Truth Magazine

By David A. Padfield

Many attempts have been made by Baptist preachers to negate the force of Acts 2:38. One of the most common is their insistence that since the words “repent” and “be baptized” are different in both person and number in the original text, the Phrase “for the remission of sins”,.cannot refer to both of these verbs.

During recent discussions with a Baptist preacher, I took the time to write to several prominent Greek scholars to find their opinion on the language of Acts 2:38. The question sent to them was as follows:

“Is it grammatically possible that the phrase ‘eis aphesin humartion,’ ‘for the forgiveness of sins,’ as used in Acts 2:38, expresses the force of both verbs, ‘repent ye and be baptized each one of you,’ even though these verbs differ in both person and number?”

The following men responded to my letters; I have given their qualifications along with their response.

Bruce M. Metzger was the editor of the Textual Commentary on The Greek New Testament published by the United Bible Societies. He is currently teaching at Princeton Theological Seminary in New Jersey.

“In reply to your recent inquiry may I say that, in my view, the phrase ‘eis aphesin hamartion’ in Acts 2:38 applies in sense to both of the preceding verbs.”

F.W. Gingrich is a professor of New Testament Greek at Albright College in Reading, Pennsylvania. Gingrich, along with William F. Arndt, Published A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature in 1957.

“The difference in person and number of ‘repent’ and ‘be baptized’ is caused by the fact that ‘repent’ is a direct address in the second person plural, while ‘be baptized’ is governed by the subject ‘every one of you,’ and so in third person singular. ‘Every one of you’ is, of course, a collective noun.”

Arthur L. Farstad was the chairman of the New King James Executive Review Committee and general editor of the NKJV New Testament. The NKJV was translated by over 120 Greek Scholars, many of these men teach in Baptist schools and colleges.

“Since the expression ‘eis aphesin hamartion’ is a prepositional phrase with no verbal endings or singular or plural endings I certainly agree that grammatically it can go with both repentance and baptism. In fact, I would think that it does go with both of them. Exactly what is the interpretation of it is another question.”

John R. Werner is the International Consultant in Translation to the Wycliffe Bible Translators. He was also a consultant to Friberg and Friberg with the Analytical Greek New Testament. From 1962 to 1972 he was Professor of Greek at Trinity Christian College.

“Whenever two verbs are connected by UP ‘and’ and then followed by a modifier (such as a prepositional phrase, as in Acts 2:38), it is grammatically possible that modifier modifies either both the verbs, or only the latter one. This is because there is no punctuation in the manuscripts, so we don’t know whether the author intended to pause between the first verb and the ‘and’.

“It does not matter that, here is Acts 2:38, one of the verbs is secondperson plural (“y’all”) and the other is third person singular (“is to”). They are both imperative, and the fact that they are joined by UP ‘and’ is sufficient evidence that the author may have regarded them as a single unit to which his modifier applied.”

The Translator’s Handbook On The Acts Of The Apostles, Published by the United Bib e Societies, so provides some valuable information.

“So that your sins will be forgiven (literally ‘into a forgiveness of your sins’) in the Greek may express either purpose or result; but the large majority of translators understand it as indicating purpose. The phrase modifies both main verbs: turn away from your sins and be baptized.”

If you need copies of the original quotations cited above, please write to me at the above address.

Guardian of Truth XXVIII: 3, p. 82
February 2, 1984

By Dennis C. Abernathy

All who are zealous for God, realize the importance of faithful attendance to Bible classes. We understand the importance of studying the Bible (2 Tim. 2:15; 1 Tim. 4:13; Acts 17:11; Jn. 5:39), of doing that which we know is good (Jas. 4:17), of the consideration we ought to have toward our brethren in provoking unto love and good works (Heb. 10:24-25), of being steadfast, firm, and abounding in the Lord’s work (1 Cor. 15:58). Because we understand the importance of these things, we are constantly encouraging brethren to be faithful in their attendance to Bible classes, and to take an active part therein. But in spite of the teaching, pleading and encouraging, more often than not the effort seems futile. The class attendance lags far behind the regular preaching services. You feel frustrated at times – nothing seems to create interest!

I was reading from a bulletin (from a huge liberal church, incidently) and ran across the following with reference to a Wednesday evening class. It seems that many who wanted to attend and participate were turned away, due to lack of space. So this year, they are having the class again and stated: “So, if you were frustrated last year, or if your interest is kindled this year, please contact, etc.” With reference to another class on Colossians, it is being repeated also for “the benefit of those who were squeezed out this summer.” Imagine that! People with a desire to attend Bible class, but the class is so full, they have to be turned away.

My point: If there is to be frustration, let it be from overcrowded classes, and not from a failure to even attend classes. My brother and sister in Christ, if you have a desire for spiritual things, and you love the church, you will be regular in your attendance to Bible classes. Remember, Paul said, “always abounding in the work of the Lord.” (1 Cor. 15:58).

Guardian of Truth XXVIII: 3, p. 81
February 2, 1984

By Irven Lee

Several people who have been very active in church work for years have recently become impure and unfaithful to their marriage partners. Who can explain this? Why are such shocking reports coming to our attention so often? There are possibly many factors involved.

The efforts of humanists to destroy faith through the news media, schools, etc., have evidently succeeded at least in weakening the faith of many. Those affected may be people of the world who became more corrupt or active church people who became cont . ed. Our nation is sick morally and spiritually. This sickness is contagious.

There is need for tenderness and love in the home. Some have told us that infants develop more normally if they are handled and loved in those early weeks of life. The child and the parents need these strong ties that bind them together. This gives the child a sense of security, and the adults have joy in parenthood. There is need for affection expressed between husbands and wives, and between parents and children. Our materialistic, pleasure-mad world starves for love and kindness.

The church is meant to be one great family where love abounds (John 13:34,35). Active good will is to reach out in all directions from the devout Christian. Love that does not manifest itself in some way may not actually be love. If we love God, we keep His commandments (John 14:15,21,23). Love for the brethren is expressed in many ways (e.g., 1 Cor. 13:4-8; 1 John 3:14-19).

Mention is made of the holy kiss (Rom. 16:16; 1 Thess. 5:26; 1 Peter. 5:14). The word “holy” deserves emphasis in this expression because there is also the unholy kiss (Prov. 7:13). America is entertained by television programs where lasciviousness seems to be the main ingredient. The unholy kiss is one item in these corrupt displays.

There is more freedom of expression in our day in conversation and in display of affection among good people. Things are discussed freely in these days that would not have been mentioned in groups a few years ago. There is much more use of the embrace and the kiss in our time. It may te hard to know when to offer a word of warning about this freedom. Proper affection may be expressed with discretion at any time.

Sometimes when some preacher is found guilty of immorality people recall that for some time he had been free with his hands as he greeted the women in the church. There is no worthy place for the unholy kiss or the embrace of lust. Let those who accept the freedom of our times beware. Be sure that the affection expressed is not lust. “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Abstain from all appearance of evil” (1 Thess. 5:21,22). Do you see any danger?

The freedoms of our time have more or less destroyed such words as modesty, chastity, discretion, and shamefastness (Tit. 2:3-5; 1 Tim. 2:9; 1 Pet. 3:1-6). These words seem to have no meaning for some. They question any definitions that would restrain the exposure of the body in public. Even men who are known as able gospel preachers claim that the swim suit is modest for beach wear. If it is, to what evil was the apostle referring in these passages? If people who wear clothes such as the swim suit are modest, chaste, discreet and given to the shamefastness, I do not know of any warnings needed for these things. Does the ungodly world set the standard (Jer. 6: 15)?

Guardian of Truth XXVIII: 3, p. 81
February 2, 1984

By Frank Jamerson

One of the major problems through the years among brethren has been the accumulation and use of money. The major reason for the trouble has been the failure to distinguish between individual and congregational activity.

When churches have bazaars, operate businesses and rent property to make money, they are doing what individuals are authorized to do, but the church is not authorized to raise funds in these ways. Individuals are to “work with their own hands” in order to have resources to support themselves and to help others (Eph. 4:28). The same writer said that if a man will not work, “neither should he eat” (2 Thess. 3: 10). An individual may farm, operate a business or work for someone else, own rental property, etc., but churches that engage in such methods of raising money are acting without authority from God.

A local church is to raise money by the giving of members on the first day of the week (1 Cor. 16:1, 2). God has revealed no other day or way for churches to raise money. When brethren recognize the distinction between individual and congregational activity, they will not contend that the church can do what the individual can do. Those who do not understand this distinction will have churches involved in all kinds of business enterprises to earn money.

Another problem area is the use of money. The Bible clearly teaches that there is a difference between what belongs to the individual and what belongs to the church. The property of Ananias and Sapphira did not belong to the church, and the money gained from its sale did not belong to the church (Acts 5:1-6). God killed them because they lied about how much of it they were giving. They wanted people to think they had given it all when they had not. God knew that what they kept was under their control and did not belong to the church!

Other passages clearly indicate that individuals have responsibilities that the church does not have. A Christian is to “relieve” his widow, “that the church be not charged” (I Tim. 5:16). Individuals are authorized to provide recreation (1 Tim. 4:8), participate in business (Eph. 4:28), engage in social activities (such as PTA, Red Cross, Scouting, etc.) (Lk. 10:30-37; 1 Cor. 5:9-11), support political activities (Rom. 13), and fulfill domestic obligations (Eph. 6:14), but this does not authorize churches to participate in, or to support, such activities.

Churches are limited to those things that God authorized congregations to do, which basically may be summarized in “teaching” (1 Thess. 1:8; Heb. 10:24,25), and “relieving” (Acts 2:44,45; 4:32-35; 6:1-6; 11:27-30; 1 Tim 5:16). When a church provides for recreation, entertainment, social meals, political rallies, secular education, etc., it is engaged in projects that are authorized for individuals but not for churches!

A third problem area is in saving money. There are too many brethren who feel that the church may do what the individual may do in saving money.

I know of no one who would contend that an individual may not invest his money in property, savings certificates, etc., for the purpose of earning a profit. In fact the one talent man was condemned for not putting his money to proper use and gaining “interest” (Matt. 25:26,27). There are brethren who are opposed to churches spending their money like individuals do, but they have not seen that churches that save money are making the same mistake!

I am not saying that a church may not save money for a particular need. Corinth gathered for at least a year to send to Jerusalem (2 Cor. 8:10,11; 9:1,2). This is not the same as a church going into the “saving business” to get gain.

It certainly would not be using good common sense to spend every dollar collected within the week, but churches that have big bank accounts while the world dies in sin and preachers beg for support, need to realize that churches are not to run their business like individuals run theirs. Brethren if it is wrong for churches to spend their money like individuals do, it is also wrong for them to save it like individuals do! “Saving for a rainy day” (the roof that may start leaking or the central heating and air-conditioning system that “may” break down, etc.) may be simply an excuse for brethren who want to save instead of use the Lord’s money!

The Lord’s treasury must be raised as God authorized and it must be used as He taught. We are not at liberty to use it for “any good work that the individual may do,” neither are we at liberty to save/ invest it like individuals do. Let us contend for God’s way in every respect.

Guardian of Truth XXVIII: 3, p. 80
February 2, 1984