The Baptist
Examiner Forum
Replies By Elder
Oscar B. Mink
April
1, 1978 (This is Elder Oscar's first forum reply)
Question:
What about a man who divorces his wife to marry another and is later saved,
should he be allowed to be a member of a church? Should he be required
to leave his second wife (by whom he has children) and go back to his first
wife?
Answer:
The easy divorce laws of our land have made divorce popular, and have gone
a long way in wreaking havoc with the marriage institution. The general
rule is that which is popular with man is hated of God, and so it is with
the easy divorces which show despite to the laws of God governing marriage,
divorce and remarriage.
God rebuked Israel for their flaunting of the marriage alliances, saying,
"For I hate divorce, says the Lord, the God of Israel" (Malachi
2:16 - American Translation) The action of the man in question suing
out a divorce so as to marry another is to add sin to sin, and it marks
up the instability of the marriage contract wherein one or both parties
are unsaved. Any marriage where one or both parties are unsaved is
on shaky ground, and especially so in this era of easy divorces.
Yet, we need to remember when a man is saved "The blood of Jesus Christ
His Son cleanseth us from all sin" (I John 1:7), and that includes
the awful sin of adultery. The divorce and remarriage in question is one
of sin, and when Christ died, he atoned for all the sins of his people,
including the sins of an ill gotten divorce and the resulting marriage.
Adultery is a definite and specific act. It is not a progressive
state. The bible condemns adultery in clear and uncertain terms, but it
says nothing about "living in adultery."
In that God has forgiven the man his sins, the church ought to accept him
via New Testament. Baptism as a member. To divorce his second wife and
go back to his first wife, assuming she would have him back, which is highly
unlikely would be to make matters worse. The first divorce was wrong.
God forgave the man for this wrong. A second divorce would be wrong, and
two wrongs never make a right.
Instead of the church taking a holier-than-thou attitude toward the man,
let them receive him, and encourage him in his new life, for he will meet
with a host self-righteous Pharisees who will try and attach again the
stigma to him which the blood of Christ has washed away.
April 8, 1978
Question:
Please explain Hebrews 6:4-8.
(Hebrews
6:4-10) "For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened,
and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy
Ghost, {5} And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the
world to come, {6} If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance;
seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to
an open shame. {7} For the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh
oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed,
receiveth blessing from God: {8} But that which beareth thorns and briers
is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned. {9} But,
beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany
salvation, though we thus speak. {10} For God is not unrighteous to forget
your work and labour of love, which ye have showed toward his name, in
that ye have ministered to the saints, and do minister."
Answer:
This narrative shows how far people may go in religion, and, after all,
fall away from their own steadfastness and perish forever. Some object
to the thought that anyone could go as far as those apostates had gone
without being saved, but verses 9 and 10 are proof positive that this is
the very case. Verse 9 tells us that things better than what the
Apostates had are the things which accompany salvation, and verse 10 tells
us these "better things" are wrought by a "labor of love"
and that God would not forget their labors. True saving grace brings
forth "better things" than what is stated herein of these apostates.
Now let us note some things about these apostates, and their fatal shortcomings:
1. They had been, at one time enlightened (verse 4), not as to the truth
as it is in Christ, but as to the claims of Jesus' Messiahship. They
had more than the common light of mere profession. They had light which
made them strong religionists, but which came short of the true light.
At best, theirs was a natural knowledge of spiritual things.
2. They had tasted of the "Heavenly gift" (verse 4). A person
may get a good bite of religion, like what he tastes, and would continue
to eat if some of the demands connected with the eating were relaxed.
Christ did not say, "He that tasteth Me shall live by Me", but "he the
eateth Me even he shall live by Me" (John 6:57). Their
tasting is contrasted with eating.
3. They were partakers of the Holy Ghost (verse 4). This does not
mean that they were, at any time, indwelt by the Holy Spirit. It
does not say they were born of the Spirit, nor does it say that the Holy
Spirit had wrought in them their measure of light. It simply means they
had beheld the supernatural operations and manifestations of the Holy Spirit,
and were thereby restrained in their overt sinning. In that sense, became
partakers of the blessings bestowed on the church by the Holy Spirit.
4. They had tasted the good word of God (verse 5). They had been
introduced to the prophetical Word and had believed the prophecies were
fulfilled by the Apostles. Note, how the author belabours the term "taste"
that is to keep the reader ever aware that he has reference to those who
has yet not eaten the Word of God. Jeremiah says "Thy words were found
and I did eat them" (Jeremiah 15:16.) They had tasted of the
cup of the Gospel, and in some manner appreciated what they tasted, but
they were unwilling to drink the full cup. An intellectual assent to the
truth of the Gospel, is but to taste the Gospel, and will profit nothing.
5. They were made aware of the powers of the age to come (verse 5).
These Hebrew Apostates had been the subjects of preaching which declared
the sovereignty of God in the Old Testament economy, and of the miracles
of Christ in the introduction of the New Testament. They were instructed
as to the coming again of the Messiah, and of His great power in the coming
Millennial age.
6. So while these apostates had an outward familiarity with Christianity,
they had never experienced the efficacious work of the Holy Spirit inwardly.
"If they shall fall away ... " (verse 6) in this verse the apostle
describes the dreadful and awful frame of mind of those who after having
gone so far in the right direction, fall away from it. Or as the term apostasy
means, a total denunciation of their former belief. In this case, they
being Hebrews, it would mean an approval of what the Jews did in crucifying
Christ, and if the opportunity presented itself, they would crucify Him
afresh. They totally abandon God, and, and the nature of such apostasy
is so absolute that true repentance is the most alien thing to it. Thus
the appropriateness of the term "impossible" (verse 4).
April
15, 1978
Question:
Please explain Hebrews 10:26.
Answer:
Text in question reads; "For if we sin willfully after that we have
received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice
for sin."
This text is a stern warning against apostasy. Verse Verse 29 of
this chapter describes the awful nature of the apostasy warned against.
Verses 27, 28, and 30 tell of the terrible judgment annexed to such an
apostasy. What we have before us in considering this text is not the backsliding
of a born again Christian, which all do in lesser or greater degree. A
Christian may follow Jesus afar off, but all follow him (John 10:27).
What we have before us is a warning against a willful, premeditated, and
total abandonment of the Gospel of Christ. In the deeper sense, it is a
call for all who profess the name of Christ to examine themselves whether
their faith be of the intellect or of God. Thus it is, Paul says
to the Corinthian church, "Examine yourselves whether ye be in the faith,
prove your ownselves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?"
(II Corinthians 13:5).
Mere intellectual faith is a breeding ground for apostasy, and there can
be no apostasy from the truth without some knowledge of the truth. The
apostasy Paul refers to is not one of mere defection, but a definite rejection
of the truth, and a revolt against it. In the case of the Hebrews it meant
esteeming the blood of bull and goats above that of Christ. Yea, it meant
a trampling underfoot of the Son of God. With the Hebrews, it meant
a turning back to the Mosaic Law, which Paul equates with a drawing back
"unto perdition" (Verse 39). Such an apostasy would be inexorable,
and leave the apostate with nothing to look for but "judgment and fiery
indignation" from the Lord.
"Sin willfully" of verse 26 is more than an act of apostasy, it
is a deliberate and persistent state of apostasy The verb is the
present participle and means continuous sinning. The language of the context
leaves no doubt to the vehemence such apostates directed toward the Gospel
of Christ. Paul was a constant object of this kind of hatred, and he said
he was often in "perils of false brethren" (II Corinthians 11:26).
Paul's desire was that they would be "cut off" (Galatians 5:12).
The sanctification of verse 29 is a positional sanctification, such
as the sanctification of Israel as a nation. The nation as a whole was
set apart from the other nations of the Earth, while as yet there were
many unsaved people in Israel. So it is with the Lord's true churches,
they are set apart but not safe from reprobate intrusion.
Jesus Christ is the ONE sacrifice whereby sins are forgiven. When one has
intellectually accepted the Gospel which relates to that ONE sacrifice
then turns away from it to a system of works, which delights in making
a mockery of the Gospel and persecuting it's adherents, there remaineth
no more sacrifice for his sins.
While the unpardonable sin is not mentioned per se in the context, there
is a strong implication that it is included in the actions of the apostates
(verse 29). Verse 39 leaves no doubt as to their end, i.e., perdition
and perdition means utter destruction or eternal damnation.
April 22, 1978
Question:
"How do you explain 'one body' in Ephesians 4:4, if it is not a
universal body?"
Answer:
There is a consensus among students of ecclesiology regarding the metaphorical
term "body" used in this text. All agree it is a reference to the Lord's
church. The parting of the way comes when the question is posed, what kind
of church does the term refer to? The Romanist answers with great pride,
"The universal Catholic Church is the church referred to by the term 'body'
in this text." Catholics believe the church is a world-wide organism under
the human headship of the pope at Rome. This concept of the church is refuted
simply by the Greek word "ekklesia" which in original usage meant, a called
out assembly. It is this designation (Ekklesia) the Lord used in reference
to His church (Matthew 16:18;18:17). The term "Universal Church"
is a misnomer, for such a church can never assemble, Therefore, the Roman
Catholic concept of the church is erroneous.
The Universal Invisible Church theorist is not long in answering the question,
what kind of a church does the term "body" in Ephesians 4:4 refer
too? With a feeling of certitude, he replies, "It refers to the true
church, the Universal Invisible church." To be consistent with this answer
the proponent must deny the existence of the local church, for whatever
Paul refers to with the term "body" we know it is "one".
Adherents of the Universal Invisible church theory have two kinds of churches:
One which they call the true church, the universal invisible church which
includes all believers, and a local visible church which is constituted
of a fragment of the believing aggregate. When one of two things
is referred too as true, by inference the other is denied genuineness thus
it is, the universal invisible church theorist, by his doctrine which calls
for two kinds of churches places himself outside of the Lord's church.
The Lord's body, in the ecclesiastical sense is not anything, more or less
than a local visible true church. The Lord's churches are chaste
and virtuous " (II Corinthians 11:2), and shall enter glory in "fine
linen clean and white" (Revelation 19:8).
If the one "body" of the text can be dualized, then the other six elements
which constitute the foundation of church unity may also be dualized. The
impossibility of which is seen when one considers such an interpretation
has Paul saying, "There are two bodies, two Spirits, two hopes, two Lords,
two faiths, two baptisms, and two Gods." Such an interpretation would
be ludicrous, if not so ridiculous.
The one "body" in the text does not mean one in number but one in kind,
the same as one "baptism" means one in kind. Paul, in writing to
the church at Corinth, says, "Now ye are the body of Christ ..."
(I Corinthians 12:27). Now we know every saved person on the earth
at the time was not in the church at Corinth. Yet Paul says to the Corinthian
church "Ye are the body of Christ." In admonishing the church
at Corinth Paul says, "There should be no schism in the body ..."
(I Corinthians 12:25). They are not only an infinite
number of schisms and divisions in the so called universal Invisible church,
but many of their differences are of such nature that they are irreconcilable
apart from the abandonment of all reasoning.
It is the devil's delight to take those who are wise in their own conceit,
having turned their ears from the truth and are feasting on fables and
use them in building his ecumenical church. They are victims of that vain
philosophy which says, "Nothing is either black or white, everything is
a beautiful shade of gray." So they conclude that their dissimilarities
are only imaginary, and the ecumenical architect realizes his diabolical
designs. The last word or the bottom line concerning the ecumenical harlot
is; "And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall
hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked and shall eat her
flesh and burn her with fire. For God hath put in their hearts to
fulfill His will" (Revelation 17:16-17).
Question:
Does I Corinthians 3:3 teach that a born again person can be a carnal
Christian, etc.?
Answer:
Yes, I Corinthians 3:1-4 teaches that a born again member of the
Lord's church may at times be carnal. However, habitual carnality is a
denial of the Lordship of Christ, and the negation of the profession of
salvation, for carnality is the very opposite of the true Christian character.
The life of the true Baptist will be that of habitual devotion to the principals
of righteousness set forth in the New Testament. His old nature will on
occasion assert itself, and cause him to stumble. A sheep may fall into
a mud hole, but it will not long abide therein, and so it is, with the
Christian whose general tenor of life is that of Bible obedience. He will
on occasion fall victim to his flesh, but will not adopt carnality as a
rule or code of conduct for his life.
They that are of the flesh may profess to be Christians, and assume for
a time outwardly the character of a Christian, but the trials of time will
manifest their superficiality, and they will return to wallowing in the
mire of this world. On the other hand, a true Christian will bemoan the
fact of his liability to sin, and will lament and repent of his actual
sin. Therefore, the Christian's sporadic deviation from the righteous course
of his life is not indicative of a fallen character, or of a general drift
into carnality.
The person who professes to be a Christian, and is not as a rule subject
to the Lordship of Christ is a false professor. He is a liar. There is
no basis in Scripture for the contention of habitual carnality of a Christian.
They which contend for such a theory always refer to isolated cases in
the lives of godly people, such as the sin of David, Samson, Abraham's
subterfuge, Peter's denial of Christ, etc. Let us not excuse these sins,
nor the sins of our own lives, but let us highlight the fact that these
men regretted and repented of these temporary digressions from the God
honoring course of their lives.
A goat is a goat, a dog is a dog, a hog is a hog, and cosmetic surgery
can never alter that fact. Their nature remains the same no matter if they
are made to look like a sheep. In due season their true nature will manifest
itself, their mock appearance will be laid aside, and their stench will
become so obnoxious to the true church that excisive discipline must be
invoked to preserve the church.
August 9, 1980
Question:
In regard to a born again believer who is not a member of a scriptural
New Testament Baptist Church - please list all the things such a one could
do that would be good and pleasing to our great God.
Answer:
The best I can do is to answer this question in part, for I do not know
the fulness of God's mind in this matter, therefore I can not 'list
all the things' that the unbaptized Christian may do which would be pleasing
to God.
The unbaptized regenerate person may:
1.) Pray acceptably unto God (Luke 23:41).
2.) Study God's Word. Teaching precedes baptism (Matthew 28:19).
August
30, 1980
Question:
Did those with Saul (Paul) at his conversion hear a voice or did Paul hear
the voice only?
Answer:
(Acts 9:7)
"And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice,
but seeing no man."
(Acts 22:9) "And they that were with me saw indeed the
light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake
to me."
(Acts 26:14) "And when we were all fallen to the earth,
I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul,
Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the
pricks."
It would appear from a superficial reading or study of the above Scriptures
that they who journeyed with Paul stood. Acts 26:14 says that they
all fell to the earth. The other seeming contradiction, Acts 9:7
says, "then they which journeyed with Paul heard the voice", and
Acts
22:9 says, "They heard not the voice." Like all other supposed
contradictions of Scripture, even those of higher criticism, these two
may be erased with a brief, but diligent investigation. Acts 9:7
in connection with Acts 26:14 says, they which traveled with Paul
stood and fell to the ground, and that is exactly what happened. The idea
conveyed is, that when they first saw the light they stood speechless,
and with quick subsequence fell to the ground prostrate. They stood as
opposed to going forward, or ceased in going forward, and their falling
to the ground was a normal reaction under such awesome circumstances. So,
as the Scripture says, they which journeyed with Paul "stood speechless
...
(and then) ... were all fallen to the earth." The same is much the
case with hearing and not hearing at the same time. Many people hear the
Word of God, but few hear it with understanding (Luke 8:18,
John 8:47). Acts 9:8 says they which journeyed with Paul heard
the voice. Acts 22:9 says, they heard not the voice. Did you ever
have some person say to you, "I heard you, but what did you say?" You were
heard in the one sense but in another sense you were not heard. Thus was
the case with Paul's traveling companions, they heard the audible voice,
but not the articulation. We have a perfect example of this in I Corinthians
14:2 where Paul speaks about the use of unknown tongues. "For he
that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God:
for no man understandeth him." Had the translators rendered the word
"heard' in Acts 229 'understand' as they did in I Corinthians
14:1 it would have greatly facilitated understanding of what Paul said.
The men with Paul heard the voice, but they heard it not with understanding.
In John 12:28-30 there is an analogy which should greatly enhance
our ability to understand what Paul expressed regarding the hearing and
not hearing of those with him when he was converted. Christ prayed saying,
"Father, glorify Thy name. Then came there a voice from heaven, sayiing
, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again. The people therefore,
that stood by, and heard it, said that it thundered, others said, An angel
spake unto Him. Jesus answered and said, This voice came not because of
Me, but for your sakes." Note: Jesus heard and understood that the
voice from heaven spoke, but they that stood by only heard the sound of
the voice.
Some went so far as to admit that the sound which they heard was a language,
for they said, "an angel spake to Him". So they heard the voice
in one sense, but not in the sense of understanding what the voice said.
Acts
26:14 says that the voice which spoke to Paul was spoken "in the
Hebrew tongue". It is highly probable that the men which journeyed
with Paul were Roman authorities and soldiers who understood not the Hebrew
language. If this was the case, then it is easy to see how they could have
heard the voice, but the meaning or understanding they heard not.
"They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world
heareth them. {6} We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that
is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the
spirit of error." (1 John 4:5-6)
The world hears the voice
of the faithful Christian, but he does not speak the language of the world,
so the world hears not what he says.
There are NO contradictions in God's Word!
December
27, 1980
Question:
Please explain the ministry of reconciliation in II Corinthians 5:19-21.
Answer:
In Adam all of humankind suffered an irreparable imbalance, and man by
nature is unable to reconcile his book of responsibility with the Divine
standard. Man may reconcile many of his differences with his fellow creatures,
but he is utterly helpless to balance his book of life with the infallible
record of God. A change must be made in man, it is man who needs to be
reconciled to God, it is man who erred, it is the records of man that are
in total disarray, and it is man who can not, nor cares to set the record
straight. The account of man is not merely out of balance, but he exhausted
all of his means, assumed infinite debt, and has not the least farthing
to pay toward retiring the account. Man owes God a life of perfect righteousness,
but at his best state he is altogether sin ( Psalms 39:5). Thus,
it was that Christ was sent to reconcile unto God an innumerable host of
Adam's spiritually bankrupt children. "For there is one God,
and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;" ( I
Timothy 2:5). The objects of Divine reconciliation are the elect of
God, the means of reconciliation is the propitiatory death of Christ.
"For
if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his
Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life." (
Romans 5:10). It is by the death of Christ that Jew and Gentile may
be reconciled, and will one day be altogether reconciled with one another
and with God. So it, is we read, "And that he might reconcile both unto
God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:" (
Ephesians 2:16). The sacrificial and atoning blood of Christ is the
ground and basis of reconciliation. By dying in the room and stead of His
people, Christ removed the sin debt, He paid it all, and not only reconciled
His people unto God, but made them "... holy and unblameable andunreproveable
in his sight:" ( Colossians 1:22).
The reconciling work of Christ has been accepted and approved of God, and
on the basis of this fact, Paul says to the believer, "And you, that
were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works,
yet now hath he reconciled." ( Colossians 1:21). " Reconciled"
is in the past tense, meaning that the believer, here and now is at peace
with God, through the merits of Christ's shed blood (Colossians 1:20).
The " ministry" ( II Corinthians 5:18) or " word"
of reconciliation is the proclamation that the work of redemption is accomplished
in Christ. "... we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled
to God." ( II Corinthians 5:20). God in and through Christ has
done everything necessary to save His people, and now they may return to
God without fear of retribution for their sins. Their sins were charged
to their reconciling sacrifice ( Isaiah 53:6) and shall never be
remembered against them anymore ( Hebrews 10:17). The Greek word
from which the word "reconciled" is translated means to change.
So it is, man must undergo a change, for God is immutable and never changes.
The necessary change is wrought in the elect by the Spirit of God, and
apart from this change none would be reconciled to God.
January
2, 1982
Question:
In I Corinthians 13:8 some gifts are said to pass away and one to
cease. When did that happen?
Answer:
I Corinthians 13:9 says that the gifts of knowledge and prophesy were
partial, that is, for a given period of time. They were special gifts,
but were of a temporary nature. These two gifts (knowledge and prophesy)
were to be phased out or superseded by and at the time "when that which
is perfect is come" (I Corinthians 13:10). Tongues were a sign
gift, "not to them that believe, but to them that believe not" (I
Corinthians 14:22). Tongues were to remain in the church during its
infancy period, but with the coming of maturity, tongues would cease. This
is what Paul had reference to when he said, "When I was a child, I spake
as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became
a man, I put away childish things" (I Corinthians 13:11).
The church realized maturity while as yet Paul was alive, and long ere
the death of the Apostle John. The Mediterranean world had already been
evangelized and churches planted throughout the Roman Empire. God had brought
the church to maturity, therefore, there was no further need for the gift
of tongues, and they ceased about as readily as they were given. The gifts
of knowledge and prophesy are spoken of as vanishing away, that is, they
would gradually cease as the need for them diminished, and that need, while
extending beyond the need for the gift of tongues, would in due season
("when that which is perfect is come") be non existent.
I
Corinthians 13:10 "But when that which is perfect is come, then
that which is in part shall be done away." The word "perfect"
in this text means mature or complete, and is a reference to the written
revelation of Jesus Christ. Knowledge and prophesy were in part or incomplete,
previous to the writing of the book of Revelation by the Apostle John around
96 A. D. The book of Revelation was the final installment, making the knowledge
which God has determined for this age complete, and the gifts of knowledge
and prophesy vanished away.
The remaining question to be considered is, What is " that which is
perfect" in I Corinthians 13:10? It is not a reference to the
person of Jesus Christ because the term " that which" is in the
neuter gender. A close study of the context will reveal that the "perfect"
of verse 10 is a reference to the plenary and infallible Book.
Return
To O. B. Mink Page
Return To PBC Home