Truth Magazine

By Edgar C. Walker

Can a child of God so sin as to be lost eternally? This simple question has been asked on many occasions. Many answers are given to this simple question that are not in harmony with the will of God. There are some who say one cannot be lost after he has obeyed the laws of their denomination. There are others who say that one can. Too often these teachings come from the teachings of man and not from the word of God. We should realize that the soul of man is at stake and that the answer must be in harmony with the word of God. We are to be judged by God’s word (Jn. 12:48). Let us note the following passages:

John 15:1-7. Our Lord pointed out clearly that one can so sin as to be lost, after he has become a child of God. Christ said, “I am the vine, ye are the branches.” One only gets into him through obedience. He also said, “now ye are clean,” meaning one has been cleansed. He shows that we must abide in him or be cast forth. Note verses 5-6. If we abide in him, he abides in us. If we abide not in him, we will be cast forth as a branch and wither and then be cast into the fire and be burned.

Matt. 13:41-42. “The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; and shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.” Now let us note for a moment; since the church and the kingdom are one and the same, one must be in the church before he can be gathered out. It is impossible for one to be gathered out of something he has not been in. If he is in the church or kingdom, it was the Lord that added him (Acts 2:47) since the Lord adds to the church daily such as should be saved. Thus he can be “such as should be saved,” and then become such as will be lost eternally.

Heb. 10:38-39. “Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.” Our Lord has pleasure only in those who are his. To draw back unto perdition is to be lost. The word “perdition,” according to Webster, has this meaning: “entire loss, ruin; utter loss of one’s soul, or of final happiness in the future state.”

Jude 5. “1 will therefore put you in remembrance, though you once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.” Can anyone think of any earthly reason that this would be brought to our attention if it had no meaning? God promised them a land flowing with milk and honey but it was on the condition that they would abide in his will. We are promised a home with him when this life is over, only if we are faithful unto death (Rev. 2:10).

Rev. 3:5. “He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.” Now let us notice the blotting of one’s name out of the book of life. We find in studying the Bible that one is added to the book of life when he obeys the Gospel. This, then also teaches one can be lost after becoming a child of God. Paul speaks, in Phil. 4:3, about his fellow workers having their names written in the book of life. Also in Rev. 13:8, we learn that those who did not have their names written in the book of life will worship Satan. Rev. 21:27 shows one must have his name in the Lamb’s book of life. Rev. 20:12 shows what will happen at the judgment if one’s name is not found in the book of life.

Matthew 25:1-13. The parable of the ten virgins shows the end of those that are unprepared at the coming of the Lord. Note verse 13. If there were no danger of being lost, why should we be warned to be prepared at all times? We are going to be judged on the basis of our own lives and not be able to borrow from our fellow Christians. What each of us do with our own lives will determine where we spend eternity.

Heb. 3. We note in this chapter, in the beginning that it speaks of Moses being faithful. Then in verse 6, “But Christ as a Son over his own house; whose house are we, If we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.” If we do not hold fast, then what? Also verse 12 plainly says that one can depart from God. By reading the whole chapter it would be impossible for one not to see that he can fall.

Heb. 4:1-11. Verse one says, “Let us fear.” Verse 11 says, “Let us labor lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.” No greater warning could one have.

Heb. 6:4-6. We are told here that those who have fallen away, have put Christ to an open shame. They have crucified him afresh.

1 Cor. 9:27. “But I keep my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself might be a castaway.” Paul shows a possibility of his being lost. It is then necessary that we keep our bodies in subjection. That we be careful with our lives each day test we be lost in the end. If there was a possibility of the Apostle Paul falling, each of us needs to walk with care lest we fall. I do not believe that any of our lives will compare with that lived by the Apostle Paul.

2 Pet. 1:1-11. Peter speaks of those who have obtained like precious faith, that is, to those who are children of God. He speaks of seven graces which one should add to his life as a child of God. He says, “if these things be in you and abound, you shall never fall,” signifying that one can fall if these things do not abound in his life. We have already noticed in John 15:2 what will happen to the one that is unfruitful; he will be burned as a branch cast forth.

2 Pet. 2:20-22. Here he speaks of those who have escaped the pollution of the world through the knowledge of Christ. If they should again be entangled, the latter end would be worse than the beginning. They would have been better had they never known, than to have known, to have turned back to the world again.

James 5:19-20. If one does err from the truth and one convert him. He has saved a soul from death and hidden a multitude of sins. We know that James is not speaking of physical death since we are told that all must die (Heb. 9:27). All must die and face the judgment.- Death is an appointment we must all make. James is speaking of a soul being separated from God.

Rev. 2:1-3:22. John is writing, to the seven churches in Asia showing that five of them are in a lost condition unless they repent. Each of these five must repent or else the Lord will come quickly and remove their candlestick. Unless they repent, they will be lost.

Heb. 12:15-17. “Looking diligently lest any man should fail of the grace of God.” Then it goes on to use the example of Esau who found no place of repentance. Those who fail to repent will also lose their inheritance.

Acts 8:13-24. Simon heard the preaching of Philip, believed, and was baptized. Then he saw the miracles being performed and wanted to buy that power. In verse 20, Peter told him, his money would perish with him. Then in verse 22, he was told to pray that the thought of his heart might be forgiven him. Why? Lest he perish with his money.

Gal. 5:4. “Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.” Yes, my friend, you can fall from grace.

1 Cor. 10:12. “Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.”

These are just some of the many places in the Bible that teach that one can fall from grace. The Bible does not teach that you cannot fall. This is a false doctrine taught only by man. We are warned many times throughout the Bible to beware of false teachers. Because of lack of space I did not copy all the passages mentioned here but I beg you to turn to them that you might read them yourselves and come to a knowledge of the truth: We are going to stand in judgment some day to give account of the deeds we have done, whether they have been good or evil (2 Cor. 5:10). Christ will render to every man according to his deeds (Rom. 2:6). Are you ready to stand in judgment?

Truth Magazine XIX: 42, pp. 669-670
September 4, 1975

By William C. Sexton

James wrote, “But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth. This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish” (James 3:14-15). Envy is defined as . . . the feeling of displeasure produced by witnessing or hearing of the advantage or prosperity of others; . . .” (Vine, Vol. II, p. 37). It appears to me that I detect a bit of envy in some “conservative” brethren. It seems to come through loud and clear at times, when efforts to reach the lost are made and slurs are directed, no support comes, and counter acts are made.

If there is envy in my heart, then I need to know from whence it comes. It is not of God, and it does not advance the cause of Christ, nor does it strengthen the “Christian” who is holding it in his heart! As Christians, beloved, we need to rejoice when the gospel is preached and souls are saved. And we need to do all we can to advance the cause of Christ and not “our cause.” There is such a great need all over the United States today, including the state of Kansas, to present the gospel of Christ in its purity and simplicity, let us therefore lay aside the “weight” that slows us down and dissipates our energy. Likewise, let us lay aside the “sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us, . . .” (Cf. Heb. 12:2-3).

The success of other Christians ought to cause us to rejoice and not provoke a sense of displeasure; it ought to provoke us to a greater effort and not cause us to launch a counter move. Standing on the promises requires us to be alert and moving forward; setting on the promises and finding fault is the easier course but it is the destructive one. Let us examine our hearts to see if we be in the “faith” (2 Cor. 13:5). If we feel a sense of displeasure as others make progress in the way of the Lord, then we can be sure that we are “out” of the faith and not “in” it.

Truth Magazine XIX: 42, p. 668
September 4, 1975

By Mike Willis

In the April issue of Restoration Review, editor Leroy Garrett continued his series on “The Word Abused” by writing an article on “The Rebaptized Church of Christ.” In this article, he criticized the Lord’s church for two things: (1) over-emphasizing baptism and (2) re-baptizing people who are uncertain about their baptism. (Indeed, about the only religious group which Leroy Garrett and Carl Ketcherside ever criticize is the Lord’s church; they rarely ever condemn any denomination. When and if they do, they are quite gentle in their criticisms. But, in criticizing the Lord’s body, they employ sarcasm, they belittle, they buffoon, and otherwise abuse the church of our Lord. I do not know how many blows the church must suffer from these men before its members recognize that the one inflicting them is an enemy.)

Under the first point, Garrett wrote:

“There is unfortunately, more than one way to abuse the scriptures . . . . Still another way is through underemphasis or overemphasis, which either makes too little or too much of what the scriptures say. One might accept a scriptural truth and give it the right interpretation, but err in a failure to give it proper significance. All scripture may well be true and of course the word of God, but not all truths are equally important. We can abuse the word in failing to recognize this.

“Our purpose in this installment, however, is to notice an instance of making too much of what is written. Anything can be warped by stretching as well as by shrinking. Any truth can be overworked to the point of distortion . . .

“It is becoming increasingly apparent that many of us in the Churches of Christ have abused the scriptures in this way in reference to baptism.”(1)

If a person can abuse the scriptures in the manner in which Garrett asserts, no one is more guilty of so abusing the scriptures than he and his colleague Carl Ketcherside are! I have been reading Mission Messenger for over five years. Every article which I can remember reading in one way or another related to unity-in-diversity-the fellowship apostasy. Brother Ketcherside does not write new articles; he only retitles the same old garbage. Brother Garrett is only a little behind Ketcherside in laboring one point. “You who teach another, do you not teach yourself?” (Rom. 2:21).

One must, however, admit that gospel preachers have emphasized baptism in their preaching and, I think, for perfectly legitimate reasons. As a young lad growing up around cattle, I soon learned that a person works on the fence in the place where the cows are getting out. Through the years, denominationalists generally taught the truth with reference to Jesus, faith, and repentance, but refused or failed to teach the truth about baptism and the church. Consequently, we have had to spend no little amount of our time expounding these Bible doctrines. I am certain that by emphasizing these doctrines, we have inadvertently neglected some other areas. (Of course, if these were weaknesses of the flesh or ignorant mistakes, the Lord would automatically forgive them, wouldn’t He, Brother Garrett?)

Nevertheless, I am not so sure that we have overemphasized baptism. If some of the writings which come from the pens of the false apostles of the unity movement are any reflection of general belief, we need to keep on emphasizing baptism! For example, Garrett wrote:

“Only recently I heard a reforming Methodist, laboring within his own context for that one, great, spiritual community of God on earth. Praise God that he is using this man where he is! He is talking to Methodists, in their language and out of their history, of a better and more spiritual way. It would be folly for me to try to take him from his own people, converting him to the Church of Christ. He should paddle for the old ship Zion where God has dropped him down. And I think it would be equal folly for me to become a Methodist, even if I didn’t really become one, and thus cut myself off from my own roots.

“I met with a group of Roman Catholics a few times recently, some of them being business associates of ours, who are really turned on to Jesus. In their own `sanctuary,’ with their priest sitting with us, I laid before them a long view of the scheme of redemption in scripture, God’s eternal purpose in Christ. These folk want their people to get with it and turn to Jesus, and they are working to that end in various mini-meetings. How foolish it would be for me to try to bring them into `the church of Christ,’ where they would become mere spectators of our own particular set of traditions.”(2)

“I also sat in on a mock drill for door-to-door evangelism. The man to be `converted’ described himself as a Baptist, but an immersed believer who had ‘enthroned Jesus as Lord in my heart.’ I later told some of the fellows that in that case there was no evangelism to do, for the man was already in Christ, that I would express my pleasure in meeting a new brother, and I would wish him well in helping bring his Baptist friends closer to Jesus and to the scriptures.”(3)

Notice that Garrett considers Baptists, Methodists and Catholics as Christians; he has the typical denominational concept of the church! Thus, whether or not men have been immersed is immaterial to whether or not they are Christians, according to him.

Carl Ketcherside reflects the same uncertain sounds about baptism. Even some in the Christian Church, with whom I have talked, are worried about Carl’s stance on baptism. In August, 1973, he wrote,

“Much as I deplore what may seem to many the manifestation of an uncharitable attitude toward a people renowned for their gentle goodness, I freely acknowledge that, upon the basis of my understanding of the teaching of God’s precious word, the Quakers are not in the fellowship of the called-out ones. They may have heard the invitation to become citizens of the kingdom, but they have not responded to it in the manner prescribed by the King. . .

“Regardless of what else may be said about it, sprinkling or pouring do not constitute baptism in the scriptural context. . . Therefore, as cruel as it may appear to a modern and vacillating world, I do not consider those who have used a form unauthorized by Jesus, unsanctioned by the Spirit, and unknown to the apostles, as being in the fellowship of the congregation of saints . . .

. . . But to regard those who are unimmersed as having been brought into the family relationship upon the same basis as those who have been immersed would make an empty face of immersion and the testimony of the scriptures on the matter both useless and meaningless.”(4)

Although these quotations reflect a position that sounds like the testimony of scripture, just one year later, Ketcherside wrote,

“Turning to church history we notice a number of people who loved God, repented of sin, trusted in Jesus as redeemer, and demonstrated in their lives the fruit and power of the Holy Spirit, although they were never immersed. (Don’t the Quakers do the same?, mw) Think of Luther, Whitefield, Wesley, Finney, Moody, Livingstone, and Hudson Taylor. These were mighty men of God. Think of John Newton, Horatius Bonar, Fanny Crosby, and others whose hymns of warm devotion we love to sing. For us to consign such followers of Christ to outer darkness because they were not immersed seems the equivalent to accusing Josiah of great wickedness because for years he kept no Passover. Will not God’s verdict contradict ours?

“In the light of these things, especially the two lines of Biblical teaching, I distinguish between what I practice and what I recognize. I practice immersing without delay those who repent and trust in Christ, upon their confession of faith in Him as divine Lord and Savior, for such is the Bible’s command and precedent. At the same time I recognize there are a number of unimmersed disciples of Jesus who are Christians, for they trust in him, seek to obey him and to the extent of their knowledge do obey him in everything.”(5)

Obviously, during this period Ketcherside must have changed his mind. In August, 1973, the unimmersed were outside the fellowship of God; in August, 1974, the unimmersed were Christians. One time or the other, he erred!

Earlier F. L. Lemley, one of the most radical left-wing writers whose articles have appeared in Mission Messenger., had written the following:

“Has anyone ever heard of a preacher giving a candidate the third degree to determine if he knew the full import of faith and repentance, and that these are for the remission of sins? If immersion of the body will remit sins-in spite of defective faith and imperfect repentance, then why not allow also that valid faith and repentance may remit in spite of imperfect immersion? Why make such an issue of being sure the subject knows that baptism is for the remission of sins and being sure that every hand, foot and lock of hair is immersed? We ought to be consistent! . . . .

“These observations raise other interesting questions. Do the commands involved in conversion fall within the sphere of God’s grace or must one make a grade of 100 % on all of them in order to reach the sphere of grace? If perfection is required to reach the domain of grace, who can be saved? Who can lay claim to perfect faith and perfect repentance, and thus, to perfect conversion? We have always allowed a lot of latitude in everything but baptism. Why? . . . .

“It is a serious thing to allow those to escape whom God has ordained to destruction (1 Kings 20:42), but it is equally serious to condemn those who are within the realm of God’s. grace but who have not yet caught up to us in obedience and understanding. We cannot afford to sit in God’s judgment seat to condemn all those who may have been ‘circumcised in heart’ but who for some extenuating circumstance have not completed their obedience in outward forms, total immersion of the body in water.”(6)

My brethren, be sure to consider carefully what has been written by these brethren. They are saying that men can be saved without immersion or without knowing the proper design of baptism. They have accepted, or are in the process of accepting, the position of salvation by ‘faith only.” So long as I continue to hear these uncertain sounds, I shall continue to emphasize the commandments regarding baptism.

Garrett’s criticism reads like this:

“Not only have we hammered away at the ‘something you have to do’ bit, but we have made a big deal out of one’s proper understanding of the import of the act, which makes not only the act essential but a certain indoctrination as well …. It is evident that our theology of baptism has become terribly warped, for we have come to see it as something arbitrary and absolute rather than in reference to the Cross. We have so dogmatized the acts, rather than treating it as within the framework of grace and mercy, that we have led our people to suppose that this is the one thing that they must get right. Our warping has taken such extremes as to insist that one must have a certain education about baptism before the act is valid. One must understand what it is for and what it does, and this is pounded into our folk year in and year out, so that we have a lot of people that keep on being baptized in order to make sure they have done it right …. My position is that there is but one condition for baptism, and that is faith in Jesus. ‘He that believes and is baptized shall be saved,’ says Jesus. It was to believers that Peter said ‘repent and be baptized.’ No requirements are laid down about knowledge or comprehension. God will take care of all the benefits and blessings, for that is His part, not ours. Even when one supposes that some of blessings come before baptism, the fact remains that he has believed and been immersed. All who do that are my brothers, however well or poorly be their knowledge of the theology of baptism.”(7)

A more mixed up theology is unimaginable! Garrett said that baptism was based on faith and not on knowledge. But, what is faith? Is faith not the belief of a certain body of facts? And, how can one believe what he does not know? Yes, baptism is contingent upon knowledge as well as upon faith!

Either a person must believe that the purpose for which a man is being baptized is important or he must say that it is not. There is no middle ground. If knowledge and belief of why one is being baptized is unimportant, I could go down the street with a concealed .38 pistol and ask people if they believed in Jesus. If they answered in the affirmative, I could take out my .38 and proceed to take them to a baptistry where I could baptize them. That would be believer’s baptism! But, on the other hand, if the purpose for being baptized is important, a person must be baptized for the right reason. That reason is “in order to be saved,” or however you might chose to express it (e.g. “for the remission of sins,” Acts 2:38; “the appeal to God for a good conscience,” 1 Pet. 3:21; to get “into Christ,” Gal 3:27 etc.). Now which is it? Is the knowledge of the purpose of baptism essential or nonessential?

My brethren, if one can be saved by God in spite of his noncompliance with the purpose of baptism, why can he not also be saved by God in spite of his lack of compliance with the action of baptism? Or again, if the improper purpose of baptism does not affect its validity, why will the improper action affect its validity? Brethren Ketcherside and Garrett have succeeded in expressing that the action and subject of baptism are more important than its design. Or, have they thrown this out as a test to see if you brethren are ready to accept the conclusion that one can be saved without believer’s baptism? If a person can be saved without 100% knowledge of the purpose of baptism, why can he not also be saved without 100% knowledge of the action of baptism? If he can be saved without being totally immersed (Garrett ridiculed re-baptizing a person whose arm did not go completely under the water during his baptism), can he be saved if he is poured? Exactly what percentage of his body must get wet, Brother Garrett? 99%? 75%? 50%? 16%? 5%? 1%? Or again, if a person can be saved without 100% compliance with the purpose of baptism, can he be saved without believing the proper facts about Jesus? Exactly what percentage of the facts about Jesus must a man believe before he can be saved? Can he be saved while disbelieving the virgin birth, resurrection, or ascension (surely there must be some honestly mistaken modernists)? I have raised all of these questions to press this point: that argument which proves too much proves nothing. Garrett and Ketcherside know that they cannot produce any passage which promises salvation to the unimmersed. Consequently, like any other Baptist, they argue situation doctrine to reach the conclusion which they want to believe. Why the hypothetical argument will only work for the Baptists and not for the modernists as well has not been explained. I thought that we had already concluded that book, chapter, and verse were essential for the establishing of religious authority. Brother Garrett, if you know of a passage of scripture which proves that one can be saved without knowing the purpose of baptism, we will be glad to consider it. Heretofore, you have given us your “thinkso’s” but no scripture. We want the Bible! We know that the doctrine that a person can be saved without believing that baptism is essential to salvation is the teaching of Restoration Review 17:4, but Restoration Review has not reached the status of inspired literature to some of us; indeed, it is not even inspiring!

My conviction is this: baptism involves three important aspects-the right subject, the right action, and the right design. If anyone of these is incorrect, the baptism is invalid. I have not seen any scripture to persuade me to believe otherwise. The very arguments employed by Garrett and Ketcherside to reach the unity-in-diversity fellowship apostasy ultimately led to universalism. Already it has led to fellowship of not only all of the liberals among us, but now of Baptists as well. When Garrett persuades you that one can be saved without 100% compliance with the purpose of baptism, you are set up for anyone who asks you, “Must one have 100% compliance with the action of baptism in order to be saved?” You cannot answer “yes” to one and “no” to the other. If Garrett has proved anything, he has proved that men of every denomination are in the body of Christ, regardless of whether or not they have been scripturally baptized. Are you ready to accept that?

Endnotes

1. Leroy Garrett, “The Word Abused: The Rebaptized Church of Christ,” Restoration Review (April, 1975), XVII, No. 4, p. 62.

2. Ibid., “Shall We ‘Hang In’ Or Leave?”, Restoration Review (November, 1974), XVI, No. 9, p. 367.

3. Ibid., p. 375.

4. Carl Ketcherside, “Questions About Baptism,” Mission Messenger (August, 1973), XXXV, No. 8, pp. 116, 118, 120.

5. Ibid., “Was King Josiah Saved?”, Mission Messenger (August, 1974), XXXVI, No. 8, p. 124.

6. F. L. Lemley, “Heart Circumcision,” Mission Messenger (May, 1972), XXXIV, No. 5, pp. 72-73, 74.

7. Garrett, op. cit., “The Word Abused: The Rebaptized Church of Christ,” Restoration Review (April, 1975), XVII, No. 4, pp. 62-63, 64, 65.

Truth Magazine XIX: 42, pp. 665-668
September 4, 1975

By Johnie Edwards

It is not the purpose of this article to limit what the Lord knows but to call to our attention some valuable lessons.

Christ Knew No Sin

Paul told the Corinthians, “For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him” (2 Cor. 5:21). We read, in Matt. 4:1-11, of Jesus being tempted by Satan, “yet without sin” (Heb. 4:15). Peter said that Christ left us a perfect example “Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously” (1 Pet. 2:22-23). Jesus never did commit one single sin. What a record!

Christ Does Not Know When He Will Return

Down through the years there have been many time setters in regards to the Lord’s second coming. Up to this time, they have all proven to be false: The Bible teaches that Christ Himself does not know when He will return. In reference to the second coining, Mark said, “But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father” (Mark 13:32). Only God the Father knows when Christ will return and He has not told anyone! The emphasis is not placed on the time but being ready when it does come (Mk. 13:32-37).

Christ Does Not Know A Single Person He Did Not Die For

Contrary to the teaching of some, Christ did not die for just a pre-selected few. The Hebrew writer said, “But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man” (Heb. 2:9). Christ died for the worst sinner. Paul said, “But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:8). The death of Christ has made the salvation of every man possible if he will . but obey Him (Heb. 5:8-9).

Christ Knows Nothing About Establishing Any Church But His Own

The Psalmist has warned us, “Except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. . .” (Psa. 127:1). The only church Jesus ever promised to build was His own. Jesus told Peter, “I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Matt. 16:18). Because the church belongs to Christ, we can read about “the churches of Christ” (Rom. 16:16) in the New Testament. If Jesus had anything to do with the establishing any other church but His own, He does not know about it.

People have always tried to get to the Father without Christ. Jesus told Thomas, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father but by me” (Jn. 14:6). Jesus is the door and He knows of no person who can reach the Father except by coming through the door. The process by which one comes to Christ is that he be drawn by the power of God to save, which is the gospel of Christ (Jn. 6:44-45; 2 Thess. 2:14). Thus when one hears, believes and obeys the gospel, he can, be saved from his past sins and be added to the Lord’s church. The Lord knows of no other plan by which men are saved.

The Lord Will Not Know Some at the Judgment

Jesus said, “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord; shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done- many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you; depart from me, ye that work iniquity” (Matt. 7:2123). In the judgment, the Lord will have those standing before Him who have been lawless while they lived and He will declare that He never did approve of them. Such a person Jesus will not know. at the judgment.

Truth Magazine XIX: 42, p. 664
September 4, 1975