Peter's Second Gospel Sermon -- Acts 3

Most people who know anything at all about the Christian faith realize that Peter preached the first gospel sermon ever preached on the Day of Pentecost as recorded in Acts 2.  The second recorded sermon in the Christian dispensation of time is again a sermon preached by Peter as found in the next chapter in Acts -- chapter 3.  That there was preaching being done between Peter's first sermon and his second there is no doubt for the Bible says "the Lord was adding to their number day by day those who were being saved" (Acts 2:47 NAS) and this was after Pentecost but before the events recorded in Acts 3.

Of those sermons, of which we know nothing, we can only say with certainty that the truth was taught and what was taught was the same as that taught by Peter in Acts 2 by inspiration of the Holy Spirit.  For it to be otherwise would be to say two or more different gospels were preached which we are sure was not the case.  Peter did not preach one gospel one day and another gospel another day.  He did not have a different gospel for everyday of the week or month nor did one apostle preach one thing and another apostle preach something else.

In order to not make this article too long I want to zero in on only one issue -- what did Peter tell those he preached to on this second preaching occasion that they needed to do in order to be saved?  The answer to that is found in Acts 3:19, "Repent therefore and return, that your sins may be wiped away, in order that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord." (NAS)  The English Standard Version has, "Repent therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out."  The New King James has, "Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out."

Albert Barnes, the well known Bible commentator, says of the Greek word translated "return" or "turn again" or "be converted" in this passage that it "means properly to 'turn; to return to a path from which one has gone astray; and then to turn away from sins, or to forsake them.' It is a word used in a general sense to denote 'the whole turning to God.'” (This is from his commentary on Acts.)  It does not then designate one specific thing but includes everything not covered by the word "repent."

One needs to ask some questions.  Earlier in this sermon Peter had accused those of whom he was speaking to of delivering up Jesus to be killed (Acts 3:13), disowning Jesus (Acts 3:13), and asking that a murderer be set free rather than Jesus thus condemning Jesus to death (Acts 3:14-15).  In view of Jesus' innocence of all wrongdoing this was sin and sin of the worst sort since Jesus was the Son of God.  What they had done was evil and repentance was needed.

Now what is repentance?  Paul says, "Godly sorrow produces repentance to salvation." (2 Cor. 7:10 NKJV)  Thus godly sorrow precedes repentance and is not itself repentance.  Judas was sorry but did not repent in the biblical sense of the word and was not saved thus the sorrow he had was not "godly sorrow" since godly sorrow leads to repentance and salvation.  Jesus said with reference to Judas, "The Son of Man indeed goes just 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 never been born." (Mark 14:21 NKJV)  Jesus could not have said that of Judas had Judas been saved in the end.

John the Baptist spoke of bearing "fruits worthy of repentance" (Matt. 3:8 NKJV) thus reformation of life is a product of repentance and is not in itself repentance but a result of repentance.  Repentance is that which lies between godly sorrow and reformation of life and we might ask what that is?  It is a determination made in the mind and will of man to cease sin and to turn to God and live for God.  It is a matter of the mind and will of man, a decision made because of godly sorrow that will lead to reformation of life, a turning from sin and a turning to God and a godly life.

The point being made is that when Peter used the phrase "return" in Acts 3:19 he had something in mind other than repentance.  He had already told them to repent.  He was not being redundant in his language.  He was not just using different words to refer to the same thing.

Now the careful reader who reads the entire sermon (Acts 3:12-26) will note that just like in Peter's first gospel sermon (Acts 2) he does not mention faith in Christ.  Is it because he does not think it matters?  That is ridiculous in view of the fact Peter is speaking by means of the Holy Spirit and the whole New Testament emphasizes faith.  The explanation lies elsewhere.  In Acts 3 faith in Christ is understood.  How so?  No one repents until convicted by guilt.  No one is convicted by guilt of sin until they come to believe.  It is not possible to repent until you believe.  Repentance itself will be proof of faith.

If one will take the time to read Acts 3:12-18 he will see clearly that Peter has preached Christ to them and the sin he points out to them that they are guilty of is not just the murder of any ordinary man but of God's "Servant Jesus" (Acts 3:13 NAS), the "Holy and Righteous One" (Acts 3:14 NAS), the "Prince of life" (Acts 3:15 NAS).  Now they have just witnessed a miracle done in the name of this Jesus whom they had put to death (the man lame from his mother's womb--Acts 3:2) and Peter has done this preaching to them.  If they repent it will only be because of faith.  They will have come to believe what Peter preached.

We are now at a point in this sermon that we were in Peter's first sermon.  No mention of faith but faith is necessarily implied.  We are then told directly in both sermons the necessity of repentance (Acts 2:38 and Acts 3:19).  We are also told in both sermons that if we will do as Peter has said, said by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, we will have "the forgiveness of your sins" (Acts 2:38) or that which is the same ""your sins may be wiped away." (Acts 3:19 NAS)  But in both sermons there is something else mentioned in addition to repentance that is necessary unless we desire to cut sentences in half and delete part of God's word on the subject.

We can now come to an understanding of what the word "return" means in Acts 3:19, the other thing Peter says that is needed to have sins wiped away, by seeing what it was Peter required of those on the Day of Pentecost in order to have "the forgiveness of your sins" (Acts 2:38 NAS).  What was that one thing he mentioned that it would take to obtain the forgiveness of sins in addition to repentance on the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2?  It was baptism.

Now note what Barnes said as quoted earlier.  "It (a reference to the Greek word translated "return" in the NAS or "be converted" in the NKJV--DS) is a word used in a general sense to denote 'the whole turning to God.'”  All that is left of that turning to God according to Peter in his Acts 2 sermon is baptism.  Should we be surprised?  Why should we be surprised?  Do we think the Holy Spirit preached different gospels at different times?  If baptism was required of those not Christians on the Day of Pentecost why would we think it would not be required of those not Christians some days later? 

But one might argue that the word "return" does not mean baptism.  No it does not for it is a general term, not a specific term.  In the KJ and the NKJV the Greek word is translated "be converted."  Surely everyone can see that phrase is general not specific.  It tells you to do something but not how to do it.  You have to learn that elsewhere.  How would one do that?  Simple!  By seeing how the thing was done under similar circumstances elsewhere--in Acts 2.  How were sins wiped away elsewhere?  What was required elsewhere for the forgiveness of sins?

But one might object and say it means in this context of Acts 3 return to God.  Yes, but how is that done in this gospel dispensation?  How did Peter say it was done in his first gospel sermon, the first one ever preached to humanity?

A lot of denominational people do not like Peter's Acts 2 sermon because of what he says about baptism and would like to somehow or another get rid of it.  One common way is to try and pit Peter against Paul mistakenly thinking Paul taught something different on salvation (he did not).  That effort will not succeed.  Paul, then called Saul, was not converted until Acts chapter 9 some 3 years after the church was established and after the gospel was being preached (dating according to "The Oxford Companion to the Bible," edited by Metzger and Coogan, pages 120-121).  Were there no Christians until Paul began preaching?  Acts 2:47 says there were daily conversions.  Thousands were converted before Paul.

Later in his preaching on this occasion Peter quotes Moses saying, "The Lord God shall raise up for you a prophet like me from your brethren; to him you shall give heed in everything he says to you.  And it shall be that every soul that does not heed that prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the people." (Acts 3:22-23 NAS)

If I had not been baptized for the remission of sins I would be scared by that statement for it was Jesus who said, "Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." (John 3:5 NAS)  It was Jesus who said, "He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved." (Mark 16:16 NAS)  It was Jesus who said to the apostles while delivering the Great Commission to "make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit." (Matt. 28:19 NAS)  It was Jesus that said all of that.  It was Peter, quoting Moses, who said if you do not heed everything he (Jesus--DS) said you shall "be utterly destroyed from among the people." (Acts 3:23 NAS)  Was Peter inspired to say that?  What do you think?     

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

No Inheritance in The Kingdom of God – Part II

This is a continuation of an article I started awhile back on Paul’s statements that those practicing certain sins would not inherit the kingdom of God.  As a text I used three  passages as follows:

1 Cor. 6:9-10	Gal. 5:19-21	Eph. 5:5-7
“Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.” (1Cor.  6:9-10 NKJV)	“Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.” (Gal. 5:19-21 NKJV)	“For this you know, that no fornicator, unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore do not be partakers with them.” (Eph. 5:5-7 NKJV)

As is evident I used the New King James Version of the Bible (underlining by me - DS).  The first two sins mentioned by Paul in Galatians – adultery and fornication – were covered in my first article.

Some of the sins listed can be grouped together due to the features they share.  Uncleanness, lewdness, homosexuals, and sodomites all relate to sexual sin in part or altogether.  All involve sexual immorality.  Why list them at all then since Paul has already given us the umbrella term “fornication” (translated “sexual immorality” in modern versions) under which term they could all be sheltered? 

We can only speculate on that as we are not told.  I think it likely that when we use terms that can be broadly interpreted there can be some danger that we will miss the mark in our understanding.  For example, in my last article I talked about sexual immorality.  There is a bit of a problem.  Sexual immorality has to be defined.  Where do you draw the line; what is sexually immoral and what is not?  I thought about listing a large number of such sins, not just from my own thinking but from reading others (commentaries, etc.).  I hesitated and did not do it.  Why not?

Paul said in Ephesians 5:12, “It is shameful even to speak of those things which are done by them in secret.”(NKJV)  So, did I want to dare to be so specific and graphic in light of what Paul told the Ephesians?  No, I felt it best to just be general and leave it at “sexual immorality.”  But, again, the danger is a person may not be aware of their specific sin when one is so general in such broad declarations.  Things may be excluded that ought to be included.

My speculation, that is all it is, says that perhaps Paul did at times get specific in naming sins that could have been closeted under a more general term not wanting to take the chance that some sins would be overlooked if not explicitly mentioned.  Sometimes we need to be told straight up that what we are engaged in is sin, no guessing or wondering about it.

I begin today’s discussion with the sins of homosexuality and sodomy.  Paul says neither homosexuals nor sodomites will inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-10 NKJV).  Instead of using those two terms the Christian Standard Bible says, “males who have sex with males” and both the English Standard Bible and the New International Version have footnotes that are similar.  The NIV footnote says, “The words men who have sex with men translate two Greek words that refer to the passive and active participants in homosexual acts.”

The Bible knows nothing about homosexual marriage which is solely an invention of sinful mankind and a very, very recent invention at that.  Man cannot invent a right in order to circumvent God’s condemnation and think that if God exists they will get by with it eternally.  Kick sand in God’s face and see what happens when his patience is exhausted and you face him in judgment.  God never gave man the authority to overrule his decrees.

The next term is uncleanness.  What is uncleanness?  It is hard to find any commentator on this term who will actually define it with any specificity.  It is another broad inclusive term.  We can only do our best.  We know uncleanness is a work of the flesh from our Galatian passage and that an unclean person has no inheritance in the kingdom of God from the Ephesian passage.

By comparing other Bible translations we learn that the Greek word behind the English word “unclean” can be translated as “impure.” The Christian Standard Bible translates in Gal. 5:19 using the phrase “moral impurity” and in Eph. 5:5 with just the word “impure.”  The English Standard Bible in Eph. 5:5 uses the word “impure” and in Gal. 5:19 the word “impurity.”  The New International Version, the New American Standard Bible 2020, and the New Living Translation all do the same thing.  So, the question arises as to what makes one impure (unclean).

If we were living under the Law of Moses (the Old Testament) it would be easy to name many things that made one unclean, things that separated from God until cleansing took place, but we now live under the new covenant sanctified by the blood of Christ.  So how about for us living today? 

We can get an idea from Ezra 9:11 where we read, “The land which you are entering to possess is an unclean land, with the uncleanness of the peoples of the lands, with their abominations which have filled it from one end to another with their impurity.” (Ezra  9:11 NKJV)  Ezra is going back in time here referencing the days long gone by when the children of Israel were told to enter the promised land and drive out the inhabitants (destroy them).  What kind of uncleanness had those inhabitants practiced?

Idolatry was perhaps the most egregious sin but there was far more to their idolatry than just a spiritual devotion to an idol.  It often involved what one commentary said was “little else than sexual orgies with a religious scenario,” there were male and female temple prostitutes, and there was offering as burnt sacrifices their own sons and daughters.  They were involved in witchcraft, soothsaying, interpreting omens, sorcery, mediums, etc.  You can find a listing of these things in Deuteronomy 18:9-14 and another listing with regards to the general immorality as related to sexual sin in Leviticus 18.  Leviticus 18:27 reads, “For all these abominations the men of the land have done, who were before you, and thus the land is defiled” thus unclean. (Lev. 18:27 NKJV)  When one reads the word “defile” in his/her Bible we immediately understand we are talking about uncleanness.

One can conclude that anything related to idolatry would make one unclean in God’s eyes, the only eyes that matter.  Would the same apply to false worship or false doctrine?  I am not the judge of where such things begin and end, where the exact line is to be drawn, but it seems the wise man or woman would want to stay as far away from any kind of false religion as possible including within Christendom when one finds it. 

One can also say any kind of sexual immorality being practiced would make one unclean.  In fact, uncleanness is such a general term that one could say almost any and every sin one would practice would make one impure or unclean.  If not, why not?

Jesus said, “But those things which proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and they defile a man.  For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies.  These are the things which defile a man, but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile a man." (Matt. 15:18-20 NKJV)  This would seem to me to be a listing of things that would make one unclean or impure.  If you are defiled you are unclean.  Again, one is led to the conclusion that uncleanness is a broad all-encompassing term for any and all sin that is practiced.

I would suggest that a person find any listing of sins in his/her New Testament, go down the list, and ask themselves with each sin listed “if I did this thing would it keep me pure (clean) or would it make me impure and unclean?  That is probably as good a way as any of deciding what is clean versus what is not.  Is the thing I am contemplating doing leading me to holiness?

I will close the comments on uncleanness with this from 2 Cor. 6:17 where Paul quotes from the Old Testament and applies it to the present.  “Therefore ‘come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord.  Do not touch what is unclean, and I will receive you.’" (2Cor. 6:17 NKJV)  God wants us to be holy and undefiled by the world, separate from the world, and certainly separate from idolatry in whatever form it might take.  We need to live pure and holy lives.

The last sin to be dealt with in this essay is that of “lewdness.”  Lewdness is the word used in the New King James Version of the Bible from e-sword but I have an evidently older version of the New King James Version New Testament that uses the word licentiousness.  The old King James Version uses the word lasciviousness.  Other modern-day versions translate using words like promiscuity (CSB), sensuality (ESV, NASB), indecent behavior (NAS20), depravity (NET), debauchery (NIV), and lustful pleasures (NLT).  The online dictionary at dictionary.com says for lewdness, “indecency or obscenity; vulgar sexual character or behavior.”

We generally think of lewdness as being sexual and obscene in a public way by one’s behavior and/or dress or lack thereof.  However, one can be lewd in non-sexual ways.  You cannot use the public streets and walkways as your toilet as is reported about some in San Francisco without being lewd.  You cannot be loud and vulgar in your speech and behavior in public.  You cannot live without respect for others round about you in your conduct.

Jesus, in Mark 7:20-23, says lewdness defiles a man (V. 22 NKJV).  Paul says we are to walk properly, not in lewdness and lust (Rom. 13:13).  He says there were some in Corinth that had not repented of their lewdness (2 Cor. 12:21).  In Ephesians speaking of the Gentiles he says they “have given themselves over to lewdness, to work all uncleanness with greediness.” (Eph. 4:19 NKJV)  Lewdness here is associated with uncleanness as it was with lust in the Roman passage.  The point is that the scriptures clearly condemn such a way of life.  There is no inheritance for those who fail to repent of this sin.

There is a word of caution here in defining lewdness.  We get so used to things the way they are we become immune to them, take them for granted, and think no more about them.  I have in mind the way so many young women especially, but sometimes older women as well, dress.  Have you ever wondered about what God thinks about short shorts worn out in public?  It may not be lewdness for us for we have become so used to such things but how does God see it?  I wonder how such dress would have gone over among Christians living in the first century.  I think I know.  For that matter how would our great grandparents have felt about it?  We must consider God in every aspect of our lives first and foremost.  We cannot let modern-day life scar us over to the point we become like the world and think and behave as they do.  We need to see things the way God does.

This brings this article to a close.  When I started out on this project I had no idea it would take this much time, effort, and space but like the tortoise we will keep at it as long as we can and as long as the Lord wills and hopefully get it done.  The goal is to define every term that Paul says will deny us an inheritance from the passages chosen.

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

Link to Part I

Link to Part III

 

Redemption in Christ

One frequently comes across the words redeem, redeemed, and redemption in reading through the New Testament.  I found twenty instances using a concordance for the New King James version of the Bible.  What do these words mean?  If you were to look into a modern-day dictionary you would likely find a number of responses.  My Random House Webster’s College Dictionary, 2000 edition, lists nine meanings for the word redeem.  Most have the general idea of paying off or buying back or releasing.

According to Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, a dictionary based on the words found in the King James Version of the Bible, there are four Greek words behind the English words translated as redeem and redemption, two verbs, and two nouns.  For the purpose of this article I will only be dealing with three of them, those most relevant to the purpose of this article, and I will be quoting from Vine.

The Greek verb “lutroo” signifies “to release on receipt of ransom … signifying to release by paying a ransom price.”  Vine lists Titus 2:14 and 1 Peter 1:18-19 as examples.  The Titus passage, speaking of Christ, reads, “Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for himself his own special people.” (NKJV)  Peter says we were redeemed “with the precious blood of Christ.” (1 Peter 1:18-19 NKJV).  We were thus released from sin and its penalty by the ransom price of the blood of Jesus shed on the cross.  Christ delivered us from sin.

The noun form of “lutroo” is “lutrosis.”  Lutrosis is “a redemption.”  “With his own blood he entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.” (Heb. 9:12 NKJV)  Hebrews 9:12 is a statement of fact as to what has been done and how, redemption by the blood of Jesus.

The final Greek word to be dealt with here is “apolutrosis,” which is “a strengthened form of” lutrosis.  It is “a releasing, for … a ransom.”  I am here interested in the third example of lutrosis given by Vine.  He says, “forgiveness and justification, redemption as the result of expiation, deliverance from the guilt of sins.”  Scriptures listed under this Greek term are Rom. 3:24, Eph. 1:7, and Col. 1:14.

Each passage speaks of redemption by the blood of Christ.  “Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth to be a propitiation by his blood.” (Rom. 3:24-25)  “We have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins.” (Eph. 1:7 NKJV)  The Colossian passage is identical to the Ephesian passage, “In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins.” (Col. 1:14 NKJV)

Having done the word study one can see that redemption is a release, a deliverance from sin and its consequences by means of a ransom, the ransom being Christ’s shed blood, his death on the cross.  Its end result is thus salvation of one’s soul, the soul of the one who takes advantage of the ransom Jesus made.  The ransom made was “a ransom for all” (1 Tim. 2:6 NKJV) but while this redemption is universal in its scope, that is it is available to all, it is only effective for those who come into Christ.

This redemption, this salvation, is “in Christ Jesus.” “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood.” (Rom.:3:23-25a NKJV)

One enters into Christ by believing and obeying the gospel; the final step in obeying the gospel and thereby being placed into Christ is baptism.  Baptism is preceded by faith in Christ, repentance of sins, and confession of one’s faith in Jesus.

We are then to be “baptized into Christ Jesus.” (Rom. 6:3 NKJV)  “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)  Faith led to baptism.  The corollary of Gal. 3:26-27 would be “as many of you as were not baptized into Christ have not put on Christ.”  If not, why not?

I do not know of a single scripture that speaks of entering into Christ some way other than through baptism.  There was no other way on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2) when Peter preached the first gospel sermon.  Peter required baptism in that sermon.  “Repent, and be baptized everyone of you.” (Acts 2:38 KJV)  Everyone means everyone.  There is no other way today.  Mankind has no power to override the spirit-filled preaching of an apostle.

One fact people often overlook who desire to be redeemed by the blood of Jesus is that Jesus shed his blood in his death.  He was dead when the soldier came around and pierced his side and the blood and water then flowed from his side. (John 19:33-34)  Paul says in Rom. 6:3 that we “were baptized into his death.”  His blood was shed in his death; we enter into his death by baptism where we contact the blood that redeems us.  This is a spiritual contact but whoever thought it would be otherwise?

“We have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins.” (Eph. 1:7, Col. 1:14 NKJV)  It is an “eternal redemption” (Heb. 9:12) for those who remain faithful to the end of life.  To be delivered from one’s sins and released from the burden, guilt, and punishment due us for our sins is like the weight of the world off one’s shoulders.  What a joy, what a relief.

Anyone who so desires can be redeemed by the blood of Jesus.  God has offered us all his special invitation.  “And the Spirit and the bride say, ‘Come!’  And let him who hears say, ‘Come!’  And let him who thirsts come.  And whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely.” (Rev. 22:17 NKJV) 

If someone was to offer you in this material world a gift of great value, very costly, whether in terms of monetary value or of great personal sacrifice and you rejected it that would come across on your part as cold and unfeeling, ungrateful, unloving, and unkind.  What if we reject Christ’s great sacrificial gift of his life?

“Knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold … but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot.” (1 Peter 1:18-19 NKJV)  We “were bought at a price; therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God’s.” (1 Cor. 6:20 NKJV)

Anyone who is willing and so desires can even this day be redeemed by the blood of Christ.

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

No Inheritance in The Kingdom of God – Part I

The apostle Paul when he was not writing to a specific individual in his epistles was writing to a church or a group of churches, Galatians for example.  He was writing to Christians in all cases.  In the course of his writing, he warns against a multitude of sins, sins of all kinds.  One finds long listings in Rom. 1:28-32 and 2 Tim. 3:1-5.

While we know sin of any kind unrepented of can keep one out of heaven I have found it noteworthy that in three places Paul gives the reader specific warning that the sins he lists, if practiced, will keep one from inheriting the kingdom of God.  Those passages are found in 1 Cor. 6:9-10, Gal. 5:19-21, and Eph. 5:5-7.  I quote them below using the New King James version.  All underlining is mine.

1 Cor. 6:9-10   “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.” (1Co 6:9-10 NKJV)

Gal. 5:19-21   “Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. (Gal 5:19-21 NKJV)

Eph. 5:5-7   “For this you know, that no fornicator, unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore do not be partakers with them. (Eph 5:5-7 NKJV)

I thought it might be good to be sure we understand the nature of the sins that will keep us out of heaven if practiced. 

Adultery is the first sin listed in Gal. 5.  I suspect most people think they know what adultery is but Jesus’ gives one definition of it in Matt. 19:9, “And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery." (Matt. 19:9 NKJV)  Of course, if the woman was to do this rather than the man the principle is the same.

There are people who claim that adultery is a one-time act.  No so!  Col. 3:5-7 clearly teaches one can live in a sin.  “Therefore put to death your members which are on the earth: fornication (‘sexual immorality’ in modern versions – DS), uncleanness, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. Because of these things the wrath of God is coming upon the sons of disobedience, in which you yourselves once walked when you lived in them.” (Col. 3:5-7 NKJV)  So, one can live in a sin or sins versus just a one-time act.

Besides that it is said by those who know the Greek that the word “committeth” as in committeth adultery in Matt. 19:9 in the King James version of the Bible denotes linear or continuous action thus means it is ongoing, not a single act.  I am not a Greek scholar but I don’t think they are lying about it.  There is no reason to do so. 

One must also remember why John the Baptist got in trouble with Herod.  He was imprisoned for Herod did not like what he had to say, “It is not lawful for you to have your brother’s wife.” (Mark 6:18 NKJV)  Herod had married her but John said she is “your brother’s wife.”  Herod was living in adultery with Herodias.

Of course, all extra-marital affairs are adulterous.  A fitting definition that more or less covers the whole ground of what adultery is would go something like this:  voluntary sexual intercourse between two persons, one at least who is married to another (both might be).  Yes, this is an act but when engaged in habitually it is a manner of life, a way of life which one lives or practices.

Is this the only way to commit adultery?  Good question.  How about what Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky were involved in?  What about those who are sexually intimate but have not yet gone all the way?  God will judge whether or not it is adultery but it is certain such things are sexually immoral and will keep the unrepentant out of the kingdom of God no matter what descriptive name you would give to the specific sin.  Those things would at the very least fall under the category of “fornication,” our next topic.  As a matter of fact, all adultery falls under the more inclusive classification of fornication (sexual immorality).

Before moving on to the topic of fornication one other comment ought to be added to this discussion.  Jesus did say, “But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” (Matt. 5:28 NKJV)  “Blessed are the pure in heart, For they shall see God.” (Matt. 5:8 NKJV)  Is this equivalent to the adultery spoken of in Paul’s listings?  It would be tough to take the position that one could face God on the Day of Judgment with an impure heart and have hope of heaven.  I suppose technically, which is to say physically, it would not be adultery but it is definitely a soul destroyer.  That is about all one can say about the matter.

The next sin Paul lists that committed habitually and unrepented of that will keep one out of heaven is fornication.  When I was growing up in the mid-20^th century when one used the word fornication we all thought we knew what was meant.  It was a single person having sexual relations, sexual intercourse, outside of marriage.  Such a person was a fornicator.  That was the limit of the sin.

Nowadays one will not even find the word “fornication” or “fornicators” in the major modern-day translations.  Those terms have been exchanged for a much broader more inclusive term, “sexual immorality.”  This includes versions like the New American Standard 2020, the English Standard Version, the Christian Standard Version, and the New International Version.  The New Living Translation uses the term “sexual sin” in 1 Cor. 6:9.

Think of the many Greek scholars who worked on these translations deciding how to most accurately translate the Greek into understandable English.  Were all these scholars wrong in making the decision to change the wording from fornication to sexual immorality?  Perhaps the very reason they did it was to clarify the meaning of the text to those of us who were likely to misunderstand the meaning of the word “fornication” in our modern-day society.

The Greek word behind the King James, the New King James, and the older New American Standard versions that was translated as “fornication” was the word “porneia” in its noun form with a slightly different spelling in its verb form.  It was long thought among the average person, so to speak, that this word had the restricted meaning I have already spoken of, but modern scholarship has debunked that idea and thus changed the translation to “sexual immorality.”

One can easily be misled by reading some of the older commentaries and word study books on the word fornication that seem to restrict the meaning to one specific act.  Whether they actually did that or not is open to question.  They may have meant more than we commonly give them credit for when they used phrases like “sexual intercourse.”  That phrase likely had a more broad based meaning many decades ago than it does today in society in general, more specifically the word intercourse.  We have today confined it to one act.  That does not mean they did or that they intended to.

Be that as it may, scholarship does advance with time in nearly every field of endeavor.  Not every change in our bibles is the devil trying to destroy us as some King James only advocates seem to imply.  “Sexual immorality” is a much better way to translate the Greek word porneia to give the modern-day reader an accurate understanding of what the text is meant to convey.

So, what does this phrase mean, this thing, this sin that will keep one from inheriting the kingdom of God?  Fornication (NKJV) or sexual immorality (modern versions) includes all sexual sin thus not just sexual intercourse outside marriage but nearly everything that you can imagine.  Probably no one could list every specific sin under this general category of “sexual immorality.”  I think most people have an innate sense about them, if they have any Christian background or training at all, to know when an action has crossed the line into sexual immorality whether it is specifically stated as such in the text or not.    

I know some object to “sexual immorality” as a translation of the Greek here.  They think it is too broad a phrase, encompasses too much.  Yet, they generally admit that the word “fornication” as most understand it to not be inclusive enough of what the actual Greek word “porneia” means.  So, they stand between a rock and a hard place.  What word or phrase would they use?  You get no answer.  As I said before, “sexual immorality” is a better translation for our day and age.  Trying to figure out every single sexual sin that this would include is not the job of the translator.

Certainly, this sin, sexual immorality in all its many varied aspects, is difficult for people living in bodies of flesh to conquer.  I once heard many, many years ago a faithful man in the church as far as I could tell comment that everyone was likely guilty.  I suspect he was correct if one was to talk of a one-time or an occasional occurrence over the course of a lifetime, especially in youth.  However, Paul speaks of those “who practice such things” (Gal. 5:21), who make it a way of life, who are unrepentant.

It is no news to any of us that we sin.  “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.  If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us.” (1 John 1:8-10 NKJV)  The key is to not practice sin as a way of life and to be penitent, to repent when we do sin --  that is if one is a Christian.  For those who are not the key is to obey the gospel from the heart with all that involves (another lesson for another time).

I had hoped to go through this entire listing of sins from the passages chosen in one article.  Obviously, that is not going to happen.  I will, Lord willing, continue on in later articles.  For now, I close by simply saying that the Holy Spirit says we cannot go to heaven practicing these two categories of sins. 

“For out of the heart, proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies.  These are the thing which defile a man.” (Jesus, Matt. 15:19-20 NKJV) [my underlining -- DS]

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

Link to Part II