Truth Magazine

By Frank Jamerson

The New Testament speaks of the church in both the universal and the local senses. In the universal sense, there is one body and it is composed of all the saved of all the world (Eph. 1:22,23; Acts 2:47). In the local sense, a church is composed of Christians who agree to worship and work together, and in this sense there are many churches (Rom. 16:16).

The two unscriptural concepts that we want to study involve how we become members of the universal and the local church. The “language of Ashdod” that is too prominent today indicates that many brethren do not have a clear understanding of the distinctions between these two uses of the word “church.”

First, some talk about “joining the church” when they are speaking about their baptism into Christ. This indicates a lack of understanding about how we become a part of the body of Christ. We do not “join” the universal church. The Bible says, “And the Lord added to the church day by day those who were being saved” (Acts 2:47). The one who saves us, adds us! When does He add us? The context in Acts 2 shows that those who “repented and were baptized for the remission of their sins” were saved (Acts 2:38,41). Paul told the Corinthians, “For by one Spirit were we all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether bond or free; and were all made to drink of one Spirit” (1 Cor. 12:13). The penitent believer is baptized “into one body,” or “into Christ” (Gal. 3:27) in the sense that God forgives his sins and saves him because of his obedience to his commands. That does not make one a member of a local church, but of the universal church.

The second unscriptural concept that we want to notice is the idea that baptism automatically makes one a member of a local church. Just as we do not join the universal church, we are not baptized into a local church.

The Ethopian eunuch was baptized by Philip, and “went on his way rejoicing” because he was saved (Acts 8:38,39), but he was not a member of any local church at that time. Saul of Tarsus had been baptized into Christ, and accepted by brethren in Damascus, but when he went to Jerusalem and “assayed to join himself to the disciples” there, he was not automatically accepted (Acts 9:26). After Barnabas “took him, and brought him to the apostles, and declared unto them how he had seen the Lord in the way, and that he had spoken to him, and how at Damascus he had preached boldly in the name of Jesus,” they agreed to accept him (Acts 9:27). The next verse says he “was with them” (v. 28). He did not just “join up,” he “joined in”! But there had to be the desire to “belong” on his part, and the willingness to “accept” on their part. When Apollos wanted to go from Ephesus to Achaia, brethren in Ephesus wrote a letter “to the disciples to receive him” (Acts 18:27). What the word of mouth accomplished for Saul, the written word accomplished for Apollos! Before there can be local church membership, there must be a desire to belong and an acceptance on the part of others.

How is this desire and agreement expressed? The Bible does not give the details about this, therefore we must use our judgment in applying these principles. There are three ways that I know that have been used. (1) When a person moves to an area, or is baptized into Christ, and begins worshiping with a congregation, his participation is accepted by the church and understood by him as indicating desire to belong and acceptance, and no word is spoken. (The danger of this method is that one party or the other may misunderstand the intentions of the other. Simply worshiping with a group does not necessarily indicate a desire to belong, nor a willingness to accept.) (2) A person goes forward and states his desire to the preacher, or expresses it to the elders and a public announcement is made of this person’s desire to “identify” or join this group. Unless there is some reason to question the person’s faithfulness, he is accepted by the congregation as a member. (3) When a person expresses a desire to be a part of the church, the elders meet with him, or her, and discuss their mutual responsibilities. After such discussion an announcement is made that this person is a part of the congregation. (Elders have a special responsibility toward members of the flock and such a meeting serves to let the prospective member know what we are doing, as well as what we do not practice, and find out what they have done in other places and are willing to do here. This is the approach that the elders here use.)

Other methods may be just as good in fulfilling the two requirements for local church membership, but we need to keep clearly in our minds that we are baptized “into Christ” (this is not “joining a local church”), and we join a local church (we were not baptized into it).

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 16, p. 495
August 20, 1987

By Ron Halbrook

Sodomy or homosexuality has been in the news often during recent years. There has been a concerted effort to remove all stigma from this practice. Homosexuals seek social acceptance, political power, and even religious approval. Then came the AIDS scare, followed by a publicity campaign aimed at making sodomy safe. Is it really safe and sane, or is it sinful, shameful, and destructive?

In Genesis 19, Lot received two male guests into his home. “The men of Sodom compassed the house round, both old and young,” demanding to take Lot’s visitors for homosexual purposes. In desperation, Lot offered his own daughters to these men who were insane with lust, but they continued to demand instead the men inside. The visitors were actually angels or messengers from God, and they struck the men of Sodom blind; These poor souls were so inflamed with lust that still they tried to take Lot’s visitors. The angels announced to Lot the impending destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.

“Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven.” Lot barely escaped with his daughters. In Jude 7 we learn that God destroyed Sodom for homosexuality in order that it might remain an example all through history, “suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.” The anger of God against this perversion pursues the sinner not only in this world but even in the next! Sodomy is not safe and sane, and we can never make it so. The story of Sodom stands to remind us that homosexuality is self-destructive and destroys respect for our fellow man.

Romans 1 teaches that men fell into such sins when they rejected the true knowledge of God from their lives.

For this cause God gave them up to vile passions: for their women changed the natural use into that which is against nature: and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another, men with men working unseemliness, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was due (Rom. 1:26-27).

The context of this passage confirms what we see happening all around us. Homosexuality is associated with the grossest sins and perversions, destroying respect for God, for others, and for self. To live and die in such sins is to judge ourselves unworthy of everlasting life and to condemn ourselves to an eternity in hell (Gal. 5:19-21).

The good news in Christ is that God is ready to forgive the sin of sodomy as well as all other sins! He sent His Son into the world to die in order that we might have eternal life (Jn. 3:16). 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 teaches that some of the early Christians had been “effeminate” and “abusers of themselves with mankind,” which refer to the sins of homosexuality.

And such were some of you: but ye were washed, but ye were sanctified, but ye were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and by the Spirit of our God (1 Cor. 6:11).

They were washed, sanctified, and justified by believing the gospel of Christ. This true faith caused them to repent of all their past sins, to confess Christ as God’s Son, and to be immersed in water for the remission of their sins through the blood of Christ (Acts 2:38).

We can never make sodomy or any other sin safe and sane! A slogan widely used in the current anti-drug campaign says, “Just say No! ” Rather than trying to make sin safe, we need to “Just say No!” to sin and say yes to God. Through the power of the gospel of Christ, He will save us from all sins.

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 16, pp. 483, 503
August 20, 1987

By Edward O. Bragwell, Sr.

“Blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute sin” (Rom. 4.8).

I am amazed at how freely Calvinists and some brethren, who say they are not Calvinists, use this passage. To the Calvinist it proves his brand of the security of the saints. To such brethren it proves their brand of continuous cleansing of the saints. In either case it is used to prove that a Christian’s sins, at least some of them, are not held against him by the Lord.

The main difference, the best I can determine from their writings, between Calvinists and the “continuous cleansing” brethren is that Calvinists believe that no sins are charged to the Christian’s account while the brethren believe that only some sins are charged to his account – mainly those high-handedly committed.

If the Lord does not impute sin, in the sense of never charging it to our accounts, then there is no need to talk about “continuous cleansing.” One does not cleanse that which is not soiled. If sin is not imputed, in the sense of not being charged to him, he is not soiled by the sin. He needs no cleansing – continuous or otherwise.

The popular illustration of the windshield wiper effect does apply here – even though this is one of the proof texts usually used in connection with it. The most recent usage that I have seen is in a sermon by Guy N. Woods being distributed in tract form by Britnell Publications of Little Rock, Arkansas. For the reader who may not be familiar with the windshield wiper illustration, it goes something like this: When one becomes a Christian his “windshield wiper” is turned on. Rain drops (sins) will continue to fall on his windshield (soul) but they are immediately wiped off by the wiper (blood of Christ). So, they say, a Christian’s sins are taken care of without his having to reach and turn the wiper on each time a drop hits his windshield – it is automatically wiped off. They may deny (as they do) that they are teaching “automatic continuous cleansing” rather than mere “continuous cleansing” – the windshield wiper illustrates automatic cleansing or it is a pointless illustration. The difference between hard core Calvinists and the brethren that use the illustration, as I see it, is that once the Calvinist’s wiper is turned on there is no way he can turn it off; while brethren leave us with the option of turning it off through high handed or willful sin.

Anyway, if the sins are not charged to our account then what is produced is not a windshield wiper effect, but an umbrella effect. One is covered by an umbrella when he becomes a Christian. Though sin may fall all around him, in the case of the Calvinist, even soaking his flesh, it is not allowed to get to his soul because the Lord will not impute it to him, holding an umbrella over his head.

Really now, who is this man to whom the Lord will not impute sin in Romans 4? Anything more than a superficial reading of this statement in context should make it clear. It is the man whom God has forgiven after he has confessed his sin. It is not the man whose sins are never imputed to him. It is not the man whose sins are forgiven without their being confessed. Verses 7 and 8, of Romans 4, should be taken together. They form a quote from Psalms 32:1,2.

It seems to me that these two verses alone identify the kind of person contemplated as a forgiven man. If he is forgiven, the sin was at one time imputed to him or there would have been no need for forgiveness. Once forgiven, he is a blessed man to whom the Lord no longer imputes the sin because it has been forgiven.

When one takes the first 5 verses of Psalms 32 together it becomes abundantly clear that the sin that is not imputed is confessed sin.

In the first two verses, those quoted in Romans 4, David tells of the blessedness (for any man) of being forgiven – of not having sin imputed to him. He then turns to a practical application of the principle in his own life.

Verses 3 and 4 tells of his own lack of blessedness as long as he did not confess – i.e., “kept silent”:

1. “My bones grew old through my groaning all the day long”

2. “Day and night Your (the Lord’s – EOB) hand was heavy upon me”

3. “My vitality was turned into the drought of summer”

In verse 5, he gives the basis upon which he now enjoyed the blessedness of “the man to whom the Lord does not impute iniquity”:

1. “I acknowledged my sin to You”

2. “My iniquity I have not hidden”

3. “I said, ‘I will confess my transgression to the Lord,”‘

4. “And you forgave the iniquity of my sin.”

So, if one is going to find any basis for some kind of cleansing of unconfessed sins, he will have to find it in some other passage. It looks to me like David had to consciously “turn the wipers on” when he said, “I will confess my transgressions.”

1 John 1:7-9 does teach continuous cleansing for the Christian as long as he confesses his sins (not merely acknowledging his sinfulness). “If we keep on confessing our sins, God ‘is faithful and righteous to forgive our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.’ ‘Faithfulness’ and ‘righteousness’ are attributes of the great Jehovah; and when we confess our sins before him, we enter into and partake of the blessings which result from them. He has promised to forgive us on condition that we confess our sins. . . ” (A Commentary on the New Testament Epistles, pp. 219 220, by Guy N. Woods). All emphasis in the preceding quotation are mine and I couldn’t have said it better myself.

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 15, pp. 462-463
August 6, 1987

By Jeffrey Asher

Very few realize there exists a special relationship between the shed blood of Jesus Christ and baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus. That such a relationship exists was established by the apostle Paul in Romans chapter 6: “Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? Certainly not I How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?”

Blood In God’s Redemption Plan

In God’s unfolding scheme or plan of redemption, blood has always had a special significance. In all dispensations, under all covenants, God has allowed blood to procure the expiation of sin, that is, release from the penalty due for sin. The Scripture says: “almost all things are by the law purged with blood: and without the shedding of blood there is no remission” (Heb. 9:22). Blood has sin cleansing power because a sacrifice of blood is actually a sacrifice of life, and death is the penalty for sin; the wages of sin is death (Rom. 6:23). Moses commanded, “Only be sure that you eat not the blood: for the blood is the life, and you may not eat the life with the flesh” (Deut. 12:23). Now, not just any blood can expiate sin. Even the blood of the bulls and goats offered in sacrifice to God lacked real sin cleansing ability, “for it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins” (Heb. 10:4). No, these animal sacrifices were types or representations of the atoning sacrifice Christ would make. Only his blood can take away sins (Heb. 10: 18). In Scripture Jesus is called “the lamb of God” (John 1:29), “our Passover” (1 Cor. 5:7,8), and “the Lamb slain from the foundation of the earth” (Rev. 13:8). Jesus is readily described by New Testament writers as our expiating sacrifice for sin.

Blood Must Be Applied

In order for the blood to “cleanse,” it was necessary that it be applied to the supplicant for whom the sacrifice was made. There are numerous Old Testament examples of this; however, let us consider only these three.

First, blood was applied to the house of Israel at the first Passover (Exod. 12:13). “And the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where you are: and when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and the plague shall not be upon you to destroy you, when I smite the land of Egypt.” Observe, that it was essential that the blood be upon the houses. Those houses which did not have blood applied to their lintels and door posts would not be protected from the plague of the death of the first born. God only passed over those houses where he saw the blood.

Second, blood was applied to the house of Israel when God made his covenant with them (Exod. 24:6-8). “And Moses took half of the blood, and put it in basins; and half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar. And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, all that the Lord has said will we do and be obedient. And Moses took the blood and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the Lord has made with you concerning all these words.” Here we see that before Israel could be God’s covenant people they had to be sanctified with the blood of the covenant. Their relationship to God was sealed with his blood.

Third, the priests of the Tabernacle worship were consecrated by the application of blood (Exod. 29:20). “Then you shall kill the ram, and take his blood, and put it upon the tip of the right ear of Aaron, and upon the tip of the right ear of his sons, and upon the thumb of their right hand, and upon the great toe of their right foot, and sprinkle the blood upon the altar round about.” As before these individuals could not be set aside in the priesthood until they had the blood of the offering applied to them.

Water Baptism: When Jesus’ Blood Is Applied

These three illustrations should establish that there was always the application of the blood of the offering to those who offered the sacrifice. Even now the blood of Christ must be applied to sinners who seek the forgiveness of their sins today. “For if the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies to the purifying of the flesh, how much more shall the blood of Christ, . . . purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?” (Heb. 9:13,14)

Unlike the examples we have given from the Old Testament the application of the blood of Jesus is not a literal application. However, the Scriptures teach that saints are washed in this blood. “[Jesus Christ] loved us and washed us from our sins in his own blood” (Rev. 1:5). We must determine where and how the blood is applied to sinners in order to make them “clean.”

When we read the New Testament we find that just as the blood of the Passover was applied to the house of Israel, so the blood of our Passover, Christ, has been applied to God’s House, the church (1 Tim. 3:15). Paul told the Ephesian elders: “. . . shepherd the church of God which he purchased with his own blood” (Acts 20:28). Also, we read that just as Israel was sprinkled with the blood of Moses’ covenant before they were God’s people, so today, we are sprinkled with the blood of the New Covenant (Matt. 26:28). “Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus, . . . let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water” (Heb. 10:19, 22). Finally, we noticed that priests were set aside for service by the blood. Today, Christians, God’s holy priesthood and kingdom of priests, are set aside by Jesus’ blood (1 Pet. 2:5; Rev. 1:5,6). “In as much as you know that you are not redeemed with corruptible things, . . . but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot.” Somehow and somewhere the blood of Jesus is applied to sinners seeking salvation. I submit that the Scriptures teach the blood of Christ is applied to sinners in baptism, and that this is what the apostle Paul had in mind in Romans 6:3 when he said we are “baptized into [Christ’s] death.”

Baptism is designed to change our relationship to Christ. Baptism changes our relationship by bringing us into Christ. Before baptism we are aliens, outside of the realm of the blessings for the saved (Eph. 1:3), but after baptism we are in Christ where the blessings can be had. “For you are all sons of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ” (Gal. 3:26,27). Again, baptism changes our relationship by bringing us into the body of Christ from outside the body of Christ, which is the church (Col. 1:18). “For by one Spirit we are all baptized into one body” (1 Cor. 12:13).

Baptism carries the believer to where remission of sins is found.

Baptism into Christ’s death enables us reach the blood of his cross (John 19:34). Baptism is God’s operation of washing us in the blood of the Lamb and cleansing us of our sins (Col. 2:12,13). “[You] were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead. And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses. . . . ” How much clearer can it be? God forgives men of their sins when they obey his command for baptism.

Let us examine one case of conversion and determine when and where God washed our sins in Jesus’ blood. In Acts chapter 9 we read of Saul’s conversion. On the road to Damascus the Lord Jesus appeared to him and said, “Go into the city and there it shall be told you what you must do. . . ” (Acts 9:6). There Saul fasted and prayed three days waiting to be told what to do. Finally, Ananias, a gospel preacher, came and asked him, “Saul, why are you waiting, get up and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16). Now, when was Saul washed in the blood of the lamb of God? When he got up and was baptized.

Friend, today you too can be saved from your sins. All you need do is come in faith, turning from your sins unto God, and be baptized. Christ will save you and God will add you to his church.

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 15, pp. 460-461
August 6, 1987