"THOSE THAT OPPOSE THEMSELVES"

“In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth” ~ 2 Tim. 2:25

It is amazing that so many religious and well-intended people who oppose baptism for remission of sins, HAVE been baptized…yet for some other reason. It seems strange that they would oppose teaching on the PURPOSE of baptism for the reason of ‘remission’, yet, submit to it for another PURPOSE.

Obviously, they have been taught differently as to baptism’s PURPOSE than we in the church of Christ. It seems strange that one would submit to an act that one denies as necessary…all because of its PURPOSE.

Baptism’s PURPOSE: what is it for? Two differing teachings on baptism’s PURPOSE are TAUGHT:

1] to ‘show’ remission, or

2] to ‘receive’ remission?

Yet, another point to consider: is baptism a ‘church ordinance’, performed by and on saved people, [as stated in a denominational creed]; or is it a command for an unsaved person to obey as a part of the new birth of John 3?

Again, it is not an act that is entirely opposed, for all those who differ, HAVE SUBMITTED to being baptized. So why oppose the act based upon the lone purpose of it being done “to receive” remission?

Consider some relevant questions and parallel examples to the rational on baptism’s purpose from the Bible:

~ Romans 10:13 – “For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

Does “calling” show salvation, or does “calling” mean, ‘in order to be saved’?

Is “calling” an outward sign of an inward grace, or does “calling” mean, ‘in order to be saved’?

Does it matter as to the PURPOSE for ‘calling’?

~ Mark 16:16 – “He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved.”

Does “belief” show salvation, or does “belief” mean, ‘in order to be saved’?

Is “belief” an outward sign of an inward grace, or does “belief” mean, ‘in order to be saved’?

Does it matter as to the PURPOSE for ‘belief’?

Now, regarding BAPTISM:

Does “baptism” show salvation, or does “baptism” mean, ‘in order to be saved’?

Is “baptism” an outward sign of an inward grace, or does “baptism” mean, ‘in order to be saved’?

Does it matter as to the PURPOSE for ‘baptism’?

Is it not clear that belief AND baptism are HOW one “calls” upon the name of the Lord?

Consider whether or not the logic used toward baptism’s purpose [as being to “show”] would make sense, if the same logic were applied to other matters, whose purposes are regarded as NECESSARY? For example:

“Faith is not necessary for remission of sins, but to show your salvation…”

“Repentance is not necessary for remission of sins, but to show your salvation…”

What about confessing that you are a sinner, quoting Romans 10:

“Confession is not necessary for remission of sins, but to show your salvation…”

What if one were to say that they don’t believe faith is necessary, but they believed to “show”…?

What if one were to say that they don’t believe repentance is necessary, but they have repented to “show”…?

Strange that one would oppose as necessary an act [baptism] that he, himself, has submitted to, on the basis of ‘not’ necessary.

Is this not an example of “those who oppose themselves” in “acknowledging the truth”?

This is why Jesus warned:

"Take heed WHAT ye hear" ~ Mark 4:24

"Take heed HOW ye hear" ~ Luke 8:18

“NEGLECT”

No matter where it occurs, neglect results in damage, and possible ruin. This is especially true of spiritual neglect. We recognize when a fellow saint is struggling. Yet we delay. While we may pray for the brother, is prayer ‘alone’ fulfilling our stewardship? Prayer is very important, make no mistake about it. But it is not a substitute for obedience. When you know a brother’s faith wavering, delay could very well result in death.  But not just for the weak brother…your soul may very well suffer death.  Gal. 6 demands involvement to restore, CONSIDERING YOURSELF. In times like this, the hearts of brethren are made known to one another.

The words from a familiar hymn, “there’s danger and death in delay…why d0 you wait dear brother”, certainly apply here. Unity within a local church doesn’t exist by prayer alone. It is maintained as brethren address the needs of one another. It was exemplified in Acts 2:44-45; 4:32-35; and 6:1-7 in benevolence. It was exemplified when the Corinthian brothers acted in the restoration of a brother involved in fornication (2 Cor. 7:8-11).  Finally, it was exemplified by the Philippians in their willing support of the gospel (Phil. 1:5, 7; 4:15).

 

When brethren neglect to act in these three areas, it is because of fear. Obedience will never occur from the faint of heart. This is why spiritual growth must be constantly monitored by shepherds. While it is an individual responsibility, when a brother is overtaken, and brethren neglect their responsibility, danger and death result.

May love of the brethren continue (Heb. 13:1).

“APOSTASY - proof that TRUTH is a standard”

 Apostasy is both a departing and a reverting to a previous condition (2 Peter 2:20-22).

We learn much from this text. Notice, these phrases:

       a. “after they have escaped...defilements of the world”

b. “Through the knowledge” (spiritual discernment)

c. “entangled/overcome”

d. “Last state is become worse...than the first.”

e. “Better...not to have known...than to turn back”

This language describes a return to a defiled condition; one in which was escaped by spiritual discernment. Knowledge of: ‘the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’; ‘the way of righteousness’; and ‘the holy commandment’ (all of these are one and the same thing).

Other passages describing apostasy:

2 Thess. 2:3, 10-12. Here, apostasy is called ‘a falling away’. We are also told the causes of this ‘falling away’: “they received not a love of the TRUTH”; and, they “believed not the TRUTH, but had pleasure in unrighteousness”.

 

[Apostasy necessarily implies the existence of TRUTH. The reason this is so, is because TRUTH was ‘fallen from’. TRUTH existed because knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ had made TRUTH known. Jesus was “…the way the truth & the life...” because His teachings were TRUTH and life (cf. John 6:68; 14:6). TRUTH equates to ‘the holy commandment’ and to ‘the way of righteousness’. TRUTH also necessarily implies the existence of a standard or a pattern (Gal. 1:6-9).]

2 Peter 2:2 – false prophets blaspheme the way of truth. The way of truth must exist, else it could not be evil spoken of. Something ‘true’ must exist before anything false can be identified. A ‘departure’ cannot occur from something that doesn’t exist.

“The Consequences of Stolen Words”

The Bible speaks often of stealing. In its various forms, the word ‘steal’ appears 44 times in the Bible (not to mention other similar words such as rob, covet, etc.).

There is an interesting passage in Jeremiah involving this idea of stealing. As with other such thoughts, this one condemns the thief. However, what makes the passage so interesting is the object said to be stolen and the one who did the stealing. The object was God’s words, and the thieves were those who claimed to be prophets. The passage reads: “Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets, saith the LORD, that steal my words every one from his neighbor” (Jer. 23:30).

When considered in our modern setting there are still those claiming to be ‘prophets’ who “steal” God’s words. They can be seen on television, heard on the radio and read from in print media. They claim to be spokesmen for God, yet their teachings are foreign to His Word. Since they substitute their own words they, in essence, steal God’s. The results of such actions are devastating, for they endanger the souls of those who would hear and follow their teachings.

Numerous are the false prophets of our day. Sadly, they convince many to follow them, to the detriment of their souls. Peter said of them: “…who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. and many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.” (2 Peter 2:1-2). The condemnation of God rests upon those who “steal his words”.

“THINGS MONEY CAN BUY”

Money can buy you a soul that is spiritually bankrupt: Prov. 11:4 – Riches profit not in the day of wrath; but righteousness delivereth from death.

Money can buy you a heart of hatred: Prov. 15:17 – Better is a dinner of herbs, where love is,
Than a stalled ox and hatred therewith.

Money can buy you a tongue that lies: Prov. 21:6 – The getting of treasures by a lying tongue is a vapor driven to and fro by them that seek death.

Money can buy you a pocketbook of insecurity: Prov. 23:5 – Wilt thou set thine eyes upon that which is not? For riches certainly make themselves wings, like an eagle that flieth toward heaven.

Money can buy you possessions that decay: Prov. 27:24 – For riches are not for ever; and doth the crown endure unto all generations?

Money can buy you an eternal home apart from God: Prov. 28:20 – A faithful man shall abound with blessings; but he that maketh haste to be rich shall not be unpunished.

Money can buy you an eye of covetousness: Prov. 28:22 – He that hath an evil eye hasteth after riches, and knoweth not that want shall come upon him.

Money can buy you a life with no purpose: Prov. 30:8 – Remove far from me falsehood and lies; give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with the food that is needful for me.

“For the love of money is the root of all evil. Which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.” ~ 1 Tim. 6:10

“THE IRONY OF EXCUSES”

A man was asked by a second man if he could borrow his lawnmower; the first man replied ‘No, I am baking a cake’; to which the second man stated, ‘what does baking a cake have to do with my borrowing your lawnmower’? The first man replied, ‘nothing, but when you need an excuse; one is as good as another’.

So likewise for the half-hearted disciple. God invites him to commune every week on Sunday, but he “has a cake to bake”. What does baking a cake have to do with worship? “Nothing, but when you need an excuse, one is as good as another.

Speaking of excuses for not assembling for worship; one is ‘as good as another’. The irony of excuses is seen when the same person uses opposite reasons to hide the truth about why he couldn't assemble to worship. The same person has been known to say one thing on one occasion, and the opposite thing on another occasion. 

For example, on one occasion, a man said:

· “I had a hard week at work” … but said on another occasion... “I needed to work”.

· “I had relatives show up” …  but said on another occasion... “I went to visit relatives”.

· “I’m sick and couldn't go out” … but said on another occasion... “it was such a beautiful day; I went out”.

·  “I went last week” … but said on another occasion... “I’ll go next week”.

·  “I overslept” … but said on another occasion... “I slept in”.

·  “I was on vacation” … but said on another occasion... “I need a vacation”.

Truly, “...wisdom is justified of all her children.” (Matt. 11:19; Lk. 7:35).

“COMPARE AND $AVE

When Jesus had taught in the temple, the Jews were astonished at how He could teach, not having been “trained”; i.e., “uneducated”; “not knowing letters”. (John 7:14-15). When they heard Peter and John teach, they were astonished at the confidence with which they taught, being unlearned and ignorant men. “And then they recognized that they had been with Jesus.” (Acts 4:13). Any similarities in the teaching of Jesus with the teaching of Peter and John? What else would have made the Jews connect Peter and John as having been with Jesus?

Today, it is still true that teaching can connect one with Jesus. But it can also be proof that teaching is in error (false). The teachings of the Jews could not identify them with Moses because they did not teach what Moses taught, but taught traditions (Matt. 15:1-9).

The apostle Paul stated in 2 Thess. 2:15 – “Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.” Paul once taught things, that he later recognized as being in error (Gal. 1:14). But, when he began preaching “the faith which once he destroyed”, he was connected as having been with Jesus, for his teaching was no different from Jesus’ (1 Cor. 14:37). Today, teaching will either cause the preacher to be connected with Jesus’ teachings, or in error.

The responsibility is upon each person to compare what is taught today, with what was taught by Jesus and the apostles. “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.” (1 John 4:1).