Truth Magazine

By Paul K. Williams

“Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness?” (2 Cor. 6:14, NASB) In the margin of the NASB there is a note concerning the words “bound together” which states, “Lit., unequally yoked, ” and this is how the phrase is translated in the King James Version.

This verse does not mean that a person married to an unbeliever is sinning by being married to him. This is clear from what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 7:12-13: “But to the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, let him not send her away. And a woman who has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to live with her, let her not send her husband away.” Paul’s instructions to the one unequally yoked to an unbeliever are: “Therefore, ‘come out from their midst and be separate. “‘ However a believer yoked to an unbeliever in marriage is to remain in that marriage if the unbeliever is content to allow the marriage to continue. Therefore, being married to an unbeliever is not, in itself, the unequal yoke Paul writes about in 2 Corinthians 7:14.

However, marriage to an unbeliever can become an unequal yoke. This is what Paul describes in 1 Corinthians 7:15: “Yet if the unbelieving one leaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us to peace.” Under certain circumstances a Christian married to an unbeliever must choose not to continue in that marriage. This happens when the marriage is an unequal yoke.

I know a young woman who is planning to marry a man who opposes the church of the Lord and has told her that he will not allow her to go to church after they are married. If she marries him she will have entered into a yoke which will require her to do evil in order to stay married. If she marries the man under these circumstances she will be rebelling against God. If after she marries she repents of her sin, and the man will not change his opposition to the Lord, she will have to insist on going to church even if it means he leaves her. Following Christ is more important than keeping a marriage together!

In Columbus, Ohio I called on a member of the church who had not attended services in the years she had lived in that city. She explained that she was married to a Roman Catholic. He insisted that the children be reared as Catholics and did not want her to go to church. She explained to me that since it was important for her to obey her husband she was sending the children to a Catholic school and not going to church herself. That woman was doing evil in order to obey her husband even though the apostles said, “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). What she should have done was to choose to obey God. If her husband would not then allow her to live with him, she should have “let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us to peace” (1 Cor. 7:15).

Therefore 2 Corinthians 6:14 applies to marriage just as it does to any other relationship. When a Christian is forced to do evil in order to keep any relationship from breaking up that Christian is unequally yoked, and if a Christian is unequally yoked he or she must come out of that relationship. If you have to lie in order to keep your job, you must refuse to lie and must let your boss fire you. If your parents command you to do wrong, you must refuse even if they disown you. If your husband demands that you not follow Christ, you must follow Christ even if he divorces you.

I knew a woman in Columbus, Ohio who was fired when she refused to give to the Community Chest. I know a young man in South Africa who refused to lie for his boss over the telephone and was fired on the spot. I know a number of young people who have had to leave home because their parents will not let them stay at home unless they worship ancestors. A young girl had to leave her mother because her mother insisted that the girl commit fornication with a certain man. These Christians obeyed God rather than man and came out from unequal yokes. Working for a boss is not an unequal yoke unless it causes you to do wrong in order to keep the job. Having parents does not cause an unequal yoke unless the parents insist that the child does evil. Marriage is not an unequal yoke unless one partner insists that the other disobey God. But when any relationship becomes an unequal yoke, the believer must obey God rather than man even if obeying God destroys a precious relationship.

Paul wrote: “the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us to peace” (1 Cor. 7:15). The woman who obeyed her Roman Catholic husband by sending her children to Catholic schools and staying home from church misunderstood the nature of her bondage to her husband. We are not under bondage to anyone that we should sin. We have never been under such bondage. Even in marriage we are not under bondage to keep the marriage together at the price of sinning against God.

But don’t read more into what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 7:15 than what he actually wrote. The verse does not say that the believer is free to remarry if the unbeliever departs. The only thing Paul says is that the believer must not feel guilty if, by following the Lord, he or she causes the unbeliever to leave. Paul already told the Corinthians what the divorced person must do. “But to the married I give instructions, yet 1, but the Lord, that the wife should not leave her husband (but if she does leave, let her remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband should not send his wife away” (1 Cor. 7:10-11). The only time a divorced person has the right to remarry is when that person divorces his or her mate for the cause of fornication (Matt. 19:9). All other divorced persons do not have the right to remarry and must “remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband.”

How careful we should be, therefore, when we plan to get married. We must understand thoroughly that no matter what happens we must obey God. If this leads to trouble in the marriage, we have no choice. God must come first. Therefore we should be as careful as we can be to marry one who will assist us in obeying God, not hinder us. It is sinful foolishness to think that love will overcome all obstacles. If you marry an obstinate unbeliever, you are either going to disobey God or be left by the unbeliever. Be as sure as you can. Don’t enter into the yoke of marriage if there is the likelihood that it will become an unequal yoke.

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 20, pp. 622, 630
October 15, 1992

By Paul K. Williams

Is there a set pattern to follow for those who desire to become a child of God? Did Jesus authorize a set plan to be saved or did he leave it up to each individual to come in whatsoever way he wanted to.

We know that Moses was given the pattern for building the tabernacle (Heb. 8:5). Moses did not have authority to change that pattern, providing he wanted to please God. We know that Noah was given the pattern for the building of the ark (Gen. 6). He was not allowed to alter the pattern in any way. In order to arrive at the over all pattern to become a child of God, all examples of New Testament conversion must be taken into consideration. No one example of conversion includes all that is required to be saved (I mean it is not so stated). We conclude that all commandments were required even though it is not so stated. Jesus said, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved” (Mk. 16:16). Does this preclude the necessity of repentance and confession? No! “The Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized” (Acts 18:8). Repentance and confession are not mentioned.

When we consider all the listed conversions in the New Testament, we arrive at this conclusion: (1) one must hear the gospel (word of God) – Acts 18:8, (2) one must become a believer in Christ – Acts 16:31, (3) one must repent of his sins – Acts 2:38, (4) one must confess Christ to be the Son of God – Acts 8:37, (5) one must be baptized – Acts 10:48. This appears to be the pattern which all sinners must comply with to receive the remission of sins (Acts 2:38).

Preachers and/or teachers have no authority to change what the apostles have bound (Matt. 18:18). Since this is true, then we today are restricted to this pattern, it alone, in telling sinners what to do to be saved. Question! Can these commands be arranged in different order than listed above, or does it makes any difference so long as all are obeyed? I have been hearing and reading that “confession of Jesus” is required before repentance and baptism. The order cited above is H-B-R-C-B, while it is being taught that hear, believe, confess, repent, baptize, is the order. If this is permissible, then why not put baptism before hearing and believing as some teach in denominationalism. Why not put baptism before repentance?

In the conversion of the eunuch, confession was required just before baptism (Acts 8:26-39). While Philip was preaching Jesus to the eunuch they came to a certain water and the eunuch requested baptism. Philip said: “If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God” (Acts 8:37). This should prove without question that the confession was required just prior to baptism. This being true in the only recorded account of confession in a conversion, then who has the right to teach that it comes before repentance and baptism. We must not, yea, we cannot alter God’s pattern.

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 20, p. 627
October 15, 1992

By Bill Crews

In Ephesians 4:5 the New Testament teaches that there is “one baptism” (in the same context, vv. 4-6, we are also told that there is one God and Father, one Holy Spirit, one Lord, one faith (the gospel), one body (the church, the spiritual body of Christ) and one hope (the hope of eternal life). Each accountable person needs to be certain that he has received the one baptism of this passage. In Acts 19:3-5 we read of twelve men at Ephesus who were “baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus” by the apostle Paul. These men had already been baptized “into John’s baptism,” but John the Baptist (or baptizer) had been dead for more than thirty years, and his baptism was no longer to be practiced or received (see also Acts 18:24-26). There are many today who have been baptized, but who need to be baptized again.

If I honestly believed that Baptist baptism as identical to New Testament baptism, I would certainly say so and be willing to accept it. But I know for a surety that it is not. By New Testament baptism I mean the baptism commanded by Christ is his new covenant. I have a book of Baptist Confessions of Faith written by Baptist preachers, church history books by Baptist preachers, and tracts and articles, and a Baptist encyclopedia. I know what Baptist churches teach, and I would not knowingly misrepresent them. Baptist churches reject infant baptism because they believe that baptism is for believers and that infants are incapable of being believers. In this they are right. In the first place the New Testament neither states nor necessarily implies that any infants were ever baptized. In the second place it clearly teaches that those who are baptized must be taught and must believe that teaching. Please read Mark 16:15-16; Acts 8:12,35-38; 18:8, which all show that teaching and faith precede New Testament baptism.

Baptist churches reject the practice of sprinkling or pouring water upon a person for baptism and insist that baptism is the immersion of a person in water. In this they are right. The New Testament was written in Koine Greek, and all Koine Greek lexicons define the word for “baptism” (actually a transliteration of the word) as “immersion, submersion, dipping, plunging, washing, overwhelming, etc.” and never as “sprinkling” or “pouring” (other Greek verbs had those meanings). Furthermore references to baptism and actual descriptions of baptizings clearly show that New Testament baptism is immersion in water. When the Ethiopian eunuch was baptized, he and Philip came unto a certain water, he and Philip both went down into the water, he was baptized by Philip, and he and Philip both came up out of the water (by faith) buried with Christ and raised with Christ (Rom. 6:3-4; Col. 2:12). Baptism involves a burial of a person in water and a resurrection of a person from water; it is to bring to mind the burial and resurrection of our Lord. Sprinkling or pouring of water upon a person is not New Testament baptism.

So far I have agreed with the teaching and practice of Baptist churches on baptism. Wherein do I disagree? In these five points:

1. Even though Baptist churches rightly teach that prospects for baptism must be capable of hearing and understanding the gospel and must be believers, in practice they baptize very young children who cannot comply with these conditions. The New Testament also shows that baptism is for people who are lost due to their own sins against God and that they must be convicted of their sins (Rom. 6:16-18,14). Baptist churches, though they will not baptize infants, teach that everyone is born lost because they come into this world with the guilt of Adam’s sin upon them. This the Bible does not teach (Ezek. 18:20; Eccl. 7:29; Lk. 18:15-17).

2. Baptist churches not only teach that one must be a believer before he can be baptized. They teach that one must believe that he is already saved before he can be baptized; they put salvation at the point of faith; they teach salvation by faith alone. They put salvation from sin before baptism; the New Testament puts it after baptism (Mk. 16:15-16; 1 Pet. 3:21). They put remission of sins before baptism; the New Testament puts it after baptism (Acts 2:38). They put discipleship before baptism; the New Testament puts it after baptism (Matt. 28:18-20). They put the washing away of sins before baptism; the New Testament puts it after baptism (Acts 22:16). They put being in Christ before baptism; the New Testament puts it after baptism (Gal. 3:26-27; Rom. 6:3-4).

3. Baptist churches teach that one must be accepted by the members of a congregation before he can be baptized; in times past they actually had the matter put to a vote. In the New Testament no one was ever brought before a congregation for approval before he could be baptized; in the New Testament churches did not vote upon receiving anyone for baptism (please read the example in Acts 8:26-39; the Lord adds one to the church, Acts 2:47; God sets the members in the spiritual body which is the church, 1 Cor. 12:18).

4. Baptist churches teach that one can only be baptized by one who is authorized to do so, usually a “licensed” and “ordained” “minister,” who is a Baptist. Some teach that that authorization must go back in an unbroken chain all the way to Christ and his apostles before the baptism can be valid. The New Testament places no significance upon the identity of the one who does the baptizing. The important thing is whether or not the individual who is baptized has been taught and convicted and is from the heart obeying the truth (Rom. 6:17-18). When anyone at Corinth began to place significance upon who baptized him, Paul wrote that he thanked God that he did not baptize that person (1 Cor. 1:10-17).

5. Baptist churches teach that baptism puts one into a local congregation and makes him a member of that local body. In the New Testament we do not read anywhere that baptism put anyone into a local church or congregation. We rather read that baptism puts one into Christ and into the spiritual body of Christ, the church (“the church” in that sense is all the saved and not some local congregation as in Matt. 16:18; Col. 1:18; Eph. 1:22-23; 3:10,21; 5:23; now please read 1 Cor. 12:12-13; Gal. 3:26-27 and Rom. 6:3-4, which show that we are baptized into Christ and into the spiritual body of Christ, the church).

This is why I know that anyone who has received Baptist baptism has not received New Testament baptism. Please be honest; it is not all “just a matter of interpretation.” It is rather a matter of Bible teaching and the salvation of precious souls.

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 20, pp. 618-619
October 15, 1992

By Greg Littlejohn

The most precious gift that God has given to us is the sacrifice of his only Son for our sins. But what would be the next greatest gift that he has given us? Answer: The second greatest gift given to us, his children, is our own children, “Sons are a heritage from the Lord, children a reward from him” (Psa. 127:3). With this in mind, let’s take a look at what God’s word says about our children.

Israel. The Israelites are often times condemned by modern Christians for their lack of faith, and for turning against God even though he had just performed some miracle for their benefit. And although this criticism may be deserved, one of the major causes of Israel’s lack of faith stemmed from a problem that is most prevalent today. They failed to instruct their children in the ways of the Lord. This failure is evident from their history.

At many points in their history, the children of Israel turned away from God. One such instance is recorded in the second chapter of the book of Judges, “After that whole generation had been gathered to their fathers, another generation grew up, who knew neither the Lord nor what he had done for Israel. Then the Israelites did evil in the eyes of the Lord and served the Baals” (Judg. 2:10-11). The previous generation’s failure properly to teach its children about the effect of God’s guiding hand on the nation of Israel is doubtlessly a heavily contributing factor in the latter generation’s departure from God. If the nation as a whole had properly educated its young about the grace of God and all that he had done for them, this radical departure almost assuredly would not have taken place. Because of this failure to teach their children and their resultant turning away, Israel, in this instance, was plundered by raiders (Judg. 2:14). Similar scenarios occur throughout the books of Judges, I and 2 Kings, and other books in the Old Testament as well.

Thus, the entire nation of Israel suffered many times throughout its history because of the older generation’s failure to teach the younger generation. No doubt, much of their suffering could have been avoided had parents taken more time to teach their children about God and everything that he had done for them.

Today. Although the Old Testament is recorded for our learning, many people who do not learn from history subsequently are condemned to repeat it. The failure of Christian parents to educate their children about God today will result in serious problems for the children of today as it did for the generations who turned away from God in the Old Testament. However, instead of a danger of being savaged by another country, the children run the risk of losing their souls . . . a much greater loss to be sure.

Training. Few books in the Bible are a greater source of timeless wisdom than the book of Proverbs. In Proverbs, we see the effect of educating a child, “Train a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not turn from it” (Prov. 22:6). Obviously, no matter how well a parent teaches a child, some children will stray from the path. But no single influence in a child’s life is greater than that of a parent. For this reason it is vital that we as parents teach our children the truth about God and what he has done for us.

Discipline. Over the past few decades this country has seen a gradual decline in family values and morality. This decline has in part been caused by the erosion of discipline. Noted psychologists attempting to improve on parenting offered new methods of rearing children. One such theorist suggested that parents refrain from telling a child “no.” Others said that any form of physical punishment is wrong. But God’s word gives us instruction in the rearing of children that does not agree with these “new and improved” ideas. “Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you punish him with the rod, he will not die. Punish him with the rod and save his soul from death” (Prov. 23:13-14). Furthermore, “The rod of correction imparts wisdom, but a child left to himself disgraces his mother” (Prov. 29:15). There can be no doubt that a child needs the active participation of both parents to discipline him. All one has to do today is look at the world around him and he will quickly see the effects of a lack of discipline on this country. Crime, poverty, nonexistent public morality, lack of respect for elders and others, the list goes on and on. And a large percentage of each of these problems can be attributed to a lack of parental discipline.

The nuclear family, which used to be the norm, has become a dying breed. With the split of the nuclear family, even those still in existence are marred by a myriad of problems which all stem from a lack of parental love for children. Even Hollywood has identified the problem. Note the following quote from a recent blockbuster movie where a mother is watching her son talk to a cyborg. “Watching John with a machine, it was suddenly so clear. The terminator would never stop. It would never leave him. And it would never hurt him. Never shout at him or get drunk and hit him. Or say it was too busy to spend time with him. It would always be there and it would die to protect him. Of all the wouldbe fathers who came and went over the years, this thing, this machine, was the only one who measured up. In an insane world, it was the sanest choice” (Terminator 2: Judgment Day). It has become a truly sad day when a machine could ever be viewed as a better father than a person.

What to teach? Parents need to teach their children about God. This sounds perfectly simply, and it is! Paul’s concern for parenting is evidenced in his letter to the saints in Ephesus where he wrote, “Fathers, do not exasperate your children; instead, bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord” (Eph. 6:4). But just what is “the training and instruction of the Lord?”

As parents, we must teach our children everything that we know about God. And in order that we may be able to know as much as we can to teach them, we must study God’s word regularly. This does not mean that we should be satisfied with being prepared for Sunday morning Bible study. That is just a starting point. Our study must go beyond that to other topics or areas of concern tht we face in everyday life. Furthermore, we must never lose sight of the basic, fundamental principles of God’s word, which would include, among other things, God’s plan of salvation and the sacrifice that Jesus made for us.

Proper biblical authority must also be emphasized. The denominational world has run afoul many times simply by virtue of a failure to find proper biblical authority for their actions. We must stress the importance of proper authority for everything that we do in our worship of God and in living our lives. Failure to search for proper authority can lead well-intended individuals down a slippery slope that ends far away from God and what he wants us to do for him. Thus, we must always emphasize to our children that we have the proper authority for doing everything that we do.

God’s greatest gift to us was given out of his love for us. We must be certain that we never forget that everything that God does for us he does out of his love for us. and we must never forget to emphasize this great love that God has shown for us to our children. When we explain to our children how God’s great love has affected our lives in a very positive manner, they will understand why we love him. In turn, they will be able to love God when they see everything that he has done and will do for them.

God’s love for us manifests itself in the blessings that he bestows upon us. We must tell our children about all the blessings that God has given us, both physical and spiritual. These blessings range from the sacrifice of his Son on the cross for our sins to the food on our tables, the clothes on our backs, and the roofs over our heads. Yet another great blessing, one I believe to be under-emphasized by most Christians, is that of prayer. It is a blessing to know we have the opportunity to go to our Father in prayer at any time of the day and he will always listen to us. Futhermore, we know that he will answer our prayers, although not always in the way that we may want if we ask for something that we should not ask for or something that is not in our best interests.

Furthermore, we must be certain to teach our children the gospel plan of salvation (hear, believe, repent, confess, be baptized, and remain faithful) so that when they reach the age of accountability, they will be able to act on their faith. What good would it be to know everything else if a person did not know how to act on his faith? After all, faith without works is dead (Jas. 2:26).

How to Teach? How to teach is more important than what to teach because if we do not teach our children in the correct way, it will not matter what we teach because they will not learn.

First, we must teach in word. We must always be teaching them about God, not just helping them with their lessons on Saturday night. Our instruction should be ongoing, similar to Paul’s instruction to the saints in Thessalonica to “pray continually” (1 Thess. 5:17). Whether you are home or away, day or night, weekday or weekend, instruction about God is a must.

Second, we must teach by our actions. If a parent says one thing and does another (i.e. a hypocrite), a child will soon learn that what mom or dad says does not really matter. You just say what they want to hear and then go off and do whatever you want. However, if a child hears you talking about God and then sees you acting upon your beliefs, this will re-enforce what you have taught. And, as James wrote, “Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do.”

Conclusion. As parents, we love our children intensely and want only what is best for them. And what could be better for them than giving them the knowledge about God and the opportunity to be pleasing to him? Or instead do we want to keep them ignorant or confused and risk the loss of their souls for eternity? Would a truly loving parent willfully put his child in harm’s way for no good reason? Therefore, we should teach our children about God because we love him and we love them.

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 20, pp. 620-621
October 15, 1992