Truth Magazine

By Raymond E. Harris

Through the years premillennialist have differed on many points. However, they all agree on one major theme. They all deny that the establishment of the church fulfilled the kingdom prophecies of the Old Testament. This denial of the fulfillment of the kingdom prophecies has in turn spawned the myriad of complex false doctrines held by all varieties of premillennialists.

At this time we will consider some Old Testament kingdom prophecies and point out their fulfillment in the establishment of the church of Christ.

Daniel 2:44

The prophet Daniel, writing some 580 B.C., foretold the establishment of God’s Kingdom. As Daniel interpreted King Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, he revealed that Nebuchadnezzar’s kingdom would be followed by three great, but lesser, kingdoms. History has proven Daniel’s word to be true. Nebuchadnezzar’s kingdom, Babylon, was followed by the Medo-Persian, the Macedonian and the Roman Empires. Daniel revealed that in the days of the fourth (Roman) empire, God would set up a kingdom. Let’s look at the verse: “And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and ‘the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever” (Dan. 2:44).

Notice Daniel specified the time the prophecy would be fulfilled: “. . . In the days of these kings.” God’s Kingdom would come in the days of the Roman Kings. That should be plain and specific enough for anyone! The man of God said, God “shall” set up His kingdom in the days of the fourth great world empire, which We now know to have been the Roman Empire.

Now to the fulfillment. In Luke 3:1-3, we learn that John the Baptist came forth preaching “. . . in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Ceasar.” And so we have John preaching in the days of the Roman Empire, when Daniel said that God would set up His kingdom. Let’s consider now what John was preaching. Notice Matthew 3:1-2: “In those days came John the Baptist preaching in the wilderness of Judea, and saying repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (emp. mine, R.E.H.). Then, a short time later, Jesus said, “Verily I say unto you, that there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power” /Mark 9:1). Hence, we find both John and Jesus, living in the days of the Roman Empire- declaring that the Kingdom of God was “at hand” and that that generation would see “. . . the Kingdom of God come with power.”

Thus the premillennialists find themselves in the very unenviable position of disputing and denying the fulfillment of prophecies made by Daniel, John the Baptist, and Jesus Christ.

Now let’s see what really happened. In Matthew 16:18-19, Jesus demonstrates that the kingdom and the church are one and the same. Look at the passage, “And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church (“assembly” or “called out body of people,” R.E.H.); and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys /authority, R.E.H.) of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” It should be obvious that Jesus uses the terms “church” and “kingdom” interchangeably. The kingdom is the church and the church is the kingdom.

You will remember that in Mark 9:1, Jesus said the kingdom would come in that generation with power. Then in Luke 24:49, He commanded the apostles, “. . . And, behold I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.” In Acts 2:1-4, that promise was fulfilled as the apostles were filled with the Holy Spirit and received inspiration and power. Continuing on in Acts 2:14, we find Peter standing up with the other apostles; he began to preach the Gospel of Christ for the first time. In Acts 2:38 Peter told those gathered on that occasion what to do to receive the remission of sins. And verse 41, explains that “they that gladly received His word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.” And verse 47 concluded the chapter by informing us that, the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

So, the kingdom was to come with power /Mark 9:1). The power came on Pentecost (Acts 2:1-4/. The church came into existance on Pentecost (Acts 2:47. Hence, the church is the kingdom and the kingdom is the church!

Later, in Acts 8:12, Phillip went out, “. . . preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God”; and the people did the same things others did on Pentecost to get into the church (they were baptized/.

In Colossians 1:13-14, Paul noted that God, “. . . hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of His dear son; in whom we have redemption through His blood, even the forgiveness of sins.” Yet we remember that in Acts 2:38 people were baptized for the remission /forgiveness) of sins and so were added to the church (Acts 2:47). Hence, when one is baptized for forgiveness of his sins, he is added to the church and translated into the kingdom.

Further, you will .remember that in Daniel 2:44 the prophet said that God’s Kingdom “. . . shall stand forever.” In Hebrews 12:28, Paul testified, “Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear.” So, Paul states that God’s Kingdom which “. . . shall stand forever” or “which cannot be moved” had been received in his day.

And finally, in Revelation 1:9, the apostle John advised his readers that he was their brother and “. . . companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ . . . .”

Hence a culmination of the foregoing passages indicate that:

1. If we can have any confidence in the integrity of Daniel as an inspired prophet of God, the Kingdom was established in the days of the Roman Empire.

2. If we can have any confidence in the integrity of Jesus as the Son of God, the Kingdom was established in His generation.

3. If we can have any confidence in the integrity of Paul and John as inspired apostles, they were in the Kingdom of God.

4. If we can have any confidence in the New Testament as the inspired word of God, the Kingdom of God is the church of God, the house of God (1 Tim. 3:14-15).

Additional prophecies of the Old Testament with their fulfillment in the New Testament could be pursued if space allowed. For your private study we suggest the following. They all have .to do with God fulfilling His eternal purpose in placing Jesus on the throne in the New Kingdom, which is also further designated as the church and the family or house of God.

Prophecy		Fulfillment
1. 2 Sam. 7:12-13	Christ raised up to sit on David’s throne	Acts 2:29-33
2. Dan. 7:13-14	Jesus receiving glory and a kingdom	Acts 1:9
3. Isa. 2:2-3	The establishment of the Lord’s house	1 Tim. 3:14-15
4. Jer. 31:31	A new covenant from the Lord	Heb. 8:6-13
5. Mic. 4:1-2	The law of the Lord was to come from Jerusalem	Acts 2:14-47

Questions

What basic mistake do all premillennialists make regarding God’s Kingdom?

1. How many world powers did Daniel see in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream?
2. During the reign of which world power, did Daniel foresee the coming of God’s Kingdom?
3. How long was God’s Kingdom to last?
4. John the Baptist and Jesus lived during the reign of what world power?
5. When did John the Baptist think God’s Kingdom would come if it was “at hand”?
6. What did Jesus say would accompany the coming of the Kingdom?
7. When did Jesus say the Kingdom would come?
8. What did Paul say those that had their sins forgiven had been translated into?
9. Was the apostle John a premillennialist? How do you know?

Guardian of Truth XXVI: 1, pp. 5-7
January 7, 1982

By Hoyt H. Houchen

I. Usages Of The Word “Church”

Sometimes the church (Gr. ekklesia) is referred to in the universal sense – the general assembly (Heb. 12:23). The word “church” denotes “a called out assembly.” The church in this sense is composed of all the saved, all the redeemed individuals throughout the world. They sustain this spiritual relationship because they have obeyed the gospel of the Son of God (Rom. 6:17). They have by one process been baptized into Christ (Gal. 3:27) and into the church (1 Cor. 12:13), which is the body of Christ (Eph. 4:4; Col. 1:18). It is one body and is the institution that Jesus promised to build (Matt. 16:18). It came into existence on the first Pentecost after Jesus arose from the dead (Acts 2).

The church, in the universal concept, has no organization except that Christ is the head of the body and each member is subject to Him. The church is governed by the divine laws as set forth in the pages, of the New Testament (2 Tim. 3:16, 17; Jude 3). It has no universal bishops (elders) to direct its affairs, has no earthly headquarters and has no synods, councils or conventions composed of delegates. It does not enact laws and issue decrees.

In the New Testament, the church is sometimes referred to in a regional or territorial sense – “the churches of Galatia” (Gal. 1:2), “the churches of Judaea” (vs. 22). These were congregations, different assemblies of Christians in a specific district or area. There was no tie-up or federation of churches in these regions. An organizational tie-up of the Judean churches or the Galatian churches was unknown.

A third way in which the New Testament speaks of the church is in a local sense – a particular congregation of saints in a given place, the church which was in Jerusalem (Acts 8:1), “the church of God which is at Corinth” (1 Car. 1:1), “the church of the Thessalonians” (1 Thess. 1:1). Each church was separate and independent from every other church. There was no federation of these churches; there was no sponsoring church (one church directing any work of any other church or churches). In whatever sense the church may be referred to, each individual Christian and each local church must work under the direction of Christ and be guided by His teaching (2 Jn. 9).

Elders were appointed in every church (Acts 14:23). There was always a plurality of elders in each church (Acts 11:29, 30; 14:23; 15:4; 20:17; Phil. 1:1; 1 Tim. 4:14; 5:17; Tit. 1:5; Jas. 5:14; 1 Pet. 5:1, 2). In view of the fact that there were no universal elders and no diocesan elders, the question of how elders are ordained is confined to the local church only. Their oversight begins and ends in the local church where they have been ordained. They do not oversee another congregation nor any work of another congregation.

The New Testament reveals to us that the church is a divine institution. It originated in the mind of God (Eph. 3, 10, 11); it was built by the Son of God (Matt. 16:18); it was purchased by the blood of Christ (Acts 20:28); Christ is its head (Eph. 5:23); it exists for a divine purpose (1 Tim. 3:15); and its members labor in the hope of heaven (Tit. 1:2; 1 Pet. 1:3-5). These are but a few noteworthy features of this grand and glorious institution.

I1. A Specific: Appointment

Some false ideas have been circulated among brethren through the years about the appointment of elders. One of these views that has been advocated is that elders are not to be formally appointed; that is, they are not actually to be selected by the congregation and then announced “officially” that they are now recognized as elders. The basis of this contention is that men in a congregation who qualify for the work of elders automatically become elders when they do the work of elders. Coupled with this view, is the idea that when these men become elders they rule by example and teaching only, not having any right to make decisions for the congregation. This author dealt with these views in 1966 (Gospel Guardian, Vol. 17, No. 38, p. 550), under the heading “Elders by Appointment, or by Assumption?”

Now let us consider the word “appoint.” “And when they appointed for them elders in every church . . .” (Acts 14:23). Paul wrote to Titus, “For this cause I left thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that were wanting, and appoint elders in every city” (Tit. 1:5). Both of these passages are quoted from the American Standard Version. In the King James Version, instead of the word “appoint,” the word “ordain” is used. The Greek word in Acts 14:23 that is translated “appoint” or “ordain” is cheirotoneo. According to Robert Young, it means “to elect by stretching out the hand” (Analytical Concordance, p. 722). Thayer defines the same word cheirotoneo, “to elect, appoint, create” (Greek-English Lexicon, p. 668). These definitions indicate that it was in some definite manner that these men were elected to do the work of elders.

The Greek word, translated “appoint” or “ordain” in Titus 1:5, is kathistemi. It is contended that because this same word is used in 2 Pet. 1:8 (“make you (kathistemi) to be not idle nor unfruitful”) and their being made such was without direct appointment but by growth and development; therefore, it conveys the same idea with regard to elders. This interpretation is not valid, however, because the word is used in different senses in the two passages. Thayer defines the word in Titus 1:5, “to appoint one to administer an office”. He defines the word in 2 Peter 1:8, “to render, make, cause to be” (op. cit., p. 315). Arndt and Gingrich make the same distinction (A Greek-English Lexicon, p. 391). The two verses are not parallel in meaning, so the contention referred to cannot be sustained.

From our consideration of the word “appoint” or “ordain” as used in Acts 14:23 and Titus 1:5, there was some method of appointment. Certain men were named and designated. By what method this was done, the Scriptures do not say. It would be well to observe here that the same Greek word kathistemi that is translated “appoint” or “ordain” in Titus 1:5 is found in Hebrews 5:1; 7:28, and 8:3 where reference is made to the High Priest under the law of Moses. Those among the Levites who qualified to become priests were named (Ex. 28:1) and they were appointed in a definite manner (see Ex. 28 and Lev. 8). Their priesthood was not by assumption, but by appointment. So, we have established that the appointment of elders was specific – that men did not simply assume the office of elders because they were doing the work of elders.

III. How Ordained

The method of appointing or ordaining elders in the local church is optional, provided it in no way violates any Bible principle. When men meet the qualifications as set forth by the Holy Spirit in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1, in some way recognition is to be made by the congregation.

Some maintain that because the Bible does not specify how to ordain elders, they are therefore not authorized in the church today. But there are some things which fall in the area of human judgment. The Scriptures do not tell us how many songs to sing in worship, nor how to serve the Lord’s supper. Are we to conclude from this that we are not to have any songs in worship, or that we are not to observe the Lord’s supper? Certainly not; however, the procedures are matters of judgment. So it is with ordaining elders; the procedure is left to us, and we emphasize that any method that does not violate Scripture teaching may be used.

Others contend that, since there is no one to ordain or appoint elders today, therefore elders are not authorized to exist. This fallacy is based upon the asumption that inspired men in the New Testament did the appointing and because there are no inspired men today, there is therefore no way by which elders can be appointed. Although Timothy and Titus may have had some spiritual gifts, there is no way to prove that they were inspired. Timothy was to teach what he had learned from Paul (2 Tim. 2:2) and from the Scriptures (2 Tim. 3:14, 15; 1 Tim. 4:13). Elders in each local church are guided by the word of God, so their work is not dependent upon spiritual gifts. No one today is needed to bestow these gifts by the laying on of hands. Furthermore, spiritual gifts were given by the laying on of hands by the apostles. Neither Timothy nor Titus were apostles; therefore, when they appointed some elders they did not bestow spiritual gifts upon them. And, even the laying on of hands did not always mean that spiritual gifts were given. The brethren at Antioch laid hands on Barnabas and Saul, two men who had been selected by the Holy Spirit to do a work. There is no indication that spiritual gifts were given to them. So, the idea that elders cannot be apointed today is without scriptural warrant.

How then are men selected and appointed? First, proper preparation should be made. The preacher and, perhaps, the elders along with Bible class teachers should devote considerable time to preaching and teaching on the subject of elders. The congregation should be thoroughly taught concerning their qualifications and work. The congregation should then be ready for the selection of men whom it believes qualify for elders.

A method that has been used in various churches where this writer has preached, and where he now preaches and serves as an elder, is for names to be submitted by the members to the elders, or to whoever may be designated to be in charge of this matter. The names are then placed before the congregation, and the members are given the opportunity to voice any scriptural objection to anyone whose name has been submitted. If a scriptual objection is made to a man being considered, that man is not qualified and, therefore, cannot be appointed. Sufficient time should be given for scriptural objections to be offered.

Sometimes objections are made, but they are not scriptural ones. Such may be offered because of some personality conflict, a personal dislike for the person, and sometimes even jealousy. Petty peeves should not keep a man who is qualified from serving as an elder.

An invalid objection is sometimes made to a man serving as an elder because all of his children are not members of the church. Brethren have been known to become contentious on such a point, but they need to stop and think. If those children of a man’s family who have reached an accountable age have become Christians, but there are younger children not yet accountable and, therefore, have not become Christians, he would meet the qualifications of having believing children. Suppose a man has been faithfully serving as an elder and his wife bears him another child, does this automatically disqualify him? I would say it certainly does not. By the same token of reasoning, a man who has all the other qualifications is not unqualified to serve because he has some younger children who are not old enough to obey the gospel. Should there be children in his family who are old enough to obey the gospel, but who have not, would be another matter. Brethren very often offer their opinions instead of scriptural objections.

After a careful selection of men has been made of those considered to be qualified to serve as elders, and after a reasonable time has been given for any scriptural objections, then this procedure could follow. The preacher, in a solemn manner, may so appoint these men, impressing upon them their .most serious responsibility as overseers and upon the congregation as to its obligations to these men. This is one method of selection and appointment which has proven to be successful. But whatever method is used should not be a political maneuver to select men who will best serve the personal interest of the one who has suggested them, nor by a secret ballot. Whatever method is employed, we should be careful to do nothing, which in any way, would violate any scriptural principle. When brethren have the motive to please God, there should be no difficulty in selecting and appointing men who meet the requirements of the scriptures.

An additional point or admonition should be kept in mind. A preacher may appoint men as elders, but it should always be the congregation who has first selected them. In Acts 6:3, 4 when men were to be appointed to see after the work of benevolence, the disciples selected these men; the apostles appointed them. So, the church chooses those whom it will have to rule over it. As to this point, elders are not to act for the church in selecting other elders. God has not invested elders with such power. H. Leo Boles made a very appropriate comment. “The power of elders in the church is small. They cannot make a single rule or enact a principle to impose on the church that is not found in New Testament teaching. They have no power save that which is granted them by the New Testament. They cannot add a single command; neither can they give any promise of blessing. They cannot lord it over God’s people . . . When churches begin to delegate their own inherent powers and rights to elders, the days of their degradation has set in; that moment they depart from the New Testament pattern” (“How Elders Are Appointed.” The Gospel Advocate, Feb. 2, 1941). The word of God has already legislated what we are to do; elders (the overseers) see to it that the word of God is obeyed. The Lord’s plan is right and cannot be improved upon; let us always follow it.

Questions

1. What are three usages of the word “church” in the New Testament?
2. Why is the appointment of elders confined to the local church only?
3. What scriptural evidence do we have for the specific appointment of elders? What idea does the word “appoint” convey?
4. Do the Scriptures specify the method by which elders are to be appointed?
5. What reasons do some give for not having elders in the church today?
6. What preparation should be made in the local church before their selection and appointment of elders?
7. Name one practical method of selecting elders.
8. What are some invalid objections offered about men who are being considered to become elders?
9. Who is to select men to become elders before they are appointed?
10. Why are the preacher or the elders not permitted to make the selection of who are to become elders?

Guardian of Truth XXV: 43, pp. 680-682
October 29, 1981

By Leonard Tyler

Hear Mr. Alexander Campbell in his first issue of the Christian Baptist.

“The `Christian Baptist’ shall espouse the cause of no religious sect, excepting that ancient sect called `Christians first at Antioch.’ It’s sole object shall be the eviction of truth, and the exposure of error in doctrine and practice. The editor acknowledging no standard of religious faith or works, other than the Old and New Testaments, and the latter as the only standard of the religion of Jesus Christ, will, intentionally at least, oppose nothing which it contains, and recommend nothing which it does not enjoin. Having no worldly interest at stake from the adoption or reprobation of any article of faith or religious practice – having no gift nor religious office of any worldly emolument to blind his eyes or to pervert his judgment, he hopes to manifest that he is an impartial advocate of truth” (Prospectus of the Christian Baptist, Buffalo Creek, Brooke County, Va., Edited and published by Alexander Campbell; Vol. I, page IV, July 4, 1823).

An Honest Search for Divine Authority

These early seekers of truth as set forth in the Bible, especially in the New Testament, recognized that truth exposes erroneous doctrines and those who espouse such. They claimed to change and be changed to conform to the mold or pattern set forth in the teaching of Christ. Here is what Alexander Campbell wrote, “If it be a crime to change our views and our practice in religious concerns, we must certainly plead guilty. If it be a humiliating thing to say we have been wrong in our belief and practice, we must abase ourselves thus far” (Ibid., Preface, page VIII).

They also understood that men defeated by truth were not intellectually honest and that they would garble, twist, and pervert plain positive statements. So Mr. Campbell wrote, “There is another difficulty of which we are aware, that, as some objects are manifestly good, and the means attempted for their accomplishment manifestly evil, speaking against the means employed we may be sometimes understood as opposing the object abstractly, especially by those who do not wish to understand, but rather to misrepresent” (Ibid., page X).

He made one last request which emphasizes his desire for honesty as well as open investigation. Think about it. He has already proposed, “Never to hold any sentiment or proposition as more certain than the evidence on which it rests . . . ” Alright, what about you, Mr. Campbell? Here is his answer. “We have only one request to make of our readers – and that is, an impartial and patient hearing; for which we shall make them one promise, viz. that we shall neither approve nor censure any thing without the clearest and most satisfactory evidence from reason and revelation” (Ibid., page X). So long as this design and purpose of heart is followed, we believe that truth can be found and men can be united in Christ and saved eternally. This is why such men are named, quoted, and eulogized. Not because they were the authority, but rather they diligently sought the proper authority, God’s Word. They sought to understand it as a basis of their faith, to find direction for their lives, and to establish the hope of their salvation. This is our greatest need today, viz; men who seek God’s will as revealed; men who believe, practice, teach, and find joy and confidence in its promises. Herein is found faith, unity, accomplishment and eternal salvation.

To Correct Error, Restore Truth

They sought sincerely to learn the truth and accept it. Listen to Mr. Barton W. Stone in the first issue of the Christian Messenger.

To illustrate lengthily the importance of the object contemplated in this work; would be unnecessary. Of this the public will judge, to whom the work is now presented.

It is universally acknowledged, by the various sects of Christians, that the religion of Heaven, for centuries past, has fallen far below the excellency and glory of primitive Christianity. The man, who honestly investigates the cause of this declension, and points the proper way of reformation, must certainly be engaged in a work, pleasing to God, and profitable to man. This is our design; and to accomplish this desirable end, shall our best exertions be enlisted and engaged. That these exertions may be better calculated to effect the object contemplated, we invite and solicit the aid of qualified brethren, who feel as we do, an ardent desire for the restoration and glory of the ancient religion of Christ – the religion of love, peace, union on earth.

That there are errors in the doctrines, as well as in the lives and practices of the various religious denominations now living, I presume, no Protestant will deny. Their various, jarring creeds their bitter strife and uncharitable opposition to one another their pride and worldly spirit – their death and cold formality these are undeniable evidences of the melancholy fact. To have these errors corrected and removed from the church; and to have truth restored in her heavenly, captivating robes, unadorned with the tinsel of human wisdom, are certainly the pious wishes of every honest Christian. Therefore, unappalled at the dangerous attempt, not discouraged at the attendant difficulties, we will boldly, though humbly, advance to the work, as the Bible alone acknowledged by all Protestants to be the only infallible rule, by which all doctrines and spirits are to be tried; so by this rule we will honestly try the various, jarring doctrines and spirits, which have done so much mischief in the world, for so many centuries back. Should we be so happy as to find the error, we shall be compelled by our benevolence for man, and love of truth, to expose it to view; and to endeavor to exhibit the doctrine of the Bible, unsullied by the unhallowed touch of man’s wisdom.

Before we can promise ourselves success, the mind must be previously prepared to enter upon the work.

1. We must be fully persuaded, that all uninspired men are fallible, and therefore liable to err. I think that Luther, in a coarse manner, said that every man was born with a Pope in his belly. By which I suppose he meant, that every man deemed himself infallible. Our pride abhors the idea of being accounted weak. To give up an opinion, a sentiment or doctrine, and to receive a different one, has been long reckoned a certain evidence of weakness. The public has strangely affixed this stigma on the man, who dares change his opinion. If the various reformers, in the different periods of the world, had been influenced by this principle what would have been the consequences? Certainly, they would have remained in error – have evaded persecution, and we should now have been under the midnight shades of paganism and popery. If the present generation remains under the influence of the same principle, the consequences must be, that the spirit of free enquiry will die – our liberty lie prostrate at the feet of ecclesiastical demagogues -every sect must remain as it is – their various and contradictory notions must continue, and strife and division remain, in opposition to the will of God, and to the disgrace of Christianity” (The Christian Messenger, Vol. 1, No. 1, by Barton W. Stone, page 1-2, Nov. 25, 1825).

Which Way Will We Go?

May I take the liberty to place an awakening beware! We had better take warning today less we shall end up right back where they started. It seems that some – the extreme liberals among us, – reject the restoration movement. These radicals claim in effect that the early efforts blocked true thinking, stigmatized progressive acquisition of truth, and infringed upon the rights, liberties, and blessed privileges inherent under God. Our digression from a true, honest, conservative, literal understanding of pure and undefiled religion before God is rapidly back-stepping the path of restoration to a full-fledged denominational, theological, experimental and empirical religion. We must awake from our sleep, arise, redeem the time, and shout from the house top those things which are revealed in the Divine Volume and surely believed by us.

Guardian of Truth XXV: 28, pp. 433, 444
July 16, 1981

By Johnny Stringer

In order to understand this subject, one must remember that the words of the scripture are the words of the Spirit. The Spirit was responsible for revealing God’s word to man (John 14:26; 16:13; 1 Cor. 2:12, 13; Eph. 3:3-5; 1 Tim. 4:1), and it is through His words that the Spirit acts to persuade and motivate us to serve God. He moves our hearts and influences our lives in the same way that men so often move the hearts and influence the lives of other men – by words.

Many believe that the Spirit operates directly upon our hearts to influence our behavior, rather than indirectly, through the word. They charge that a denial of a miraculous, direct operation is really a denial that the Spirit works. However, the fact that the Spirit uses His words to influence men does not mean that the Spirit is not responsible for the effect produced in our lives. The Spirit is necessarily responsible for whatever effect is produced by His words. We know that eloquent speakers, by their words, can move an audience to tears; vociferous speakers, by their words, can move a mob to riot, burn, and kill. The fact that these speakers use words to produce the effects does not mean that the speakers are not responsible for producing the effects. Furthermore, it is a fact that the Spirit’s direct influence has never changed the character of any man. Balsam prophesied under the direct influence of the Spirit (Num. 24:2 ),yet remained evil in character (2 Pet. 2:15; Num. 31:6; Rev. 2:14); Saul, prophesied under the Spirit’s direct influence (1 Sam. 19:18-24), yet continued his evil efforts to murder David. God’s method of changing the character of a man has always been moral persuasion, not a miraculous direct operation of the Spirit.

The Alien Sinner

In all the word of God, we do not read of one instance in which the Spirit came directly upon the heart of a sinner so as to miraculously cause him to turn to Christ. The New Testament, however, is replete with the teaching that the gospel message which the Spirit revealed to men is the force that leads men to Christ. Note the following scriptures which plainly affirm that men are converted by the word of God:

(1) Romans 10:17 is quite clear in stating that faith comes, not by a direct operation of the Spirit, but by hearing God’s word. The Spirit is responsible for the faith that exists in a man’s heart, because the Spirit revealed the message which produced his faith. The truth stated in Rom. 10:17 is corroborated by other passages. For example, according to the Parable of the Sower, the word of God is necessary for faith to exist (Lk. 8:11-12). Also, John affirmed that the things which he wrote were designed to produce faith (John 20:30-31). Finally, John 17:20 shows that people would believe through the word preached by the apostles.

(2) John 6:44-45 shows that men are drawn to God by hearing and learning; hence, the Spirit draws through the word He revealed.

(3) 2 Thess. 2:14 teaches that men are called by the gospel. The gospel which He revealed, therefore, is the means by which the Spirit calls us. He calls through words.

(4) John 17.17 says that men are sanctified by the truth – the truth which the Spirit revealed. In 1 Cor. 6:11, Paul said the Corinthians had been sanctified by the Spirit. Putting these two Scriptures together, we conclude that the Spirit sanctifies by means of His revelation. When you hear that a gun killed a man, then you hear that Joe killed the man, you conclude that Joe killed the man by means of a gun.

(5) Romans 1:16 declares that the gospel is God’s power unto salvation. The Spirit’s role in our salvation is vital, for He made the gospel available to us.

(6) 1 Pet. 1:23 speaks of the word of truth as the incorruptible seed of the new birth. 1 Cor. 4:15 and James 1:18 corroborate this point. This fact helps us to understand Jesus’ statement in John 3:3-5 regarding the necessity of being born of water and the Spirit. He did not in that place explain precisely what part the Spirit would play in the new birth; and those who have concluded that Jesus had reference to a miraculous, direct operation of the Spirit on the individual’s heart have jumped to a conclusion which is not even hinted at in the passage. 1 Pet. 1:23 explains the Spirit’s role in the new birth. In order for a birth to occur, the seed must be planted. In revealing the word of God to man, the Spirit was providing the seed of the new birth. One is born again when he receives the seed which the Spirit provided into his heart, so that the seed produces an obedient faith in his heart. The Spirit’s part in the new birth was in providing the seed (the word of truth).

Not only do we have these plain affirmations that-men are converted through the influence of the word within their hearts, but we also have many examples of conversion in the book of Acts, all of which demonstrate this fact. In all the examples of conversion which we find in the book of Acts, we do not read of men getting some inexplicable “better-felt-than-told” feeling by a direct operation of the Holy Spirit; rather, we read of people hearing the words of the Spirit, believing, and obeying God. In Acts 2, Peter preached under the influence of the Spirit. Verse 37 says, “Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?” It was through hearing the words that they were pricked in the heart. Was the Spirit responsible for their being so moved? Surely, for it was His words that moved them. The same thing is repeated time and time again through the book of Acts. See Acts 4:4; 8:5, 12; 11:14; 14:1; 18:8. The idea of a miraculous, direct operation of the Spirit which gives a “better-felt-than-told” feeling is derived from the fertile imaginations of men, not from the word of God.

It is in this light that we understand 1 Cor. 12:13, where Paul said, “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body.” As we have already seen, the Spirit teaches and motivates people to obey God; this obedience includes baptism. It is by the Spirit’s teaching that men are led to be baptized, for the Spirit emphasizes the need for baptism. Some examples of the Spirit’s teaching on the subject are found in Acts 2:38; Rom. 6:3-4; Gal. 3:26-27; 1 Pet. 3:21. Being baptized by the Spirit meant “through the teaching of the Spirit,” just as offering sacrifices by the Law (Heb. 10:8) meant “through the’ teaching of the Law.”

Christians

The Spirit influences, not only the alien sinner, but also the Christian, through the word which He revealed. The word of God was the force which effectually worked within the Thessalonians (1 Thess. 2:13). The scripture is a complete guide for us (2 Tim. 3:16-17). Paul told the Ephesian elders, “And now, brethren, I commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified” (Acts 20:32). In revealing the word of God, the Spirit was providing the teaching which we need for guidance, strength, and motivation in serving God. In writing to Christians, James said that the word of God was able to save their souls (James 1:21). The New Testament epistles are filled with guidance and with pleas, exhortations, and facts designed to motivate and persuade Christians to live faithfully. In them we see the Spirit’s persuasive powers at work, as He sought through His words to influence Christians unto righteous conduct. When one yields to the Spirit’s teaching, the fruit of the Spirit will be seen in his life (Gal. 5:22-23).

In Romans 8:9, Paul said, “But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.” I do not believe that he here speaks of a personal, literal indwelling, for I believe that such a thought would contradict the teaching of Acts 8 regarding the Samaritans. We have seen in previous studies that the Samaritans, even after becoming Christians, did not receive the Spirit until the apostles came from Jerusalem and laid their hands on them. This proves that the Spirit does not automatically come and dwell personally, within one when he becomes a Christian. A personal, literal indwelling was not necessary in order for the Samaritans to belong to God. This must be admitted unless one is prepared to say that the Samaritans, though they were baptized believers, did not belong to God until the apostles came and laid their hands on them. Romans 8:9 must be interpreted in the light of this fact. I believe that any interpretation of this verse which says that the Spirit automatically comes to dwell personally within all Christians is contradictory to the case of the Samaritans, hence is false.

In seeking an interpretation of Rom. 8:9 which does not contradict the teaching of Acts 8, and which is in harmony with the teaching of Scripture regarding the role of truth in influencing our conduct, I have concluded that Paul had reference, not to a literal, but to a figurative indwelling of the Spirit. He dwells within us figuratively as He rules from within through His teaching. When we take into our hearts the truths which the Spirit has taught, and when we let these truths mold our thinking and our very personalities, we thereby enthrone the Spirit in our hearts. As His word works within us, the Spirit is working within us – through the word He gave us. He is dominating our lives. It should be noted that after speaking of the Spirit’s dwelling within us, Paul spoke in the same. breath of Christ’s dwelling within us (v. 10). We can say that Christ dwells within us, just as the Spirit does, for the Spirit’s teachings are Christ teachings. When the Spirit rules from within, Christ rules from within. In Gal. 2:20 Paul said, “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me.” Rather than saying that Christ lived within him, he could just as well have said that the Spirit lived within him. The idea would have been the same namely, that his heart, personality, and life was controlled and dominated by the teachings of Christ, revealed by the Spirit. The one in whom the Spirit dwells is not one who simply knows the Spirit’s teachings; he is one who is controlled by them, so that the Spirit rules him from within. Let us all permit the Spirit to exercise complete control over our minds and lives.

Guardian of Truth XXV: 24, pp. 374-375
June 11, 1981