is foolishness. What is that supposed to prove even if it is true which, by the way, I do not deny? What if the thief on the cross did not have to do what you or I do for salvation? What does that have to do with either you or me?

If we expect to be saved like the thief on the cross that is about the equivalent of giving Jesus a slap across the face. It is saying I don't care about your new covenant. You save me like you saved him. Instead of you obeying Jesus you would have him taking orders from you and obeying you. It does not work that way.

We are bound to live under and obey whatever law is in effect while we live, not when someone else lived. Our job is not to question God but to do as he has told us. No matter what someone else has done or not done in years gone by for salvation you have the gospel of Christ now, the new covenant, the law of Christ. You are bound to it, to believe and obey it, as am I.

I add a footnote here in closing for clarification. The thief on the cross was not saved because he lived under the Law of Moses or kept it in any fashion. He was saved because the Lord extended him grace. In our day the Lord’s grace is extended to us in the gospel. To reject the gospel is to reject God’s grace.  

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

 

Philip Preaching the Gospel in Samaria

 "But when they believed Philip preaching the good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were being baptized, men and women alike." (Acts 8:12 NAS)

Most people with an elementary knowledge of the scriptures understand that the first gospel sermon ever to be preached was preached by Peter on the day of Pentecost as recorded in Acts 2.   If one wants to learn what one must do to be saved from sin it is a great place to start. This sermon was the first ever preached after Jesus’ resurrection and return to heaven where he sat down at the right hand of God the Father.   His blood had now been shed for the remission of the sins of man.  Full forgiveness was now possible.

After Peter’s preaching Jesus on that day of Pentecost, having made believers of approximately 3,000 souls, Peter exhorted them to “Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.” (Acts 2:38 NAS)   What was required for their salvation that day?   Faith, repentance, and baptism.

Who was saved that Day of Pentecost?   The text tells us, “So then, those who had received his word were baptized; and there were added that day about three thousand souls.” (Acts 2:41 NAS)  Who was saved?  Was it those who believed the word only?  Or, was it those who heard the word and acted on it, who repented and were baptized?  To ask is to answer.

We find a similar account in Acts 8 but this time a different Holy Spirit inspired preacher, Philip the Evangelist.  Here we see Philip preaching in the city of Samaria and the text tells us he “began proclaiming Christ to them.” (Acts 8:5 NAS) But, now watch what happened.  “When they believed Philip preaching the good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were being baptized, men and women alike.” (Acts 8:12 NAS)`

The Acts 8:12 passage parallels Acts 2:41.  What was the good news Philip preached?   Was it the gospel Peter preached?  Was it “the power of God for salvation” (Rom. 1:16 NAS)?  I am sure we can all agree on this.

The text says "they believed Philip" (Acts 8:12) with regard to what he was preaching.  This is the equivalent of "those who had received his word" with reference to Peter's preaching in Acts 2:41.  When they believed Philip what did they do?  The text says "they were being baptized."  In Acts 2:41 when they received Peter's word what did they do?  They were baptized.   Thus we see that in the beginning of the church, of Christianity, of faith in Christ, that when the gospel was preached and believed or received it led to people being baptized.  There has to be a reason for that.

Is baptism a part of the gospel?  Is it a part of the good news?   It is if it is "for the forgiveness of your sins" as per Acts 2:38.  It is if Peter preached it.  It is if Philip preached it.  It is if these two Holy Spirit inspired men preached it.  It is if it is a part of God’s means of saving people, a part of God’s plan.  Saying this is not discounting faith in any way.   It is only those who first believe who benefit by baptism.   Baptism is the obedience of faith.   It is what a scriptural faith leads to.

Only when one receives the word, the gospel, only when one believes, is he baptized.  Those who did not receive the word did not believe it, were not baptized.  This pretty much tells us who has believed the gospel and who has disbelieved it.  If you believe something else, something other than the gospel, you are not baptized.  We ought to consider that seriously.

We know in both cases baptism was preached for how else were people led to be baptized? What led Philip's audience to be baptized if Philip did not preach it?  Where did they learn about baptism if he did not preach it?   Why were people baptized on the day of Pentecost under Peter's preaching if he did not preach it?  But, we do not have to guess about Peter's preaching for Peter's words were "repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins." (Acts 2:38 NAS)

I am reminded of those living in the lifetime of John the Baptist who rejected John’s baptism. The Bible says, “But, the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected God’s purpose for themselves, not having been baptized by John.” (Luke 7:30 NAS)   We now live under King Jesus who has a baptism of his own for mankind.   Are we going to reject it?  Is not the baptism Jesus gives us God’s purpose for us?

If you have never been baptized for the remission of sins you are in a fight against God.   Don't be one of those who insist on being saved your way rather than the way taught by Peter and Philip, by the Holy Spirit.   You cannot win in a fight against God.   It is his narrow gate or the wide gate and the gate you enter makes all the difference (Matt. 7:13-14).  You cannot become a child of God by disobedience, by ignoring his word, by doing it the way my group believes. God only has one group--those who have done it his way.  It is "the Way."   The way of salvation.

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

Preaching Jesus Means Preaching Baptism

The text for this article is taken from Acts 8:26-39, the account of the conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch.  He seems to have been a proselyte to the Jewish religion for he had been to Jerusalem to worship when Philip, at the behest of the Holy Spirit, met him on his trip back to his homeland on the road to Gaza and proclaimed Jesus to him.

"And Philip opened his mouth, and beginning from this Scripture (Isa. 53:7-8– DS) he preached Jesus to him.  And as they went along the road they came to some water; and the eunuch said, ‘Look! Water! What prevents me from being baptized?’" (Acts 8:35-36 NAS)

This shows us that when Jesus was preached baptism was preached as a part of preaching Jesus to an alien sinner.  When the preaching was received (Acts 2:41) or believed (Acts 8:12) it resulted in people being baptized.  The case of the Ethiopian eunuch was no exception.

Why would the eunuch request baptism if Philip had not taught him it?  Furthermore, why would he request it unless he felt some urgency about it, unless he felt there was a need?

Philip taught the eunuch baptism because as Peter said on the Day of Pentecost baptism is for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38).  Without the remission of one’s sins a person cannot be saved.  

When Philip preached in the city of Samaria the Bible says he preached "the good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ" (Acts 8:12 NAS) with the result being that men and women "were being baptized" (Acts 8:12 NAS).  Here in Acts 8:35-36, he has an audience of only one man and in a different location but we still see him preaching with the same result - baptism.  This time it is just said that "he preached Jesus to him." 

In the book of Acts up to this chapter we have had two Holy Spirit inspired men preaching - first Peter and now Philip.  In each case, baptism was a part of what was preached.  They preached it because the Holy Spirit by which they spoke required it.  Either that or they just spoke whatever they wanted.  Which do you believe?

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

Obedience of Faith and Justification by Faith—A Conflict?

The book of Romans begins and ends talking about the “obedience of faith” (Rom. 1:5 and Rom. 16:26). In chapter 1 Paul says, “We have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith among all the Gentiles.” (Rom. 1:5 NAS) In Rom. 16 he speaks of the gospel being made known to all nations with the purpose being “obedience of faith.” (Rom. 16:26 NAS)

Obedience of faith is simply the obedience that grows out of or is the result of faith. No man obeys God who does not first believe in God and believes what God says. Without faith, there is no motivation for obedience. Where there is no faith the natural man prevails--our fleshly human nature. We do what pleases us without thought of God.

Faith is always the first step in pleasing God. “Without faith it is impossible to please him, for he who comes to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of those who seek him.” (Heb. 11:6 NAS)

Jesus said, in speaking of himself in John 8:24, “Unless you believe that I am he, you shall die in your sins.” (NAS) Jesus again, “he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.” (Mark 16:16 NAS) We might say disbelieved what? The gospel message (1 Cor. 15:1-4, Mark 16:15-16), the fact that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God (Acts 8:37, Philippians 2:11, 1 John 3:23), that he is Lord and Christ (Acts 2:36).

So, faith is essential to salvation. Where there is no faith salvation is impossible. We must always remember, however, that “faith without works is useless.” (James 2:20 NAS) “Faith without works is dead.” (James 2:26 NAS) Thus in John 12, we find a group of believers who could not be saved. “Nevertheless many even of the rulers believed in him but because of the Pharisees they were not confessing him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue; for they loved the approval of men rather than the approval of God.” (John 12:42-43 NAS) We do well to remember even demons believe (James 2:19).

The faith Paul spoke of in the book of Romans was that which led to obedience. It was an obedience of faith. It was a living faith and not a dead faith.

I have said all of that to get to this point. Why is it that men use Rom. 5:1-2 in such a way as to make void works (obedience) of faith? Rom. 5:1-2 reads as follows:

“Therefore having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we exult in hope of the glory of God.” (NAS)

It is widely taught that man is saved by faith alone and this passage is often used as one proof text. Of course, we are justified by faith but not faith alone or faith only. “You see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone.” (James 2:24 NAS) Faith must be accompanied by obedience for it is the obedience of faith that saves--a living faith and not a dead one.

In Acts chapter 2 Peter preaches the first gospel sermon ever to be preached not long after Christ’s ascension back to heaven. All agree that he spoke by inspiration as the Holy Spirit had just fallen upon the apostles. He argues that the Jesus whom they had not long ago crucified was and is the Christ of God. What is the result? Does he convince them? He most certainly does for they cry out being “pierced to the heart … ‘Brethren, what shall we do?’” (Acts 2:37 NAS)

Would you dare say these men lack faith? According to our saved by faith-alone friends, the mission has been accomplished. Nothing else to be done. They are saved. Oh, they might, according to the teaching of our times, offer a prayer to God confessing to him--a confession of faith--but that is it.

Did Peter tell them they were saved when he realized they believed?  If they did not believe they would not have asked what they must do, Acts 2:37.  Did he tell them to offer a prayer of confession to God? He neither told them they were saved nor to pray. I emphasize this--he did neither. With Peter, the Holy Spirit being in Peter, they were not yet saved, not yet forgiven of their sins. What was left to be done? Obedience of faith, repentance and baptism. In Peter’s own words, “repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.” (Acts 2:38 NAS)

Paul’s conversion was similar as found in Acts chapters 9, 22, and 26. When the Lord appeared to him on the road to Damascus there was no doubt but what faith came instantly to him. Salvation by faith only advocates have Paul saved at this point. They have him saved by their human doctrine but God does not.

Paul (called Saul at that time) spends the next 3 days in Damascus neither eating nor drinking, strange behavior for a man who should be rejoicing in his salvation if he is saved (Acts 9:9). He prays (Acts 9:11). Now, according to the salvation by faith alone people, he has to be saved. He has faith. He has prayed. It is a done deal.

Not so with the man sent from God to Paul, the man Ananias. Ananias tells him to “Arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.” (Acts 22:16 NAS) Jesus had already told all who would believe him, a long time before Paul’s conversion, that water was involved in salvation. In Jesus’ words, “Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” (John 3:5 NAS) He said, “He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved.” (Mark 16:16 NAS)

What is baptism? It is one aspect of obedience of faith. In Acts 2 on the day of Pentecost when Peter preached that first sermon would there have been obedience of faith had those he spoke to failed to heed his admonition? What if Paul had refused to heed the words of Ananias? Would there have been obedience of faith?

Justification by faith is dependent on obedience of faith. The book of Romans was not written to people who had not been baptized. I want to emphasize that point. Those to whom Paul wrote were baptized people.

“Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into his death? Therefore we have been buried with him through baptism into death, in order that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.” (Rom. 6:3-4 NAS) Who gets to walk in newness of life? Paul tells you. It is the man or woman who has been baptized.

How is it, do you suppose, that the Romans came to know about baptism? Do you suppose it was taught to them in the same way Peter taught those in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost? Paul also tells how the Romans got into Christ. He says, “All of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus.” (Rom. 6:3 NAS) He said the same thing in Gal. 3:27 in writing to the Galatian Christians.

Of grace, Paul says “We have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand.” (Rom. 5:2 NAS) He is talking to us all but in context, the message is to the Romans. Where is grace found? We are to “be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus.” (2 Tim. 2:1 NAS) We enter into Christ by the obedience of faith. Our faith leads us to be baptized per Mark 16:15-16. When we have done so we have been saved by grace for we are then found in Christ where grace is found.

I know a lot of people have a hard time with grace and law. Any effort to be obedient, especially being baptized, is seen as a work and thus working one’s way to heaven. What people fail to understand is man has always been and always will be under law to God.

If there has been no law there has been no sin for John defines sin as being lawlessness, “sin is lawlessness.” (1 John 3:4 NAS) Were Adam and Eve under law to God? How about the people in the time of Noah? Why did they die if not because of lawlessness? How about the people of Sodom and Gomorrah? I remind the reader all of this was before the time of the Law of Moses. Then later we have a long period of time when the Jews were under the Law of Moses.

Well, how about today? Are we under law today? Paul says if we “bear one another’s burdens” we “fulfil the law of Christ.” (Gal. 6:2 NAS) To the Corinthians he speaks of himself as “not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ.” (1 Cor. 9:21 NAS) Being under grace as we are today does not mean lawlessness. If Paul was under the law of Christ so are you and I. In Romans, the very book from which this article is drawn, Paul says “The mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the Law of God.” (Rom. 8:7 NAS)

Yet, the reader of the book of Romans will recall that a good portion of the book deals with the teaching that one cannot be saved by the works of the law. “By the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in his sight.” (Rom. 3:20 NAS) One thing that is often overlooked as people read through books such as Romans, Galatians, and Hebrews is that what the writer is combating, generally speaking, is the idea held by many Jews that keeping the Law of Moses was the road to salvation.

Paul often had to deal with Judaizing teachers within the church for even when converted to Christ many still believed keeping the Law of Moses, to one degree or another, was essential and were happy to try and bind that upon others. Thus there was an attempt by some to bind things like circumcision (Gal. 5:3) and it is said of Peter that he feared “the party of the circumcision” (Gal. 2:12 NAS). Had this group had their way it would have eventually destroyed Christianity.

It is true no man can be saved by law-keeping apart from grace. Salvation by law requires perfection in law-keeping. Thus Paul says, “For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, ‘Cursed is every one who does not abide by all things written in the book of the Law, to perform them.’” (Gal. 3:10 NAS) One mistake and you are not saved but condemned by law.

That being the case James says, “Whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all.” (James 2:10 NAS) When one breaks a single law he has convicted himself as being a lawbreaker. A criminal is a criminal. It matters not what one specific law he broke.

James’ statement is as applicable to the law of Christ as to any law. With regards even to the law of our land, you became a lawbreaker the first time you exceeded the speed limit by even a single mile per hour. You will always be guilty of having done that. You were a lawbreaker and there is no going back and undoing it.

This is why to be saved we must be saved by God’s grace. God being perfect himself demands perfection in us if we are to be saved by works of law. For us that is an impossibility.

But, does salvation by grace mean salvation by disobedience? Does it mean disregard for the law of God? Paul says, “May it never be!” (Rom. 6:2 NAS) Please listen now carefully to what Paul has to say and mull it over in your mind.

“How shall we who died to sin still live in it? Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into his death? Therefore we have been buried with him through baptism into death.” (Rom. 6:2-3 NAS) We have been baptized into his death where he shed his blood, the blood that redeems us. Baptism is the place where that blood is contacted. In baptism, we experience our own death to sin. Thus Paul says, in the conclusion of verse 3, “So we too might walk in newness of life.” (Rom. 6:3 NAS)

God has always saved man the same way--by faith and obedience, “obedience resulting in righteousness.” (Rom. 6:16 NAS) Other versions say “obedience to righteousness” (NKJV), “obedience, which leads to righteousness” (ESV), and so on.

The beginning of salvation is found in the beginning of the obedience of faith, not in a non-acting faith that resides in the mind alone. That is why Peter demanded of believers that day so long ago that they “repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.” (Acts 2:38 KJV) That is the obedience of faith, the faith that saves. 

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