Bible Contradictions on Salvation

If we believe the Bible is the word of God why do we often interpret it in a way that makes it contradict itself?  Truth is harmonious or else it's not truth and cannot be.  Jesus says of God's word, "Your word is truth." (John 17:17)  It does not oppose itself when properly interpreted.

Martin Luther was persuaded he had found contradiction in the Bible between what Paul wrote in Romans about salvation being by faith versus James saying works were necessary.  In an online article (online at the time I originally wrote this) entitled, "Martin Luther's View of the Epistle of James" by Daniel Petty he says, "Once Luther remarked that he would give his doctor's beret to anyone who could reconcile James and Paul (Bainton 259)."  (Petty's source:  Bainton, Roland H., Here I Stand: A Life of Martin Luther, New York: New American Library, 1950; 1978.)

Martin Luther's doctrine does indeed make Paul and James contradict one another.  That fact alone ought to tell you Luther was wrong in his theology no matter how sincere.  Any time your doctrine makes the Bible contradict itself this tells you if you will listen, that your doctrine is in error, that you are wrong in your thinking, and need a new approach to understanding the scripture.

In the first place, we error when we speak of the word of God as though it came from man even though I concede we generally know what is meant by such statements.  But, the reality is it is not Paul's word, then James' word, and then Peter's, etc., for "all scripture is given by inspiration of God." (2 Tim. 3:16 NKJV)  What Paul wrote he wrote by inspiration.  What James wrote he wrote by inspiration.

Thus if Paul says we are saved by faith and James says works are necessary then both are correct else you have God fighting against himself.  Even worse you have God lying in one place or the other if either Paul or James is wrong.  If both are correct truth is harmonious as it must be. 

Everyone agrees the New Testament is full of passages that teach that a man is saved by faith so I will only list a couple.  "He who believes in the Son has everlasting life." (John 3:36 NKJV)  "Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." (Rom. 5:1 NKJV)
 
We all accept these passages and this teaching but too often people do not consider or give thought to what faith is.  Do these passages define faith?  Do they tell you whether this is a living faith or a dead faith as per James?  Is it an obedient faith or a disobedient faith?  Is faith just a matter of the mind alone, a belief held, or is it more than that?  The texts do not tell us.

The assumption is we know what faith is and generally, that is whatever we each individually want it to be.  We define it as we desire.  This creates a lot of problems in interpreting the Bible; the result is we end up with doctrines that contradict the Bible.

Without preaching a sermon on faith to define it let me refer you to James 2:22.  "You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works." (ESV)

The scriptural biblical faith that saves is that faith which is a completed faith, not an incomplete faith.  Other versions use the word "perfect" instead of the word "complete".  It is the faith that is made perfect that saves rather than the faith not made perfect.

The New Living Translation of the Bible, which I consider a paraphrase, gets at the sense of what is being taught.  "You see, he was trusting God so much that he was willing to do whatever God told him to do.  His faith was made complete by what he did--by his actions." (James 2:22 NLT, 1996 edition)

This is saving faith, the faith that saves, the only kind of faith that makes a difference, the only concept of faith we should hold, the only concept of saving faith that is scriptural.  Only faith so strong that it obeys can save but this is the very concept of faith that is wanting among large numbers of believers.   

James then says by inspiration that we are saved by works.  "You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only." (James 2:24 NKJV)  A man can either believe that or say it is a lie.  We can say no, justification is by faith alone.  A man can say a lot of things.  It is what the Bible says that matters.  No-where does the Bible say we are saved by faith alone and nowhere does it say we are saved by works alone.  It is a faith completed by obedient works that saves thus both faith and obedience (works) save. 

Jesus has said we will be judged by his word on the last day.  "He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him--the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day." (John 12:48 NKJV)  If a person's doctrine does not allow for salvation by both faith and works he is in error since the Bible states clearly that one is saved by both.  The passages quoted above suffice to show that.

But, one will object.  How about Eph. 2:8-9, "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast." (NKJV)  Since the Bible, and truth, cannot contradict itself it becomes immediately obvious that Paul is speaking of one kind of works while James speaks of another.  One type of works saves; the other does not and cannot.

The type of works that cannot save are the works of the Law of Moses.  Why could they not save?  I quote Gal. 3:10 (TEV), "Those who depend on obeying the Law live under a curse.  For the scripture says, 'whoever does not always obey everything that is written in the book of the Law is under God's curse!'"  One act of disobedience at any point in the course of one's life would condemn him without remedy under the law.  No man can live a perfect life without ever sinning.  No man will ever be a perfect law keeper.

This being the case Paul writes in Gal. 3:21, "For if there had been a law given which could have given life, truly righteousness would have been by the law." (NKJV)  Since no such law was given man could only be saved by Christ, by faith in him.

But, there are works other than the works of the Law of Moses.  These are the works James speaks of which bring justification.  What are those works?  Hear the writer of the book of Hebrews.

The Hebrew writer says of Jesus, "And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him." (Heb. 5:9 NKJV)  Paul who speaks so much of salvation by faith and grace says in Rom. 6:16, "Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one's slaves whom you obey, whether of sin to death, or of obedience to righteousness?"  Note his phrase, "obedience to righteousness."  This is the same as to say obedience to salvation for the righteous person will be saved, not the unrighteous.

It becomes clear then that the works James speaks of that bring justification are works of obedience to Christ and are the same as Paul’s “obedience to righteousness.”  James' “works” and Paul’s “obedience” are equivalents, one and the same.

Too many are ready to say that obedience is more or less equivalent to law keeping.  Since we are not saved by law they do not see obedience as being essential.  For example, from their point of view, Christ commands baptism but one does not have to obey that to be saved.  To require it would be law keeping or salvation by works.

The trouble with that way of thinking is that the idea is in conflict with passages such as those I have just quoted, Hebrews 5:9 for example, where Christ is said to be the author of salvation to all who obey him.  If one's doctrine does not harmonize with total Bible preaching on a subject it cannot be true.

The truth is Christ was also a lawgiver and has a law we are expected to keep as much as we humanly can.  Listen to the following scriptures.  "Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ." (Gal 6:2 NKJV)  This is Paul's writing, the very one who wrote of salvation by grace and faith.  Paul says of himself, "not being without law toward God, but under law toward Christ." (1 Cor. 9:21 NKJV)

The Hebrew writer says, "For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law." (Heb. 7:12 NKJV)  He doesn't say now there is no law but only that the law has changed.  It is now the law of Christ, not the Law of Moses.  If there is no law today how does one commit sin?  John says, depending on which version you use, that "sin is lawlessness" (NKJV, NAS), "sin is the transgression of the law." (KJV 1 John 3:4).

Jesus himself says, "He who has my commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves me." (John 14:21 NKJV)  Is a God-given commandment not law?

But, here is the difference.  The Law of Moses required perfect law-keeping for salvation which no man other than Jesus ever did.  The law of Christ, while still law, provides a grace element for sin.  The person, however, who thinks he can forget all about the commandments of Jesus and just be saved by grace and faith apart from works of obedience makes the scriptures contradict themselves, invites lawlessness, and propagates error if he teaches such. The scriptures are harmonious.

This brings us to the place where so many want to kick and say it is not so -- to baptism.  The Bible teaches we are saved by baptism.  "There is an antitype which now saves us, namely baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." (1 Peter 3:21 NKJV)

"Then Peter said to them, 'Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins,'" while preaching the first gospel sermon ever heard after the resurrection of Jesus (Acts 2:38 NKJV).

Saul was told, "Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins." (Acts 22:16 NKJV)

Jesus says, "Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God."  (John 3:5 NKJV)

Paul, the very man who speaks of salvation by faith, although never faith alone, says, "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)  Many would have this read, "for as many of you as were not baptized into Christ have put on Christ."  Really!  That will not work.  That is not what Paul said or taught.

Paul says in Rom. 6:3, "as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus" so he says the same thing again that he had said in Gal. 3:26-27.  One is baptized into Christ.  Salvation is in Christ.  Paul says (2 Tim. 2:10 NKJV), "Therefore I endure all things for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory."

Salvation is "in Christ Jesus".  We are, Paul says, "baptized into Christ Jesus."  Thus if there is no baptism, there is no being in Christ Jesus and no salvation which is found only in Christ Jesus. 

One can believe it or not but make no mistake about it, that is what God's word says and teaches.  When God says something we ought to believe it and obey it.  One's sins are forgiven at baptism which is the act where one contacts the blood of Christ spiritually speaking.

Jesus shed his blood in his death.  Paul says we are baptized into his death (Rom. 6:3) which is where Jesus' blood is located for the simple reason that is where God chose to locate it.  No, there is no real blood in the water.  No one ever literally comes into contact with physical blood.  But, figuratively or spiritually, that is the place God chose for us to come into contact with the blood of the cross for the remission of our sins. 

In 2 Kings 5:11 (NKJV) we find a man by the name of Naaman who wanted to be healed of his leprosy and thus came to Elisha, God's prophet.  He was told to go dip 7 times in the Jordan River.  This did not satisfy him.  He did not want water involved in his cleansing.  "But Naaman became furious, and went away and said, 'Indeed, I said to myself, 'He will surely come out to me, and stand and call on the name of the LORD his God, and wave his hand over the place, and heal the leprosy.'" (2 Kings 5:11 NKJV)

Naaman wanted to be cleansed of his leprosy but wanted it done his way and at first that did not include any water.  It was only after he decided to go about it in God's way that he was cleansed.  We ought to learn from that.  If God wants water involved in our cleansing from sin why should we object?  Why should we object to doing it God’s way?

So far I have not mentioned even one item that conflicts with another in the teaching of God's word concerning those things that bring about our salvation the reason being that everything God has had to say on the matter works together in perfect harmony with everything else he has had to say about it.  Faith is not in conflict with works, is not in conflict with obedience, and is not in conflict with baptism.

The word of God does not contradict itself.  Whatever the Bible says you are saved by, made righteous by, justified by, is truth, and is essential to salvation.  To say it is not is to reflect upon the word of God.  It is to set God's word aside to keep one's own tradition, the tradition of men.  Many have done that on the subject of how a man is saved.

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

 

  

More on Peter’s First Sermon – Calling On the Name Of The Lord

I wrote sometime in the past an article on Peter’s first sermon, the one recorded in Acts 2 delivered on the Day of Pentecost, the day the church was established, the first gospel sermon ever preached by man after Christ’s resurrection.  I titled that article “Receiving the Gospel.”  I thought it good to go back and look again at that sermon and expound a little more on it.

As you recall a crowd was drawn together that day in the city of Jerusalem by a noise that sounded like “a rushing mighty wind.” (Acts 2:2, 6 NKJV)  This was occasioned by the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the apostles gathered together as a group (Acts 2:4).  Peter then begins his sermon starting with the explanation of the event by quoting the prophet Joel from Joel 2:28-32 and he says this is the fulfillment of that prophesy (Acts 2:16). 

The part I am interested in today for our purposes is the last quote from Joel (verse 32 in Joel 2, verse 21 as quoted by Peter in Acts 2), “whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be save.” (Acts 2:21 NKJV)  Peter says that prophecy is now being fulfilled before you gathered here.  This was, is, and will forever be great news for all humanity as long as the earth shall stand.  It is God’s promise to all of us no matter how badly our lives have turned out otherwise.  The key word in this Holy Spirit inspired declaration is the word “whoever.”  Many translations use the word “everyone” (the ESV, NAS, NIV, NET, and the CSB).  The promise of God is that you will not be excluded.  It is “whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely.” (Rev. 22:17 NKJV)  God is “not willing that any should perish.” (2 Peter 3:9 NKJV) 

The only stipulation is that a person calls on the name of the Lord.  So what is involved in that?  Well, we know it is not saying to Jesus “Lord, Lord” for Jesus himself says, "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.” (Matt. 7:21 NKJV)

Do you suppose Peter in that first sermon might have told his audience what the Lord’s will for them was?  Yes, I think we would all agree upon that.  After he preached his sermon and it became evident many believed his message about Christ even to the point of asking what they could do about the sin they had committed against the Lord (Acts 2:37) Peter responded.  “Then Peter said to them, ‘Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.’” (Acts 2:38 NKJV)

In doing what they were instructed to do they had called upon the name of the Lord.  They were saved.  The scripture says, “Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them.” (Acts 2:41 NKJV)  Were they added to the saved or to the damned?  Let the reader answer.

Remember Peter earlier, in the beginning of his sermon, had told the crowd, “Whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.”  They are now saved.  Had they called on the name of the Lord?  What had they done?  Let the reader answer.  I ask this of the reader for it is easier to see the truth when we see it for ourselves versus someone else telling us what it is.  We need to reason it out for ourselves.

Calling on the name of the Lord means doing what God tells us to do with full faith that he will respond by doing what he told us he would do.  The people on the Day of Pentecost obeyed Peter’s spirit-inspired preaching of God’s will in faith that God would remit their sins if they would do so. (Acts 2:38)  God would do this for his spirit-inspired apostle said he would if they would do what he told them to do.

Paul’s own conversion experience is further confirmation of this truth.  Ananias in Acts 22:16 having been sent to Paul directly from God says to Paul, a man who because of his experience on the road to Damascus is already a believer and penitent, to “Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.” (Acts 22:16 NKJV) 

There are two very important points to be made here.  (1) Paul was not yet a saved man.  He still had sins to be washed away.  (2) He had not yet called upon the name of the Lord for if he had Peter told us in Acts 2 that all who do so are saved.

Ananias instructs Paul to call on the name of the Lord how -- by arising and being baptized.  If Ananias is correct that in being baptized Paul’s sins will be washed away making him sin-free Paul will then be a saved man.  If he is a saved man he is a man who has called on the name of the Lord.  God sent Ananias.  Ananias was not mistaken.

Neither Ananias nor Peter nor any other Christian believes there is anything magical in water to wash away sins.  There was no magic potent in the water of the Jordan River Naaman was instructed to bathe in to cure his leprosy in the Old Testament either.  The power lies in doing by faith what God tells you to do with faith believing if you do that God will do in turn what he promises as a result thereof.  Paul’s sins were washed away in water because of God’s promise.  “He who believes and is baptized will be saved.” (Mark 16:16 NKJV)  Such a person has called upon the name of the Lord.

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

This article was written in late May of 2023.

  

Are Paul's Writings as Authoritative as Jesus' Words?

Many years ago as a young man, I heard it said by a young lady of my own age that the apostle Paul just had a thing against women with the idea being that what he wrote on the subject of women had no authority but was merely the expression of personal prejudice on his part.  That young lady many years later became a preacher within her denominational body contrary to Paul's teaching on the subject in 1 Tim. 2:12.

Over the course of the many years that have transpired since that time, I have heard the same or similar comments regarding things Paul wrote.  It seems many believe he lacked the authority of Christ in the words he spoke or wrote.  That is the subject I wish to pursue in this article.  I add that the reality is that if what Paul wrote is not authoritative then we cannot stop there but have to go right down the line and ask about what Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, James, Peter, and Jude wrote. 

The truth of the matter is every single word of the New Testament excepting only those words added by translators for clarification (usually marked by being printed in italics) came directly from God the Father including the words of Jesus himself.  In John 1:1 Jesus is called "the Word" (NKJV) and he is recorded as saying, "He who rejects me, and does not receive my words, has that which judges him—the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day.  For I have not spoken on my own authority; but the Father who sent me gave me a command, what I should say and what I should speak.  And I know that his command is everlasting life. Therefore, whatever I speak, just as the Father has told me, so I speak." (John 12:48-50 NKJV)  He says again, "The word which you hear is not mine but the Father's who sent me." (John 14:24 NKJV)  One could add to these references but the point has been made. 

Before Jesus ascended back to heaven he promised to send the Holy Spirit to his apostles.  "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 things that I said to you." (John 14:26 NKJV)  "I will pray the Father, and he will give you another helper (the Holy Spirit--DS) … even the Spirit of truth." (John 14:16-17 NKJV)  "But when the helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, … he will testify of me." (John 15:26 NKJV)  Now here is where one needs to pay special attention.  Did the Holy Spirit speak free-lance style?  Listen carefully. 

"However, when he, the Spirit of truth, has come, he will guide you into all truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak; and he will tell you things to come.  He will glorify me, for he will take of what is mine and declare it to you.  All things that the Father has are mine.  Therefore I said that he will take of mine and declare it to you." (John 16:13-15 NKJV)  The apostles were commanded by Jesus to stay in Jerusalem until they were baptized with the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:4-5 NKJV).  That day came on the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2:1-4. 

The important thing to see thus far is the chain of command.  Even though God the Father, Jesus the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all one, all being equally God, they have an order in which they of their own accord have chosen to work.  Jesus, "being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made himself of no reputation, taking the form of a servant." (Philippians 2:6-7 NKJV)  Jesus thus submitted himself to God the Father and spoke only the Father's words.  When the Holy Spirit came after Jesus returned to heaven it is clear from the passage just quoted in the prior paragraph (John 16:13-15) that he did not originate truth for he did not speak on his own authority but spoke what he heard.  He glorified Jesus by taking what was of or from Jesus and declared it to them. 

Thus when an apostle spoke by means of the Holy Spirit he spoke not out of himself but rather spoke the very words of God.  Peter speaks of "those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven." (1 Peter 1:12 NKJV)  On the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2 Peter himself spoke just such a gospel sermon after the Holy Spirit fell on him and the other apostles.  Paul says, "No one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God.  Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.  These things we also speak, not in words which man's wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual." (1 Cor. 2:11-13 NKJV) 

If Paul was not an inspired writer (as well as a gospel preacher) then Peter was in error for he said of Paul's writings that some twisted them "to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the scriptures." (2 Peter 3:15 NKJV)  Not only does Peter compare Paul's writings with the rest of the scriptures but also says his writings can be twisted to one's destruction.  That would be a little hard to do if they were uninspired writings would it not?  If one recalls correctly Ananias was sent to Paul at his conversion with one reason being that Paul might be "filled with the Holy Spirit." (Acts 9:17 NKJV)  

Sometimes people latch on to a few statements made by Paul in 1 Cor. 7 and read into them more than they should in that they feel Paul is there giving uninspired advice or giving only his own judgment or opinion apart from any direction of the Spirit.  For example, Paul says in verse 12, "I, not the Lord, say," (NKJV) and then in verse 25 he says, "I have no commandment from the Lord; yet I give judgment as one whom the Lord in his mercy has made trustworthy." (1 Cor. 7:25 NKJV)  Well, is Paul trustworthy or not?  He closes this very chapter with these words, "According to my judgment—and I think I also have the Spirit of God." (1 Cor. 7:40 NKJV)  Do you think Paul had the Spirit of God?  Do you think he was questioning himself by making that statement?  You know better. 

Here is the bind that those get themselves into when they begin questioning scripture and taking some of it as inspired and other parts of it as not inspired—how do you decide which is which?  Are you that all wise and knowing so that you can declare beyond doubt that this scripture is inspired while that one is not?  How do the rest of us know you are that smart, even God-like, in your declarations?  How did you come to possess these mighty powers of discernment?  Maybe showing us a miracle would help the rest of us build confidence in you.  In New Testament times miracles were performed to confirm the word as being from God (Heb. 2:1-4).  We need confirmation of like nature if you are going to start cutting out scripture from the Bible for proof is needed that your word is from God when you do such cutting.   After all, you will be giving us a new Bible when your cutting is done. 

Needless to say, all such approaches to scripture end up being faith-destroying.  How do you have faith if you do not know what to have faith in and what not to have faith in?  Yes, I know these types proclaim their faith but genuine faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God (Rom. 10:17) and not by one's own “I think so.”  It does not come by one declaring himself to be God and thus able to give man the true scriptures versus the false ones. 

The bottom line ends up being that one either has to hold to the scriptures as being authoritative, and verbally inspired by God, or else he holds to the words of some man that declares otherwise but can work no miracle in proof of his declaration. 

In closing yes the words of Jesus in red are authoritative but no more so than the words in black in your New Testament for the truth is the source of all inspired writings is God the Father.  When Paul or Peter or whomever the New Testament writer was spoke with pen and ink or otherwise on matters of the faith his words came from the same source that Jesus' did while Jesus was on the earth.  The idea that Paul was writing for Paul's sake promoting his own doctrine contrary to what Jesus would have said is as unscriptural as it gets. 

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." (2 Tim. 3:16-17 NKJV) 

Postscript:  This article is not meant to imply that Bible translations, man-made, are infallible.  However, to the extent a translation accurately represents the original manuscripts of the New Testament, it is reliable.

 

[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.]