January 17, 2022

Things change by Gary Rose

 
 

This picture ( which is really four pictures made into one ) shows how the island changes with the passing seasons. We all know that the changing seasons alter how the world looks, but its nice to see something like this to remind us.


This morning as I took my dog Pal for a walk, the cold wind seemed to go right through me. I remembered the past summer with its 90 degree temperatures every day for months on end ( actually June to October [maybe even November]here in Florida ) and thought: This WILL CHANGE and by March it will be warmer again. Then the following passage of Scripture came to my mind and I smiled, for it is very, very true.

 

Ecclesiastes 3 ( World English Bible )

Ecc 3:1, For everything there is a season, and a time for every purpose under heaven:

Ecc 3:2, a time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted;

Ecc 3:3, a time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;

Ecc 3:4, a time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;

Ecc 3:5, a time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;

Ecc 3:6, a time to seek, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away;

Ecc 3:7, a time to tear, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;

Ecc 3:8, a time to love, and a time to hate; a time for war, and a time for peace.

Ecc 3:9, What profit has he who works in that in which he labors?

Ecc 3:10, I have seen the burden which God has given to the sons of men to be afflicted with.

Ecc 3:11, He has made everything beautiful in its time. He has also set eternity in their hearts, yet so that man can’t find out the work that God has done from the beginning even to the end.



Yes, everything in its own time; even the cold of winter. Here in Florida it does get cold ( perhaps a day or two of freezing temperatures ), but when you experience 90 degree temperatures for most of the year, it just seems colder. After all, I could still be living in upstate New York with snow piled high and temperatures below zero. Somehow, after thinking about that, verse 11 seems even more true. Look around, things change. This year, as the seasons change, will I determine in my heart to grow even closer to God and follow HIM with all my heart; every bit of it? I wonder if anyone else reading this feels the same?

"BAPTISM" Sprinkling, Pouring, Or Immersion? by Mark Copeland








"BAPTISM"

Sprinkling, Pouring, Or Immersion?

INTRODUCTION
  1. In the preaching and teaching of the apostles, we saw that baptism is essential to:
    1. Salvation - Mk 16:16; Ac 2:38; 22:16
    2. Becoming disciples of Christ - Mt 28:19-20; Ga 3:27
  2. But even when the necessity of baptism has been established, questions often remain:
    1. Is baptism to be immersion, pouring, or sprinkling?
    2. Should infants be baptized?
    3. Is there ever any reason to be "re-baptized?"

[This lesson examines the first of these questions: "Is baptism to be sprinkling, pouring or immersion?" Let's begin by examining...]

  1. THE GREEK WORDS FOR "BAPTIZE" AND "BAPTISM"
    1. THE WORDS ARE "BAPTIZO" AND "BAPTISMA"...
      1. Note that the words "baptize" and "baptism" are not actually TRANSLATIONS of the Greek words
      2. They are TRANSLITERATIONS (where Greek letters in a word are simply given their English equivalents)
      3. To confirm the actual meaning, we must go to authorities on the Greek language
    2. THE FOLLOWING GREEK LEXICONS DEFINE "BAPTIZE" AS "TO IMMERSE, TO PLUNGE, TO DIP"...
      1. Greek-English Lexicon Of The N.T. (THAYER)
      2. Greek-English Lexicon, 7th Edition (LIDDEL & SCOTT)
      3. Greek Lexicon Of The Roman And Byzantine Periods (SOPHOCLES)
      4. Biblio-Theological Lexicon Of N.T. Words (CREMER)
      5. To quote VINE'S EXPOSITORY DICTIONARY OF N.T. WORDS: "baptism, consisting of the processes of immersion, submersion and emergence"
    3. NOT ONE STANDARD GREEK LEXICON DEFINES "BAPTIZO" AS "SPRINKLE" OR "POUR"...
      1. In fact, there are completely different words in Greek for "pouring" (CHENO) and "sprinkling" (RAINO)
      2. It is important to keep in mind concerning "baptize" and "baptism":
        1. That they are simply "transliterations"
        2. That they were transliterated instead of translated in our Bibles to avoid offending those who practice pouring or sprinkling
        3. But when translated into English, they can only mean "to immerse" and "immersion"!
    4. WHAT ABOUT MODERN ENGLISH DICTIONARIES?
      1. It is true that they define baptism as sprinkling, pouring, or immersion
      2. But their definitions reflect common usage of words by people TODAY
      3. To know exactly what was meant by Jesus and His apostles, we must consult authorities who define how words were used IN BIBLICAL TIMES!

      [That of course is where Greek lexicons like those referenced to above are helpful. They define words according to their meaning at the time used by the New Testament writers. Now let's consider...]

  2. FIGURES OF SPEECH USED TO DESCRIBE BAPTISM
    1. BY PAUL IN ROMANS...
      1. In baptism, we are "buried with Him...into death" - Ro 6:3-4
      2. Baptism is a "likeness of his death" - Ro 6:5
    2. BY PAUL IN COLOSSIANS...
      1. In baptism, we are "buried with Him"
      2. "in which, you were also raised with Him" - Col 2:12
    3. WHICH ACTION (IMMERSION, POURING, SPRINKLING) IS:
      1. A "burial?"
      2. A "likeness of His death?"
      3. A "likeness of His resurrection?"
      -- Only immersion (followed by an emersion) fits Paul's description of baptism

    [Paul's use of such figures of speech would make no sense if baptism were either pouring or sprinkling. It is also interesting to note...]

  3. THE TESTIMONY OF VARIOUS SCHOLARS
    1. WHOSE DENOMINATIONS PRACTICE POURING OR SPRINKLING...
      1. EPISCOPALIAN
        1. "This passage (Ro 6:4) cannot be understood unless it be borne in mind that the primitive baptism was by immersion" - CONYBEARE & HOWSON (Life And Epistles Of St. Paul)
        2. "Baptism means immersion; and it was immersion...Unless it had been so, Paul's analogical argument about our being buried with Christ in baptism would have had no meaning. Nothing could have been simpler than baptism in its first form. When a convert declared his faith in Christ, he was taken at once to the nearest pool or stream of water and plunged into it, and henceforward he was recognized as one of the Christian community." - CUNNINGHAM (The Growth Of The Church)
        3. "Baptism is the grave of the old man and the birth of the new. As he sinks beneath the baptismal waters, the believer buries there all his corrupt affections and past sins; as he emerges thence he rises regenerate, quickened to new hopes and a new life. This baptism is an image of his participation both in the death and resurrection of Christ." - BISHOP LIGHTFOOT (Commentary)
      2. METHODIST
        1. "Alluding to the 'immersion' practiced in the case of 'adults,' wherein the person appeared to be buried under the water, as Christ was buried in the heart of the earth; His rising again the third day, and their emerging from the water, was an emblem of the resurrection of the body." - ADAM CLARKE (Commentary on Colossians 2:12)
        2. "'We are buried with him.' Alluding to the ancient manner of baptizing by immersion." - JOHN WESLEY (Notes)
      3. LUTHERAN
        1. "The sacrament of baptism was administered in this century (the first) without the public assemblies, in places appointed and prepared for that purpose, and was performed by an immersion of the whole body in the baptismal font." - MOSHEIM (Mosheim's Church History)
        2. "For the explanation of this figurative description of the baptismal rite, it is necessary to call attention to the well-known circumstance that in the early days of the church, persons, when baptized, were first plunged below and then raised above the water." - THOLUCK (Commentary on Romans)
      4. CATHOLIC - "For thirteen hundred years was baptism an immersion of the person under water." - BRENNER
    2. HOW DO THEY RECONCILE WITH THEIR DENOMINATIONS' PRACTICE?
      1. Since these scholars (and many others) admit and affirm that immersion is the only "form" of baptism taught in the Bible, are they to be charged with dishonesty and insincerity because they practiced "sprinkling" or "pouring"?
      2. Not necessarily; rather, they fell into the fallacy of assuming:
        1. Apostolic commands and examples are not binding
        2. Human wisdom may alter specific Bible teaching in what they call "rites" or "customs"
      3. But Jesus condemned the religious leaders of His day for making the same mistake! - Mt 15:1-9; Mk 7:1-13
        1. Laying aside the commandments of God, they were keeping traditions of men
        2. By keeping certain traditions, they were not keeping the commandments of God!
      4. When one practices pouring or sprinkling...
        1. They are keeping traditions of men, not the commandments of God
        2. They render the commandment of God to be immersed (baptized) of no effect!
      5. Though sincere, one is not necessarily right; we are right only when we do the Father's will! - Mt 7:21-23
        1. Love for Jesus will be manifested by keeping His commandments - Jn 14:15; 15:10,14
        2. Love for God is manifested the same way - 1Jn 5:3
CONCLUSION
  1. What have we learned?
    1. That the Greek words mean "immersion"
    2. That "sprinkling" or "pouring" is inconsistent with the FIGURES OF SPEECH used in the Bible to describe baptism
    3. That there is no question "immersion" was the mode of baptism in the Bible and the early church
  2. As a final confirmation, consider the account of Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch - Ac 8:35-39
    1. "both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water"
    2. "he baptized (immersed) him"
    3. "they came up out of the water"
  3. What of yourself?
    1. Was your baptism like that described in Ac 8:38-39?
    2. If you were sprinkled or had water poured upon you...
      1. You were keeping a tradition of man
      2. You have not yet kept the commandment of God!
  4. If you have not been baptized (immersed) as commanded by Jesus and His apostles...
    1. You are still in your sins! - Ac 2:38; 22:16
    2. You have not yet put on Christ and become His disciple! - Ga 3:27; Mt 28:18-20
    3. '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)

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2022

"BAPTISM" What About Infant Baptism? by Mark Copeland








"BAPTISM"

What About Infant Baptism?

INTRODUCTION
  1. In the previous studies we have seen that baptism...
    1. Is essential to:
      1. SALVATION - Mk 16:16; Ac 2:38; 22:16
      2. BECOMING DISCIPLES OF CHRIST - Mt 28:19-20; Ga 3:27
    2. Is immersion, for:
      1. The Greek words can only mean immersion
      2. Pouring and sprinkling do not fit with figures used to describe baptism in the N.T.
      3. Scholars are unanimous in pointing out that immersion was the practice in the Bible and early church
  2. Two more questions remain which are often in the minds of people:
    1. Should infants be baptized?
    2. Is there ever a need to be "re-baptized?"

[This study shall consider the question "What about infant baptism?" My first point is to suggest that...]

  1. "INFANT BAPTISM" IS NOT BIBLE BAPTISM
    1. BIBLE BAPTISM REQUIRES IMMERSION...
      1. We have seen that pouring or sprinkling is not baptism
      2. Therefore "infant baptism" as commonly practiced is really a misnomer
        1. "Infant pouring" or "infant sprinkling" would be a more accurate description
        2. Only if the infant is immersed could it be called "infant baptism"
        -- Of course, immersion is not the only thing which constitutes Bible baptism...
    2. BIBLE BAPTISM REQUIRES CERTAIN PREREQUISITES...
      1. Bible baptism requires FAITH - Ac 8:35-38
        1. Notice the eunuch's question, and Philip's response
          1. "See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?"
          2. "If you believe with all your heart, you may."
          -- If one believes, they may be baptized - cf. Mk 16:16
        2. Infants, however, are incapable of belief!
      2. Bible baptism requires REPENTANCE - Ac 2:38
        1. If one is a penitent believer, they may be baptized
        2. But infants are incapable of repentance!

        [The first thing to realize about "infant baptism" is that it is not baptism in the strict sense of the word; nor is it the baptism spoken of in the N.T., which was only for those who possessed faith and a penitent heart.

        Another point to consider is...]

  2. "INFANT BAPTISM" IS NOT NECESSARY
    1. THE RISE OF INFANT BAPTISM IN CHURCH HISTORY...
      1. Even those who later approved of infant baptism admit that one could not prove it from the Scriptures...
        1. "It cannot be proved by the sacred Scriptures that infant baptism was instituted by Christ, or begun by the first Christians after the apostles." (MARTIN LUTHER, On Rebaptism)
        2. "Infant baptism was established neither by Christ nor the apostles. In all places where we find the necessity of baptism notified, either in a dogmatic or historical point of view, it is evident that it was only meant for those who were capable of comprehending the word preached, and of being converted to Christ by an act of their own will." (JACOBI, Article on Baptism in Kitto's Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature, Vol. I, p. 287)
      2. If this is true, when did the practice of "infant baptism" begin?
        1. The earliest mention of infant baptism is around 200 A.D.
        2. The practice began only after the doctrine of "original sin" had been developed
          1. "The early theological development of the doctrine of original sin contributed to the importance of infant baptism." (Christianity Through The Centuries, p. 160)
          2. The whole basis of "infant baptism", therefore, lies in the assumption that infants are born in sin
    2. ARE BABIES BORN IN SIN?
      1. Of course, the doctrine of "original sin" means different things to different people
        1. Some understand it to refer only to inheriting the "fallen nature" of Adam, and not any personal guilt of his
        2. But the common conception includes the idea of inheriting the guilt of Adam's sin as well, meaning that babies are born in sin and guilty of sin
        3. It is this latter understanding that led to the practice of infant baptism
      2. People are not held accountable for the guilt of their forbears!
        1. God has clearly said that He does not hold the child guilty for the sins of the father - Ezek 18:20
        2. Paul described a time in his life when we was alive before he became a sinner - Ro 7:7-11
          1. According to the common idea of original sin, this would have been impossible!
          2. But not if children are born free from the guilt of sin and remain so until they reach an age of accountability
      3. Consider also the nature of the NEW COVENANT - He 8:6-13
        1. One of the notable features about the new covenant is:
          1. "None of them shall teach his neighbor, and none his brother, saying 'Know the Lord'..."
          2. "For all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them."
          -- In other words, no one enters into this new covenant without already knowing the Lord!
        2. Unlike the OLD COVENANT...
          1. Where people entered the covenant by virtue of birth into the family (Israel)
          2. Where males entered the covenant by virtue of circumcision when eight days old
          3. Where as they grew older they had to be taught to know the Lord!
        3. When "infant baptism" is practiced, this distinctive feature of the new covenant is no longer present!
          1. Children, who have supposedly entered a covenant relationship with the Lord, still need to be taught as they get older
          2. They have to be taught to know the Lord!
        4. This distinctive feature of the new covenant is true only when:
          1. Baptism (the means by which we enter a covenant relationship with the Lord today) is administered to penitent believers
          2. Those who enter the covenant have already been taught about the Lord (via the gospel of Christ)
CONCLUSION
  1. Should infants be baptized? The answer is "yes" if we can show...
    1. One example in the N.T. where infants were baptized
    2. That they meet the prerequisites of faith and repentance required of all those baptized in the N.T.
    3. That they can know the Lord somehow before they enter into the relationship baptism places them, and so do not need to be taught to know the Lord
  2. But the Biblical facts are...
    1. There is not one case of "infant baptism" in the N.T.!
    2. Only those who believe and have repented may be baptized!
    3. To baptize infants would make the point of He 8:11 without meaning!
  3. The logical conclusion from the Biblical evidence is that babies...
    1. Are born into this world without the personal guilt of their ancestors
    2. Are not lost and in need of salvation
    3. Are "safe" (not "saved," for they were never "lost")
    4. Remain safe until they reach an accountable age where they become guilty of their sins, and in need of salvation
  4. What if you were "baptized" as an infant?
    1. Most likely you were not actually baptized (immersed), simply "sprinkled"
    2. Even if immersed, it was not "Bible baptism", which requires faith and repentance
    -- Thus you are still in need of obeying the Word of the Lord!

Don't place your faith in the traditions of men, or in the doctrines of some church; place your faith in God's Word, and obey it accordingly!

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2022

"BAPTISM" What About "Re-Baptism?" by Mark Copeland

 








"BAPTISM"

What About "Re-Baptism?"

INTRODUCTION
  1. In our study of baptism we have seen that it is...
    1. Essential
      1. To salvation - Mk 16:16; Ac 2:38; 22:16
      2. To becoming disciples of Christ - Mt 28:19-20; Ga 3:27
    2. Immersion, not pouring or sprinkling
      1. The Greek words can only mean immersion
      2. Pouring and sprinkling do not fit the FIGURES used to describe baptism in the NT.
      3. Scholars are unanimous that immersion was the practice in the NT
    3. For penitent believers
      1. For sinners with faith in the Lord Jesus who have repented of their sins
      2. Not infants, who are incapable of faith and repentance
  2. Another question that is often raised: "Is there ever a need to be re-baptized?"
    1. What about those who were sprinkled?
    2. What about those baptized as infants?
    3. What about those baptized believing they were already saved?

[This study examines the question of re-baptism, first by noticing...]

  1. A CASE OF "RE-BAPTISM" IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
    1. RECORDED IN ACTS 19:1-5...
      1. Background information is found in Ac 18:24-28
        1. Apollos had been teaching the baptism of John
        2. But he himself was taught more accurately by Aquila and Priscilla
      2. Paul finds some "disciples" at Ephesus - Ac 19:1-3
      3. Upon further examination he has them "re-baptized" - Ac 19:4-5
    2. SOME OBSERVATIONS...
      1. They had been previously "baptized"
      2. But their baptism was lacking in some way
        1. Even though it was immersion
        2. Even though it was "for the remission of sins" - Mk 1:4
      3. But their baptism was not in the name of Jesus, i.e., by His authority - Ac 2:38; 10:48; 19:5
        1. Which would have been a baptism into the name of the Father, the Holy Spirit, and the Son - Mt 28:19
        2. Which would have been a baptism into the death of Christ, by which they would have been clothed with Christ - Ro 6:3-7; Ga 3:27
        -- Because their first "baptism" lacked an essential element, "re-baptism" was necessary!

      [May we not conclude that if an earlier "baptism" lacks some essential element, then "re-baptism" is necessary? To determine whether "re-baptism" is required of us, consider...]

  2. WHEN "RE-BAPTISM" IS APPROPRIATE
    1. FOUR "ELEMENTS" CONSTITUTE BIBLE BAPTISM...
      1. The proper mode: a burial (immersion) - Ro 6:3; Col 2:12
      2. The proper authority: in the name of Christ - Ac 19:5
      3. The proper purpose: for the remission of sins - Ac 2:38; 22:16
      4. The proper subject: a penitent believer - Ac 2:38; 8:37; Mk 16:16
    2. WHEN ONE ELEMENT WAS LACKING, "RE-BAPTISM" WAS COMMANDED...
      1. In Ac 19:1-5, the proper authority was lacking
      2. Even though their previous baptism had the right mode, purpose, and subject, "re-baptism" was commanded!
    3. APPLYING WHAT WE HAVE LEARNED...
      1. If we were baptized by sprinkling or pouring:
        1. As practiced by Catholics, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Methodists and others
        2. Our baptism lacked the proper mode (immersion)
        -- "Re-baptism" would be therefore be necessary
      2. If we were baptized by the authority of anyone other than Jesus:
        1. Such as Ellen G. White (Seventh Day Adventists), The Watch Tower Society (Jehovah Witnesses), Joseph Smith (Mormons), and others
        2. Our baptism was not by the right authority (Jesus Christ)
        -- "Re-baptism" would be therefore be necessary
      3. If we were baptized as a public confession of faith (thinking we were already saved):
        1. As practiced by most Baptists, Assemblies Of God and others
        2. Our baptism was not for the right purpose (remission of sins)
        -- "Re-baptism" would be required to ensure we have been scripturally baptized
      4. Finally, if we were baptized but were not penitent believers:
        1. As is the case when people are baptized...
          1. When all their friends are doing it
          2. Because their spouse, fiancé, or parents are pressuring them to do it (and they do it to please them, not God)
          3. As infants incapable of faith or repentance
        2. Our baptism was lacking the right subjects (penitent believers)
        -- Our need for "re-baptism" would be just as great as any other!
CONCLUSION
  1. In summarizing what has been said in this study:
    1. If our baptism lack any of the four essential elements of Bible baptism...
      1. The proper mode - immersion
      2. The proper authority - Jesus Christ
      3. The proper purpose - for remission of sins
      4. The proper subject - a penitent believer
    2. Then "re-baptism" is both appropriate and necessary to ensure that our sins have been washed away by the blood of Jesus!
  2. But perhaps I should clarify:
    1. When one is baptized because their "first" baptism lacked an essential element...
      1. It is not really "re-baptism"!
      2. Technically speaking, the person is being baptized scripturally for the first time!
    2. When one has been scripturally baptized once...
      1. There is never a need to be baptized again!
      2. For once we have clothed ourselves with Christ in baptism:
        1. The blood of Christ continually cleanses us of our sins
        2. As we repent and confess our sins to God in prayer - Ac 8:22; 1Jn 1:9

Have you been scripturally baptized? If you desire assistance, please feel free to let me know! May God bless you in your efforts to do His Will!

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2022

How should believers deal with risk? by Roy Davison

 
 

http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Davison/Roy/Allen/1940/202103-Risks.html


How should believers deal with risk?

In the Scriptures God teaches us how to deal with risks.

We are subject to chance.

Solomon observed: “I returned and saw under the sun that - The race is not to the swift, Nor the battle to the strong, Nor bread to the wise, Nor riches to men of understanding, Nor favor to men of skill; But time and chance happen to them all. For man also does not know his time: Like fish taken in a cruel net, Like birds caught in a snare, So the sons of men are snared in an evil time, When it falls suddenly upon them” (Ecclesiastes 9:11, 12).

“Time and chance happen to them all.” Life involves risks and the Scriptures tell us how to deal with these risks.

We are liable for preventable risks.

“When you build a new house, then you shall make a parapet for your roof, that you may not bring guilt of bloodshed on your household if anyone falls from it” (Deuteronomy 22:8).

Most houses at that time had flat roofs that were used as living space. A wall around the edge of the roof was required to prevent people from falling off.

Love for our fellowman motivates us to make conditions as safe as we can. If we fail to take reasonable safety precautions in a dangerous situation, we are morally and sometimes even legally responsible for resultant damage or loss of life.

Once when I was driving along a rural road, I suddenly saw a child - barely big enough to walk - standing in the middle of the road! I stopped, took him by the hand and said: “Come! I’ll take you to your mother!” When I went around the house, his mother first reacted very negatively. Someone had her child by the hand! I explained that he had been standing in the middle of the road.

Fortunately, I saw that little boy and was able to stop. But what if I couldn’t stop because I was recklessly speeding?

Even if you drive very carefully, bad things can happen. Once at night in Holland, a cyclist suddenly shot in front of our car. He was supposed to yield but did not. In the dark I did not see him at all until he was in front of the car. By braking very hard, I barely missed him.

I know a brother whose wife, sister and two children were all killed when they were crossing a road. They were hit by two teenage boys who were racing. At high speed their cars came over the hill, side by side in both lanes.

Jesus teaches His followers to avoid unnecessary risks.

“Agree with your adversary quickly, while you are on the way with him, lest your adversary deliver you to the judge, the judge hand you over to the officer, and you be thrown into prison. Assuredly, I say to you, you will by no means get out of there till you have paid the last penny” (Matthew 5:25, 26).

“Or what king, going to make war against another king, does not sit down first and consider whether he is able with ten thousand to meet him who comes against him with twenty thousand? Or else, while the other is still a great way off, he sends a delegation and asks conditions of peace” (Luke 14:31, 32).

Risks do not justify laziness.

“The lazy man says, ‘There is a lion in the road! A fierce lion is in the streets!’” (Proverbs 26:13). This lazy man is using a fictitious or at least a very improbable risk as an excuse for not going to work.

In the parable of the talents, the master expects his servants to trade with the resources entrusted to them, which involves risk. The master said to the man who hid his talent in the ground: “You wicked and lazy servant” (Matthew 25:26).

Risks may not be misused as an excuse for being lazy.

Diversification reduces risk.

“He who observes the wind will not sow, And he who regards the clouds will not reap. As you do not know what is the way of the wind, Or how the bones grow in the womb of her who is with child, So you do not know the works of God who makes everything. In the morning sow your seed, And in the evening do not withhold your hand; For you do not know which will prosper, Either this or that, Or whether both alike will be good” (Ecclesiastes 11:4-6).

God’s providence does not justify recklessness.

In Psalm 91 “He who dwells in the secret places of the Most High” is given wonderful promises of God’s protection. The devil misapplied verses 10 to 12 to tempt Christ. “Then the devil took Him up into the holy city, set Him on the pinnacle of the temple, and said to Him, ‘If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down. For it is written: “He shall give His angels charge over you,” and, “In their hands they shall bear you up, Lest you dash your foot against a stone.”’ Jesus said to him, ‘It is written again, “You shall not tempt the Lord your God”’” (Matthew 4:5-7).

Sometimes arrogant people criticize a careful believer for allegedly “not having enough faith”.

Having complete trust in the promises of God does not mean that we may be careless: “A prudent man foresees evil and hides himself, but the simple pass on and are punished” (Proverbs 22:3). From this passage we learn that it is foolish to ignore risks, that a wise person foresees risks and takes appropriate precautions, and that failure to do so, has bad consequences.

We must pray for protection. But God expects us to take measures to reduce risk! Jesus warned His followers to flee from Jerusalem to avoid the siege of the city (Luke 20:20, 21).

Misfortune does not indicate God’s disapproval.

Job’s so-called friends thought the terrible things that had happened to him meant that he must have committed some secret sin for which God was punishing him.

This was untrue because Job’s righteousness was the very reason he was being tested so severely!

Christians risk their life to save others.

A Christian girl I knew in university died because she went back into their burning house to try to save her little brother.

Paul wrote: “Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus, who risked their own necks for my life” (Romans 16:3, 4).

Christians risk their life to follow Christ.

Jesus said, “If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me. For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it” (Matthew 16:24, 25).

Barnabas and Paul are called “men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Acts 15:26).

What have we learned?

God teaches us how to deal with risks:
- We are liable for preventable risks.
- Jesus teaches us to avoid unnecessary risks.
- Risks do not justify laziness.
- Diversification reduces risk.
- God’s providence does not justify recklessness.
- Misfortune does not indicate God’s disapproval.
- Christians risk their life to save others.
- Christians risk their life to follow Christ.
Amen.

Roy Davison

Hebrews 10:22 and the Necessity of Baptism by Dave Miller, Ph.D

Hebrews 10:22 and the Necessity of Baptism

From Issue: R&R – November 2021

[Editor’s Note: This article is excerpted from AP’s book Baptism & the Greek Made Simple.]

Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way which He consecrated for us, through the veil, that is, His flesh, and having a High Priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful (Hebrews 10:19-23).

In addition to the host of passages that explicitly affirm the essentiality of water baptism for salvation, the grammar of Hebrews 10:22 provides additional verification. “Let us draw near,” or as Greek scholar Kenneth Wuest renders it, “let us keep on drawing near,”1 is a present middle/passive subjunctive verb used for exhortation—a “hortatory subjective.”2 This drawing nearer to God is to be accompanied by “a true heart in full assurance of faith.” The term rendered “full assurance” refers to a “state of complete certainty, full assurance, certainty.”3 The recipients of the book already possessed faith (when they became Christians), but they now needed to mature their faith and bring it to a more complete state of assurance, conviction, and certainty (particularly since they were tending to revert back to their Jewish conceptions).4 This admonition is followed by two Perfect passive participles.5 The Perfect tense in Greek connotes “completed action with a resulting state of being.” Perfect passive participles describe action that is either coincident with or antecedent to the principal verb.6 Hence, the actions of “having been sprinkled” and “having been washed” occurred before the admonition to “keep on drawing near to God.” As Marcus Dods explains: “These participles express not conditions of approach to God which are yet to be achieved, but conditions already possessed.”7 Mounce conveys the thrust of the perfect passive participle even more forcefully: “since our hearts have been….”8 The following two participles, therefore, refer back to the point in time of their conversion—when they accessed the “blood of Jesus” (vs. 19). As Carl Moll noted in his comments on verse 22: “We thus refer the language, not to sanctification, but to justification on the ground of a propitiation.”9

The first participle speaks of “having had our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience.”10 In keeping with the subject matter of Hebrews, the notion of “sprinkled” undoubtedly harks back to and echoes the Law of Moses practice of sprinkling people and objects with various liquids (including water as well as blood) for purification purposes. However, it is a physical impossibility for one literally to sprinkle his heart, mind, and conscience. Hence, the writer is using figurative language. But how/when did they “sprinkle their hearts”? The answer lies in the fact that before one can become a Christian, one must alter his heart and mind, i.e., repent (Luke 13:3,5; Acts 2:38; 3:19; et al.). The Greek term for “repentance” literally means “a change of mind.”11 So the author and recipients of the book of Hebrews came to faith in Christ, and then repented of their sins. If, instead, the “sprinkling” here refers to the cleansing power of Christ’s blood, the design of baptism remains the same, since the two participles indicate coincident (with each other) actions. The former possible meaning is inviting since Romans 6 distinguishes between the “death” to sin that occurs in the mind of the prospective convert at the point of repentance which precedes the spiritual death or termination of sin which occurs in the mind of God at the point of burial in water.

The next participle, which describes action that occurred coincident with the sprinkling, adds “having had our body washed with pure water” (again, Wuest’s literal rendering). Observe that the use of the term “body” (singular-soma), not sarx (“flesh”) indicates a literal washing of the physical body with H2O—unlike the figurative use of sprinkling in the previous participle.12 The only activity associated with Christianity that involves water applied to the body is baptism. Lenski insisted that “the New Testament knows of only one washing, namely baptism.”13 Writing in the 19th century, Robert Milligan noted: “Indeed, nearly all eminent expositors are now agreed that there is here a manifest reference to the ordinance of Christian baptism.”14 To summarize, in Hebrews 10:22, the inspired writer urges his Christian audience to continue to draw closer to God, even as they had commenced that approach when they first believed, repented of their sins, and were baptized.

One other observation that merits consideration: in the very next verse, the writer admonishes his readers to “hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering.” The term “confession” is the noun form (homologian) of the verb that means to confess. The New Testament plainly declares that one of the prerequisites to initial salvation/forgiveness—in addition to faith, repentance, and baptism—is oral confession with the mouth (Romans 10:9-10). Macknight rightly notes: “The apostle in this exhortation referred to that confession of their hope of salvation through Christ, which the primitive Christians made at baptism.”15 If that is the confession that the writer has in mind in verse 23, then the writer alludes to all four prerequisites to salvation in two verses: faith, repentance, confession, and baptism.

Endnotes

1 Kenneth Wuest (2002 reprint), The New Testament: An Expanded Translation (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans), p. 529; Also R.C.H. Lenski (2001 reprint), The Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and of the Epistle of James (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson), p. 347.

2 William Davis (1923), Beginner’s Grammar of the Greek New Testament (New York: Harper & Row), p. 76; H.E. Dana and Julius Mantey (1955), A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament (Toronto: Macmillan), p. 171; Ray Summers (1950), Essentials of New Testament Greek (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press), p. 108).

3 Frederick Danker, rev. and ed. (2000), A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature (Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press), p. 827.

4 See the meaning in Colossian 2:2 and Hebrews 6:11, as well as the verb form used in Romans 4:21, Colossians 4:12, and Romans 14:5.

5 Summers, p. 103; Davis, p. 156.

6 Davis, p. 157.

7 Marcus Dods (no date), “The Epistle to the Hebrews,” in The Expositor’s Greek Testament, ed. W. Robertson Nicoll (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans), 4:346-347, emp. added.

8 Robert Mounce and William Mounce (2011), The Mounce Reverse-Interlinear New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan), emp. added. See also NCV and ISV.

9 Carl Moll (1870), The Epistle to the Hebrews (New York: Charles Scribner), p. 175, italics in orig.

10 Translated by Wuest, p. 529.

11 Danker, p. 640.

12 See Henry Alford (1874), Alford’s Greek Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1980 reprint), 4:196.

13 p. 350.

14 Robert Milligan (1950), The New Testament Commentary: Epistle to the Hebrews (Nashville, TN: Gospel Advocate), 9:282-283.

15 James MacKnight (no date), A New Literal Translation, from the Original Greek of all the Apostolical Epistles (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker), p. 556, emp. added.

Worship God by Ken Weliever, The Preacherman

https://thepreachersword.com/2012/01/15/worship-god-2/#more-224

Worship God

           A husband and wife were on the way home from worship one Sunday morning.  As they rode along, the wife asked her husband, “Did you see that woman in the front row showing off her Liz Claiborne suit?”

            He said, “No.”

           Well, “Did you see that man on our left–the one wearing that gaudy sport jacket that clashed with his slacks?”

            “No, I didn’t.” her husband replied.

            Then she asked, “Well, surely you noticed that young man to our right with the tattoo, wearing an ear-ring?”

            Her husband looked up and in a quiet tone, with an embarrassed expression of what he was about to confess said, “Honey, to be honest with you, I dozed off during worship this morning.

            His wife, in a huffy tone,  then rebuked him saying, Well!! A lot of good worship does you!”

            Today, as we prepare to attend a worship service, what are you looking at?  Who are you focused on? Why are you there?

            When John received the Revelation on Patmos he was enthralled. It was an incredible, amazing, breathtaking panorama of events that the angelic messenger unfolded before his eyes.  We can understand how John might in the excitement of the moment fall down to worship the angel.

            But the heavenly host said, “Do not do it!   I am a fellow servant with you and with your brothers who hold to the testimony of Jesus.”  Then he admonished the apostle with a simple two-word command:  “Worship God!”  (Rev. 19:10)

            There are temptations for us to worship an object or a person other than God.  There are distractions that can take our focus away from God.  There are emotions that may even make worship seem to be a satisfying end within itself. But the angel reminds us, as he did John:  Worship God!

            Today as we all join fellow Christians in worship, may we sing with the spirit and the understanding. Pray with our eyes focused on the throne of God. Give as we have purposed in our hearts to minister God’s work.  Really commune with Christ as we eat the supper.  And apply the preaching of God’s Word to our own lives.  All that we do today in our worship services is focused on one grand objective. One supreme reason.  One ultimate aim.

            Can you hear the herald exclaim?  “Worship God!”