Truth Magazine

By Carol R. Lumplin

There is more misunderstanding about “baptism,” than perhaps any other New Testament subject. A great deal of this is due to the disregard for what the New Testament plainly teaches. Paul wrote, “there is one baptism,” (Eph. 4:5). Since there is one baptism, it would rule out (1) John’s baptism, which ended when Christ died upon the cross (Col. 2:14); (2) Holy Spirit baptism, which is found only in Acts 2 upon the apostles and in Acts 10 upon the household of Cornelius; (3) fire baptism, which is yet to come upon those who know not God and obey not the gospel of Jesus Christ (2 Thess. 1:7-9). This one baptism is the one which Jesus commissioned His apostles to perform (Matt. 28:19).

The apostles were directed and controlled by the Holy Spirit in what they could teach and bind upon people in religion (Matt. 16:19; 18:18). The Holy Spirit directed the apostles in all truth (Jn. 16:13). Since they were directed in all truth, we are confined in our understanding of “baptism, ” to what they have given to us in the New Testament.

Paul said, “And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him” (Col. 3:17). “In the name of the Lord Jesus” means by His authority. The Lord has spoken on the subject of “baptism.” The book has been finished; no additional word will be forth coming (cf. Heb. 9:16-17). Honest and concerned people will open “the will of the Lord,” and there determine the “all” about “baptism.”

Baptized by the authority of Jesus Christ into the name of Jesus Christ. Peter commanded the believing Jews to, “repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins . . . ” (Acts 2:38). Peter was binding God’s law (Matt. 16:19) upon the Jews, with all the authority of Jesus Christ supporting him. Philip taught the same fixed authority to men and women in Samaria, who were baptized (Acts 8:12). Other accounts of the authority of Jesus Christ are expressed in (1) the conversion of Cornelius (Acts 10:47-48) and in (2) the conversion of the Ephesians (Acts 19:1-5).

Baptized into the likeness of the death of Jesus Christ. “Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For we have been planted together in the likeness of his death . . . ” (Rom. 6:4-5).

Baptized into Jesus Christ. “For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ” (Gal. 3:27). “Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?” (Rom. 6:3).

Since, we have the authority of Jesus Christ to bind what soever the inspired apostles and writers have taught us in the New Testament, then are we not also bound by what our Lord said about baptism in His ,commission to the apostles? He said, “All power (authority) is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of ‘the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:18-19). The authority of Jesus Christ (in His name) instructed the apostles to baptize those taught into “the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” When a sinner is baptized “in the name of the Son,” to the exclusion of the Father and of the Holy Spirit, is he baptized according to the authority of Jesus Christ? He either is, or he is not.

I firmly believe those of us who baptize people; when baptizing, should use the language of Jesus Christ. If not, then why did the Holy Spirit direct the apostles to do this? Just some food for thought.

Guardian of Truth XXVIII: 8, p. 236
April 19, 1984

By Michael L. DuBose

Is this man Coniah a despised broken idol? Wherefore are they cast out, he and his seed, and are cast into a land they know not? 0 earth, earth, earth, hear the word of the Lord. Thus saith the Lord, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah (Jer. 22:28-30).

The prophet Jeremiah said that none of Coniah’s descendants would ever prosper while sitting upon David’s throne in Jerusalem. Christ is a descendant of Coniah. In Matthew’s listing of the genealogy of Christ, Jechoniah, who was carried away into Babylonian captivity, and Coniah are the same man (see Mt. 1: 11, 12). Thus, according to Jeremiah’s prophecy, Christ of the seed of Coniah, could not reign upon David’s throne while upon the earth. This effectively destroys the premillennial doctrine of a literal thousand year reign of Christ on earth.

Usually, in order to try and circumvent the clear implications of these passages, premillennialists will argue that Matthew recorded Joseph’s lineage. Since Christ is not a fleshly descendant of Joseph, they contend that Jeremiah’s prophecy does not apply and they have done away with the contradiction between the word of God and their doctrine.

Luke, however, also records the genealogy of Christ, but on Mary’s side of the family. Notice a couple of names that are common to both records. In Matthew 1: 12-13 and Luke 3:27, the names Shealtiel and Zerubbabel appear. These are not four different men with the same names, but the same two men in both accounts. The families of Nathan and Solomon unite in Shealtiel. Thus, Christ is a descendant of Coniah on both sides of the family and according to Jeremiah, he could not rule upon an earthly throne.

Some see a contradiction in the fact that Shealtiel is called the son of Jechoniah in Matthew’s lineage and the son of Ned in Luke’s record. These discrepancies can be easily harmonized, however. In the listing of David’s descendants recorded in I Chronicles 3, Shealtiel is listed as the son of Jechoniah and Zerubbabel is listed as the son of Pedaiah (1 Chron. 3:16-19). It seems probable that Shealtiel was actually the grandson of Jechoniah either by his daughter and Neri, who was also a descendant of David through Nathan (see Lk. 3:27; 1 Chron. 3:5) or that Shealtiel was a great grandson of Jechoniah through Assir (1 Chron. 3:17) who died leaving a daughter but no sons. The inheritance was to pass to the daughter of a man who died having no sons (Num. 27:1-8), but the daughter was required to marry one who was of the same tribe as her father so that the inheritance would not be moved from tribe to tribe (Num. 36:8-12). In either case, Shealtiel would be the legitimate heir to the throne, but he never reigned because of the captivity.

If Shealtiel died, leaving no descendants, then his brother was obligated by the law to raise up seed to his name (Deut. 25:510). Thus, Pedaiah (the brother of Shealtiel and grandson of Jechoniah, 1 Chron. 3:18), took his brother’s widow and raised up Zerubbabel as seed to Shealtiel. Zerubbabel, then, would become the heir.

Whether one accept the above reasoning or not, Christ is still proven to be the descendant of Coniah by the Scriptures. He, therefore, can not reign on David’s throne while upon earth.

Nathan’s prophecy to David also shows that the Messiah would be a descendant of David through Solomon, thus through Coniah. In 2 Samuel 7:12-16, Nathan told David that his son would be allowed to build a house for the Lord and that this son would reign upon the throne of David his father forever. Solomon is the son under consideration in Nathan’s prophecy. He ascended to his father’s throne and he was allowed to build a house for God (1 Kings 5:5). But Solomon is not now reigning on David’s throne. Obviously, that part of the prophecy which speaks of David’s son reigning forever has reference to Christ. He was to reign upon David’s throne forever. But remember, we have established from Jeremiah’s prophecy, that Christ, who is a descendant of Coniah, can not rule on David’s throne while upon earth. Christ reign must be spiritual or heavenly, then.

This is exactly what Peter said in his sermon on the day of Pentecost. He told the audience gathered in Jerusalem, “Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; he seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ . . .” (Acts 2:30-31). The sitting on David’s throne was a reference to the resurrection of Christ and His ascension into heaven to sit at God’s right hand to rule over His church (Acts 2:32-36).

The premillennial doctrine of the thousand year earthly reign of Christ clearly contradicts these Bible passages and in these verses, there is a problem which the premillennialist can not answer.

Guardian of Truth XXVIII: 8, p. 243
April 19, 1984

By Don Givens

There is no more wonderful service than to impart saving truth, Lost sinners must know the truth and the truth can make them free. Our Savior commanded, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel” so that creatures could hear, believe, respond in repentance and baptism and be saved (Matt. 28:18-20; Mark 16:15,16).

It is clearly seen then, that the preaching of the word “publicly and from house to house” is of utmost importance (Acts 20:20). Every disciple of the Lord is to spread the glad tidings of salvation. Who is not thrilled to share such tremendous news? The gospel is “glad tidings” (Luke 2:10,11). As the angel said, it is truly “good tidings of great joy.”

The disciples who were driven out of Jerusalem waited for no instructions, no organized personal work program, or human clergy “ordinations,” but “went everywhere preaching the word” (Acts 8:4). We desperately need the attitude of Paul when he proclaimed, “Woe is me, if I preach not the gospel” (1 Cor. 9:16).

As one preaches and teaches the word, he must have a life consistent with the content of the gospel he proclaims. In other words, do not ruin what you say by how you live! Zealous, righteous, and blameless character must fortify the oral lessons of the teacher.

The evangelist Paul told the younger evangelist Timothy to “preach the word; be urgent in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching” (2 Tim. 4:2). It is the Word that is to be preached, not your opinions, not your surmissings, and not “the ways that seem right unto men” (Prov. 14:12). Carefully note that the apostle commands us to be longsuffering. Too many teachers are short-sufferers.

Preach the sufficiency and inspiration ‘ of the Scriptures (2 Tim. 3:16,17). Cater not to the worldly wisdom of the crafty fools (1 Cor. 3:18-21).

With the rock of Truth hurled from the sling of faith, you can smite unbelief as it parades in modern society under the guise of “sophistication.” Swallow not the bait of the devil which says that only the ignoramus believes the Bible and only the weak-minded need the faith. Show the people that the nice, pretty baits of pleasure, power, and profit only hide the hooks of damnation, destruction, and doom.

Preach repentance from sin, rather than making apologies for it. Firmly declare, with love for souls, that the sinner must repent or perish in hell (2 Pet. 3:9; Rev. 21:8). Remember that men laugh at sin instead of turning from it. They toy with it instead of hating it. Although men may joke about hell, there will be no joking in hell. Teach men to hate sin as much as they hate the hell to which it leads. Even though some have eliminated hell from their doctrinal belief, it has not been eliminated from God’s Word.

Rebuke sin wherever and in whomever it is found, and start with yourself . Be courageous enough to identify sin as wickedness in all of its filthiness and putridness, even though it be found in your best friend as well as your worst enemy. In all these rebukes remember that “the Lord’s servant must not strive, but be gentle towards all, apt to teach, forbearing, in meekness correcting them that oppose themselves” (2 Tim. 2:24,25) and “in all things showing thyself an ensample of good works” (Tit. 2:7).

Be just as broad as the Scriptures. Be just as narrow as the Scriptures. Study the sermons of Peter, Paul, Stephen, but especially those of Jesus. Think not that you can have “better manners” than the apostles. Denounce riotous living; expose the grimy hog pens of sin; and as you do so offer the amazing grace of the Heavenly Father to the returning prodigal.

As you preach the Word remember that your greatest wage and your best pay is the approval of the Lord and the glory brought to God. No wage is so satisfying as the peace and joy you will have knowing that you are laboring together with God (1 Cor. 15:58).

Do not expect overwhelming gratitude from people you serve. Truly, you are serving the Lord. About ninety percent of the good you do in this life, you will not know about in this life! Therefore, do not teach the saving truth just when you can see “visible results.” Much good that you do will not be “visible” to you. Remember that the prophets of God have always been on the receiving end of more “mud” than “medals,” and more bricks than bouquets.

When humiliated by a seeming failure, the Lord will halve your burden by helping you bear your disappointment. When you are elated with success, God will double your joy by sharing it.

As many faithful preachers and teachers of the precious Word have said before: “Preach sin horrible, death inevitable, judgment certain, hell hot, eternity never ending, and heaven beautiful.”

Preach the saving truth! Spread the good news! Go, and may God be with thee.

Guardian of Truth XXVIII: 8, p. 230
April 19, 1984

By Hoyt Houchen

Question: We have a problem understanding the word “eat” in 1 Corinthians 5:11. Is Paul saying that if a Christian’s son or daughters (after leaving home) becomes unfaithful, we father and mother) that are faithful cannot eat a common meal with them? How far do we carry the “have company with” them?

Reply: Let us first notice the words of Paul in 1 Corinthians 5:9-11. “I wrote unto you in my epistle to have no company with fornicators; not at all meaning with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous and extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world: but as it is, I wrote unto you not to keep company, if any man that is named a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such a one no, not to eat.”

One of the sins which existed in the church at Corinth was the sin of incest. Paul dealt with this problem in 1 Corinthians 5. He wrote in verse 1: “It is actually reported that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not even among the Gentiles, that one of you hath his father’s wife.” The attitude of the brethren at Corinth toward this shameful condition was not only one of indifference but one of arrogance and defiance. “Ye are puffed up, and did not mourn, that he that had done this deed might be taken from you” (v. 2). The church was not only instructed to deal with this sin but also how to handle it. The brethren were commanded, “Purge out the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, even as ye are unleavened” (v. 7). As the Israelites were to remove all leaven from their houses before the Passover (Ex. 12:15,20; 13:7), so these Corinthians were to remove the old leaven of sin that they might become pure. Action was to be taken by these brethren toward the guilty party. He was to be excluded from the fellowship of the church. Immorality must not be tolerated among Christians. We are commanded to withdraw ourselves from the disorderly (2 Thess. 3:6). Personal association that will endorse or encourage those claiming to be Christians, but who -are guilty of sin, is prohibited. “With such a one, no not to eat” (vs. 11). It is obvious that the eating here does not refer to the Lord’s Supper. The phrases “have no company” and “with such a one, no, not to eat,” do not apply to the world but to members of the church. Paul says, “if any man that is named a brother . . . ” (v. 11). So, the eating referred to in the passage is a common meal.

The question asked involves whether or not we may eat a common meal with a member of the family who is unfaithful. The passage cannot be made to apply to members of a family. There is a relationship which we sustain to our physical families which is distinct from our spiritual relationship in the church. We are in no way to act toward the disciplined or unfaithful member of the church that would lend any endorsement or encouragement of his misconduct. In the case of a family member, it should be made clear that any social activity engaged in with him is strictly in the realm of a family relationship and that it by no means sanctions his sin. It would then necessarily follow that husband-wife relations (1 Cor. 7:3-5) and social obligations with relatives do not of themselves condone the guilty.

Guardian of Truth XXVIII: 8, pp. 228-229
April 19, 1984