“Even so,” Jesus said, “let your light shine before men; that they may see your good works and glorify your Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 5:16). Paul penned similar remarks to the Philippian brethren to tell them that they are to be “blameless and harmless, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom they are seen as lights in the world” (Phil. 2:15).

Social drinking, as a beer or two with some friends is called, involves far more than whether it is right to ingest alcohol into one’s body. Alcohol is frequently used in medicines. And the Bible commends this use of it (1 Tim. 5:23). Social drinking, however, is much more complex than this.

Social drinking involves the use of alcoholic beverages in the presence of family, relatives, friends, business associates, and others with whom one may have occasional company. It is practiced for physical pleasure or relaxation, and for various ulterior motives. The ulterior motives may be to attain sexual ends, reach business goals, escape from reality, or any of many other purposes. These motives may be shared by one or more of the participants.

What should concern Christians is participation in a practice that commends or furthers the goals of Satan in particular and sin in general. Such behavior is, as Jesus and Paul teach, inherently sinful. Surely, it is not necessary to enumerate in detail all the evils that grow out of social drinking.

The fact is that just one beer begins the process of releasing inhibitions, which results in speech and behavior with less restraint. One loses some of the faculty to reason and make sound judgments morally, socially, spiritually, even physically and in secular matters. Lack of full control leads to automobile deaths, unethical business deals, poverty, occasional drunkenness, addictive drinking, malicious speech, child and wife abuse, fornication, adultery, murder, robbery, etc.

Commending social drinking because one does not engage in these immoral practices is naive and myopic. Social drinking encourages and supports others who do these things. Furthermore, one runs the risk that he may influence his wife/husband, child, grandchild, or fellow brother in Christ to practice any one or more of these sinful practices.

These evils are too widespread and so often related to drinking to deny a connection between social drinking and sin. The wisest man, other than Jesus, who ever lived wrote in the proverbs about a relationship between drinking and the woes that grow out of it.

Solomon wrote:

“Who has woe? Who has sorrow? Who has strife? Who has complaining? Who has wounds without cause? Who has redness of eyes? Those who tarry long over wine; those who go to try mixed wine. Do not look at wine when it is red, when it sparkles in the cup and goes down smoothly. In the end it bites like a serpent and stings like and adder” (Prov. 23:29-32).

Note what Solomon says about the results of tarrying long at the wine: it creates sorrow and heartache; it stirs up contention and strife; causes dissatisfaction and complaining about life; results in physical injuries, etc. And anyone of us, even Solomon himself, could have extended this list significantly. Make your own list.

But Solomon also offers a “do not” to this list to warn of the subtle, beguiling, dangerous, and destructive power of wine. “Do not,” he says, “look at wine when it is red, when it sparkles in the cup and goes down smoothly. In the end it bites like a serpent and stings like an adder” (Prov. 23:31-32). Elsewhere the wise man said: “Wine is a mocker, strong drink a brawler; and whosoever is led astray by it is not wise” (Prov. 20:1).

1. He says man must not approach the drinking of alcoholic beverages casually. No one should take it lightly or view it as an innocent practice. Many agree that it tastes good, that it quenches the thirst, and is a delight to the eyes as it sparkles in its attractive container. But…
2. But all of that, he says, is deceptive. Wine, beer, or the drink of your choice is a mocker! Its sight and taste give no hint of its destructive power. But when it enters the blood stream, reaches the mind, and alters one’s person, it robs its user of clarity of thought, rational control of emotions, firm command of speech, and restraint of behavior.
3. In the end the drinker will get hurt. Wine and similar drinks will lead men astray. They do not see or they choose to ignore the “bite” its poisoning effects will inflict. Drinkers do not with that first drink think of the deadly “sting” that results in a few hours when an altered state of mind yields perverted behavior.

I marvel that society, including brethren, gets so worked up over heroin, marijuana, cocaine; that our nation has mounted costly campaigns against the “so-called” hard drugs; and then say so little about the deadly evils that alcoholic drinks inflict on our country. A beer here and a beer there, a sip of wine at noon, and a relaxing social drink at night have lead to the most abused drug in modern society––alcohol.

But what’s totally incomprehensible is that Christians––our brothers in Christ who are dedicated to the eradication of all evil––ask: “What’s wrong with social drinking?” “What’s wrong with an occasional beer?” What’s wrong? It’s addictive and possesses its user. It alters the mind and distorts man as God created him. It impacts and influences others, including family, who lack control. It gives help to Satan who uses it to destroy others. Whoever errs thereby is exceedingly foolish.

The “name” has been associated with Satan for two reasons: One, “lucifer” is the translation of the Hebrew word heylel or helel in Jerome’s Latin translation of Isaiah 14:12 early in the fifth century A. D. The “old” King James Version transliterated the word into a proper name in this verse. Two, this translation in Isaiah 14:12 describes one who “has fallen from heaven” and been “cut down to the earth.” Because Jesus refers to Satan falling from heaven (see Luke 10:18), it has been assumed by many commentators that Isaiah is referring to the origin of the devil: a good angel who sinned and was cast out of heaven.

While this may be true about the origin of Satan, it is not what Jesus is discussing and has nothing at all to do with what Isaiah foresees. Isaiah says plainly that his prophecy denotes the downfall of the “king of Babylon” (Isaiah 14:4). The prophet begins this oracle against Babylon in chapter 13 and continues his description of the fall of the nation and its king in chapter 14.

Isaiah employs a number of “stellar” and “heavenly” images in chapter 13 to portray the fall of the nation: “for the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give light; the sun shall be darkened in its going forth, and the moon shall not cause its light to shine.” This, he says, refers to the “day of Jehovah” that comes “cruel, with wrath, and fierce anger” to make the land of Babylon a desolation (Isa 13:9-10).

These portraits foresee the end of the exaltation of this nation used by God as a rod of His indignation against Assyria and His own people––Judah (see Isaiah 10:5 for God’s use of nations). God later explains to Habakkuk that Babylon was guilty of blood-thirsty cruelty in conquering these nations and deserves to fall from its exalted place (Hab 2). God describes this fall in Isaiah 14:12: “How art thou fallen from heaven, O day star [Lucifer, KJV], son of morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, that didst lay low the nations.”

Isaiah follows this verse by highlighting the arrogance of the king of Babylon as a “man” that boasted, “I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God; and I will sit upon the mount of congregation, in the uttermost parts of the north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High” (Isa 14:13-14). All this, as seen in Daniel 4, depicts accurately the pride of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon.

The prophet sees the Babylonian king as one who exalted himself as the “morning star” but is humbled and brought low by the wrath and judgment of God. “Lucifer” is an unfortunate translation of the Hebrew word for “day star” as a personal name. But more than that, Satan is nowhere discussed in this prophecy. “Lucifer,” in the original King James Version of the Bible, is the king of Babylon—not Satan.

Science and Faith

To answer this indictment, it is necessary for the terms “science” and “faith” to be effectively defined. Yet in examining these two words, one must sift through prejudiced assumptions and statements (For example, Robert Ingersoll, an agnostic orator of the nineteenth century, insisted, “Our ignorance is God. What we know is science.” ). “Science” must be defined and understood by three limiting principles:

Principle #1: Science is limited to observable data. The simple definition of “science” is “systemized knowledge derived from observation, study, etc.” (Webster’s New World Dictionary). Geneticist John Klotz explained science as “man’s groping for truth.” He went on to say that “science deals only with the natural, with things that can be apprehended with the sense organs. Science deals with those things that can be measured.” Scientific information is thus confined to what can be observed and studied with the senses.

Principle #2: Science is limited to reproducible data. This means that tests and experiments must produce results that can be duplicated under different conditions, viz. different operators, apparatus, laboratories, and/or after different intervals of time (IUPAC Compendium of Chemical Terminology). The scientific method is not applicable to single, unique events.

Principle #3: Science is limited to naturalistic explanations. Since scientific research is restricted to that which is observed and measured with the senses, it cannot explain anything outside of natural law.

Just as the definition of “science” must be cleared of conjecture and presumption so must “faith” (Friedrich Nietzsche unfairly alleged that “faith” is “not wanting to know what is true,” and even the American Heritage Dictionary defines the word as “belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.”).

The Bible, which claims to be the word of God and the source of faith (cf. 1 Cor. 2:10-13; 2 Tim. 3:16; Rom. 10:17), testifies to a very different meaning of “faith”: Faith is the foundation of hope and the proof of the invisible (cf. Heb. 11:1). It can be these, because it is grounded in truth and confirmed by evidence (cf. Jn. 17:17; 1 Jn. 1:1-3). Jesus Himself did not expect anyone to believe without proof (cf. Jn. 10:37-38), yet John added that faith is possible even for those who have not viewed the evidence first-hand (cf. Jn. 20:30-31; 20:25-29; 1 Pet. 1:7-8). Faith is not “blind,” as Nietzsche and the American Heritage Dictionary malign it. It is based on the valid, historical evidence of eye-witness testimony and confirmed by substantial evidence (cf. Jn. 21:24; 2 Pet. 1:16; 1 Jn. 1:1-3).

Science Cannot Disprove the Bible

Due to the limitations of science, it will never be capable of refuting the inspiration and validity of the Bible:

The events recorded in the Bible cannot be observed or reproduced (Principle #1 and #2). They are historical events and are, therefore, non-scientific. This fact is even recognized by scientists: “Scientific study is limited to organisms and processes that we are able to observe and measure. Supernatural and religious phenomena are beyond the realm of scientific analysis because they cannot be scientifically studied, analyzed, or explained. Supernatural explanations can be used to explain any result, and cannot be disproven by experiment or observation” (The Living World, George B. Johnson). This does not mean that historical facts are any less true. For instance, the existence of Abraham Lincoln and his presidency cannot be proven through science, but the historical evidence–eyewitness testimony, written documents, structures, and archeological findings–confirms that he lived and served as president. Thus, science itself will never disprove the Bible, because the Scriptures’ account is non-observable, non-measurable, and non-reproducible.

The Bible testifies to supernaturalism (that which is above and beyond the natural realm). Unique, supernatural activities and persons (creation, miracles, God, Jesus, etc.) cannot be disproved by science, because they are outside of natural law (Principle #3). Any evidence against such must come from non-scientific sources.

Science Supports the Biblical Account

While scientific data can neither prove nor disprove the Bible, it can provide evidence for or against it. Many atheists and agnostics claim science overwhelmingly invalidates the Bible, but open-minded investigation shows the Scriptures to be completely accurate when it comes to matters both non-scientific and scientific. In fact, the Scriptures even mention things that have only recently been discovered by modern scientists. This is often called the “scientific foreknowledge” of the Bible. Consider the following examples:

- Five components of the universe: time, force, energy, space, and matter. Bible: Gen. 1:1. Science: Nineteenth century.

- Creation finished. Bible: Gen. 2:1. Science: Nineteenth century (First Law of Thermodynamics).

- Mankind of one blood. Bible: Acts 17:26. Science: Twentieth century.

- Earth wearing down. Bible: Isa. 51:6; Ps. 102:26; Heb. 1:11. Science: Nineteenth century (Second Law of Thermodynamics).

- Ocean springs. Bible: Gen. 7:11; Prov. 8:28; Job 38:16. Science: First century.

- Ocean currents. Bible: Ps. 8:8. Science: Nineteenth century.

- Ocean trenches or canyons. Bible: Job 38:16; 2 Sam. 22:16. Science: Nineteenth century.

- Water cycle. Bible: Ecc. 1:7; Amos 9:6. Science: Sixteenth century.

- Circumcision on the eighth day–the highest levels of Vitamin K in the body are present (without modern medicine) on the eighth day following birth. This vitamin produces prothombin which prevents hemorrhaging, making day eight the best day for surgical procedures. Bible: Lev. 12:3. Science: Twentieth century.

Not only do the accusations of critics that the Bible is proven false by science not hold up, they are demolished by the scientific foreknowledge of the Scriptures. The only explanation for this is inspiration. God alone knew and revealed thousands of years beforehand what man has only recently discovered.

“Has science disproved the Bible?” By no means. The Scriptures have not only held their ground, they have been reinforced by modern scientific findings. The word of God is living, active, and sharper than ever (cf. Heb. 4:12; 2 Cor. 10:3-6), and as Christians, we must be prepared to contend for and defend the faith and our hope (cf. Jude 3; 1 Pet. 3:15)

That faith in Jesus as the Christ and as the Son of God is the foundation of salvation is too plain in Scripture to need proof (see John 8:24; John 20:30-31; Romans 1:16; Romans 5:1; etc). So the gospel unmistakably announces condemnation to those who believe not. Damned (katrino, Thayer 332) means to pass “judgment against” or “condemn” and states that unbelievers stand before God in judgment as guilty.

The meaning of “justification,” which is by faith (Romans 5:1), is essentially “not guilty,” so that those who refuse to believe on Christ and, as a result, fail to come to the blood of Christ by baptism through faith will be judged guilty and suffer eternal damnation or condemnation (see Romans 3:24-25; 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9; Romans 6:3-4).

This raise the issue: but what of one who “believes” and is not baptized? Bible students must but remember that even the “demons” believe and recognize Jesus as the “Holy One of God” and as the “Son of God” (Mark 1:24; Mark 3:11; see James 2:19).

Faith that refuses to “obey” is as dead and lifeless as the body apart from the spirit (James 2:26). “Faith alone” is reformation theology, not biblical teaching. “Faith alone” would have left Abraham in Chaldea, Noah in the flood waters of destruction, and Moses in the king’s palace of Egypt––meaning there would have been no human race today, no nation of Israel through whom the Messiah would come, and no covenant people from which redemption would have been typified to bring men to faith (see Hebrews 11:7, 8, 24-25)

C. E. W. Dorris illustrates simply how little there is to misunderstand about this last phrase of the gospel in Mark 16:16. “He that pledges himself to be honest and will restore what he has stolen shall be pardoned, but he that will not make this pledge shall serve out his time in prison.” Dorris then comments: “None but a crazy thief could think that because restitution is not mentioned in the latter instance he would be pardoned without making restitution” (A Commentary on the Gospel by Mark, p. 388). So it is with baptism.

Please re-read and re-think the last phrase of Mark 16:16: He that believeth not shall be damned (The above taken and adapted from Truth Commentaries Mark, L. A. Stauffer)

The apostles were to preach that those who “believe” and are “baptized” will be saved, meaning clearly that both faith and baptism are essential to salvation in Christ. Only the parsing of words and twisting of meanings can escape this simple fact. Few have problems with the idea that “believers” shall be saved, but to many of the same folks baptism is not essential.

R. C. H. Lenski, a Lutheran commentator, captures the thought of the commission message: “Faith and baptism are combined here as the means of obtaining salvation. For one thing, faith and baptism always go together; the moment a man believes he will want and will have baptism. By believing he clings to the gospel, and part of that is gospel is baptism. But believing is subjective, the act of baptism is objective. They go together in this way. Baptism cannot, therefore, be a mere sign or symbol that bestows nothing. If it were no more, it could not be so vitally connected with salvation. Baptism bestows, and the believing baptized person accepts and receives this great soteria [salvation] from the Savior. For anyone who comes to faith baptism is the great means of grace, that is, the channel by which forgiveness, life, and salvation are bestowed upon him. As he believes the word, so he will demand all that the Word promises in baptism and thus the baptism act itself. He who claims to believe but refuses and rejects baptism most surely deceives himself about believing; his could be only a highly pathological faith” (The Interpretation of St. Mark’s Gospel, pp. 766, 767).

Some scholars appeal to this verse as a “spurious” passage to avoid the truth about baptism. However the textual problem may be resolved, it is clear elsewhere in Scripture that “baptism” is for “the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38); that baptism is necessary to “wash away thy sins” (Acts 22:16); that baptism “doth now save us” (1 Peter 3:21); that out of baptism one arises to “walk in newness of life” (Romans 6:4) in the experience that Jesus called the birth “of water and the Spirit” (John 3:5); that baptism puts one into Christ Jesus where he becomes a new creature (Galatians 3:26-27; 2 Corinthians 5:17); and that baptism is into the Christ’s death (Rom 6:3), where his blood was shed “for the remission of sins” (Matthew 26:28).

That baptism is into the death of Christ shows that it, as Lenski says above, “is the great means of grace, that is, the channel by which forgiveness, life, and salvation are bestowed upon him” (Truth Commentaries Mark, L. A. Stauffer, pp 412-413)

Historians report that theologians, bishops, and other church leaders of the second century tell us that the disciples of the first century met every first day of the week to eat the Lord’s Supper. Neander, a Lutheran historian, notes: “The celebration of the Lord’s supper was still held to constitute an essential part of the divine worship on every Sunday, as appears from Justin Martyr in the year 150.”

Modern theologians and Bible commentators, however, have decided that it is enough to observe the Lord’s Supper monthly, quarterly, or annually. One wonders where in the Bible they found authority for these practices. Did they decide this because it is more convenient and less trouble, because weekly is too boring or too routine, or because it is not as important as singing or praying or giving?

We don’t have to imagine how the Lord feels about those who find ways to get around what he has clearly taught his people to do. The Old Testament, which was written for our learning and admonition (1 Corinthians 10:11; Romans 15:4), tells us about a man who violated the sabbath law which forbade work on that day. The man who was found in the fields gathering sticks on the sabbath was taken to Moses and God told the leader of Israel to have him stoned to death (Numbers 15:32-36).

This man could have offered the same defense that modern denominationalists offer for not observing the Lord’s Supper on a particular first day of the week. “God, you said ‘remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy,’ but you didn’t say every sabbath.” So, people say today: “Luke didn’t say ‘every first day of the week.’”

If Acts 20:7 does not authorize the observance of the Lord’s Supper weekly, then it authorizes no frequency at all. One could observe it once a month, once a year, or once a lifetime. If God had said “the first day of the month,” we would understand he intended it to be monthly. If he had said “the first day of the year,” we would conclude he meant annually. But he said: “first day of the week.” Is it not clear that He meant weekly?

What we know about the “first day of the week” is that it is the day the Jesus was raised from the dead, the day He met with his disciples, the day when the church was established (Pentecost), and the day disciples gave as they were prospered (John 20:1, 19, 26; Acts 2:1; Leviticus 23:15-16; 1 Corinthians 16:1-2).

It is amazing that believers in Jesus meet on the Lord’s day, the first day of the week, and do everything – sing, pray, give, study – except the one thing they are told to do to remember Jesus. The Lord’s Supper is a memorial feast of unleaven bread and fruit of the vine that disciples eat to remember the death of Christ (Matthew 26:26-28; 1 Corinthians 11:23-26). Does anyone want to meet Jesus in judgment and have to explain that he assembled on the first day of the week in honor of his resurrection but didn’t remember his death by taking of the Lord’s Supper?

These words all have basic meanings, but they also have specialized uses in the context of God’s plan of human redemption. “Justify,” for example, is a legal or judicial term that means “not guilty.” It is an acquittal – a verdict of innocence declared by the court to one who has been indicted for a crime.

In the Bible it has this same sense but is used in the context of men who have sinned against God. And that includes all of us. The Bible says we all have sinned; that none of us is righteous (Rom 3:9-10, 23). It also tells us that this sin has separated us from God and fellowship with God forever – unless we are justified (see Isaiah 59:1-2; 1 John 1:5-7; Ephesians 2:1-3)

Justified, in this setting, retains its essential meaning of “not guilty.” To be restored to fellowship with God man must be acquitted of his transgressions of God’s law. God is light, in him is no darkness, and to be reconciled to him the darkness of sin must be removed from man’s soul.

Justification is one of the major themes of Paul’s letter to the Romans. There the apostle says sinners are “freely justified by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” (Romans 3:24). He adds later that man is “justified by faith,” which he defines at the beginning of the letter as “the obedience of faith” (Romans 1:5; 5:1; 16:26).

This is the point James makes in his epistle when he uses the word “works” to denote the “obedience of faith.” He says: “Ye see that by works a man is justified, and not only by faith.” The context of these “works” is the obedience of Abraham to God’s commandment to offer Isaac as a sacrifice. As Abraham obeyed God so must we to be counted righteous by justification (James 2:21-24).

The importance of obedience is stressed by Paul’s point that justification comes by “grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” (Romans 3:24). Sinners enter Christ Jesus when by faith they are baptized into him (Galatians 3:26-27). Those who are baptized into Christ are baptized into his death, where his blood was shed. They then arise from that baptism a new creature who walks in newness of life (Romans 6:3-4; see 2 Corinthians 5:17).

Only by justification through the obedience of faith can men have peace with God (Romans 5:1). Have you by faith been baptized into Christ?

What is assumed in all of this is that as the material surroundings of man change through scientific discoveries and inventions by man there is also a change in man and his needs. The fact is that both the body and soul of man need what they have always needed. We know about the body’s need for food, shelter, clothing, and safety; that’s as it has always been. But what is not as well known are the needs of the soul. Here things get complicated. Only God who created man knows the soul and can determine its needs. He himself tells us: “I know that the way of man is not in himself; it is not in man that walks to direct his own steps” (Jeremiah 10:23).

For this reason God has left man a revelation of his mind in the Bible to direct him in ways he calls “righteousness.” One of Jesus’ apostles said of man’s attitude toward God: “He that fears him and works righteousness is acceptable to him” (Acts 10:34). “Righteousness” is simply doing what is “right,” and it is God who determines that. What is good for the soul, according to God, is what’s right. That’s why God has given his word in the Bible. There man can learn what is right. The parents of John the Baptist were said to be “righteous before God” because they walked “in all his commandments and ordinances” (Luke 1:6).

This is why it is the goal of the Kirkwood Church of Christ to go back to the Bible for all our beliefs and practices. We seek to learn what the Bible says about how to be saved and then teach it and follow it. From the Bible we learn how the first-century church worshipped; we can then imitate that in our assemblies each first day of the week. We study the Bible to find out how the church Jesus built was organized on a local level, what kind of work they did as a body, and what name they carried and honored.

What we have found is that to be saved sinners believed in Jesus as God’s Son, reject and repudiated sin by repentance, confessed their faith, and were baptized into Christ and his death (John 20:30-31; Acts 2:38; Romans 10:9-10; Galatians 3:26-27; Romans 6:3-4). When they assembled to worship on the first day of the week they observed the Lord’s Supper, sang hymns and made melody in their hearts without the accompaniment of mechanical instruments of music, prayed, studied and edified one another, and gave as they were prospered (Acts 20:7; Acts 2:42; Ephesians 5:19; 1 Corinthians 14; 1 Corinthians 16:1-2).

To oversee this work they appointed elders in every church who were known as bishops and pastors (Acts 14:23; Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5:1-3). Their oversight was limited to that local church and they led the church in the works of evangelism, edification, benevolence, and discipline of its members (Matthew 28:18-20; Ephesians 4:11-16; Acts 6:1-6; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-15). In all of this they wore and bore the name of Christ (Acts 11:26; Romans 16:16).

In this way we can restore and duplicate today the church Jesus built in the first century. Yes, it is simple and uncomplicated, but it meets the demands of the soul that God created in his own image (see Genesis 1:26-27).

John Calvin taught that in salvation an irresistible grace by God’s Spirit captures the souls of those God predetermined to be saved and that they can in no way free themselves from his divine grip. The entire epistle to the Galatians is an assault against this view – asserting that they had turned from the gospel of Christ to a different gospel (Galatians 1:6-7), that they that do this shall be accursed, and that as a result of this change they had been “severed from Christ” and “are fallen away from grace” (Galatians 1:8-9; 5:4). They fell from grace because they sought salvation by the law of Moses – a system of salvation that demands perfect works (Galatians 2:16; 3:10-11).

The epistle to the Hebrews also discusses brethren who had been saved by the gospel and then fell away. The writer describes the Hebrews as Christians “who were once enlightened and tasted of the heavenly gift,” who “were made partakers of the Holy Spirit,” and who had “tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come.” Then, he says, they “fell away” (Hebrews 6:4-6).

He had warned them earlier that Israel had fallen away from God through unbelief and that they themselves needed to “take heed…lest haply there shall be in any one of you and evil heart of unbelief, in falling away from the living God” (Hebrews 3:7-12). These brethren did fall, he says, and face a more severe punishment than physical death because they had “trodden under foot the Son of God, and had counted the blood of the covenant wherewith they had been sanctified an unholy thing, and had done despite unto the Spirit of grace” (Hebrews 10:28-29).

Simon the Sorcerer is an example of a sinner who was enlightened by the power of the gospel and, along with other Samaritans, was baptized into Christ. Later he fell away when he was enticed by the lust for power to purchase the gift of the apostles. Peter reproved him, spelled out the sinfulness of is heart, described him and his money as fit to perish, and demanded that he repent and pray for forgiveness (Acts 8:13-24). The Bible warns that some will depart from the faith, and a number of men are singled out as false teachers who had erred from the truth, made shipwreck of the faith, and had turned the grace of God in lasciviousness (see 1 Timothy 1:19-20; 4:1-3; 2 Timothy 2:16-18; Jude 3-4; Acts 20:29-30)

“Take heed,” Paul warns, “lest ye fall” (1 Corinthians 10:12). Yes, Christians can fall from grace, and they must receive God’s warnings and seek to faithful, obedient members of his church (see Revelation 2:10).

All of these elements are true of Bible obedience. The Greek word for obedience in our New Testaments combines a prefix, hupo, which means “under,” with the word, akouo, which means “to hear.” Together the word means “to come under what one hears.”

This is so apparent in the command for children to “obey your parents in the Lord” (Eph 6:1). Parents are the authorities in the family. God has authorized them to teach and train their children in the nurture and admonition of his word. Children are to recognize that authority, listen to what the parents say, and then submit to or bring their lives under that instruction.

Sinners need to grasp this truth about their relationship to God the Creator. All men have been made in God’s image and must recognize his authority over his creation (Genesis 1:26-27). Accepting that authority, they must open their hearts and ears to hear and understand what God has taught. Beyond that, they must submit to his teaching.

This learning process begins with the view that Jesus has “all authority,” and that they must confess him as Lord (see Matthew 28:18; Romans 10:9-10). It follows with the wisdom to “hear these words of mine,” as Jesus taught in the story of the “wise” and “foolish” men (Matthew 7:24-27). The “wise man,” though, is not only he that “hears” these words but he that “doeth them” – meaning to submit to the teaching of Jesus.

The importance of this is that salvation is conditioned upon obedience. “Not every one that says unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 7:21). Jesus, as the Hebrew writer says, is the “author of eternal salvation” to “all them that obey him” (Hebrews 5:9). And he will render vengeance to “them that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus” (2 Thessalonians 1:8).

The sinner who thinks he can merely call on the name of the Lord by faith alone has missed the significant element of obedience in baptism that puts him into Christ where he becomes a child of God and a new creature (see Galatians 3:26-27; Romans 6:3-4). There, as a result of the obedience of faith (see Romans 1:5; 16:26), he has forgiveness of sins and the hope of eternal life (Acts 2:38; 1 Peter 1:3-5).

A major theme of the Old Testament anticipates the coming of the Messiah, who is to be the prophet and priest and king of an eternal kingdom. As prophet he would reveal God’s plan for human redemption, as priest he would offer himself as a sacrifice to redeem the world from sin, and as king he would establish and reign over God’s kingdom. And all this came to pass when Jesus, the Word who was God, became flesh and dwelt on earth. “All of this,” we say, yet many deny that the kingdom has yet arrived. To them, the time of the kingdom is at Jesus’ second coming. This, however, is to deny the clear teaching of Jesus and the apostles in the New Testament.

Jesus, when he came the first time, announced: “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom is at hand” (Mark 1:15). “At hand” means near. It was so near that Jesus said to his disciples and others standing near by: “There are some here of them that stand by, who shall in no wise taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God come with power” (Mark 9:1). The kingdom was not to be of this world like kingdoms of men; it was to be a rule of the king within the hearts of men; it was to come when men with honest and good hearts responded to the gospel and were born of the water and the Spirit (see John 18:36; John 17:20- 21; Luke 8:11-15; John 3:3-5).

This kingdom came after the death of Jesus when sinners were purchased by the blood of Christ in obedience to the gospel message proclaimed on the first day of Pentecost after Jesus was raised from the dead. The Lamb of God, Jesus, was slain and by his blood purchased men of every tribe and tongue and nation and made them to be a kingdom (Revelation 5:9-10). This is the same body of people who were purchased by the blood of Christ and became the church of the Lord (Acts 20:28). Obedient believers, saints and faithful brethren, are called the church at Corinth, but were said to be translated into the kingdom at Colossae (see 1 Corinthians 1:2; Colossians 1:13).

This transformation of sinners is also called a birth of the water and the Spirit – a reference to the response of baptism that sinners make to the message of the Holy Spirit through the preaching of the apostles. This baptism by faith puts one into Christ and into his death, where his blood was shed. There, one becomes a new creature (see Galatians 3:26-27; Romans 6:3; 2 Corinthians 5:17). When buried with Christ in baptism, sinners die to sin and arise to walk in newness of life (Romans 6:4).

This happened on the day of Pentecost when the Spirit filled all the apostles (Acts 2:1-4). The Holy Spirit guided the apostles into the truth, and they preached the life, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus – who was made both Lord and Christ. The message of the Spirit pricked the sinners’ hearts and they asked what to do. The answer was to repent and be baptized “for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:22-38). They that gladly received the message of the Spirit were baptized – being born of the water and the Spirit. They continued steadfastly in the apostles’ teaching, subjecting themselves to the rule of Christ, and living as faithful citizens under that rule. That was the beginning of the kingdom. It is a spiritual body of citizens, not a world empire yet to come.

The Book of Revelation, as all New Testament books, was written for churches in the first century to describe and deal with the problems they faced. Revelation differs in that it is written in visions and symbols, but the message was still a contemporary one.

The writer, John, tells us, for example, that the events described in the book were “shortly to come to pass” and that the “time is at hand.” He makes this point to his readers at the beginning (1:1, 3) and at the end of the book (22:6, 10).

The apostle then addresses the book and its message to “seven churches that are of Asia” (1:4). The Spirit told him: “What thou seest, write in a book and send it to the seven churches: unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamum, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea” (1:11).

After penning a letter to each of the seven churches, he begins in visions and pictorial language to write about how these churches were suffering persecution, being imprisoned, and even put to death “for the word of God and the testimony of Jesus.” In the fifth seal he describes the blood of these martyred brethren, which was under the altar of sacrifice crying out to God to avenge their cause with wrath against their adversary (1:9; 6:9-11).

He describes their enemy as a beast come out of the sea who had received his power and authority from Satan. This enemy is helped by a beast coming up out of the earth – a beast with horns of a lamb but the voice of the Satanic dragon. These represent an evil power in the first century that was persecuting and putting to death all who would not receive its mark and bow before it (Chapter 13).

Some would identify this as the persecuting power of the Jews and others say it is the evil opposition of Rome. Regardless of its identity, it was a wicked enemy that the churches of the first century faced. The book ends with the defeat of this adversary and the victory of the martyred saints who reign with Christ (Chapters 19-20).

The point of the book is clear: God’s faithful children will find victory in Jesus – even if they die for their faith at the hands of ungodly men who serve Satan in an effort to destroy the church of the Lord.

The message of the book is likewise simple: the glorified Jesus, pictured among the seven lampstands, declares to the saints in tribulation, “Fear not; I am the first and the last, and the Living one; and I was dead, and behold I am alive for evermore, and I have the keys of death and Hades” (1:17-18). Jesus suffered and died but was victorious over death, and has the keys of victory for those in him.

Revelation does not describe modern nations and events, but struggles brethren of the first century endured and overcame through Christ.

When he entered the Jewish houses of worship, the apostle opened their scriptures, the Old Testament, and argued from them that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah the Jewish nation was expecting. More often than not, the Jews disagreed, rejected his teaching, and drove him from the synagogue and, often, from their city. This happened in the ancient city of Thessalonica (Acts 17:1-10). But after leaving this Macedonian town, he came to Berea some 50 miles away where he received an unusually different welcome.

The Bereans, Luke tells us, were “more noble” than their fellow Jews in Thessalonica “in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, examining the scriptures daily” to see whether the things Paul preached were so (Acts 17:11). “Noble” here doesn’t mean they were a higher class of people politically, economically, or socially, but that they were of a higher rank spiritually.

Open Minds. They were nobler spiritually because their minds were open to what Paul taught. Luke tells us that they “received the word,” an expression that means they welcomed what the apostles said and listened to the passages he quoted and considered the arguments he made. By opening their minds to Paul’s preaching, they were able to grasp the points he was making; at least they understood what he declared to them.

Eager Minds. Beyond hearing what the apostle was saying, they listened with eagerness. “Readiness of mind” suggests the enthusiasm one might find among students who have come to class to learn. They are there because they want to be; they are, as it were, sitting on the edge of their seats; they are hanging on every word the teacher utters. The Bereans were hearing things that were attractive – a message that made sense and was pleasant to the ears.

Cautious Minds. The good news about Jesus, though delightful to the ears, wasn’t something they would receive unless it is true. They listened cautiously and made it a point to examine or search the Old Testament writings to see if what Paul said “were so,” an expression that literally means: whether the scripture “have it this way.” Their question: Does the life of Jesus really fulfill what the Old Testament teaches about the coming Messiah?

The New Testament commends the Bereans because this is the very kind of mind that can hear what the Bible says, understand what it teaches, and respond in the obedience of faith to its demands. Only people with the heart of the Bereans will believe that Jesus is God’s Son, repent in rejection and repudiation of sin, confess that Jesus is Lord, and be buried with Christ in baptism for the forgiveness of sins (John 20:30-31; Acts 2:38; Romans 10:9-10; Mark 16:16). God demands this of all men.

First of all, baptism is not for infants or babies; it is required only of those who have been taught the gospel, who believe that Jesus is God’s Son, who repent in repudiation and rejection of the practice of sin, and who confess that Jesus is Lord (see Matt 28:18-20; Mark 16:15-16; John 20:30-31; Acts 2:38; Romans 10:9-10). Secondly, baptism was never designed for someone who is already a Christians that he might join a local body of disciples. Finally, as important as it is to obey God, baptism had a far more specific purpose than merely doing what God commanded.

Baptism is necessary to be saved from sin. From the very beginning of baptism, practiced by John the Baptist, men and women were told to be baptized “unto the remission of sins” (Mark 1:4). Jesus commissioned the apostles to preach the gospel to every creature: “He that believeth, and is baptized shall be saved” (Mark 16:15-16). When the apostles, particularly Peter, began preaching the gospel at Jerusalem they told their hearers: Repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ “unto the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38). Bear in mind that this is the same reason Jesus poured out his blood on the cross (Matt 26:28). If Jesus’ death was necessary to take away sins, so is baptism.

Baptism is necessary to reach the blood of Christ. The scriptures tell us two other things about the purpose of baptism: One, it is necessary to get into and put on Christ and, two, it is the means by which one reaches the death of Christ, where his blood was shed. Paul said: “For ye are all the sons of God, through faith, in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ did put on Christ” (Galatians 3:26-27). The same apostle also said: “Or are ye ignorant that all we who were baptized into Christ were baptized into his death” (Romans 6:3). If a sinner can be saved without baptism, he is saved outside of Christ and without the benefit of the blood of Christ – the blood poured out on the cross.

Baptism is not a work that seeks to earn salvation. Paul contrasts the “washing of regeneration” with “works of righteousness” designed to merit salvation (Titus 3:5). Works of righteousness that earn salvation refers to perfect obedience (see Rom 4:1-4; Gal 3:10-11), but baptism is the “obedience of faith” that appeals to God through the death and resurrection of Christ for a good conscience (see Romans 1:5; Galatians 3:26-27; Romans 6:3-4; 1 Peter 3:21-22; Hebrews 9:14). Baptism is the washing away of sins by calling on the name of the Lord for salvation (Acts 22:16), not a work of law that seeks salvation by perfection. Sinners, as Saul of Tarsus, called on the name of the Lord by repentance and baptism for the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:21, 37-38; Acts 22:16). This all sinners must do, even today.

Most gospel preachers at some time in their evangelistic life have been asked to perform this service. They refuse to do so for biblical reasons – the first of which is that sprinkling and pouring water on a person is not baptism. Baptism is immersion (see Roman 6:4). But the chief reason is that the New Testament nowhere teaches infant baptism. This is a practice that was started many centuries after the church was established and the Bible was written.

There are good reasons why Bible students never read of infant baptism in the scriptures. First, the Bible at no place teaches that infants are born in sin and have need of baptism. The prophet Ezekiel teaches “that the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son” (Ezekiel 18:20). Since baptism is “for the remission of sins,” there is no need to baptize an infant. Jesus also spoke of the innocence and purity of little children when he told his disciples that “to such belongs the kingdom of heaven” (Matt 19:14).

Second, the Bible teaches specifically that baptism is for those who believe in Jesus as the Christ, repent of their sins, and confess Jesus as Lord. Jesus in the great commission told the apostles to preach the gospel to every creature and tell them: “He that believes and is baptized shall be saved” (Mark 16:15-16). Peter on the day of Pentecost told the believing Jews: “Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38). The apostle Paul told believers that “with the mouth confession is made unto salvation” (Romans 10:9-10).

Belief means to understand “that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God” (John 20:30-31), repent refers to “changing one’s mind” in the rejection and repudiation of sin (Luke 3:7-8), and confess denotes the utterance from the lips that Jesus is Lord (Romans 10:9-10). Obviously, infants are unable to perform these basic but significant tasks in preparation for baptism.

Finally, some have argued that infants were circumcised under the old covenant and that baptism is likened unto circumcision in the New Testament. This, they assume, means they should be baptized under new covenant teaching. The problem with this reasoning is that one cannot enter the new covenant until he knows the Lord (Hebrews 8:10-11), and that those who are spiritually circumcised in baptism are “raised through faith” in this working of God (Colossians 2:12). Knowing and believing in the Lord eliminates infants as subjects of baptism into covenant relationship with God.

That definition, however, won’t satisfy serious Bible students. They know that the scriptures were originally written in the Greek language, and they will want to know what Jesus or Paul or Peter meant when they commanded sinners to be baptized. When they take the time to research a dictionary that defines Greek words, they will learn that the original words used by biblical writers were baptisma [noun] and baptizo [verb].

J. Henry Thayer’s Greek lexicon says of the verb, baptizo, that it means “to dip, immerge, submerge” (94). William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich say, “to dip, immerse.” A secondary idea, growing out of this definition, is “to wash” or “to cleanse.” Totally different and unrelated words in the Greek language mean “to sprinkle” [rantizo] or “to pour” [cheo].

Beyond the exact meaning of the word “baptism” are two verses that declare precisely that baptism, in the likeness of Jesus’ burial and resurrection, is a “burial.” Paul wrote to the church in Rome: “We were buried therefore with him through baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life” (Romans 6:4). At a later time he wrote to the church at Colossae in Asia: “Having been buried with him in baptism, wherein ye were also raised with him through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead” (Colossians 2:12).

Examples of baptism in the first century confirm this simple, straightforward meaning of the word. John the Baptist, who introduced baptism among the Jews, baptized near the city of Aenon because, the Bible says, “there was much water there” (John 3:23). When Jesus was baptized of John in the Jordan river, Mark describes him as “coming up out of the water” (Mark 1:10).

An Ethiopian, who was traveling in Palestine, learned about Jesus by the preaching of Philip and was commanded to be baptized. Luke, in the book of Acts, said of the two men: “And they both went down into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.” He then says: “And when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip; and the eunuch went on his way rejoicing” (Acts 8:38-39).

It was centuries later, out of convenience, that men shortened the Bible teaching of baptism by immersion to sprinkling and pouring water on sinners. May God bless all men today with the conviction to follow the teaching of scripture and be “buried” with their Lord in baptism.

–L. A. Stauffer

Science they argue means “to know” and is based on hypotheses, experiments, and demonstrable proofs. Only when these experiments and proofs can be replicated by other scientists can we accept them as fact. And, supposedly, only “facts” are worthy to be taught in classrooms.

We teach that the earth rotates on its axis every 24 hours, that it revolves around the sun every 365 days, and that gravity draws objects toward the center of the earth. All of this can be clearly established by a number of experiments. Even Christians are at peace with atheistic science teachers on these and many other matters of science.

But how did all this come to be? What is the origin of the sun, the earth, and the relationship of these entities to one another? Even the scientists don’t know, yet they want to teach some variation of the “Big Bang” theory to describe the origin of the solar system and their pet theory of “natural selection” to explain the rise of man from matter and simple forms of life. What experiment can we perform in a lab to prove either of these and many other so-called “scientific facts”?

The truth is that scientists walk by “faith” also. They simply “believe” this is what happened. Evolution through natural selection is nothing more than a working hypothesis. They cannot demonstrate the origin of matter, the transformation of matter into life, and the evolution of primitive forms of life into complex animals or man.

Anthony Flew, the world renown English philosopher and atheists, now in his 80s, finally admitted that the intricacies and complexities of DNA can only be explained by intelligent design. Michael Denton [Evolution: A Theory in Crisis] and Michael Behe [Darwin's Black Box], two prominent microbiologists, came to the same conclusion. Even Charles Darwin, in his Origin of the Species, where he taught evolution through natural selection, admits that his theory offers no adequate explanation of the origin and intricate workings of the eyeball.*

Lest scientists have a nervous breakdown, be it known that none of these men believe the Genesis account of creation; nor are any of them interested in teaching the Bible in biology or physics classes. But they do admit that life cannot be fully explained by “scientific proofs.” And some scientists are simply arguing that it is only fair that children in the classroom be exposed to the theory of “intelligent design” along with the theory of “evolution by natural selection.” Neither can be proved; both are matters of faith. Why not teach both and leave the children to examine the facts and decide for themselves.

* Darwin Wrote: “To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection [evolution], seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree” (Origin of the Species, A Mentor Book, 168)

Note what the Bible says about being saved:

1. We are saved by grace (Eph 2:5).
2. We are saved by faith (Eph 2:8).
3. We are saved by baptism (1 Pet 3:21).
4. We are saved by obedience (Heb 5:9).
5. We are saved by confession (Rom 10:9-10).
6. We are saved by repentance (Luke 24:47).
7. We are saved by belief and baptism (Mark 16:16).
8. We are saved by repentance and baptism (Acts 2:38).
9. We are saved by hope (Rom 8:24).
10. We are saved by works (James 2:24).
11. We are saved by mercy (Titus 3:5).
12. We are saved by the washing of regeneration (Titus 3:5).
13. We are saved by the renewing of the Holy Spirit (Titus 3:5).

Reformation theologians and their modern Protestant heirs are so fearful of the medieval Catholic doctrine of salvation by works that they distort beyond recognition the Bible doctrine of the “obedience of faith” (see Rom 1:5; 16:26). To do this they subtly add the word “alone” or “only” to the teaching of salvation by grace and salvation by faith.

Yes, the scripture do condemn the Judaistic doctrine of “salvation by works”- by works of law or works of the law (see Gal 2:16). Every discussion of this topic in the New Testament refers to salvation by perfect obedience in the absence of grace (see Gal 3:10-11). It has no reference to works of obedience in acceptance of God’s gracious blessings in Christ.

Paul, for example, says we are all sons of God by faith because we have been baptized into Christ and have put on Christ (Gal 3:26-27). Men are not saved by merely being baptized, but because in the obedience of faith they have come into Christ and unto God’s grace. Paul also says of Christ that men are baptized “into his death,” where his blood was shed, and are, thus, saved by grace. Out of baptism they arise to walk as new creatures who are free from sin (see Rom 6:3-4; 2 Cor 5:17).

Those who add “only” to grace, faith, baptism, obedience, confession, repentance, hope, works, mercy – or anything else – are perverting the teaching of scripture and rejecting God’s plan of salvation by grace through the obedience faith.