Saul's Conversion

"And immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he regained his sight, and he arose and was baptized." (Acts 9:18 NAS)

In Acts chapter 9 verses 1 through 18 we have the account of Saul's conversion from a persecutor of Christians to an apostle of Christ. In the early years of Christianity when a person heard and believed the gospel, accepting it, it always led immediately to baptism. One must ask himself why.

With Saul's conversion we have the fourth such account thus far in the book of Acts (see Acts 2:41, Acts 8:12, and Acts 8:38). Verse 18 says of Saul that "he arose and was baptized." (Acts 9:18 NAS) The reader needs to take note of some things said in earlier verses regarding Saul.

Jesus, in speaking to Saul on the road to Damascus, says to him, "enter the city, and it shall be told you what you must do." (Acts 9:6 NAS) Just a few verses later we see the Lord sending a man by the name of Ananias to Saul (Acts 9:11). Ananias was sent to Saul for more than one reason (see Acts 9:12 and 9:17), to achieve more than one end, but I ask this - was not one end to tell Saul "what you must do"? If Ananias did not tell Saul what he must do then who did? He was the only one sent by Christ to Saul for that purpose.

Now, what did Ananias tell Saul? Did he tell Saul you need to have faith in Jesus? Did he need to tell him that? Had not Saul become a believer already? Did he tell Saul you need to repent? Had he not done that? If his experience on the road to Damascus had not wrought these things what would it take? What do you think he told Saul "you must do" as per the words of Jesus when Jesus said it would be told him?

The text said he "arose and was baptized." Why be baptized? Was it not because it "shall be told you what you must do" and baptism was the thing he must do? But, we do not have to guess at it or reason our way to this conclusion for we can turn to Acts 22:16 where Saul recounts his conversion experience and tells us what Ananias told him. "And now why do you delay? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name.” (Acts 22:16 NAS)

Now, why was this a thing Saul must do? Because as the text in Acts 22:16 tells us, baptism is for the purpose of washing away one's sins. As Peter said in Acts 2:38 it is "for the forgiveness of your sins." (NAS) This is why in every full account of conversion we have those who believed were baptized. As Jesus said, "He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved." (Mark 16:16 NAS)

Is it so hard to believe Jesus? Is it so hard to believe Peter, to believe Philip, to believe Ananias? Judged by the belief and practice of the world it must be. 

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

Repentance--How Can I Be Sure?

The words repent and repentance are Bible words, words hardly ever used outside of a religious context.  In reading one’s New Testament, beginning with the gospel accounts, the first preaching that is recorded is that of John the Baptist preaching in the wilderness saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” (Matt. 3:2 NKJV)  In Matt. 4:17 we see Jesus preaching the same message.  The call to men from inspiration from the very beginning of the unfolding of the New Testament was a call to repentance.  Jesus said it was a matter so important that it was repent or perish, an either-or proposition. (Luke 13:3, 5) 

Repentance is a command to all men everywhere in all time to come as long as the earth shall stand.  You and I are not exempt.  Paul, in his speech in the Areopagus in Athens, made this statement:

“Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent, because He has appointed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by the man whom he has ordained.  He has given assurance of this to all by raising him from the dead.” (Acts 17:30-31 NKJV)

After his resurrection, while meeting with his apostles, Jesus said, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.” (Luke 24:46-47 NKJV)  It was thus essential then and essential now that repentance be preached.  We see the beginning of such preaching shortly thereafter.

In the very first gospel sermon ever preached, after Christ’s ascension back to heaven and the Holy Spirit’s descending upon the apostles on the Day of Pentecost, in Acts 2, the conclusion of Peter’s inspired sermon was, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.” (Acts 2:38 NKJV)  Repentance was made essential to salvation (as was baptism).

Who must repent?  Sinners.  “For we have previously charged both Jews and Greeks that they are all under sin.  As it is written:  ‘There is none righteous, no, not one.” (Rom. 3:9-10 NKJV)  “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” (Rom. 3:23 NKJV)  Repentance is repentance of sin against God.  God “commands all men everywhere to repent.” (Acts 17:30)

Well, if I am commanded to repent on the penalty of repent or perish what must I do?  What does it mean to repent?  It is very common to find people who do not understand and who simply think to repent means to be sorry. 

If sorrow was repentance then Judas, the betrayer of the Lord, was a saved man.  The Bible says, “Then Judas, his betrayer, seeing that he had been condemned, was remorseful and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders.” (Matt. 27:3 NKJV)  His sorrow was so great he went out and hung himself.

All of that be as it may Jesus said of Judas, “The Son of Man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed!   It would have been good for that man if he had not been born.” (Matt. 26:24 NKJV)  That could not have been said if Judas was to be saved.

Besides this statement we have Paul’s comment in 2 Cor. 7:10 that “the sorrow of the world produces death.” (NKJV)  Since we know assuredly that the sorrow Judas had led to death (spiritual death for he was not saved according to Jesus) we know his sorrow was of the world.  A lesson we ought to learn from this fact is that a man or woman can be as sorry as sorry can be and yet not repent nor be pleasing to God.

Paul speaks of another kind of sorrow in the same passage in 2 Cor. 7, a sorrow that leads to repentance.  He says, “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.” (2 Cor. 7:9 NKJV)  From this, we learn that there is a type of sorrow that leads to repentance.

In 2 Cor. 7:10 it is called “godly sorrow.”  “For godly sorrow produces repentance to salvation, not to be regretted.” (NKJV)  Peter is an example of a man who experienced godly sorrow.  He denied Jesus three times when Jesus was in the custody of those who would be responsible for his death.  Peter had deep regret and sorrow and went away and “wept bitterly.” (Matt. 26:75 NKJV)

What then is the difference between the two types of sorrow, say the sorrow of Judas versus the sorrow of Peter?  Namely this, godly sorrow leads one back to God.  Judas fled from God.  That was not something he had to do.  Peter said on the Day of Pentecost to those assembled there that day, “God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.” (Acts 2:36 NKJV)  See also Acts 2:23.  They were guilty of crucifying the Lord as much as Judas was and yet we see later in that same chapter 3,000 of them repenting of that sin that very day, being baptized, and becoming Christians.  Judas could have repented also but he chose another course.  Peter, while he had denied the Lord after the Lord’s arrest, came back to the Lord.

There are a couple of lessons here for us.  (1) Do not underestimate God’s love and willingness to forgive.  Did Judas do that?  (2) Do not destroy yourself by despair.  I speak of destroying yourself spiritually as did Judas (although, admittedly, he destroyed himself physically as well).  There are men and women who are sorry for the things they have done but will not turn to God for forgiveness thinking they have been too evil to be forgiven.  They despair.  This is a worldly sorrow.  It shows a lack of faith in God’s love and willingness to forgive and thus a lack of faith in God and his word.

Others are also sorry for their sins but it is because they have been caught in them and have suffered as a result (adulterers, those having affairs, are often an example of this type).  They are sorry for a reason but it is not a sorrow that has anything to do with God or God’s laws. They are sorry because they were caught.   This is another type of worldly sorrow.

Godly sorrow on the other hand leads one to throw himself upon God and his mercy and grace.  Godly sorrow is not repentance but is the thing that leads to it.  If you are being led to a thing then you have not yet arrived there although you will in due time by continuing the course.

Repentance is the actual surrendering of one’s will to God’s will.  It is a determination to turn from sin to God, from unrighteousness to righteousness; it is a matter of the human mind and will.  The idea is that I will cease being my lord in life.  Jesus will now be my Lord.  His will will be my will.  It is a determination to follow God.  It is the determination to make Jesus my Lord and Savior with all that implies.

It is not yet reformation of life for reformation is the fruit of repentance.  John the Baptist commanded “bear fruits worthy of repentance.” (Matt. 3:8 NKJV)  Reformation is, to a degree, a measure of repentance.  A man who truly repents reforms his life.

Let me clarify that last statement.  There are sincere people who truly have repented who come to doubt their conversion at this very point.  When we obey the gospel we have it in our minds that we are going to live an almost perfect life thereafter.  We are committed as we ought to be.  Unfortunately, we never live the perfect life.  When we next sin we begin doubting our conversion.  Did I really repent?  If I did why did I commit this sin?  Doubts arise about our conversion.  We begin to wonder am I doomed to just live my life a hopeless sinner.

There is no such thing as living a sin-free life after conversion unless of course you die almost immediately upon being converted.  The apostle John in speaking to Christians says, “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.  If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” (1 John 1:8-9 NKJV)

Repentance, unlike baptism, is not just a one-time act.  While there is no true conversion without repentance we are unable to live sin-free over any extended period of time.  David Lipscomb once made the comment that he doubted that any man ever lived a single day without sin.  Whether or not that is true I do not know but my suspicion is that if not true it is not far from it.  There are sins of commission, sins of omission, sins of ignorance, sins of the mind, of heart, and attitude.  We are what we are and none of us will live without sin after our conversion.

We must also bear in mind that if we could be perfect law keepers we could be saved by law, by works, and that is clearly not the case.  All who are sincere in their Christian life will readily bear witness to the fact that despite their best efforts they fail in keeping the law of Christ from time to time.  We can bear witness for we can name our sins.  We know our failures.

The Law of Moses was designed to bring the Jews to Christ by showing them this very thing; namely, you cannot keep God’s law perfectly and thus the road to salvation cannot be found in perfect obedience. (Gal. 3:24, Gal. 3:10)  That was true under the Law of Moses and under the law of God under which we live today (the New Testament).  The need for God’s grace is obvious.

The New Testament is full of admonitions to those who are already Christians but who are involved in sin to repent.  Read First and Second Corinthians.  Even the apostle Peter needed to repent (read Gal. 2:11-13).  In the books of First and Second Corinthians Paul does not raise the question whether or not those brethren who were caught up in sin were genuinely converted.  They were true Christians but they had nevertheless sinned after their conversion and needed to repent.  Let me list a few examples.

There was the man who had his father’s wife in a sexually immoral relationship (1 Cor. 5:1); there were those he wrote of in 2 Cor. 12:21 who he feared might not have “repented of the uncleanness, fornication, and licentiousness which they have practiced.” (NKJV)  They were also taking one another to courts of law (not an act of love). (1 Cor. 6:7) 

We could also read about various churches in the Book of Revelation chapters two and three who needed to repent in one way or another.  We could talk about the Galatians.

But my point is this--if you were sincere in heart when you obeyed the gospel with regards to your repentance and you then followed through and completed your obedience of faith as per Acts 2:38 being baptized for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16), baptized into Christ (Gal. 3:27, Rom. 6:3), then there is no reason down the road to look back and wonder if you were truly converted, to doubt your conversion.  Many have done that and we need more teaching about it so minds can be set at ease on that point.

You will never live perfectly.  If you are a human being you will sin again after your conversion (dare I say many times?).  That does not mean you were never converted.  It does mean you need to repent just as Peter needed to in Gal. 2.  Having repented, confess your sin and pray and ask for God’s forgiveness and ask for the forgiveness of any you may have personally sinned against. (1 John 1:9, James 5:16)  God will forgive if we will repent and ask his forgiveness.

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

Paul's Conversion—How Justified by Faith

The conversion of Saul of Tarsus, who was soon to be known as Paul the apostle, is one of the most interesting accounts of conversion to Christianity found in the Bible.  One can read about Paul's conversion in 3 different accounts given in the book of Acts--Acts 9:1-19, 22:1-16, 26:9-20.  Saul of Tarsus was one of the really bad men we read about in the New Testament which makes his conversion even more dramatic.  How bad a man was Saul?

In Acts 9:1 we read about Saul "still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord." (NKJV)  Evidently, if it was something he was still doing it was pretty much a habitual thing with him.  This was said at a time when he was setting out to Damascus to find Christians he could bind and bring back to Jerusalem for punishment. (Acts 9:2)  Paul says of himself, "I persecuted this Way (Christianity--DS) to the death." (Acts 22:4 NKJV)  He says, testifying against himself, "many of the saints I shut up in prison ... and when they were put to death, I cast my vote against them." (Acts 26:10 NKJV)

Will God have a man like this, a man this bad?  Saul clearly had personal responsibility in the death of Christians.  Christians died because of his actions whether he ever cast a stone personally or not.  But, the answer to the question of whether or not God will have a man this bad or not is easily answered.  The first people the gospel was ever preached to lived in Jerusalem and were guilty of putting Jesus the Son of God to death.  When Pilate wanted to release Jesus they would have none of it (John 19:12).  They wanted him crucified.  Peter confronts them with their guilt over this matter in Acts 2:23 and again in Acts 3:14-15.  The good news is that "Christ died for the ungodly" (Rom. 5:6 NKJV) and thus as a result of Peter's preaching on the Day of Pentecost faith was created, about three thousand (Acts 2:41) responded to the preaching, obeying Peter's command to repent and be baptized for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38), and were forgiven.

Would God forgive Saul?  Most certainly!  Paul later says, "But God had mercy on me so that Christ Jesus could use me as a prime example of his great patience with even the worst sinners. Then others will realize that they, too, can believe in him and receive eternal life." (1 Tim. 1:16 NLT)  The NLT (New Living Translation) is not a literal translation but I believe it is an accurate rendition of the meaning of this verse and makes it easy to understand what Paul is saying.  Paul considered himself to be chief of sinners (1 Tim. 1:15) and said he was "not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God." (1 Cor. 15:9 NKJV)  He said as all Christians must say, "by the grace of God I am what I am." (1 Cor. 15:10 NKJV)  We must all say I am saved by the grace of God; I am what I am (assuming we are doing our very best to be what God would have us to be) by the grace of God.  "For by grace you have been saved through faith." (Eph. 2:8 NKJV)

Thus far we have seen the kind of man Saul of Tarsus was prior to his conversion and also the change of attitude and heart a result of his conversion but what of Paul's conversion itself?  The word preached was having no effect upon him.  He would have none of it and to preach it in his presence would have meant as a minimum imprisonment if he could affect it at all.  Certainly, Paul had heard of Christ but wanted none of him or his message.  He rejected Christ and yet Christ intervened directly in his life for a purpose--see 1 Tim. 1:16 quoted above.

It took a miracle to convert Saul of Tarsus.  Without Jesus appearing directly to him and speaking with him on the road to Damascus there appears to have been little to no likelihood of Saul of Tarsus ever being converted but the question of interest to us in this article is when in Paul's conversion was he justified by faith.  Certainly, there is no doubt that this miraculous wonder Paul experienced, a light from heaven (Acts 9:3, 22:6) brighter than the sun (Acts 26:13) surrounding him and his party and a voice out of heaven telling him it was Jesus speaking to him (Acts 9:5, 22:8, 26:15) totally destroyed unbelief in Paul's life and that instantaneously. 

Likewise there can be no doubt repentance was immediate.  Paul immediately became submissive to the will of God.  He was told directly by Jesus that he (Paul) was a persecutor of the one who spoke to him--Christ (Acts 9:4, 22:8, 26:15).  He was blinded.  This was no time for rebellion against the God who was speaking out of heaven nor was there any inclination on Paul's part to be rebellious.  I think we all understand that clearly.  Paul's only response after knowing it was Jesus who was speaking was, "What shall I do, Lord?' (Acts 22:10 NKJV)

Virtually every denomination in the land according to their idea of what it means to be justified by faith has to have Paul saved right then and there.  He has all the faith any man will ever have.  He is most certainly penitent.  Nevertheless, Jesus' response to Saul's question, "what shall I do, Lord," is "arise and go into Damascus, and there you will be told all things which are appointed for you to do" (Acts 22:10 NKJV) or as recorded in Acts 9:6, "Arise and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do." (NKJV)  Does must mean must?

Jesus sent the man Ananias to Saul in the city of Damascus to tell Saul those things which were appointed for him to do.  One wonders what it was Ananias had to tell Saul.  Was it Saul's mission to be?  No!  How do I know?  I know because Saul had already been told that by Jesus on the Damascus road.  Read Acts 26:16-18.  He was told he was being made a minister, to be sent to the Gentiles, to turn them from darkness to light.  It is true Ananias did reiterate what Jesus had already told Saul (Acts 22:14-15) but that was all it was--a retelling of what Saul had already been told by Jesus directly.

The best way to find out why Ananias was sent to Saul is to read what Jesus and Ananias had to say about it.  Jesus said it was so Saul "might receive his sight." (Acts 9:12 NKJV)  Ananias said Jesus "has sent me that you may receive your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit." (Acts 9:17 NKJV)  The only other comment we have on why Ananias was sent to Saul is found in Acts 9:6 and Acts 22:10 both quoted two paragraphs above. 

So what was it that Saul was told by Ananias that he (Saul) was appointed to do that Saul did not already know from having heard it from Jesus himself?  Was it a specific geographic area he was to move to in order to begin his ministry?  If so there is no mention of it in the scriptures.  There was but one thing at that specific point in time he was told by Ananias that he was appointed to do.  "And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord." (Acts 22:16 NKJV)

But, wait, that cannot be.  He was justified by faith alone when he was converted on the road to Damascus.  Says who?  Did your Bible tell you that or was it your denominational pastor?  Perhaps it was your religious heritage that told you.  Paul was certainly justified by faith but when and where is the matter to be decided and not just assumed.  Now I do not debate for a single second that Paul's heart was changed on the road to Damascus but did that change his state is the question?

Let me illustrate.  A young man and a young woman begin keeping company with one another and fall in love.  They become fully committed to one another and to no other.  Their faith in one another and love for one another becomes as solid as it can get.  Yet, the marriage date is down the road a few weeks.  Their hearts have been changed but not their status, not until the marriage ceremony is performed. 

Christians are married to Christ.  "Therefore, my brethren, you also have become dead to the law through the body of Christ, that you may be married to another--to Him who was raised from the dead, that we should bear fruit to God." (Rom. 7:4 NKJV)  But, one is not married until he/she is married despite the feelings of the heart.  Baptism seems to be the marriage ceremony (so to speak) of the disciple with Christ. 

Paul himself says we die in baptism (Rom. 6:4) and walk in newness of life upon our baptism, read all of Rom. 6:1-8.  This means our state or status is changed at baptism.  He says Christ cleansed the church "with the washing of water by the word." (Eph. 5:26 NKJV)  The washing of water is certainly baptism.  One might ask cleansed the church of what but the answer is obvious--sin.  Was Paul ever washed in water and cleansed of sin?  Ananias told him to be (Acts 22:16) and the Bible says he was (Acts 9:18).  When one has been cleansed of sin his status with God has been changed.  His state has changed.  He is now a Christian.

A very close relative of mine use to say there was nothing in water to cleanse from sin.  One might just as well say there was nothing in water to cleanse Naaman of leprosy either (see 2 Kings 5).  But, you see when God tells you to do something saying you will receive a certain blessing upon acting by faith and doing as he says you will get the result you seek by such faith and obedience.  The God who made the world is able to make good on his promises.

The real key to water for both Naaman, Paul, you, and me is nothing in the water itself (other than God's promise--God's promise is there) but God acting on our behalf when we act by faith upon the command he gave.  To Naaman it was the promise of the healing of a physical disease upon dipping 7 times in the Jordan River.  For you and me it is the promise of the remission of sins upon baptism.  "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins." (Acts 2:38 NKJV)  "Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." (Jesus, John 3:5 NKJV)

Paul most certainly was justified by faith but Paul knew when that happened and if we would read the things Paul wrote on the subject and would consider them as closely as we should we would realize it just as well.  "According to his mercy he saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit." (Titus 3:5 NKJV)  The washing here is baptism and it is called the washing of regeneration which means (the word means) rebirth thus a washing resulting in a new birth.

The old Paul, the man of sin, died to sin (Rom. 6:2) when he was baptized into Christ's death (Rom. 6:3) having been crucified with him (Rom. 6:6).  Paul says, "if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him" (Rom. 6:8 NKJV) but we died with Christ by being "baptized into his death." (Rom. 6:3 NKJV)  When we are baptized on the basis of faith we come up out of the water to "walk in newness of life." (Rom. 6:4 NKJV)  We have been born again, born of water and the Spirit (John 3:3, 5).

One really ought to also consider Paul's state of mind at that point in time prior to Ananias' arrival on the scene.  He was not yet an inspired man.  He knew he had been told to go into Damascus and wait for further directions and he knew of the vision he had of "a man named Ananias coming in and putting his hand on him, so that he might receive his sight." (Acts 9:12 NKJV)  When Ananias does come he tells Paul that Jesus has sent him to him (Acts 9:17).  Paul has no problem believing this because it corresponds with the vision he has had and also because of what he had been told by Jesus himself on the road to Damascus.  He is expecting further enlightenment from God and knows God had told him in a vision a man was coming called Ananias.

Now here is the point.  Is Paul in any frame of mind to doubt the message that Ananias delivers to him?  To ask is to answer.  When Paul was told to arise and be baptized to wash away his sins did Paul doubt he had sins to be washed away?  Did he believe at that point in time that baptism was just a figure, a symbol, or a representation of a salvation already received?  Now be honest with yourself before you answer that.  A man comes from God and gives you this message and you know full well he was sent from God and you are going to do what--doubt him and his message?  I don't think so!

Here is a point that is often overlooked at is relates to justification by faith and baptism, tying them together, and which pretty much proves the point I am trying to make relating to Paul's conversion.  Speaking of the baptism taught and practiced by John the Baptist the Bible says, "The Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him (by John--DS)." (Luke 7:30 NKJV)  In Mark 11:30 Jesus asks the question, "The baptism of John--was it from heaven or from men?  Answer me." (NKJV)  This was said by Jesus to those who confronted him in the temple.  Now watch closely as the Bible describes their thinking as they contemplate a response to Jesus.  "And they reasoned among themselves, saying, 'If we say, 'From heaven,' he will say, 'Why then did you not believe him?' " (Mark 11:31 NKJV)  This shows that one who believed was baptized.  One who did not believe was not baptized.  Those who did not believe and obey were certainly not justified by faith and it has always taken faith to save a man.

Now apply the same reasoning to the baptism Jesus gave as a part of the Great Commission (Matt. 28:18-20, Mark 16:15-16).  Is one going to be so daring as to claim he is justified by faith all the while disbelieving and disobeying Jesus on the subject of baptism?  Jesus commanded baptism (Matt. 28:19), promised that those who believed and were baptized would be saved (Mark 16:15-16), and said that "unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God" (John 3:5 NKJV).  If a man sinned and was condemned for not believing and obeying the baptism taught by John then one must remember one far greater than John is found in Jesus the Son of God.  A man was not justified by any kind of faith while rejecting John's baptism.  Is it now somehow different with Jesus' baptism?  I would hate to have to make that kind of argument but it is the very argument a man must make who believes justification by faith has nothing to do with baptism and is not essential to salvation.  

I have one other question to ask then I bring this article to a close.  The Bible says one reason Ananias was sent to Saul was that he might be "filled with the Holy Spirit." (Acts 9:17 NKJV)  My question is this--what part did Ananias have to play in that?  Only Jesus could baptize men with the Holy Spirit.  True the apostles had the power to lay hands on others and impart spiritual gifts but only Jesus could baptize in the Holy Spirit.  So, the question remains what role did Ananias have to play in that?  He was not an apostle, had no power to impart spiritual gifts, and he had no power to baptize a man with the Holy Spirit. 

The answer has to be only one thing.  He told Paul what to do in order to become a Christian.  Paul had faith, had repented, was willing to confess Jesus, but had not yet been told about taking the final step into Christ--baptism.  It is Christians that God gives the Holy Spirit to.  The only time in Christian history (which is Pentecost onward) a non-Christian was baptized with the Holy Spirit was the case of Cornelius and his household and there was a specific reason behind that just as there was a specific reason God directly intervened to make Paul a believer and convert him.  Ananias helped Paul be filled with the Holy Spirit by telling him what else God had appointed for him to do, "Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins." (Acts 22:16 NKJV)  When that was done Paul had put away the old man and put on the new man (the Christian man) and the Holy Spirit was given.

You say how can I be sure?  Ask yourself some questions.  What was keeping Jesus from filling Paul full of the Holy Spirit on the road to Damascus?  Since Jesus baptizes with the Holy Spirit directly from heaven (day of Pentecost and the apostles, Cornelius and his household) what does he (Jesus) need Ananias for?  Why wait on Ananias?  There was only one reason.  Paul needed to hear the completion of the first gospel sermon ever preached by man (Acts 2:38)--Peter's on the Day of Pentecost.  Peter was not there to preach it but Ananias was.  He needed to be told that he had sins that needed to be remitted or as Ananias phrased it washed away and needed to be told how to do that.  He needed to be cleansed in God's sight.  Then the Holy Spirit could be given.

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

  

         

  

The Conversion of Lydia – Acts 16:13-15

In Acts 16:13-15 we find the account of the conversion of Lydia in the city of Philippi.  This is a very interesting conversion account and one that men have debated as to what actually happened.  It is a short account so let us read it and see if there is anything to debate or to cause controversy. 

“And on the Sabbath day we went outside the gate to a riverside, where we were supposing that there would be a place of prayer; and we sat down and began speaking to the women who had assembled. (Act 16:13 NAS77) 

And a certain woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple fabrics, a worshiper of God, was listening; and the Lord opened her heart to respond to the things spoken by Paul. (Act 16:14 NAS77) 

And when she and her household had been baptized, she urged us, saying, "If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house and stay." And she prevailed upon us. (Act 16:15 NAS77)”

Paul, Silas, and Timothy, as you recall, entered the city of Philippi to preach the gospel.  Their first opportunity, as far as we can tell, is to a group of women out at the riverside at a gathering place for prayer.  Lydia is one of the women assembled there. 

The first mystery to some people is found in the statement in verse 14 where it is said that "the Lord opened her heart to respond to the things spoken by Paul."  Well, how did the Lord do that?  Did God take a kind of spiritual crowbar to her heart and mind and force conversion on her?  Did the Holy Spirit come upon her in some mysterious operation taking over her will and making her receptive to the gospel as Paul preached it?  Some think so.  The reality is there is no truth to such suppositions as will soon be shown. 

God opened Lydia's heart to the gospel simply by the preaching of the word.  How do I know?  That is a fair question.  If God acted miraculously on the heart of Lydia resulting in a sort of forced conversion, one of which she had no way of resisting, and God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34 KJV), shows no partiality (Rom. 2:11, Eph. 6:9, Col. 3:25), and teaches us that it is a sin to show partiality (James 2:9), then God did the very thing in converting Lydia that he says, through his word, that he does not do and that he condemns in us.  None of us believe that. 

Lydia's heart was opened by God's word in the same natural way yours and mine are.  For example, all of us have read passages in the Bible that condemn us for something we have done at one time or another resulting in a pang of guilt and sorrow within us.  Is that the Holy Spirit acting miraculously on my heart or is it the power of the word of God upon a man's heart?  Yes, it is the Spirit working but working through the word, not miraculously separate and apart from the word.  We retain the free will to either believe what we read thus allowing it to touch our hearts or the free will to pass it off and reject it.  

Our hearts are left free to choose either for or against the gospel thus we can be fairly condemned for choosing to reject it.  If it was otherwise how could it be said that God was fair to all?  In conversion, God treats all the same and does not play favorites. 

But, I want to make a note here about Paul's preaching that day.  In earlier articles, I have tried to show that in first-century accounts of gospel preaching all men who preached taught the same thing with the same results among those who believed.  Whether it was Peter, Philip, or Ananias doing the preaching, and now Paul the result was that in every case where the preaching was believed the result was that believers were baptized.  When we believe the words of Peter preaching by inspiration in Acts 2:38, we readily see why that was the case. 

What did Paul preach to Lydia?  We all agree he taught the fundamentals of the Christian faith.  With Paul, as with the other evangelists of his day, that included baptism for the remission of sins.  The text says Lydia was baptized along with her household (Acts 16:15) but when did she do this and why?  The verse before, verse 14, tells us that she was responding "to the things spoken by Paul." (NAS) 

Paul preached to her the gospel.  Paul preached baptism because Lydia was baptized in response to the things spoken by Paul (verse 14).  Baptism then is a part of the gospel.  The gospel cannot be preached without baptism being preached.  We see it preached by Peter, by Philip, by Ananias, and now by Paul. 

Some might respond by saying in earlier accounts found in earlier chapters of Paul's missionary efforts accounts are given where baptism is not mentioned - passages like Acts 13:12, 13:39, 48 and Acts 14:1, 14:21.  The reader ought to realize two things regarding such passages. 

(1) They are summary statements of what happened and not detailed accounts of conversion.  For example, Acts 14:21 simply says they "made many disciples."  There is no attempt to say how that was done.  Acts 13:39 says, "Everyone who believes is freed from all things, from which you could not be freed through the Law of Moses." (NAS)  True, but what is not stated is what is to be believed.  In Acts 13:48 the text says "as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed." (NAS)  Believed what?  If they believed what Paul preached then they believed, among other things, that they must be baptized.  But, the point is that such passages are just summary statements without details being provided. 

Let the reader ask himself this question.  None of these accounts mention a word about repentance nor should they given the fact they are, as has been stated, summary statements.  Do we believe that there is such a thing as salvation by faith without any repentance of sins?  Again, when it is simply stated that people believed it is a summary of what took place and not a detailed account of everything they believed and believed to the point of obedience. 

If we were studying the subject of biblical hermeneutics we would say the word "believed" when used in such passages as we have been talking about is used as a figure of speech called a "synecdoche."  A synecdoche is "a figure of speech by which we speak of the whole by a part." (Hermeneutics, by D. R. Dungan, page 300)  As Dungan says, "This is many times the case with the salvation of sinners.  The whole number of conditions are indicated by the use of one.  Generally the first one is mentioned-that of faith-because without it nothing else could follow." (page 305) 

In more detailed accounts we know what was preached and what was believed by what was done.  Lydia was baptized because the text says she was responding to what was preached and Paul was the preacher.  

(2)  Paul preached the same gospel wherever he went, not one thing in one place and something else in another.  If you can find what he preached once you know he always taught the same elsewhere.  Paul says, "But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we have preached to you, let him be accursed." (Gal 1:8 NAS)  Paul did not preach different things in different places when it came to the gospel.  If he preached baptism to Lydia he preached the same wherever he went and we know he preached it to her. 

If Paul did not believe baptism for the remission of sins was essential to gospel obedience (and thus salvation) then please tell me how he could have written what he did in passages such as Rom. 6:3-4 and Gal. 3:26-27.  Tell me why when Ananias told him "now why do you delay?  Arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name" (Acts 22:16 NAS) that Paul did not object and respond to Ananias along the line of now look here Ananias, I know you have the Spirit of God but the minute I met Jesus on the road I believed and was saved and so both you and the Spirit are in error.  I need not be baptized to "wash away" any sins for they were forgiven me when Jesus appeared to me and I first believed.  Why did he not respond that way? 

It astounds me that people can claim to be saved by faith, apart from baptism, given the fact their claim to believe is fraud.  How can I believe in Jesus and yet deny what he taught?   Jesus taught both personally on the subject of baptism (Matt. 28:19, Mark 16:15-16, John 3:5) and through his Holy Spirit-inspired apostles and prophets.  Believe in him, just not in what he has said, and you will be saved seems to be the idea.  What!  How does that work?  Someone needs to explain that. 

What does it mean to be faithful to God as a new convert?  Lydia says, as a new convert speaking to Paul and his party, "If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house and stay." (Acts 16:15 NAS)  That they did because they judged her, as she says, as one who was faithful to the Lord. 

What did she do to become faithful?  She believed what Paul preached (including baptism) and responded to it by acting upon it.  If one wants to become faithful to the Lord they need to do what she did assuming they have not already done so.  Would she have been judged faithful if she had not been baptized?  Think about that long and hard.  Paul taught it.  Let us say she refused to do it.  Would she then have been judged to be faithful? 

One final fact about Lydia's conversion that has caused trouble is that the text says "she and her household " were baptized (Acts 16:15 NAS).  The thought is that this means she and her young children maybe including infants.  It is easily seen that infants were not baptized for the simple reason that baptism is of no value to one who is not a sinner as its purpose is for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38) and infants have no sin.  They are safe in the arms of God as is. 

But, there is another point as well confirming there was no infant baptism or baptism of very young children.  Baptism saves only when accompanied by faith (Mark 16:16) for it is "he who has believed and has been baptized" that shall be saved.  It is not he who is too young to believe and is baptized shall be saved.

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