Written by Max Patterson, this appeared in the April 1, 1982 edition of the Gospel Advocate.
Perhaps no passage in the New Testament is neglected and misinterpreted more than Mark 16:16. Yet, from any approach of study, it is one of the plainest and easiest of all passages to understand. In this article I shall set out this simplicity in three approaches to explaining this passage.
The first approach to explaining Mark 16:16 is to read the passage and use common judgment in determining its meaning. "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." There are two factors mentioned in the verse, belief and baptism, that are necessary to obtaining the desired result of being saved. This salvation is from our past sins.
The passage under consideration is a statement of the Holy Spirit and is parallel to saying, "He that eateth and digesteth food shall live; but he that eateth not shall die." It would seem obvious that there are two things in this parallel sentence that must be done in order to live, that is, we must eat food and digest it. So it is with Mark 16:16. We must believe and be baptized to be saved.
Someone may object, "but it does not say, 'he that believeth not and is baptized not shall be damned.'" There is no point in talking about digesting food that has never been eaten. Just so, there is no need to talk about baptizing someone who does not believe. The passage reads, therefore, "he that believeth not shall be damned," not, "he that believeth not and is not baptized shall be damned." Obviously, if one does not believe, he is not in a position to be baptized. In fact, it would be wrong to baptize someone who did not believe. The real meaning of the passage is that we must believe and be baptized and salvation will result.
Some have attempted to evade the force of this verse by the use of a pseudo parallel sentence, "He that getteth on a train and is seated shall arrive in Chicago." The allegation would then be that while it was true that one must get on the train, one did not necessarily have to be seated in order to arrive in Chicago. According to those making this pseudo parallel, one is saved at the point of faith, prior to and without baptism. But, this claim renders ridiculous the alleged parallel. The illustration, to be true to their belief, would need to say, "the one who gets on a train is already in Chicago before he has time to be seated," a remarkable feat indeed. That which proves too much does not prove anything. The error lies in the effort to explain away a clear fact of the Bible by an illustration. I believe the reader can see that the sentence does not void the force of our Lord's teaching.
A second approach to an understanding of Mark 16:16 is to discuss the verse from the standpoint of English grammar. The first half of the verse is a complex sentence with two clauses, one independent and one subordinate. The independent clause is "He shall be saved." "He" is the subject and "shall be saved" is the verb. Who shall be saved? He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. "That" is a relative pronoun whose antecedent is "he" and serves as the subject of the subordinate clause, "that believeth and is baptized." "Believeth and is baptized" is the compound predicate of "that" and this subordinate clause serves as an adjective that describes who the "he" is. It is not just any "he" that shall be saved but rather, the one who believes and is baptized shall be saved.
Notice also the coordinating conjunction "and." This places the verbs "believeth" and "baptized" on the same level and shows that both are equally necessary to accomplish salvation.
A third way to approach an understanding of Mark 16:16 is from the original language. In the Greek, "believeth" is an aorist active participle and "baptized" is an aorist passive participle. Literally the sentence reads, "The one having believed and the one having been baptized shall be saved."
It is a well known fact among Greke grammarians that the aorist participle represents action taking place before the action of the leading verb, no matter what the tense of the leading verb is. Machen, in his New Testament Greek for Beginners, says, "the aorist participle denotes action prior to the action denoted by the leading verb, whether the action denoted by the leading verb is past, present or future" (Page 116). In the case of the sentence under consideration, the leading verb "shall be saved" is future tense. The action of believing and being baptized is action taking place before the action of the leading verb. Therefore, it is impossible to conclude anything else on the basis of the grammar, except that believing and being baptized must take place before one is saved.
The conclusion from all of this discussion is that it does not matter from what standpoint one views Mark 16:16. The truth is, it sets forth the good news of the Lord's Great Commission and the requirements of those wanting to be saved. The only way around the verb is to deny it. Yet, even then, the verse still says what it says, and teaches what it teaches.
Monday, August 7, 2017
Saturday, August 5, 2017
"Eis"
This short article was written by Ed Boggess and appeared in the July 15, 1982 edition of the Gospel Advocate.
In Acts 2:38, the preposition translated "for" (KJV) or "unto" (ASV) is the Greek word "eis." It is characteristic of this preposition that it always points forward. Thus, Acts 2:38 says that a man repents and is baptized for the purpose of receiving remission of sins. However, this is precisely the point of contention in religious discussions with those who refuse the essentiality of baptism.
Since they cannot grant the normal meaning of "eis" in Acts 2:38 and still consistently maintain the doctrine that baptism is non-essential, they "discovered" a new meaning for the preposition which they call the "casual eis." It is argued that the "eis" in Acts 2:38 means "because of." For example, a footnote to this verse in the Ryrie Study Bible claims, "Water baptism is the outward sign of repentance and remission of sins. The remission is through faith in Christ, not through the act of baptism (for may here mean 'because of' as in Matthew 12:41)."
However, note that this manufactured meaning of Acts 2:38 does not resolve their problem, instead it multiplies their trouble. For now they must not only try to justify an invented meaning of "eis," they must also explain how remission of sin is received before repentance. If "for" is changed to "because of" then remission of sins is prior to and the cause of both repentance and baptism. However, this runs contrary to their own doctrine that one first repents, then receives remission of sins, then is baptized. The old adage, that which proves too much proves nothing at all, would certainly apply here.
Nevertheless, other highly respected scholars of that persuasion, A.T. Robertson, J.R. Mantey, have vigorously defended a casual use of "eis" in the New Testament. In spite of their best arguments, the consensus of scholarly thought rejects their position. Evidence of this is seen in the following quotation from the recently published New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. "Can eis be retrospective, giving the cause, as well as prospective defining the purpose or result? Such a sense for eis seems unlikely in any one of the passages sometimes adduced...Liddell-Scott list no casual use of eis." (Vol. 3, p. 11187, "Prepositions and Theology in the Greek New Testament," M.J. Harris, see also p. 1208-9)
When I read this I jotted it down in the margin of my Bible and pass it on with the though others may want to do the same.
In Acts 2:38, the preposition translated "for" (KJV) or "unto" (ASV) is the Greek word "eis." It is characteristic of this preposition that it always points forward. Thus, Acts 2:38 says that a man repents and is baptized for the purpose of receiving remission of sins. However, this is precisely the point of contention in religious discussions with those who refuse the essentiality of baptism.
Since they cannot grant the normal meaning of "eis" in Acts 2:38 and still consistently maintain the doctrine that baptism is non-essential, they "discovered" a new meaning for the preposition which they call the "casual eis." It is argued that the "eis" in Acts 2:38 means "because of." For example, a footnote to this verse in the Ryrie Study Bible claims, "Water baptism is the outward sign of repentance and remission of sins. The remission is through faith in Christ, not through the act of baptism (for may here mean 'because of' as in Matthew 12:41)."
However, note that this manufactured meaning of Acts 2:38 does not resolve their problem, instead it multiplies their trouble. For now they must not only try to justify an invented meaning of "eis," they must also explain how remission of sin is received before repentance. If "for" is changed to "because of" then remission of sins is prior to and the cause of both repentance and baptism. However, this runs contrary to their own doctrine that one first repents, then receives remission of sins, then is baptized. The old adage, that which proves too much proves nothing at all, would certainly apply here.
Nevertheless, other highly respected scholars of that persuasion, A.T. Robertson, J.R. Mantey, have vigorously defended a casual use of "eis" in the New Testament. In spite of their best arguments, the consensus of scholarly thought rejects their position. Evidence of this is seen in the following quotation from the recently published New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. "Can eis be retrospective, giving the cause, as well as prospective defining the purpose or result? Such a sense for eis seems unlikely in any one of the passages sometimes adduced...Liddell-Scott list no casual use of eis." (Vol. 3, p. 11187, "Prepositions and Theology in the Greek New Testament," M.J. Harris, see also p. 1208-9)
When I read this I jotted it down in the margin of my Bible and pass it on with the though others may want to do the same.
Friday, August 4, 2017
The Tabernacle
Eugene Springer wrote this brief history of the tabernacle. It appeared in the January 22, 1981 edition of the Gospel Advocate.
We very seldom hear anyone refer to or trace the history of the tabernacle. Usually the individual will trace the ark of the Covenant instead. We want to trace the tabernacle.
After the children of Israel crossed the Red Sea and came to Mt. Sinai, they were given the law and the tabernacle was built. The tabernacle was moved about, as the children of Israel moved until they divided the land of Canaan for the tribes. At the time of the dividing of the land, the tabernacle was set up at Shiloh (Joshua 18:1). The tabernacle, with the ark of the the Covenant remained at Shiloh until 1 Samuel 4, when Israel was fighting the Philistines. The children of Israel took the ark of the Covenant out of the tabernacle at Shiloh and brought it to Ebenezer (the battlefield), where the Philistines captured it. After the problems the Philistines had, which are described in 1 Samuel 5, they sent the ark of the Covenant back. They sent it to Kirjath-jearim, where it remained for the next 20 years (1 Samuel 7:2).
The place of the tabernacle after the capture of the ark is not given, but Samuel, who was a prophet and priest, was at Gilgal. Samuel judged the people at Bethel, Gilgal and Mizpah (1 Samuel 7:16). Saul was installed as king at Gilgal (1 Samuel 11:15).
The next mention of the tabernacle is at Nob in 1 Samuel 21:1. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia describes Nob as, "a city just north of Jerusalem, between Jerusalem and Anathoth." While David was fleeing from Saul, he came to Nob and to the tabernacle. This is where he ate the shew-bread of the tabernacle (1 Samuel 21:3-6) and David was given Goliath's sword (1 Samuel 21:9). When Saul learned the priests had helped David, he had all the priests killed, only one escaped (1 Samuel 22:9-20). In this passage Nob is called the city of priests.
The tabernacle is moved from Nob to Gibeon, probably by Saul. Later, when David is king, he brings the ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem from Kirjath-jearim. David builds a tabernacle for the ark of the Covenant at Jerusalem (1 Chronicles 15:1-3, 2 Samuel 6:12-18). We now have two tabernacles, one at Jerusalem with the ark (1 Chronicles 16:10 and the original one at Gibeon with the alter (1 Chronicles 16:39).
The tabernacles at Gibeon and Jerusalem were both used until the temple was built by Solomon. The original alter was at Gibeon and the ark of the Covenant was at Jerusalem. Solomon went to Gibeon to offer sacrifices (1 Kings 3:4). The Lord appeared to Solomon in 1 Kings 3 at Gibeon and Solomon went to Jerusalem and stood before the ark of the Covenant (1 Kings 3:15).
After Solomon built the temple, the services at Gibeon were stopped because the tabernacle and the ark were placed in the temple (1 Kings 8:4).
We very seldom hear anyone refer to or trace the history of the tabernacle. Usually the individual will trace the ark of the Covenant instead. We want to trace the tabernacle.
After the children of Israel crossed the Red Sea and came to Mt. Sinai, they were given the law and the tabernacle was built. The tabernacle was moved about, as the children of Israel moved until they divided the land of Canaan for the tribes. At the time of the dividing of the land, the tabernacle was set up at Shiloh (Joshua 18:1). The tabernacle, with the ark of the the Covenant remained at Shiloh until 1 Samuel 4, when Israel was fighting the Philistines. The children of Israel took the ark of the Covenant out of the tabernacle at Shiloh and brought it to Ebenezer (the battlefield), where the Philistines captured it. After the problems the Philistines had, which are described in 1 Samuel 5, they sent the ark of the Covenant back. They sent it to Kirjath-jearim, where it remained for the next 20 years (1 Samuel 7:2).
The place of the tabernacle after the capture of the ark is not given, but Samuel, who was a prophet and priest, was at Gilgal. Samuel judged the people at Bethel, Gilgal and Mizpah (1 Samuel 7:16). Saul was installed as king at Gilgal (1 Samuel 11:15).
The next mention of the tabernacle is at Nob in 1 Samuel 21:1. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia describes Nob as, "a city just north of Jerusalem, between Jerusalem and Anathoth." While David was fleeing from Saul, he came to Nob and to the tabernacle. This is where he ate the shew-bread of the tabernacle (1 Samuel 21:3-6) and David was given Goliath's sword (1 Samuel 21:9). When Saul learned the priests had helped David, he had all the priests killed, only one escaped (1 Samuel 22:9-20). In this passage Nob is called the city of priests.
The tabernacle is moved from Nob to Gibeon, probably by Saul. Later, when David is king, he brings the ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem from Kirjath-jearim. David builds a tabernacle for the ark of the Covenant at Jerusalem (1 Chronicles 15:1-3, 2 Samuel 6:12-18). We now have two tabernacles, one at Jerusalem with the ark (1 Chronicles 16:10 and the original one at Gibeon with the alter (1 Chronicles 16:39).
The tabernacles at Gibeon and Jerusalem were both used until the temple was built by Solomon. The original alter was at Gibeon and the ark of the Covenant was at Jerusalem. Solomon went to Gibeon to offer sacrifices (1 Kings 3:4). The Lord appeared to Solomon in 1 Kings 3 at Gibeon and Solomon went to Jerusalem and stood before the ark of the Covenant (1 Kings 3:15).
After Solomon built the temple, the services at Gibeon were stopped because the tabernacle and the ark were placed in the temple (1 Kings 8:4).
What Are We Saying?
This timeless article about church attendance was written by M.N. Fox. It appeared in the June 17, 1982 edition of the Gospel Advocate.
A problem has developed throughout the brotherhood and is common in nearly all congregations. The problem is non-attendance at the evening services on the Lord's day and at the midweek Bible study.
When you are tempted to neglect the evening services, seriously ponder what your absence is saying.
To the preacher, "You do not have anything worthwhile to tell me. It would be a waste of my time to attend a service and listen to your sermon. I know that you have been given a charge, 'to preach the word, be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine' (2 Timothy 4:2) but, I am not going to give you an opportunity to fulfill that charge!"
To the elders, "I do not respect your authority (Hebrews 13:17). You are not going to tell me what to do! I know that you have scheduled these services for the benefit of every Christian, yet I will not attend. I know these services are methods used by the elders to fulfill their responsibilities of feeding the church of God (Acts 20:28) yet the food you are offering is not palatable to me so I will not 'eat' of it. I know you 'watch for my soul' (Hebrews 13:17) but I am not as concerned as you."
To the members of the congregation, "I do not value your company; you have nothing to offer me, my associates of the world (1 Corinthians 15:13) are far more important to me than any member of the church." Furthermore, it is saying, " I really do not want to be a fellow citizen with you; I really do not want to be a part of the household of God" (Ephesians 2:19).
To our children, "I do not want to 'train you up in the way that you should go' (Proverbs 22:6). I really do not care if I provoke you to wrath or if I relinquish the responsibility of bringing you up 'in the nurture and admonition of the Lord' (Ephesians 6:4). I want you to realize that things of this world are very important because I know that if you treasure worldly things, your heart will be worldly (Matthew 6:19-20). I am not interested in my own spiritual growth; consequently, I am not interested in your spiritual growth (Hebrews 5:11-14). I plan to ignore the admonition to grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord (1 Peter 3:18) and I would prefer if you did likewise!"
To the non-Christian, "I will be your brother in the world (John 17:14) because I believe that you are right in following the god of this world instead of the God of heaven (1 Corinthians 4:4). The entertainment and pleasures you offer are far more important to me than those spiritual blessings provided at the assembly. You are correct, the church has little to offer me, I will conform to the world" (Romans 12:2, 1 John 2:15-17).
To the Lord, "I will not make you King of my life (Revelation 15:3), I am not concerned about your body (Colossians 1:18) and I will not glorify you as King (1 Timothy 1:17). I do not appreciate your death on the cross of Calvary, I do not appreciate the better and lasting covenant that you have made possible; therefore, I will not submit to God nor to you as the reigning King" (James 4:7, 1 Corinthians 15:24).
These are serious matters! We may not intend to be saying so much by our negligence; but, it is a fact that we are!
A problem has developed throughout the brotherhood and is common in nearly all congregations. The problem is non-attendance at the evening services on the Lord's day and at the midweek Bible study.
When you are tempted to neglect the evening services, seriously ponder what your absence is saying.
To the preacher, "You do not have anything worthwhile to tell me. It would be a waste of my time to attend a service and listen to your sermon. I know that you have been given a charge, 'to preach the word, be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine' (2 Timothy 4:2) but, I am not going to give you an opportunity to fulfill that charge!"
To the elders, "I do not respect your authority (Hebrews 13:17). You are not going to tell me what to do! I know that you have scheduled these services for the benefit of every Christian, yet I will not attend. I know these services are methods used by the elders to fulfill their responsibilities of feeding the church of God (Acts 20:28) yet the food you are offering is not palatable to me so I will not 'eat' of it. I know you 'watch for my soul' (Hebrews 13:17) but I am not as concerned as you."
To the members of the congregation, "I do not value your company; you have nothing to offer me, my associates of the world (1 Corinthians 15:13) are far more important to me than any member of the church." Furthermore, it is saying, " I really do not want to be a fellow citizen with you; I really do not want to be a part of the household of God" (Ephesians 2:19).
To our children, "I do not want to 'train you up in the way that you should go' (Proverbs 22:6). I really do not care if I provoke you to wrath or if I relinquish the responsibility of bringing you up 'in the nurture and admonition of the Lord' (Ephesians 6:4). I want you to realize that things of this world are very important because I know that if you treasure worldly things, your heart will be worldly (Matthew 6:19-20). I am not interested in my own spiritual growth; consequently, I am not interested in your spiritual growth (Hebrews 5:11-14). I plan to ignore the admonition to grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord (1 Peter 3:18) and I would prefer if you did likewise!"
To the non-Christian, "I will be your brother in the world (John 17:14) because I believe that you are right in following the god of this world instead of the God of heaven (1 Corinthians 4:4). The entertainment and pleasures you offer are far more important to me than those spiritual blessings provided at the assembly. You are correct, the church has little to offer me, I will conform to the world" (Romans 12:2, 1 John 2:15-17).
To the Lord, "I will not make you King of my life (Revelation 15:3), I am not concerned about your body (Colossians 1:18) and I will not glorify you as King (1 Timothy 1:17). I do not appreciate your death on the cross of Calvary, I do not appreciate the better and lasting covenant that you have made possible; therefore, I will not submit to God nor to you as the reigning King" (James 4:7, 1 Corinthians 15:24).
These are serious matters! We may not intend to be saying so much by our negligence; but, it is a fact that we are!
Thursday, August 3, 2017
We Need What He Had
Written by Jim Bill McInteer, this appeared in the March 20, 1986 edition of the Gospel Advocate.
A part of Nehemiah's spirit still lives. It will be a good day when the second phase is duplicated.
Nehemiah and 20th century Christians share a similar emotion - sadness. For Nehemiah, the wall of Jerusalem were broken down; for today's saints the lost are not being reached as readily as Christians wish it could be. Pulpit and pew are joining in a kindred prayer; "Help the church to grow." Every time a penitent sinner confesses his faith in Jesus and is baptized into Christ, the church grows. It isn't happening fast enough. The observers, as the king of old, ask, "Why is thy countenance sad?" Disappointed, for some selfish reason? No, sir, it's "for others, dear King." The church, as did Nehemiah, has first the Lord's cause, then the Lord's people in mind and the personal consideration is last.
but in his anxiety, Nehemiah got a green light! Surely the church today faces no dead end street. Rather, it's on the ramp that leads to the freeway of no obstruction. But she has to move. One can get run over just sitting still on a street of safety.
Nehemiah did something that today's leaders would do well to imitate. He went to Jerusalem with (1) a plan to rebuild the wall, (2) the authority to do it and commandeer resources, and (3) the strength of heart to execute the plan.
One thing stands out however, in bold relief that today is not duplicated. As the silent silhouette in a Judean moonlight, Nehemiah quickly moved to his purpose. The very night of his arrival in Jerusalem he went on an unheralded inspection tour. For him the matter was urgent.
That's the spirit that must be recaptured. This is the spirit that is agonizingly absent today.
Elders have questions placed before them. They appoint committees, they put it on next month's agenda, they need time to get together and by the time that's done the opportunity is gone. The devil has brought the "let's wait and be sure" hoax to elders' meetings and it's become the "no decision," "no letter answered," "no request acknowledged" patented procedure. It's paralyzing in effect.
Preachers can make that call next week as well as this one. That visitor will come again next month; why go see him this month. The letter of encouragement, the voiced gratitude can later be expressed. Nehemiah went that night; the preacher hasn't gone yet - "but I plan to."
The student's been absent three Sundays from class. It's football, holidays, sickness, company. "He'll be back" says the teacher of his class. But he won't be back. He's gone, he's running the wrong way but no teacher has a "night of Nehemiah" to go get him.
It's the old story, "I'm so busy." No one accuses the others of laziness but have we lost our sense of urgency? Is time no longer a precious commodity? Is it true that tomorrow is as good as today? Nehemiah rebuilt the wall. It was a consuming, compelling, driving desire. By God's help, he did it. He got started the night he came night to Jerusalem.
Maybe we haven't the luxury of delay we think we do. Tonight? Go out tonight? It produced desired results. Hear it: "Then I told them of the hand of my God which was good upon me; as also the king's words that he had spoken unto me. And they said, 'Let us rise up and build.' So they strengthened their hands for this good work" (Nehemiah 2:18).
If it's God work, it's work, it's worth not only carefulness but urgency in so doing.
A part of Nehemiah's spirit still lives. It will be a good day when the second phase is duplicated.
Nehemiah and 20th century Christians share a similar emotion - sadness. For Nehemiah, the wall of Jerusalem were broken down; for today's saints the lost are not being reached as readily as Christians wish it could be. Pulpit and pew are joining in a kindred prayer; "Help the church to grow." Every time a penitent sinner confesses his faith in Jesus and is baptized into Christ, the church grows. It isn't happening fast enough. The observers, as the king of old, ask, "Why is thy countenance sad?" Disappointed, for some selfish reason? No, sir, it's "for others, dear King." The church, as did Nehemiah, has first the Lord's cause, then the Lord's people in mind and the personal consideration is last.
but in his anxiety, Nehemiah got a green light! Surely the church today faces no dead end street. Rather, it's on the ramp that leads to the freeway of no obstruction. But she has to move. One can get run over just sitting still on a street of safety.
Nehemiah did something that today's leaders would do well to imitate. He went to Jerusalem with (1) a plan to rebuild the wall, (2) the authority to do it and commandeer resources, and (3) the strength of heart to execute the plan.
One thing stands out however, in bold relief that today is not duplicated. As the silent silhouette in a Judean moonlight, Nehemiah quickly moved to his purpose. The very night of his arrival in Jerusalem he went on an unheralded inspection tour. For him the matter was urgent.
That's the spirit that must be recaptured. This is the spirit that is agonizingly absent today.
Elders have questions placed before them. They appoint committees, they put it on next month's agenda, they need time to get together and by the time that's done the opportunity is gone. The devil has brought the "let's wait and be sure" hoax to elders' meetings and it's become the "no decision," "no letter answered," "no request acknowledged" patented procedure. It's paralyzing in effect.
Preachers can make that call next week as well as this one. That visitor will come again next month; why go see him this month. The letter of encouragement, the voiced gratitude can later be expressed. Nehemiah went that night; the preacher hasn't gone yet - "but I plan to."
The student's been absent three Sundays from class. It's football, holidays, sickness, company. "He'll be back" says the teacher of his class. But he won't be back. He's gone, he's running the wrong way but no teacher has a "night of Nehemiah" to go get him.
It's the old story, "I'm so busy." No one accuses the others of laziness but have we lost our sense of urgency? Is time no longer a precious commodity? Is it true that tomorrow is as good as today? Nehemiah rebuilt the wall. It was a consuming, compelling, driving desire. By God's help, he did it. He got started the night he came night to Jerusalem.
Maybe we haven't the luxury of delay we think we do. Tonight? Go out tonight? It produced desired results. Hear it: "Then I told them of the hand of my God which was good upon me; as also the king's words that he had spoken unto me. And they said, 'Let us rise up and build.' So they strengthened their hands for this good work" (Nehemiah 2:18).
If it's God work, it's work, it's worth not only carefulness but urgency in so doing.
The Great Commission vs. Catholic Authority
Written by Charles Barrick, this appeared in the December 6, 1984 edition of the Gospel Advocate.
The Lord claimed unique authority, saying, "All authority has been given unto Me in heaven and on earth. Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world" (Matthew 28:18-20). The Catholic Church, accepting the Pope and the ecumenical councils as additional sources of authority, has denied that the New Testament is the final, the absolute and the all-sufficient revelation of God's will for mankind.
Regarding councils, it is most significant to note that the first one, Nicea in 325, was called by Constantine, the ambitious and unbaptized emperor who sought to bring unity to his empire by uniting religious sects. The conciliar tendency denies that the Bible is ever relevant by trying to update the church and its doctrine. As for the Pope, two things are particularly noteworthy. First, the papacy rests on the unfounded assumptions that Peter was the first Pope, the papacy was to be passed on and the one in Rome is the rightful successor.
Second, the alleged successor to Peter, whose infallibility was not declared dogma until the first Vatican council in 1870, depends largely upon a misunderstanding of Matthew 16:19. Unfortunately, most translations render this verse as if the Greek verbs for "binding" and "loosing" were simple future tense verbs. Rather than simple future, they are in the future perfect tense. Rendered literally, the verse says, "I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heavens; and whatever you bind on the earth shall have been bound in the heavens, and whatever you loose upon the earth shall be loosed in the heavens." Binding doctrinal matters in heaven was neither dependent upon nor subsequent to the apostles. Rather, God bound and loosed in heaven and then the apostles revealed what God had already done or decided.
Consider the consequences of this disregard for the all-sufficient authority of the New Testament. Human establishments have replaced God's design, the right and responsibility of each individual to think and decide for himself has been seriously undermined, and many have been tragically misled.
The complete authority of the Lord demands that all men render complete obedience to His word, accepting His mandates as final and absolute. The word written by and passed on through the apostles is the light which guides us into eternity (2 Peter 1:19-21). It is the word which lasts forever (1 Peter 1:23-25).
The Lord claimed unique authority, saying, "All authority has been given unto Me in heaven and on earth. Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world" (Matthew 28:18-20). The Catholic Church, accepting the Pope and the ecumenical councils as additional sources of authority, has denied that the New Testament is the final, the absolute and the all-sufficient revelation of God's will for mankind.
Regarding councils, it is most significant to note that the first one, Nicea in 325, was called by Constantine, the ambitious and unbaptized emperor who sought to bring unity to his empire by uniting religious sects. The conciliar tendency denies that the Bible is ever relevant by trying to update the church and its doctrine. As for the Pope, two things are particularly noteworthy. First, the papacy rests on the unfounded assumptions that Peter was the first Pope, the papacy was to be passed on and the one in Rome is the rightful successor.
Second, the alleged successor to Peter, whose infallibility was not declared dogma until the first Vatican council in 1870, depends largely upon a misunderstanding of Matthew 16:19. Unfortunately, most translations render this verse as if the Greek verbs for "binding" and "loosing" were simple future tense verbs. Rather than simple future, they are in the future perfect tense. Rendered literally, the verse says, "I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heavens; and whatever you bind on the earth shall have been bound in the heavens, and whatever you loose upon the earth shall be loosed in the heavens." Binding doctrinal matters in heaven was neither dependent upon nor subsequent to the apostles. Rather, God bound and loosed in heaven and then the apostles revealed what God had already done or decided.
Consider the consequences of this disregard for the all-sufficient authority of the New Testament. Human establishments have replaced God's design, the right and responsibility of each individual to think and decide for himself has been seriously undermined, and many have been tragically misled.
The complete authority of the Lord demands that all men render complete obedience to His word, accepting His mandates as final and absolute. The word written by and passed on through the apostles is the light which guides us into eternity (2 Peter 1:19-21). It is the word which lasts forever (1 Peter 1:23-25).
The Rich Young Ruler
Written by Keith Parker, this appeared in the January 3, 1985 edition of the Gospel Advocate.
"And when He was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to Him and asked Him, 'Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?' And Jesus said unto him, 'Why callest thou me good? There is none good but One, that is, God. Thou knowest the commandments, do not commit adultery, do not kill, do not steal, do not bear false witness, defraud not, honor thy father and mother.' And he answered and said unto Him, 'Master, all these have I observed from my youth.' then Jesus beholding him, loved him and said unto him, 'One thing thou lackest, go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast and give to the poor and thou shalt have treasure in heaven; and come, take up the cross and follow me.' And he was sad at that saying and went away grieved, for he had great possessions" (Mark 10:17-22).
Usually we think of this story as a negative one because of the way it ends. Mark says that the rich young ruler went away sad. However, there are some positive things about this young man:
1. He came to the RIGHT PERSON. Verse 17 says that he came to the Master, Jesus Christ. Because Jesus is our example (1 Peter 2:21), our friend (John 15:13), the way to the Father (John 14:6), the way to salvation (Acts 4:12) and the way to happiness (John 13:17), that's why we say that the rich young ruler came to the right person. Some folks try to find happiness in wine, women, wisdom and wealth. But friend, Jesus is the way!
2. He came with the RIGHT ATTITUDE. Verse 17 says that he came and fell on his knees before Jesus. He bowed in submission to the Master. This indicates that he had a heart of humility. Brethren, the sin of ride will cause many to miss Heaven. God hates it (Proverbs 6:17). It's one of the sins that is listed by Paul in 2 Timothy 3 to indicate that we are living in terrible times. If one turns to Jesus he must humble himself to the Master and come to Jesus with the right attitude.
3. He came with the RIGHT INTENTION. Notice what the ruler asked: "Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?" His intention was to do the will of God. The question that the young ruler asked was also asked by sinners on Pentecost (Acts 2:37), by the jailer in Philippi (Acts 16:30) and by Saul of Tarsus (Acts 22:10). Every time the question was asked, the answer was the same. Do the will of God. Jesus said, "Why call ye me, 'Lord, Lord' and do not the things which I say?" (Luke 6:46) May we all turn to Jesus with the aim in mind of doing the Master's will.
4. He came with the RIGHT LIFESTYLE. When Jesus told him to keep the commandments, the rich young ruler answered, "Master, all these have I observed from my youth" (10:20). It seems that the young man had tried to live the right life. He wanted to do right. He had done right. He had kept the commandments.
Although the young ruler came to the right person with the right attitude, intention and lifestyle, Jesus told him, "One thing thou lackest." Often we are asked, "Preacher, do you believe that this one little thing will keep me out of Heaven?" My friend, one thing does make a difference! May God help us to do everything the Master requires.
"And when He was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to Him and asked Him, 'Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?' And Jesus said unto him, 'Why callest thou me good? There is none good but One, that is, God. Thou knowest the commandments, do not commit adultery, do not kill, do not steal, do not bear false witness, defraud not, honor thy father and mother.' And he answered and said unto Him, 'Master, all these have I observed from my youth.' then Jesus beholding him, loved him and said unto him, 'One thing thou lackest, go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast and give to the poor and thou shalt have treasure in heaven; and come, take up the cross and follow me.' And he was sad at that saying and went away grieved, for he had great possessions" (Mark 10:17-22).
Usually we think of this story as a negative one because of the way it ends. Mark says that the rich young ruler went away sad. However, there are some positive things about this young man:
1. He came to the RIGHT PERSON. Verse 17 says that he came to the Master, Jesus Christ. Because Jesus is our example (1 Peter 2:21), our friend (John 15:13), the way to the Father (John 14:6), the way to salvation (Acts 4:12) and the way to happiness (John 13:17), that's why we say that the rich young ruler came to the right person. Some folks try to find happiness in wine, women, wisdom and wealth. But friend, Jesus is the way!
2. He came with the RIGHT ATTITUDE. Verse 17 says that he came and fell on his knees before Jesus. He bowed in submission to the Master. This indicates that he had a heart of humility. Brethren, the sin of ride will cause many to miss Heaven. God hates it (Proverbs 6:17). It's one of the sins that is listed by Paul in 2 Timothy 3 to indicate that we are living in terrible times. If one turns to Jesus he must humble himself to the Master and come to Jesus with the right attitude.
3. He came with the RIGHT INTENTION. Notice what the ruler asked: "Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?" His intention was to do the will of God. The question that the young ruler asked was also asked by sinners on Pentecost (Acts 2:37), by the jailer in Philippi (Acts 16:30) and by Saul of Tarsus (Acts 22:10). Every time the question was asked, the answer was the same. Do the will of God. Jesus said, "Why call ye me, 'Lord, Lord' and do not the things which I say?" (Luke 6:46) May we all turn to Jesus with the aim in mind of doing the Master's will.
4. He came with the RIGHT LIFESTYLE. When Jesus told him to keep the commandments, the rich young ruler answered, "Master, all these have I observed from my youth" (10:20). It seems that the young man had tried to live the right life. He wanted to do right. He had done right. He had kept the commandments.
Although the young ruler came to the right person with the right attitude, intention and lifestyle, Jesus told him, "One thing thou lackest." Often we are asked, "Preacher, do you believe that this one little thing will keep me out of Heaven?" My friend, one thing does make a difference! May God help us to do everything the Master requires.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)