Truth Magazine

By Mike Willis

This special issue of Guardian of Truth is devoted to a study of two false religions — the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Branch Davidian Cult in Waco, Texas. A special word of appreciation needs to be given to Randy Harshbarger who edited the section on the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Although some of our readers may not have the time to sit and read these articles from cover to cover, I am confident that they will put this issue in a place of safe-keeping for future reference.

This issue has special relevance for another reason. Some among us have recently been teaching that we need to preach Christ and not the church. They have written that lessons which contrast “us” and “them” do not convert men to Christ. There is no one among us teaching that the church dispenses grace; it is the recipient of grace, not the dispenser. One is saved by the shed blood of Jesus Christ not because he has affiliation with a certain group of men, however good they may be.

Having said that, I still insist that the contrasting of revealed religion with unrevealed religion is the proper work of a gospel preacher. If one wants to call this preaching church vs. church sermons, so be it. There is a difference between revealed and unrevealed religion and it is the work of gospel preachers to call on men to forsake unrevealed religion and turn to revealed religion. This is the essence of what Elijah did on Mt. Carmel and what Paul did on Mars Hill. He who belittles this kind of preaching is belittling the preaching of Christ and him crucified, regardless of how palatable his rhetoric may sound.

False doctrine cannot thrive in the hearts of men who “search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so” (Acts 17:11), who “try the spirits whether they are of God” (1 In. 4:1). When men belittle sermons which “try the spirits” and become too refined to preach such sermons, they prepare the seedbed for false doctrine to be planted and thrive.

Believing that this is true, I heartily commend this series of articles of our readers.

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 8, p. 1
April 15, 1993

By Donnie V. Rader

One of the most notable cases of conversion in the book of Acts is that of the Ethiopian treasurer. The story is a simple one with many practical lessons to be gleaned from it.

The Prospect (vv. 26-34)

Let’s consider what we know about this man that was converted at the preaching of Philip.

He was a eunuch (v. 27). We are not told whether he was born a eunuch or was made one by men or became one by choice (Matt. 19:12). What little we do know seems to indicate that he did not allow his problems to get in the way of his interest in spiritual things. He did not take his frustration out on God by refusing to serve him. In spite of his lot in life, he was willing to listen to and obey God.

He was the treasurer of the Queen of Ethiopia (v. 27). He was a man of great power and authority. He was the Nicholas Brady or Lloyd Bentsen of the day. He was a man of prestige. Yet, he needed the gospel just like anyone else.

He was a dedicated religious man (v. 27). He had gone to Jerusalem (about 1,000 miles) to worship. This not only tells us that he was a religious man, but he was devoted to what he thought was right. He obviously was sincere. However, he was still in sin and needed to obey the gospel.

He desired to know the truth. As he was riding along in his chariot, he was reading the word of God (v. 30). When Philip came, he asked for help in understanding the words of the prophets (vv. 31,34). He willingly listened to the preaching of the truth (v. 35) as is evidence by his response (vv. 36-39).

We have already learned some basic lessons: (1) The gospel is for all — those with power, money and fame as well as those who have none of these. All still need the gospel. (2) One can be religious and yet be wrong. (3) If one desires to see the truth and searches for it, he can see and obey it.

The Sermon (v. 35)

Though we are not given the complete text of Philip’s sermon, we can draw some conclusions about its content from the context.

1. The sermon was taken from Isaiah 53. The eunuch was reading from this text when Philip “beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him” (v. 35). We learn a couple of things from this: (a) Our text (Acts 8) serves as a divine interpretation of Isaiah 53. We know, without a doubt, that the prophet was speaking of Jesus. (b) Christ is the fulfillment of the Old Testament. He is the Messiah.

The sermon was about Christ. The text said he preached Jesus to him (v. 35). This would involve the same message that was preached in other cases of conversion. Taking Isaiah 53 as his text he must have preached about Christ being rejected of men, being crucified and being raised again. He must have preached something about the Deity of Christ for the eunuch came to believe that Jesus is the Son of God (v. 37).

The sermon included a message about what he must do in obedience to Christ. He must have preached on the necessity of baptism for the prospect asked to be baptized (vv. 36,38). There seems to have been some urgency to be baptized as soon as they came upon some water (vv. 36-39).

Through the preaching in this sermon God operated upon the sinner to convict and convert him. It was not done by an angel. Notice that the angel appeared to the preacher to send him to the sinner and did not appear to the sinner to convert him (vv. 26,29). There is no evidence of any direct operation of the Holy Spirit.

The Response (vv. 36-39)

He was eager to obey (v. 36). He saw the urgency of obedience. He wanted to be baptized immediately. Those who are thinking of obeying the gospel today must recognize that they could die at anytime (Heb. 9:27) and Christ could come (2 Pet. 3:10).

He asked, “What hinders me from being baptized?” That is a logical question once one learns what God would have him to do. He apparently couldn’t think of one thing keeping him from obeying the gospel. Neither could Philip. So, he was baptized.

He believed what was preached (v. 37). He accepted the teaching about Jesus and his need to respond in obedience.

He repented. Repentance is not specifically mention-ed. However, he was eager to obey the gospel which indicates repentance. He wanted to make a change in his life which is what repentance involves.

He confessed his faith (v. 37). When this prospect was asked if he believed, he confessed (acknowledged), “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.” This was not a confession of sin, but one of faith. He was doing what Romans 10:9-10 states is required.

He was baptized (v. 38). He, like every other convert in the book of Acts, was baptized. He did what Jesus commanded for salvation (Mk. 16:16). His baptism was a burial in water for both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water (v. 38).

He rejoiced (v. 39). Having obeying the Lord he now has the remission of sins (Acts 2:38) and the hope of eternal life (Heb. 5:9). No wonder he goes on his way rejoicing. Obedience to the Lord produces true happiness.

This is a simple story of a sinner, a teacher, the Scriptures and obedience.

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 7, p. 21-22
April 1, 1993

By Walton Weaver

Two times in the New Testament the Holy Spirit is connected with fire. The first time is Matthew 3:11 where John the Baptist tells the Jews,

I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but he who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire (NKJV, emphasis added).

Then in Acts 2:2-4 we read that as the apostles were waiting in Jerusalem for the promise of the Father (Acts 1:4).

. . . suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. Then there appeared to them divided tongues, as of fire, and one set upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance (NKJV, emphasis added).

Let’s take a closer look at these two cases.

What Is the “Fire” in Matthew 3:11?

The reference to baptism in the Holy Spirit and fire (Matt. 3:11) has been an often discussed subject, but much disagreement has developed over the meaning of and fire, and exactly to whom the promise applies. The statement has been explained in the following ways.

Some have seen here a direct reference to the “fire” mentioned in Acts 2:3. One writer, for example, says, “this was literally fulfilled on the day of Pentecost,” and another, in almost the same words, wrote, “this prophecy was literally fulfilled on the day of Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit descended upon the disciples in tongues of fire, Acts 2:3.”

Others have said that “fire” in this passage is an image of the Spirit’s purifying work upon the individual; that this is a figurative description of the Spirit’s consuming a person’s faults. To state it in a positive way, the terms “in fire” describe “the kindling, sanctifying fire of the Holy Ghost.”

Another view is that the “fire” here is “an experience that accompanies the Holy Ghost when he comes into the life of a person”; or, it is “an experience that flashes through the human body and causes one to feel happy and full of joy,” the “feeling that accompanies the Holy Ghost as he quickens the body he enters.”

Finally, the most common view (and what seems to me to be the correct one), is that “fire” in Matthew 3:11 is the fire of the last judgment into which the wicked will be cast.

We will now make a few observations on these different views:

(I) Little needs to be said about the view that the promise of “baptism in fire” of Matthew 3:11 was literally fulfilled in the reference to “fire” in Acts 2:3. The careful reader must have observed that there is no reference to literal fire in Acts 2:3; so how could John the Baptist’s statement about fire have been literally. fulfilled on the day of Pentecost? The passage in Acts 2 says “cloven tongues like as fire” (KJV), or “divided tongues as fire” (NKJV).

McGarvey cites another reason why this interpretation is not possible. He says, “even if these tongues had been actual fire, their sitting on the heads of the apostles could not have been constituted a baptism of the apostles in fire.” It might also be remembered that Jesus did not add “with fire” to his promise of Holy Spirit baptism when he made it to his disciples (see Acts 1:4-5); nor do we have any mention of “tongues like fire” sitting on Cornelius and his household, yet Peter recognized this event as also being a fulfillment of Jesus’ promise (Acts 11:16).

(2) The second view makes the statement in Matthew 3:11 speak of only one baptism, a baptism in the Spirit. “In fire” is only added to give a description of the nature of the Spirit’s work. Those who hold this view see only one class of people receiving this promise — i.e., they say the “you” who were to be baptized in Spirit and fire identifies only one class and one destiny. The fallacy of this position is that “you” in v. 11 takes into account both believing and unbelieving Jews. A mixed audience was being addressed when the promise was made. So “baptism in the Spirit” could refer to one class, the believing Jews, and “in fire” could refer to another class, the unbelieving and impenitent Jews.

This approach takes into account the warning tone of the passage while the former view totally disregards it.

The context also favors the view that two classes are under consideration in v. 11. In v. 10 John has already divided the audience into two parties by his illustration of the fruitful and unfruitful trees. The one represents good men, the other evil men. In v. 12 the wheat and chaff are used for the same purpose. The pronoun “you” takes in both classes of men. John had already used the word “you” in an indefinite way when he said “I baptize you,” when in fact he had not baptized those in his audience.

Also the term “fire” is used in both vv. 10 and 12 to describe the fate of the wicked. In v. 12 it is called the “unquenchable fire.” We should not overlook the parallelism in the three sentences appearing in these three verses. “Fire” has the same meaning in verses 10, 11 and 12. For this reason, two baptisms are under consideration here, and two classes are to receive the baptisms. In other words, Spirit baptism and fire baptism are presented as opposites in this passage. They cannot be opposites and “fire” merely describe the manner of the Spirit’s work. “Fire” does not describe the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit, but the condemnation of the wicked. As McGarvey says, “It is clearly the wicked who are to be baptized in fire, and the fulfillment of the prediction will be realized when they are cast in-to the lake of fire (Rev. 20:15).”

(3) This third view hardly needs refutation. How would one go about trying to establish from Scripture that “fire” in Matthew 3:11 is the kind of “experience” and “feeling” the author quoted claims for it? No such attempt is made by him. All we have is his word on the matter; such a conclusion cannot be established from the word of God. This writer is simply reading his own “experience” back into this passage and into Acts 2:3 (he takes “fire” in both passages to refer to this kind of experience and feeling).

This same writer goes on to tell us that this experience “might be compared with a current of electricity that flashes through the body when a person contacts a wire that is charged lightly.” “The person so effected,” he says, “feels a tingling sensation. At times the body is jerked about quickly but with no painful feeling. It is rather a pleasant feeling that makes one happy or full of joy. At times only one member of the body is moved or jerked. Sometimes the hand, sometimes the foot or both feet in the holy dance.” How about that! Look what we have been missing by not understanding that “fire” in these passages promises this kind of “experience” for all who will truly believe!

But if this were true, why does not the Bible speak of such “experience” when it describes what happened when certain people were baptized in the Holy Spirit (i.e., in Acts 2 and 10)? Not one word is said about such an experience for either the apostles in Acts 2 or Cornelius and his household in Acts 10. They were baptized in the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues, but absolutely nothing is said about a baptism in “fire” or of such effects coming from Holy Spirit baptism as are described by this writer. Besides, we have shown in the above section that the tone of Matthew 3:11, as well as the context, shows that baptism in “fire” is the opposite of baptism in Spirit, and that baptism in fire is an act of condemnation and not something “felt by every one” baptized in Spirit.

(4) From what has already been said in our discussion of the first three views, it should be clear that this fourth view is the correct understanding of the baptism of fire mentioned in Matthew 3:11. The “fire” in this passage is the fire of the last judgment into which the wicked will be cast.

What Is the “Fire” in Acts 2:3?

We have already found it necessary to set aside the view that the “fire” in this passage is the same as the “fire” of Matthew 3:11. In the latter passage a literal fire is obviously meant, but here the language will not allow a literal fire. Luke unequivocally says, “cloven tongues like as of fire” (KJV). The word translated “cloven tongues” means tongues “distributing themselves,” or “parting asunder” (ASV; i.e., among the apostles); not a tongue-like, forked appearance in each case, as the term “cloven tongues” would no doubt be understood. The change from the plural (tongues) to the singular (it sat) supports this conclusion. At first the fire-like appearance was “in a single body, and then suddenly parted in this direction and that; so that a portion of it rested on each of those present” (Hackett). McGarvey concludes that the change from the plural to the singular was used “to indicate that not all, but only one of the tongues sat upon each apostle, the term distributed having suggested the contemplation of them singly.”

One can easily see the symbolism involved in the fire-like tongue appearance over the heads of each of the apostles. They spoke in tongues, or languages (Act 2:8,11), they had never learned. The miraculous knowledge of the language each was speaking was being revealed to each of them by the Holy Spirit. The tongue shaped (though not “cloven”), fire-like flames symbolized the presence of the Spirit making known to them the language each was speaking. They were in fact immersed in the Spirit as Matthew 3:11 promised, and the “tongues like as of fire” that “sat upon each of them” was symbolical of what was happening to them as they were now speaking languages they had not before known. Nor could they have known them even now without this special revelation of the Spirit. or

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 7, p. 10-11
April 1, 1993

By Peggy Kreus

With his hand placed upon God’s Holy Word, the following words were uttered: “I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, to preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the United States, so help me God.”

Within 24 hours, our president placed his hands upon a paper, signing his name, giving his support to legislation that gives people the right to murder unborn babies. His next order of business was to try to remove all bans for homosexuals and lesbians to enter into the military.

The “gay” community is overflowing with happiness that Bill Clinton is now the president of the United States. He supports their lifestyle, has given 13 of them positions within his White House staff, and received 72 percent of their vote. They feel they can now “come out of the closet” and receive “their due respect.” Christian, it is time to stand up and take note!

On January 26, 1993, from 9-10 p.m. (primetime television), a program entitled “The Gay 90’s — Sex, Power and Influence” was aired on a local station. Interviews were conducted with several “gay” couples all expressing happiness with their “new found freedom” of not having to feel ashamed or secretive about their chosen lifestyle anymore. Our president was shown ex-pressing his thanks to this group of people for electing him, and he assured them he had a place for them within his administration.

For the first time, I fear the world in which my children will live. Satan has always had his hand in the affairs of men, but today sin has taken on a new dimension. No longer does Satan have to be sneaky and work covertly. Sin is blatant today, and completely out in the open, even within the highest ranks of our government . . . and worse yet, people are proud of it.

Absolute standards of right and wrong will soon be a thing of the past in the minds of many. Situation ethics will be the norm, and Satan will be basking in his glory as he watches so many serving him and promoting his cause. More and more of our television programs will begin introducing this idea of “open sexuality,” whether it be heterosexual or homosexual. The press is already full of news regarding the growing sentiment of finally being able to “come out of the closet.” Christian, what will you do?

First we must be familiar with what God’s Word teaches on the subject of homosexuality (and all other forms of immoral behavior). 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 is one of the clearest passages in the entire Bible: “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God. Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous; nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God” The next verse proves the condition was not inherited but chosen as Paul states, “And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.” Men and women decide for themselves whether they will become homosexual; it is not an in-born trait beyond their ability to alter.

There are many ramifications to the philosophies of our present administration. As you study the book of Acts, it is soon obvious to the student that the church of Christ grew the most when it was undergoing persecution. Christians band together in spirit and dispersed, continuing to teach God’s truths. Christians grew in their faith, and the cause of Christ was stronger than ever before.

We are undergoing a moral persecution at this very time. Will our persecution have the same effect on us as it did the first century Christian? Or do we feel fatalistic in our view and feel like we really cannot make any difference? Have you written President Clinton ex-pressing your displeasure with his intended policies? Have you written your Congressman imploring him to vote against any such legislation? When, and if, these bills are someday passed, will you feel you have done everything you could to turn the tide back toward God?

We must pray for our new president and those in power today. And although Jesus used the term “go into your closet” and pray figuratively, let’s never sup-port, by our actions or inactions, those participating in this most sinful of practices using the term “coming out of their closet.” Christian, let’s get back into our closet and pray, pray, pray for the welfare of our country, our schools, our families, our children, and yes, even our very souls.

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 7, p. 9
April 1, 1993