Truth Magazine

By Johnie Edwards

There are those who believe that since Jesus was human while he was one the earth, therefore he is still human in heaven. There are some real problems with this idea. Paul said, “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption” (1 Cor. 15:50). If Jesus is human now, this Scripture has no meaning.

It is sometimes reasoned, that Jesus is high priest now, therefore he must still be a human being in heaven, since the priests of the Old Testament were human. Please observe.

1. The Priesthood has been changed. “For the priesthood being changed, there is made a necessity a change also of the law” (Heb. 7:12). The priesthood of Jesus is not like that of the Old Testament priest. The priesthood of Jesus is “not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life” (Heb. 7:16).

2. After the order of Melchisedec. The priesthood of Christ differs from that of human priest for only his was of the order of Melchisedec. “Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec” (Heb. 6:20). Remember, Melchisedec was “without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life: but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually” (Heb. 7:3).

3. Old Testament Priests were men subject to death. The priests of the Old Testament law were only men, had sin in their lives, with a temporary priesthood and were soon replaced because physical death claimed their office. “And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death; but this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood . . . For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens: Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself. For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore” (Heb. 7:23-28).

4. Priesthood of Christ is Heavenly. We must remember that the priesthood of Christ is not earthly but heavenly. “For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law” (Heb. 8:4). The priesthood of Christ is from the right hand of God. “Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens” (Heb. 9:1). Christ is high priest in the “perfect tabernacle”; “in heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us” (Heb. 9:11,24).

If Jesus is human in heaven then Christians will also be human in heaven. “Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself” (Phil. 3:2 1). Paul didn’t think Christians will be human in heaven.

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 24, p. 749
December 20, 1990

By Don Willis

Newspapers attempt to keep the public aware of current ethics and attitudes. Enclosed is a letter to Dear Abby (Houston Post, 9/24/90, p. B-8) from a concerned brother. Paragraphing is deleted to conserve space.

Dear Abby, I have a sister who taught at the local high school until she was found guilty of fornication with some of the students. She lost her teaching credentials, her husband left her and she moved in with a man she just met. Now she’s announced that she’s going to marry him in December. Abby, Jesus stated plainly in Matthew 5:32 and again in Matthew 19:9 that marriage under these circumstances would be considered adultery. My sister claims to be a good Christian, but her conduct shows otherwise. I realize that sins can be forgiven if the sinner repents and prays (Acts 8:22), but true repentance would require that she first get out of her adulterous marriage. I have asked her to read the Scriptures to see if they apply to her situation, but she refused, and accused me of judging and condemning her. Should I persist in trying to teach her the truth? Also, should I attend her wedding? If I did, I would feel obligated to do my Christian duty and voice my objections to this adulterous marriage before man and God. I love my sister and want her to have a chance at heaven. HER LOVING BROTHER.” P.S. Abby encouraged, “please do not attend her wedding.”

Common community standards accepts adultery, fornication, and all kinds of sexual impropriety. The Bible condemns the same! This concerned brother has laid out scriptural teaching very curtly and accurately!

Why are people having this moral dilemma? Some who claim to be Christians are led into this erroneous marital teaching and society is going downhill as a consequence.

In the very same Houston Post, same section, and page B-3 under the heading “‘Till Death Do Us Part’ Unlikely Vow as Marriages Shorten,” a glimpse into community ethics is manifest by a census (observe: no one has ever consulted me in such a census). Over 40 percent of male students “do not think it very likely they will stay married to the same person for life.”

Current attitudes are money, position and power; not family, children, contentment! Observe these article conclusions:

Divorce has become so widely accepted that about 45 percent of women ages 18 to 44 approve of an “unhappy couple” getting a divorce.

There is no evidence of a new Puritanism in sexual relations as a reaction to fear of AIDS. In fact, only one quarter of women ages 18 to 24 disapprove of unmarried 18-year olds having sexual relations. (Wow! No wonder we have a problem!)

The number of couples living together (this is what fornication and adultery are all about, DW) is up dramatically. Although 40 percent marry within two years, the divorce rate is higher than among couples who did not live together.

One sage observed that “it is difficult to sleep with the hogs without smelling like the hogs!” This is nothing more than God-rebellion; and the only solution must come from respect for God!

The marital and immoral dilemma must come back and responsibly reside upon those responsible for this problem: parents have miserably failed to discharge their God-given responsibility! We have courted the world, flirted with the Devil, sold our soul to the economy, and shown too little genuine interest in our children!

“And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord” (Eph. 6:4). Too many parents push their children to be the star football player, or cheerleader; to marry a doctor or lawyer; get a good education so you can make a lot of money . . . and fail miserably in training those children that their foremost obligation is to God!

Parents! Wake up! Our nation is depending upon us! Our children are crying out for spiritual leadership! Stand up and be counted for the Lord! Remember, “And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (Jn. 8:32); and “Jesus said unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me” (Jn. 14:6). This is the only moral answer for America for our youth, and for me!

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 24, p. 741
December 20, 1990

By Ferrell Jenkins

He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit (Tit. 3:5, NASB).

In Titus 3:5 the apostle Paul declares that “God saved us” and that such was done “according to his mercy.” It was the mercy, grace and kindness or goodness of God that made salvation possible. Praise God for this grace toward man!

The passage also announces that he saved us, “not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness” but that he saved us “by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit.” What is this “washing of regeneration” by which he saved us? One thing is clear: it is not a deed or work “which we have done in righteousness.” The chart should aid us in the analysis of this passage.

He Saved Us

Not By But By

Works Washing of Regeneration

According To His Mercy

What is the “washing of regeneration” by which he saved us? We have collected the comments of various outstanding Bible scholars from a diversity of religious groups. These men often differ on some of the details in this passage, but they all agree as to what the “washing of regeneration” is. We do not cite them as our authority, but ask that you weigh their arguments carefully.

John Wesley: “Sanctification, expressed by the laver of regeneration (that is, baptism, the thing signified, as well as the outward sign), and the renewal of the Holy Ghost, which purifies the soul, as water cleanses the body, and renews it in the whole image of God” (One Volume New Testament Commentary, Wesley, Clarke, Henry, et. al.).

William Barclay: “When we think of baptism in the earliest days of the Church, we must always remember that it was the baptism of grown men and women who were coming direct out of paganism into the Christian Church. It was the deliberate leaving of one way of life to enter upon another and a new way. When Paul writes to the people of Corinth, he says: ‘Ye are washed, ye are sanctified, ye are justified’ (1 Cor. 6:11). In the letter to the Ephesians he says that Jesus Christ took the Church that “He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word” (Eph. 5:26). In baptism there came to men the cleansing, re-creating power of God” (The Letters to Timothy, Titus, Philemon in the Daily Study Bible).

Cambridge Greek Testament (J.H. Bernard): “That the ‘washing of regeneration’ is the Water of Baptism is undoubted; see Eph. 5:26 . . . It is the instrument (dia) of salvation (cp. 1 Pet. 3:21 . . . ), the means, that is, through which we are placed in a ‘state of salvation,’ in union with the mystical Body of Christ; cp. Gal. 3:27. . .”

The New Bible Commentary (A.M. Stibbs): “In status this salvation is made ours through the outward seal of baptism; in vital experience it comes through the inner quickening by the Spirit.”

The Pulpit Commentary (A.C. Hervey): “Here we have the means through or by which God’s mercy saves us . . . (regeneration) therefore, very fitly describes the new birth in holy baptism, when the believer is put into possession of a new spiritual life, a new nature, and a new inheritance of glory. And the laver of baptism is called ‘laver of regeneration,’ because it is the ordained means by or through which regeneration is obtained.”

William Hendriksen: “It is clear from such passages as John 3:3,5 and especially Ephesians 5:26 (cf. Heb. 10:22) that this ‘washing of regeneration and renewing’ stand in some relation to the rite of baptism. Undoubtedly, also here in Titus 3:5 there is an implied reference to this sacrament” (New Testament Commentary).

Albert Barnes: “The word (washing) itself would naturally be understood as referring to baptism (comp. Notes on Acts 22:16), which was regarded as the emblem of washing away sins, or of cleansing from them” (Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament).

Henry Alford: “Observe, there is here no figure: the words are literal: Baptism is taken as in all its completion, the outward visible sign accompanied by the inward spiritual grace; and as thus complete, it not only represents, but is the new birth.” At Hebrews 10:22, Alford says the clause having our body washed with pure water “refers directly to Christian baptism” and cites washing of water (Eph. 5:26) and washing of regeneration (Tit. 3:5) as “analogous expressions” (The Greek New Testament).

James Macknight: “Through the bath of regeneration: through baptism; called ‘the bath of regeneration,’ not because any change in the nature of the baptized person is produced by baptism, but because it is an emblem of the purification of his soul from sin. . . ” (Apostolical Epistles).

G.R. Beasley-Murray: Beasley-Murray said in 1962 “of all the commentators who have written on these Epistles [1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus], I can find but one who denies” that this refers to baptism. He says, “All things considered, it requires a real hardiness of spirit to refuse the weight of this evidence. . . ” (Baptism, pp. 209, 210). I have come across one additional more recent commentator who denies that baptism is under consideration.

What is the “washing of regeneration” by which he saved us? These commentators all agree and most of them cite biblical evidence to back up their position. The “washing of regeneration” in Titus 3:5 is baptism. In the chart below we have replaced the phrase “washing of regeneration” with the word baptism. This is proper since this is the meaning of the phrase.

He Saved Us

Not By But By

Works Baptism

According To His Mercy

Now observe that he saved us not by works, but by baptism. This passage clearly shows that baptism is not a work of man “done in righteousness.” Baptism is not a work of man; it is a work of God because it has been commanded by God (Acts 2:38; 10:48). Baptism is a work of God in the same sense that believing on Jesus is “the work of God” (and John 6:29 says just this). Those who believe that he saved us by works should give up the view. And those who disregard baptism should realize that they can not be saved without obeying God.

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 24, pp. 737, 751
December 20, 1990

By Shane Scott

Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:19, NASB).

The Greek word that we translate “disciple” (mathetes) derives from the Greek verb “to learn” (manthano). A disciple, then, is a person who is a pupil, and often in the ancient world the pupil had a special relationship with his teacher. To be a disciple of Christ is to have a special relationship with him in which we learn from him. Consequently, when Jesus instructed his apostles to “make disciples” (matheteuo), he was commanding them to lead people to a relationship with him in which they could be students of Christ.

When Jesus gave this Great Commission, he did not tell his apostles to “convert people” or to “make Christians,” though that is certainly the ultimate goal of preaching the gospel to every creature (Mk. 16:15). Rather, Jesus instructed them to “make disciples.” In Jesus’ view, becoming Christians and becoming disciples were one and the same event. Souls truly converted to Christ become his disciples at the point of conversion. Thus, Christians, disciples, and converts are all the same thing.

Rarely did Jesus implore people to “be saved.” Jesus did invite people to become his disciples, provided they were willing to pay the price:

If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple. Whoever does not carry his own cross and come after me cannot be my disciple (Lk. 14:26-27).

When the apostles obeyed the Savior and took the gospel to “all creation” we never read of them “converting people” or “making Christians” out of some people. Rather, Luke tells us this about Paul and Barnabas’ work in Derbe: “And after they had preached the gospel to that city and had made many disciples, they returned to Lystra and to Iconium and to Antioch” (Acts 14:21, emphasis added).

In fact, as Luke narrates the spread of the gospel in the world, only twice does he refer to converts as “Christians” (Acts 11:26; 26:28). In contrast, Luke uses the term “disciple” or “disciples” twenty-nine times to describe those in Christ. Individuals of note were not identified as “certain Christians” but as “certain disciples, ” such as Ananias (9:10), Tabitha (9:36), and Timothy (16:1).

I am afraid we have lost sight of the basic link between conversion and discipleship. We have focused on baptizing people, converting them, saving them, etc. and rightly so (Acts 2:38). But if we fail to emphasize to prospects that they must become disciples, i.e. dedicated followers who will be students of Christ, we have told them only half of the story. I know that personally I have not emphasized the equivalence of conversion and discipleship, and as a result two of the three people I have baptized this year have fallen away, and a third 66convert” is at best in a very weak condition. If we do not ask prospects to “count the cost” before baptism, we are unfair to them and unfaithful to the gospel Christ wants us to preach (Lk. 14:27-33).

I think the matter of discipleship also directly bears on what we call the “age of accountability.” I was first baptized in water at the age of 11, but five years later I was baptized into Christ. I do not know how many people in the church have had a similar experience, but I have a sneaking suspicion there are many. When I was 11, I could read well enough to understand what passages like Acts 2:38 meant, but I was not mature enough to really comprehend the meaning of discipleship. If discipleship is an integral part of becoming as a Christian, then those who are not mature enough to understand discipleship are not mature enough to become Christians and are not accountable.

When we emphasize to young people that they need to be baptized and neglect to discuss what it means to be a disciple, we end up producing “converts” who have no idea what it means to abide in the word of Christ, love brethren, and bear fruit, all of which are marks of true disciples – true converts (John 8:31; 13:35; 15:8). Certainly, individual children radically differ in stages of development, and for some the age at which they become mature enough to realize the commitment necessary to be a disciple will be much earlier than it will be for others. But we are making a mistake to baptize young people without being sure they understand what Christ will expect of them as disciples.

Brethren, in our haste to spread the gospel and win souls to Christ, let us be sure we approach our work with the words of the Savior in mind and devote ourselves to making disciples. To do less is to fill our local churches with everything but Christians.

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 24, p. 748
December 20, 1990