Truth Magazine

By Daniel H. King 

During the last couple of years many of the brethren have become elated at a new device for drawing large crowds into their meeting houses-the bus ministry. Really though, there is not anything especially new about the device since the Baptists and other denominational folk have been using the system for years. ‘It is what has made possible the “Tabernacle-style” church houses that have begun to dot the landscape in many of our cities. Many brethren have argued, “Well, the Baptists are getting good results out of it, so it must work.” As a consequence, denominational programs and gimmicks are examined, sectarian “How-to-do-it” manuals are read, and finally the system is fitted bodily into a congregation’s program. After all, “it works, doesn’t it!” Pretty soon children are being given candy, refreshments, and prizes for boarding the buses and attending regularly. Suddenly the Grand Old Gospel that brethren once recognized to be the drawing power to salvation (Rom. 1:16; 2 Thess. 2:14) goes flying out a bus window. “Why, it doesn’t matter what you use to get them there, just so they get to hear Christ preached to them.” One problem that goes unnoticed is that what it takes to get that kind of person to come the first time is what it will take to keep them coming. And, if the church of Christ is just offering a piece of gum to come to church and the Baptists offer a stick of gum and a balloon, it is certain that we will lose out on those that sell themselves to the highest bidder. I wonder what scriptural precedent is being followed when carnal rewards are being offered for spiritual service? Whatever happened to the old biblical axiom that those who seek to receive earthly compensation as their payment for spiritual service rendered have been “payed in full”? “Verily I say unto you, They have received their reward” (Matt. 6:2, 5, 16). This type of practice actually encourages the attitude that Jesus condemned.

I was recently surprised to see that some of the Baptists are even beginning to object to this kind of absurd trafficking in human souls. I was surprised because Baptists have been using every kind of gimmick and contrivance imaginable for years. Everybody from Karate experts to movie stars has been invited to speak and perform during and after their worship services to draw crowds to their meeting houses. Forrest L. Keener, pastor of the Bethel Baptist Church of Lawton, Oklahoma, last year launched a verbal attack upon such methods used in “Bus Ministry Promotion.” In July and August, 1973 issues of Faith Magazine, a Bob Jones University publication, Keener attacked the abusive techniques under the title, “A Critical Analysis of Modern `Give-Away’ Bus Promotion?” His study of these time-honored practices led him to brand them as a “hypocritical exploitation” of children, and to conclude that “these tactics never actually increase the number of converts.” Furthermore, Keener pointed out that a lowering of standards must follow or the results will not be lingering. He said, “And meanwhile sound doctrine occupies second place or no place at all.” Then he added, “The common denominator that I seem to see in all fervent users of cheap tactics is that they rate doctrine after results, and sometime belittle doctrine altogether.”

This frank assault upon an almost universally accepted practice among Baptist Churches was bound to draw fire. In the August 3, 1973, issue of The Sword of the Lord, the editor of the paper, Dr. John R. Rice, expressed his shock and surprise at Keener’s remarks. A long treatise followed in which Rice made quite a play upon Baptist tradition and perverted a number of scriptures endeavoring to put some Biblical props under a totally unscriptural practice. His miserable display would almost certainly convince any honest person that such tactics completely lack scriptural authority. I must confess, though, that Rice did do a little better job on the subject than I have heard any of the brethren do lately. At least he tried to justify it by the Bible. Many of the brethren have given this up altogether. That is the very reason that the like of the bus ministry is being practiced by Churches of Christ. When will some brethren realize that you cannot trick people into becoming Christians? There are no short-cut methods or sure-fire gimmicks that will replace the plain and simple Gospel of Jesus Christ. It is still the power of God to salvation .(Rom. 1:16) and the only thing that can draw men to Christ (2 Thess. 2:14). It will probably take the brethren a while to realize the fruitfulness of their folly, but the realization is sure to come, just as it is coming to some of the Baptists. Real conviction just cannot be bought. Even the Baptists are beginning to see that.

Truth Magazine XIX: 28, p. 434
May 22, 1975

By Donald P. Ames

In Acts 22:16, Ananias asked Saul this important question that is equally important to many people today: “And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.” The very question itself carries with it a sense of urgency which, unfortunately, many do not recognize. But, there were several reasons for it to impress Saul-and we hope you too.

The Deity of Christ

Jesus had manifested His deity on many occasions among the Jews, but being blinded by their traditions (they were seeking an earthly, political kingdom), they refused to accept the evidence so abundantly presented (see John 11:48, Acts 4:16). Although Saul was a “young man” (Acts 7:58) at the stoning of Stephen, most scholars believe he was about 26 and familiar with Jesus and His teachings as well. Yet Saul, too, had rejected the evidence that Jesus was the Son of God and had. bitterly fought the early church. Events on the road to Damascus were to open his eyes and convince him of the awesome truth that Jesus was indeed the Son of God.

Some argue that since Saul addressed Jesus as “Lord” (Acts 9:5), he was already saved on the Damascus road, but a closer reading reveals such is not so. In fact, not only was Saul still in his sins when approached by Ananias, but was not yet even aware of whom he was talking to when he asked, “Who art thou, Lord?” (Acts 9:5). Actually, “Lord” is a title of respect used for someone greater (See Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, also Matt. 21:30 “sir,” 1 Pet. 3:6). Saul here recognized someone greater than himself was behind the events he saw, but did not know who that person was until Jesus identified Himself, “I am Jesus, whom thou persecutest” (Acts 9:5).

If this be Jesus, Saul realized, then He had been resurrected from the dead! If this be Jesus, the apostles had been right all along! If this be Jesus, then He also had to be the Son of God as He claimed! Suddenly the realization of this great truth was brought home to Saul. His forefathers had been wrong. He had been wrong. Jesus was what He claimed to be.

Many claim to believe Jesus is the Son of God, but have never rendered obedience to His will (John 14:15, 1 John 2:4, Lk. 6:46). They acknowledge Him as the only mediator (1 Tim. 2:5), but refuse to obey Him (Heb. 5:89). Saul realized the meaning of Jesus’ words in John 12:48-“the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.” Now, realizing who Jesus was, he wanted to obey Him. Don’t you? “Why tarriest thou?”

His Sins

Since Ananias instructed Saul to “wash away thy sins,” we know Saul still had his sins. Despite his praying and fasting for three days, the appearance of the Lord, and his sincerity, he was still in his sins. Sin is a horrible thing that separates one from God (Isa. 59:12) and all of us are guilty of sin (Rom. 3:23). Yet, to Saul, this was a horrifying realization. He had spent his life in fighting Christ and the church (Acts 9:4, 22:4-5, 26:10-11, etc.) and was now painfully aware of the tragic mistake he had made-of the many innocent people he had caused to be killed. The nature of it was such that he came to regard himself as the “chief” of sinners (1 Tim. 1:12-15). Finally, Ananias came with the precious gospel of salvation (Rom. 1:16, Jas. 1:21), the means by which he could be made free from sin (John 8:32, Rom. 6:16-17) and have the blood of Christ wash away his sins (Eph. 1:7). No doubt Ananias saw the tremendous burden of guilt which Saul felt and thus eagerly offered the “rest” found in the yoke of Christ (Matt. 11:29-30).

Are you depressed with the nature of your life? Is your life pleasing to Jesus (2 Cor. 5:10)? Would you like a chance to begin anew, become a new creature (2 Cor. 5:17)-be free of the guilt of your sinful way of life? Regardless of how black your past may have been, the blood of Christ can wash it white as snow (Isa. 1:18). In fact, the worse the sin, the more we need the redeeming love of Christ (Heb. 4:15-16). But one thing is clear: we all need His cleansing blood to get rid of our sins (Rev. 1:5). Knowing this, “Why tarriest thou?”

The Consequences of Sin

Saul could hardly think of his sins without being equally well aware of the consequences of his sins. He was well aware of the resurrection (Acts 24:15), that Christ Himself was to be our Judge (Acts 17:31), and that the wages of sin were death (Rom. 6:23, 2 Thess. 1:7-9). He knew ignorance was no excuse, even if he had been honest and sincere (Acts 23:1, 26:9, Ezek. 3:18-20). Now he was burdened even more with the realization he had been so wrong-so close to being lost for eternity! No wonder Ananias urged his prompt obedience to the will of Christ.

If you have not yet been washed in the blood of Christ, you too need to think seriously about the eternal destiny of your soul. You too are yet in your sins, and your tragic condition is described in Eph. 2:11-12. Are you ready to face your Lord? What could possibly be more important than your soul? Do you really want to be lost for eternity in Hell (Matt. 25:41)? If not, “Why tarriest thou?”

The Time Already Lost

Nearly half of Saul’s life had already been wasted-wasted in defending that which was abolished (Col. 2:14) and fighting against the very Son of God Himself. But Saul was fortunate because God had a mission for him now, and thus he had the chance to be saved. God does not desire that any perish (2 Pet. 3:9). James warns us that our life is but a “vapor” (Jas. 4:14), and Peter adds we have already spent sufficient time pursuing the way of the flesh (1 Pet. 4:3-any time so wasted is more than sufficient). Yet, many ignore warning after warning, invitation after invitation, as though they could pick any time they wish. This could be your last admonition! Would you be ready? Time is so important “Why tarriest thou?”

Others To Be Helped

And then there were others. Saul had three days to reflect-to think of all he had influenced, to think of those doing as he had done, to think of the thousands still lost, to think of those who might not get the chance he was getting. It must have run through his mind hundreds of times (Rom. 10:13). There were so many who did not know – Jews and Gentiles alike! There was so much to be done — and so little time left. No, Saul could not afford to tarry any longer. God wanted him to spread the joy of salvation to others, beginning with his own example of obedience.

Have you thought about the lost — your own soul and others? Can they afford to wait with their souls too? The souls of your own family, perhaps, still outside of Christ? Friends? Relatives? Do you really feel you can face them in eternity–Lost–and knowing you could have helped if only you had acted sooner? “Why tarriest thou?”

Conclusion

Saul did not quibble about “I don’t see why” or “why can’t I be saved by faith only.” He knew and understood the will of God. There was no need for further delay. He wanted to obey the Lord. He arose and was baptized (Acts 9:14), and began telling others the good news. What about you? If this is God’s will, the way He has selected for the blood of Christ to wash away our sins, why not render obedience before it is too late? “Why tarriest thou?” A note of urgency-the time is so short, the stakes so high, the way so simple! Have you rendered obedience? “Why tarriest thou?”

Truth Magazine XIX: 27, pp. 429-430
May 15, 1975

By Larry Ray Hafley

Many people sincerely believe that if baptism in water is an essential condition for receiving the remission of sins, then, one is saved by water and not by the blood of Christ. This theme is written to show, first, that no one is saved by water; second, that none can be saved without the blood of Christ; third, that baptism in water “for the remission of sins” does not exclude the blood of Christ (Acts 2:38).

Do not allow prejudice or bitterness to cloud and obscure the truth from your mind’s eye. Consider what is written in view of what the Bible teaches. Charges of “water salvation” and “baptismal regeneration” do not meet the issue of whether baptism in water is one of God’s conditions of pardon from sin. Referring to those who believe that baptism is essential for salvation as followers of a “water god,” as some have done, will serve no useful purpose. Therefore, let us calmly search the Scriptures and consider the objection: namely, “If baptism in water is essential to salvation, one is saved by water and not by the blood of Christ.” The topic before us is the result of a misunderstanding. No rational, Bible believing Christian teaches that one is saved by water, but the accusation has been made that some teach salvation by water. It is this false charge that we are studying.

Parallel Arguments

(1) In Numbers 21:4-9, we have the account of Israel’s discouraged and dissatisfied attitude “because of the way.” “And the Lord sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died. Therefore the people came to Moses, and said, We have sinned, for we have spoken against the Lord, and against thee; pray unto the Lord, that he take away the serpents from us. And Moses prayed for the people. And the Lord said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live. And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.”

Suppose someone bitten by a serpent had said, “I refuse to go look on the serpent of brass. I believe the Lord will save me if I believe in Him without looking. Besides, if I look on the serpent of brass that will be trusting the serpent on the pole rather than the Lord. That is `serpent salvation.’ Anyone who believes he has to look on the serpent believes in `snake salvation.’ ” Would one have been saved if he had so reasoned? Is it true that doing what the Lord said to do makes “serpent salvation?” Of course not. Looking on the serpent of brass was an essential condition of life. And so is baptism, for it was the Son of God who said, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned” (Mk. 16:16).

(2) 2 Kings 5:1-19 describes the healing of Naaman the leper. Elisha, the man of God “sent a messenger unto him saying, Go and wash in Jordan seven times, and thy flesh shall come again to thee, and thou shaft be clean. But Naaman was wroth, and went away, and said, Behold, I thought, He will surely come out to me, and stand, and call on the name of the Lord his God, and strike his hand over the place, and recover the leper. Are not Abana and Pharpar, rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? May I not wash in them, and be clean? So he turned and went away in a rage. And his servants came near, and spake unto him, and said, My father, if the prophet had bid thee do some great thing, wouldest thou not have done it? How much rather then, when he saith to thee, Wash, and be clean? Then went he down, and dipped himself seven times in Jordan, according to the saying of the man of God: and his flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little child, and he was clean.”

Suppose one of Naaman’s servants had said, “If you go dip in Jordan that will be `water healing.’ Don’t trust in the water; trust in the Lord. Elisha says, `Be dipped or be diseased.’ He believes healing is in the water.” Was Naaman’s cleansing effected by the water? Was this “water healing?” Did Naaman say, “The waters of the Jordan have healed me?” No, he did not. On the contrary he extolled and exclaimed, “Behold, now I know that there is no God in all the earth but in Israel” (2 Kings 5:15). Therefore, when one obeys the command to be baptized “in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38; 10:48), he is not trusting in the water for salvation any more than was Naaman.

Conclusion

The Bible teaches that it is in baptism that the blood of Christ remits sin. “In whom (Christ) we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace” (Eph. 1:7). How does one get into Christ to be redeemed by the blood? The word .of God answers with a question, “Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death” (Rom. 6:3)? One is not cleansed by the blood until he is in Christ (Eph: 1:7). One is not in Christ until he is “baptized into Christ” (Gal. 3:26, 27). Thus, one must be baptized before the blood of Christ will pardon.

The apostle Peter declared that “baptism doth also now save us” (1 Pet. 3:21), yet he revealed that we are redeemed by the blood and saved by grace (1 Pet. 1:18, 19; Acts 15:11). So, gospel preachers today can command baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38; 10:48), and still say, “We acre saved by grace and redeemed by the blood of Christ.” If Peter could do it and be consistent, what doth hinder us? Or would someone accuse an apostle of the Son of God of believing in “water salvation?”

Truth Magazine XIX: 27, pp. 428-429
May 15, 1975

By O. C. Birdwell

The New Testament speaks often and much on the subject of baptism. The scriptures which speak on the subject are clear, concise, and were given to be understood: Yet, despite these plain Bible passages which show the need for baptism many still object and refuse to obey Christ in baptism. Foy E. Wallace, Jr. said, “. . . The task of circumventing every passage in the New Testament which expresses any connection that baptism sustains to salvation is the constant and studied effort of every denominational preacher” (Bulwarks of the Faith, p. 85). Because of the constant and almost passionate rejection of baptism, it is imperative that, in our study of the general theme Baptism, attention be given to a few of the more commonly heard objections to baptism.

OBJECTION: The Bible teaches salvation by faith.

Yes, the Bible does teach salvation by faith (Rom. 5:1). But does this exclude the need for baptism? Has anyone ever read from the New Testament that salvation is by faith only? We know that a well known church creed says, “. . . wherefore, that we are justified by faith only, is a most wholesome doctrine, and very full of comfort” (Methodist Discipline, 1910, Art. 9), but our question is, where is it taught in the Bible? Another church manual says, “We believe the Scriptures teach that the salvation of sinners is wholly of grace; . . .” (Hiscox, Standard Manual for Baptist Churches, p. 61). While this particular church teaches salvation “wholly of grace” they, at the same time, also teach that salvation is by “faith only.” How can this be? “Wholly” is defined as, “to the full or entire extent: COMPLETELY.” “Only” means “as a single fact or instance and nothing more or different” (Webster’s Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary). How can man be saved “wholly by grace” and at the same time his salvation be “by faith only?” It is impossible. This is man’s doctrine, and not doctrine of the Bible. The Bible teaches that man is saved by grace (Eph. 2:8), by faith (Rom. 5:1), and by baptism (Acts 22:16; 1 Pet. 3:21). The word “only” or “wholly” is not used with either, except where it is used by James when he says “not by faith only” (James 2:24, KJV).

OBJECTION: The thief on the cross was not baptized.

There is no way for one to know positively whether he was or was not baptized. But, we will grant that he was not baptized. What does that have to do with what man in this dispensation is instructed to do? The thief lived in the presence of Jesus on earth before his death and before his Testament came into effect. He was not under the instructions given unto us in the New Testament (See Heb. 9:16-17). Another who lived before the New Testament period was Abraham. As far as we know, Abraham was never baptized. But he was never so instructed! If what he did teaches anything it surely shows that he would have been baptized if he had been so commanded, and that without a quibble. But Abraham and the thief lived before the New Law came into effect. The question we need to consider is, does the New Testament teach men who live after the death of Christ must be baptized in order to be saved?

OBJECTION: Baptism is a work, and man is not saved by works.

Ephesians 2:8-9 is usually cited by those who use this objection. A careful study of this passage will show that Paul speaks of the works devised by man in which man, if he were saved by them, could boast. Is baptism such a work? Now be fair with your answer! Can man boast of meritorious works, by which he is deserving of salvation, when he obeys the Bible instruction to be baptized? If you answer in the affirmative, then you must exclude faith and repentance, along with every other act of obedience. But none of these, my friend, are works of man’s righteousness: They are all a part of God’s righteousness, authorized by God, and bound upon man as his part in God’s plan, and necessary for one to take advantage of God’s extended grace. (For further study on this subject see “Baptism: A Work of Man or God?,” elsewhere in this publication.)

OBJECTION: Mark 16:16 does not say “he that disbelieveth and is not baptized shall be condemned.”

Of all the objections to baptism, this seems to be one of the most widely used. Jesus, in this passage, instructed that salvation be promised to those who believe and are baptized, and that condemnation be preached as a consequence of unbelief. Do not confuse the two subjects–salvation and condemnation. Two acts are listed as necessary for salvation; only one for condemnation. Unbelief alone will bring condemnation, but salvation follows belief and baptism. Do not be mislead.

OBJECTION: The man stranded in the desert or dying on the battlefield could not be saved if baptism is essential to salvation.

This objection is a human-reason argument against baptism that is made to appeal to the sympathy of man. Such sympathy appeals are made in many areas. Recorded actions of God which are contrary to the accepted practice of men are used by the modernist to try to disprove the inspiration of the scriptures. It is argued that any Old Testament passage which contains a command to slay people could not really be from God and is only the record of the people’s concept of God. This position assumes that modern man can know the nature and will of God apart from God’s having revealed it to him, and is just one of the many places where the modernist has missed the mark. He presumes to set his own standard and bounds for God and concludes that any act or command outside of these bounds of human wisdom is either not from God or is an immoral act by Him.

The same kind of reasoning is used by those who voice the above stated objection. Since they conclude that God could not reject the salvation of anyone who at the last minute before death decides he wants to be saved, they feel compelled to speak for God and devise their own scheme for the salvation of such people. Thus they, as the modernist, presume to know the nature and will of God apart from His revelation. Have they overlooked the constant New Testament warning of the dangers of procrastination and the perils of putting off obedience?

Jesus said, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.” Peter’s words are, “Repent ye, and be baptized, . . . unto the remission of your sins” (Acts 2:38). Before man’s salvation is his belief and baptism. Remission of sins is promised after repentance and baptism. One who rejects baptism would remove this act as a condition. Most would, however, retain belief and repentance. Through what kind of reason would one man have the right to remove one of Christ’s conditions and another man not have the same right to remove still another condition such as belief? Then one might ask, “What about the unbeliever who dies on the battlefield but, no doubt, would have eventually believed if his life had not been cut short? Will he not also be saved? You see, there is no end to such human reasoning.

These, and all other objections to baptism, will be resolved if one will stay with just the Bible and not speculate about the matter. If God saves all people who are in the desert and all who are on the battlefield, that will be His prerogative. If man preaches the pure gospel of Christ, however, he will tell all men to believe and be baptized to be saved. This is precisely what Jesus said.

Truth Magazine XIX: 27, pp. 426-428
May 15, 1975