The TRIBE of ISHMAEL

(Revised Edition)

By G. E. Jones

[Editor’s note (Leon King):  I have scanned and proofed this book as carefully as I could.  Some of the print was illegible, so I inserted a note with my initials (lk) at the places where I could not read the print.]

PUBLISHED BY

BAPTIST SUNDAY SCHOOL COMMITTEE
214 East Broad Street

TEXARKANA, - - - ARKANSAS-TEXAS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

Abraham’s Two Sons ………………………………………………………………………………………...      4

The Two Systems ……………………………………………………………………………………………….      4

The Doctrine of Depravity ………………………………………………………………………………….      6

Waiting On God ………………………………………………………………………………………………….      7

Man’s Extremity – Grace’s Opportunity …………………………………………………………….      9

Resort to the Bondwoman – Reasoning Naturally …………………………………………….    11

Religious Pride and Scorning ……………………………………………………………………………..    13

A Fighter ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..    14

The Born-Child – Grace Works …………………………………………………………………………..    14

The Joy of Salvation ……………………………………………………………………………………………    16

Proof Texts Examined …………………………………………………………………………………………    19

Acts 2:28 …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….    20

Galatians 3:27 and Romans 6:3 ………………………………………………………………………..    33

Romans 6:17 and 18 ………………………………………………………………………………………….    39

Mark 16:16 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….    42

Acts 22:16 …………………………………………………………………………………………………………..    43

John 3:5 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………     44

The Blind Man Healed …………………………………………………………………………………………     45

The Washing of Water by the Word …………………………………………………………………..     46

Campbellites Are Blind Guides ……………………………………………………………………………     47

Campbellites Preach another Gospel …………………………………………………………………     48

Like the Pharisees, Campbellites Condemn Shouting ……………………………………….     49

A Campbellite Defames the Character of Jesus Christ ………………………………………     51

Campbellites Array the Scriptures against Themselves ……………………………………      57

Campbellites Oppose One Another …………………………………………………………………….      60

Campbellites Baptize Those Ignorant of the Gospel of Christ ……………………………     64

Campbellism and the Doctrine of the Indwelling Spirit ………………………………………     66

Campbellites Have the Wrong Motive in Baptism ……………………………………………….     69

Campbellites and Their Name ……………………………………………………………………………..     71

Mr. Webb Blunders Again …………………………………………………………………………………….     72

Human Traditions for Doctrines …………………………………………………………………………..     73

Mr. Webb’s Other Mistakes ………………………………………………………………………………….     74

Campbellites Wrong on Repentance ……………………………………………………………………     78

The Plan of Salvation has been the same in All Ages ………………………………………..     82

Salvation is not of Works …………………………………………………………………………………….     88

The Conversion of Zacchaeus ……………………………………………………………………………..     90

The Woman in Simon’s House ……………………………………………………………………………..    90

The House of Cornelius ………………………………………………………………………………………..     91

The Type of the Passover Lamb …………………………………………………………………………..     95

What the Believer has Before Baptism ………………………………………………………………..     98

Campbellites are Wrong on the Kingdom ……………………………………………………………    100

Isaiah 2:2-3 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….    100

Mark 9:1 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….    102

Daniel 7:13-14 …………………………………………………………………………………………………….     104

Campbellites Wrong on David’s Throne ………………………………………………………………    104

Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….    106

FOREWORD

Widely known as a writer, teacher, preacher, and debater is the author of this book.  To him were given many gifts which he has thoroughly developed. Humble, fearless, educated, efficient, the author expertly wields the Sword of the Spirit, defending the truth and stabbing false doctrine to death.  Years of study and much experience in preaching and debating have full qualified him to write this production.

Brother Jones, in this book, neither beats the air, nor strikes at a punching bag for practice.  He is itching for a real, tough fight.  Poise, ad confidence are written on his countenance.  His inveterate opponent defying and daring, faces him in the ring.  It appears that truth has no chance to win at all.  But this fight hardly lasts one round.  The gong having sounded, the contenders walk to the middle of the ring and begins the fight.  The walloping which Brother Jones delivers to his adversary is devastating—so devastating that the referee counts the adversary out before the gong clangs to finish the first round.  He is out—out for keeps—out cold and unconscious.  His friends tenderly pick up the battered man and carry him to the dressing room, where they rub and massage him, to restore sensibility.  Truth, with a knock-out punch has won honestly.

Reader, you will find this book valuable.  Its contents do not skim the surface.  This book has depth, richness, vitality, and power.  Its arguments are unanswerable.  As heavy artillery in <words are illegible - lk>, and uproots the trees in a forest, so the arguments here fire a stream of shells which destroy and pulverizes erroneous doctrine and its adherent’s.

Read this book diligently.  Study it.  Fasten the arguments in your mind.  And it will reveal the blindness, the weakness, and the sheer stupidity of heretical thinks and teachers—men masquerading as preachers of truth and righteousness, but who, in reality, are preachers of lies, deception, sophistry, and abominable doctrine.

H. TRAVIS HUBBARD

Hebrew teacher,

Missionary Baptist Institute.

PREFACE

Several years ago this writer put out the first edition of The Tribe of Ishmael.  Because of the unique way in approaching Campbellite heresy the book caused considerable interest and talk among the people.  Many who read it recommended it to others.  For some time the supply has been exhausted and calls continue to come in for the book.  Because of this the writer decided to put out a new and revised edition.  The first edition contained over thirty pages on the security of the believer.  Since the writer now has out a book “Once for All” that deals with both sides of this question that part of the book has been omitted in this new work.  That space has been used to expand the argument against the Campbellite plan of salvation by works.

Some will, doubtless, look upon this work as an unjustified attack on the people who hold to this doctrine.  But it is an attack on the <illegible – lk> people have been deceived by it.  This work if rather a needed defense of the true doctrines of the Word of God.  The preachers of this false doctrine continue to pour through the press and over the air, their denunciation of the belief of all others.  For the past few years they have been running a series of articles in the county papers of this county seeking to show that everyone but their people are lost.  These articles have been read by the public until patience has ceased to be a virtue.

We are living in a time when there is little conviction concerning doctrinal matters. Many think that it is wrong to lift one’s voice against what another teaches, regardless of how poisonous that teaching might be.  If one knew that some were putting poison in the food of the people it would be his duty to warn the people.  If he knew it and did not warn the people he would certainly bring on himself the indignation of the public.  I ask the question, which is the most important, the physical lives of people, or the souls of men?  If we do our utmost to warn people from partaking of poisonous food, then how much more should we endeavor to warn the people against that which will poison their souls and minds?

Often it becomes the duty of the servant of God to destroy before building.  The Lord said to Jeremiah, “I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy and to throw down, to build and to plant,” Jer. 1:10.  The prophet was to root out, pull down, throw down and to destroy before building and planting.  When a field has become overgrown with briers and bushes it is necessary to do some destroying before planting.  So it becomes the duty of the preachers of the Word to root out and to pull down false doctrines so that the truth may better prosper.

If this writer were seeking the praise and honor of this world he would not be writing this book.  Paul said, “If I yet please men, I should not be the servant of Christ.” Gal. 1:10.  He is writing it before God who told us through inspiration that we “Should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered to the saints,” Jude 3.  If but one soul shall be delivered from the snare and the delusions of Campbellism, this book shall not be in vain.  If souls who already have the truth are made stronger in the faith and are drawn closer to the Lord, this effort shall be worth-while.  Not only has the writer sought to expose the false doctrines of Campbellites, but he has endeavored to show the drift of the times and the perils that confront our own people.  Many of them are drifting from what Baptists once taught and practiced.  The Word of God has warned us of the coming of those with a form of godliness who are without the power thereof.  We are told to turn away from such.  It is as bad for Baptists as it is for Campbellites, or worse, to turn away from old time repentance, without which no one can be saved.

This writer considers Campbellism one of the greatest, if not the greatest counterfeit among us today.  Because of this he is putting forth this book to enlighten people concerning the same.  Read this book with an open mind and Bible.  Read it carefully and prayerfully.

--G. E. JONES

PART ONE

Abraham’s Two Sons

“For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free. Gal. 4:22-31.

The Two Systems

From the above passage of Scripture we learn that the incidents connected with the connected with the truth of Abraham’s two sons are typical.  They symbolize the two covenants, the one of works, the other of grace.  The righteousness of the law is a system of works.  “Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, that the man that doeth these things shall live by them.” Rom. 10:5.Over against this Paul describes the righteousness of faith by saying, “The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart:  that is, the word of faith which we preach; that if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.” Rom. 10:8-9.

From this passage in Romans we learn that the one who expects to live by what he does is under the law of works, and belongs to the tribe of Hagar and Ishmael, her son.  Those who are saved by believing in Jesus Christ have the righteousness of faith, and are, as Isaac, children of promise. The Campbellites, as well as others depend on baptism, the Lord’s Supper, and other works to save them. Paul shows us, however, that works cannot be mixed with grace for salvation.  “If by grace, then it is no more of works; otherwise grace is no more grace.  But if it be of works, then it is no more grace.” Rom. 11:6.  So salvation must be all of grace or all of works.  The two cannot be mixed.  To bring in works for salvation is to rule out grace.  “To him that worketh is the reward NOT RECKONED OF GRACE, but of debt.” Rom. 4:4.  That is, grace is not counted or extended to the person who is working to be saved.  He must give up works for salvation to come under grace.  But to him that WORKETH NOT, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.” Rom. 4:5.  In Rom. 4:5, we see one who is WORKING NOT, or has ceased to work to be saved, and has faith in the Lord to justify him.  This man is considered righteous in the sight of God, not the one who is working to be considered righteous.

Baptism and the Lord’s Supper are not God’s works in us, but our works for the Lord.  To make them the ground of our acceptance before God is to have us accepted for what we have done for God, not on the basis of what He has done for us, and in us.  That <illegible – lk> out the work of Christ in our behalf.  Paul asks the question, “Who hath first given to Him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again?”  Then he goes on to say, “For of Him, and through Him, and to Him, are all things: to whom be glory forever,” Rom. 11:35-36.  So salvation is not something God gives to us in return for what we have done for Him, but it is all “Of Him, and through Him,” that He might have the glory forever.  To attempt to be saved by what we do means to try to rob Christ of the glory.

Now, if we will turn to the Book of Genesis and read chapters twelve to twenty-one we will find the incidents connected with the story of Abraham’s two wives and the birth and lives of their two sons.  We have already seen that Paul tells us that this is an allegory.  So, we do not follow our imagination when we apply this to the true and false systems of faith and religion.

The Doctrine of Depravity

We find that God had promised to Abram (not Abraham as yet) an heir.  To the natural man that seemed impossible, for Sarai (not Sarah as yet) was barren and far past the time when by nature she could expect a child.  She was wholly incapacitated to bring forth the promised child.  Here we have a picture of the sinner in his natural state: spiritually dead, and unable to bear fruit unto God. “The carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God.  NEITHER indeed CAN BE.  So then they that are in the flesh CANNOT PLEASE GOD.” Rom. 8:7-9.  This is the divine pronouncement against the natural man.  Whether men believe it or not, it is the Word of God and no amount of reasoning or denying, or lack of belief will change this fact.  God had said that the one in the flesh CANNOT please him and it is so.  If you do not believe this statement you do not believe the Word of God. L The statement, “They that are in the flesh CANNOT please God,” is not the statement of man, but the inspired Word of God.  Here in the example of Sarai, as well as this verse just quoted, we have set forth the doctrine of depravity which Campbellites hate so badly and deny.  Sarai could not bear the promised child until she had been visited by divine power.  So, the unsaved man cannot bear fruit unto God or please Him.  He must be visited by the power of the Spirit before He can come to Christ.  Jesus said, “No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him,” John 6:44.

A man must be born again and be made a new creature in Christ before his works have any acceptance with God.  “We are his workmanship created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.” Eph. 2:10.  Since we must be made new creatures in Christ before we have any good works, then no work done before we are in Christ is a good work, or has any acceptance before God.  “I cried unto Thee; save me, and I shall keep thy testimonies,” Psalms 119:146.  Both this verse and the one from Ephesians teach that the sinner must be saved before he can keep the testimonies of God.  To have an un-renewed person to be baptized to be saves is reversing God’s order and misses the mark.  That is as impossible as it was for Sarai to bear the promised child until she had been visited by divine power.  The sinner’s part is to call upon God, submit to Him, and wait the visitation of His divine grace.

Sarai, in her barren state, was a subject of divine grace.  If the promised child was ever to be born God must give life to her womb, and give her by His divine power the ability to bear a child.  So, if the sinner, dead in trespasses and sins, ever brings forth good works, he must be quickened by God’s divine power into life.  “You hath He quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins.” Eph. 2:1.  “We are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus UNTO GOOD WORKS,” Eph. 2:10.

Waiting on God

Sarai and Abram had wait God's lime. No matter how much they might desire a child, it would not be born until God commenced the work by the quickening of Sarai's womb. So, no matter how much we may desire the salvation of men, nothing can be accomplished until the Holy Spirit does His office work. The sinner is blinded. "But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which veil is done away in Christ. But even until this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart," II Cor. 3:14, 15. "And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled in them that perish: in whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that the light of the glory of the gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should not dawn upon them," II Cor. 4:3-4, (R. V.). Here we see that there is a veil over the heart of the lost man. Now let us go back to II Cor. 3:17 and see how that veil is removed. "Nevertheless when it (the heart) shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away. Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty," verses 16-17. Here we see that there is a veil over the heart of the lost man that must be taken away by the Spirit of God before the light of the gospel of Christ can dawn upon him. God must open the understanding, even as He opened Sarah's womb. "And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, which worshipped God, heard us: whose HEART the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken by Paul," Acts 16:14. The removing of the veil and the opening of the understanding is the work of the Holy Spirit. "We know that the Son of God is come, and hath given unto us an understanding, that we may know Him that is true," I John 5:20. Here is a fundamental truth which Campbellites and many others ignore. They proceed upon the assumption that any man with reasonable intelligence is able of himself to understand the gospel and act accordingly. That is not true. We have seen that there is a veil over the heart of the lost man that hides from his understanding the gospel of Christ. He is in the dark. He is without spiritual under-standing. "The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 1 Cor. 2:14:  Spiritual things must be spiritually understood. The lost man needs to confess this blinded condition and turn to the Lord and let Him remove the veil through the Spirit. Campbellism persuades the lost man, one to whom the gospel is veiled; and who has no understanding of spiritual things, to confess with his lips Jesus and be baptized. He cannot make a true confession apart from the Spirit of God; "No man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost," I Cor. 12:3. How then can the lost man be obeying the gospel by being baptized when the gospel is hidden to him and he has no understanding of spiritual things? He must wait upon God to remove the veil and give him an understanding.

Now let us see what takes place when the Spirit removes the veil. "For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to GIVE THE LIGHT OF THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE GLORY OF GOD in the face of Jesus Christ," II Cor. 4:6. When the Spirit removes the veil from the heart of man, instantly the light of the truth as it is in Christ shines into his heart, and he embraces it and is saved. So we see that is the work of the Spirit of God to produce faith in the heart. This the Spirit does when men accept their helpless condition as God's Word teaches and turn to the Lord to do for them what they cannot do themselves. When men are stubborn, proud, self-sufficient, and unwilling to acknowledge their blindness they are left in that condition.

Man's Extremity — Grace's Opportunity

Abram and Sarai waited ten years after they were in the land of Canaan and still the promised child was not born, Gen. 16:3. Doubtless, this seemed strange to them. But God was waiting until they realized they were utterly helpless within themselves, and that they were wholly dependent on Him to perform His promises. Man's helplessness furnishes grace an opportunity. Grace cannot operate until man's works have been given up as of no value and he is ready to rely solely on what God stands ready to do. "He that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works," Heb. 4:10. Rest is found at the end of work, not in working. It comes after one quits working, not while he is working. That is true physically as well as spiritually. How slow men are to learn this truth. Paul wrote concerning the Jews, "They being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not SUBMITTED themselves unto the righteousness of God," Rom. 10:3. Their mistake, like that of the Campbellites and many others, was in working to be saved, when they should have ceased from those works and submitted themselves to the Lord to be saved. As long as man is working to be saved he has not submitted himself to the Lord to be saved. There is a mistaken idea in the world. It is that we must do our part in saving ourselves and the Lord does His part. Christ it not just part Saviour. He does all the saving. He does not need our help. He only waits for us to let Him save. Our part is to quit our works and let Him do the saving. Campbellism goes astray in that it sets a lost man to working to be saved, while grace would have him cease from those works and let Christ save. When the sinner reaches the point where he is willing to give up all his working and yield himself to Christ to be saved then the Spirit removes the veil and the work is done. He then and there is enabled by divine grace to believe in Christ from the heart. His faith is then made to stand in the power of God. Paul said his preaching was in the power of the Spirit "That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the POWER of God," I Cor. 2:4-5. Thus we see that the true faith is the product of the POWER OF GOD in men's hearts. It is a supernatural work, even as the birth of Isaac was brought about by supernatural power.

This writer used to wonder why God waited so long to give to Abraham and Sarah the promised child. But he no longer wonders about it. God was waiting until they knew that God Himself must bring to pass what He had promised. We sometimes wonder why lost men will go mourning and seeking the Lord for days and weeks before they are saved. It is not that it takes God a long time to save men. He can do it instantly and does. But it often takes men a long time to get in the attitude where they will let Christ save them. He must wait until they realize that all their efforts, are of no avail and they are ready to submit themselves to Him to be saved. Whatever the length of time it takes man to reach the end of his own strength that is the length of time the Lord waits to save him. Campbellites and many others ignore this fundamental truth. Decision days and membership drives are all of the flesh. They ignore the work of the Spirit. It is to seek to go ahead of the Spirit and do that which only the Spirit can do. We cannot take out of His hands the work that only He can do. Our part is to wait upon Him.

Now, let us sum up these things. The sinner has a veil over his heart. His mind is blinded. He must realize that he cannot remove this blindness by any effort of his own. God's children need to realize that they are unable to remove this blindness. The Spirit alone can do that. When the sinner realizes this he turns to the Lord as his only source of help and the Spirit removes the veil. Then the man is enabled to trust Christ for salvation.

Resort to the Bondwoman — Reasoning Naturally

Next, we see Abram and Sarai resorting to the bondwoman to bring about the promised heir. Sarai said, "The Lord hath restrained me from bearing: I pray thee, go in unto my maid; it may be that I may obtain children by her," Gen. 16:2. Here is a resort to the flesh to accomplish desired results. Abram and Sarai attempted to bring about through their efforts what God had promised to do. Here we see the workings of the flesh and the reasonings of the natural mind. In the mind of Sarai God had failed. She thought it time that they do something about the matter. So, do men reason today! There is a saying that, "God helps those who help themselves." No, God helps the helpless. The natural man reasons that he needs to be doing. On the other hand the Word of God teaches he needs to be waiting on God. "They that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength," Isa. 40:31. "Be still, and know that I am God," Psalm 46:10.

The natural man could understand how a child could be born to a young woman. There was nothing involved in it which he did not understand. But he could not understand how a child could be born to a woman ninety years old. That required faith in the power of God to bring about what nature could not do. So the natural man can under-stand the things that are outward about religion. He can understand how a man can give the preacher his hand, confess with his lips that Jesus is the Christ, and be baptized. That is all outward and is understood by the natural man. But what he does not understand is how the grace of God works in the hearts and lives of men to make them new creatures in Christ Jesus. The Word of God tells us "The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: —neither can he know them," I Cor. 2:14. Not understanding the things of the Spirit the Campbellite, and many others, resort to that which they understand naturally to accomplish spiritual results. Thus the work of the Spirit is ignored and the gospel of Christ is frustrated. Christian experience is taken out of the realm of the supernatural and brought down to the level of the natural. A long step has been taken toward modernism and infidelity. Here is the main cause of the trouble in so many churches. In the eagerness to bring about growth in the churches men have run ahead of the work of the Spirit and churches have been filled with members who have never known the saving grace of God. They are worldly minded, indifferent and live after the flesh. This writer is calling on people to get back to the Bible way of waiting on the Spirit. After we have preached the Word, prayed and read the Scriptures there is something about the matter that the lost man will never see until the Spirit enables him to see and understand. If we push him or persuade him into a mere lip profession before the Spirit has done His work we blunder.

To look to Hagar to bear the promised child was reasoning from the natural standpoint. To wait for a child to be born to the old woman required faith in God to accomplish what was naturally impossible. To depend on baptism or any outward works to bring salvation is reasoning naturally. To wait upon God through the power of the Spirit to bring a renewing of the heart of men is an act of faith. Sarai's womb had to be renewed. Thee sinner's mind and heart has to be renewed. No natural power could give Sarah strength to conceive. That took the power of God. No natural power can bring to the sinner an understanding of the truth. That takes the power of God. The reason that the religious world is in its present confused and ungodly condition is that too many have endeavored to take spiritual things out of the realm of the supernatural and bring them down to the level of natural things. If our experience is not the product of a divine power working in us then we are most miserable. The reason that some people's profession is so hard to keep is because it is all the result of what is natural. There is nothing supernatural about it. It is no wonder that so many think they can lose their salvation. What they think they have is all based on their own natural reasonings and works and not on divine power. They do not lose much when they lose it.

By resorting to that which the natural man can understand and do the Campbellite falls in line with the bondwoman, and may be said to belong to the tribe of Ishmael. Hence the title of this book.

Religious Pride and Scorning

Abram took Hagar to be his wife upon the suggestion of Sarai. Soon afterwards she conceived and it caused Hagar to become proud and scornful. "When she saw that she had conceived, her mistress was despised in her eyes," Gen. 16:4. Here we have the spirit of pride and scorning that goes with false religions. They who are after the flesh scorn those who are after the Spirit. "As then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born of the Spirit, even so is it now." All who live in places where Campbellites are numerous are familiar with their tactics. They will assemble at the places where those who believe in the work of the Spirit preach and testify of the same and grin with a sarcastic grin of contempt. When the Lord's people are weeping, rejoicing and shouting they will make light of them, even as the Pharisees wanted Jesus to stop His disciples from shouting, Luke 19:37-40. They, and many others, think that such people are beside themselves and are excited and hysterical. In fact such conduct on the part of Campbellites in meetings held by this writer was the cause of him getting his first insight into the application of the allegory of Abraham's two sons.

In all fairness I must say that I have seen some who were members of Campbellite churches who did not manifest this scornful spirit. I believe there are some among them who at some time have really repented and have been saved in spite of the fact that through family ties they have been persuaded into lining themselves up with that system. I have also seen others who had this feeling of contempt and scorn for those who rejoice in the Spirit and manifest the presence of God in their hearts. There are Baptists, so-called, parading around today who are as ignorant of spiritual things as Campbellites. Their hearts have never been broken because of sin. They say a lot about belief, but their belief is void of spiritual power and grace, and it is no better than the belief that Campbellites require. Their services are cold and formal. No tears of joy and penitence are shed. There has been no heart-felt crying unto God for forgiveness of sins, like the publican who went up to the temple to pray. Everything has been done according to the decorum of this world and the pride of the flesh. True experience, if given an opportunity, will manifest itself in outward praise to God. When Jesus entered Jerusalem as King, His disciple praised God with a loud voice. The prophet Zechariah called this shouting. "SHOUT, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee;—riding upon an ass," Zech. 9:9. If we really have Bible experience it should show itself today as in Bible times. There is something wrong if it does not. Why people can read the Bible all their lives and fail to see that Bible saints wept and shouted and rejoiced I cannot understand.

This writer does not want to be misunderstood. He believes that true spiritual experiences bring spiritual feeling, great joy and peace. Often our cups are made to overflow and we praise God aloud as did Elizabeth and Mary, Luke 1:41-55. But he believes that our feelings must be balanced with the Word of God. True experiences are in keeping with the Word of God, not contrary to it. But, an experience that has been void of a heart felt sorrow for sin and that has not brought a consciousness of the presence of the Spirit in the heart is no experience at all. Let all who read these pages heed the admonition of the inspired Word, "Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves how that JESUS CHRIST is IN you, except ye be reprobates?" II Cor. 13:5. Can you prove up?

A Fighter

Abram and Sarai got results through resort to the bondwoman, but the result was a bond-child and not an heir. He was a source of trouble in the family until they got rid of him and his mother. Moreover, he was a wild man. His hand was against every man, and he was always ready for a fight. His spiritual descendants are always ready for a fight. Most of their preaching is simply a denouncement of those who preach and hold to the truth. They are great at burlesquing other denominations, especially the Baptists. Anyone who has heard many of their preachers know this is true.

The Bond-child Rejected — Grace Works

God rejected Ishmael as the heir. He changed the names of Abram and Sarai to. Abraham and Sarah and told them that Sarah should bear a child. God visited her and she conceived and gave birth to Isaac, the promised child. This birth was miraculous, so is the new birth brought about by divine power. While God used Abraham as the father of the child, yet the birth of Isaac was different from that of Ishmael. It had an element of the supernatural connected with it. God uses means in the sinner’s salvation. But those means are powerless in themselves. "It pleased God through the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe," I Cor. 1:21. But it is not enough to just preach the Word. Along with the preaching must go the work of the Spirit of God. Paul said to the Thessalonians, "Our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost," I Thess. 1:5. He wrote to the church at Corinth, "My speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and power; THAT your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the POWER OF GOD," I Cor. 2:4-5. The birth of Isaac was the result of the working of the power of God. So the faith of the Corinthians was the product of divine power. It stood in the POWER of God. Ishmael's birth was the result of human planning and agency. The Campbellite's faith is the mere product of human works. According to their own claims the man is not saved when he starts to the waters of baptism. That being so he is still a natural man and not in the Spirit. The Word of God tells us that such a man does not know the things of the Spirit, I Cor. 2:14. Then he goes to baptism not understanding its true purpose. He goes there because he has been persuaded to do so by the Campbellite preacher. So, his faith stands in the wisdom of men and not in God's power. Ask him if the Spirit of God wrought faith in his heart and see how he answers. He makes light of such a thing.

All the efforts of Abraham and Sarah were in vain until God had visited Sarah. "And the Lord visited Sarah as He had said, and the Lord DID unto Sarah as He had spoken. For Sarah conceived, and bare Abraham a son," Gen. 21:1-2. This took place only after the son of the bondwoman was rejected as heir. As long as Abraham looked to the son of the bondwoman to be the heir, that long God waited to give Sarah power to conceive. Only when men turn away from dependence on the works they do will the grace of God work in their behalf. "If it be of works, then it is no more of grace," Rom. 11:6. Works must leave before grace comes in. Isaac could not be born as long as Ishmael was counted as heir. Neither can the Spirit bring about a true experience until works are discarded. Ishmael and Isaac were not heirs together. "The son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman," Gal. 4:30. Here we learn that God will not accept a mixture of works and grace. If we are saved by both works and grace then why was not Ishmael equally an heir with Isaac? Ishmael represents works, while Isaac represents faith. Both could not be heirs. In seeking to make salvation by both works and faith Campbellites are seeking to have Ishmael equally an heir with Isaac. But God said the bondwoman and her son should be cast out. So out goes works for salvation.

The Joy of Salvation

"And Sarah said, God hath made me to laugh, so that all that hear will laugh with me. And she said, who would have said unto Abraham, that Sarah should have given children suck? For I have born him a son in his old age," Gen. 21:6-7.

These words are full of meaning for the spiritually minded. Here we see rejoicing when the promised child was born. Sarah said, "God hath made me to laugh." It was God's work to make her rejoice. So, God makes His people to laugh and rejoice. "When the Lord turned again the captivity of Zion, we were like them that dream. Then was our mouth filled with laughter, and our tongue with singing, Psalm 126:1-2. The work of God in the midst of His people causes them to rejoice with laughing and singing. They laugh, shout and weep for joy. How often we have seen God's people laugh when happy. A few years ago I saw a young lady who had been a church member without salvation fall upon her knees in prayer. In just a few minutes she was on her feet again with the tears coming down her face like rain, and she looked upward and laughed and laughed and laughed, and we laughed with her. Sarah said, "God hath made me to laugh, so all that hear will laugh with me." If God makes us to laugh then who can forbid it? Such as this is out of order in a Campbellite meeting and many others. Neither did any one laugh and give praise to God when the son of the bondwoman was born. The Bible does not say anything about God making anyone to laugh when Ishmael was born. Neither does God make anyone to laugh and rejoice and shout when Campbellites join for baptism and a lot of other modern converts join a church.

Notice that Sarah said, "Who would have said to Abraham, that Sarah should have given children suck?" The thing that had happened was marvelous. It was beyond the comprehension of the natural man. Sarah herself could not understand all the mysteries connected with it. She could not explain it. She only knew that it was the work of God in her behalf. But there was the child in her arms as evidence that its birth had taken place. Jesus said, "The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit," John 3:8. We may not be able to explain all the mysteries connected with the work of the Spirit, but, like Sarah knew that the child had been born and could rejoice in that birth, so may we know that the Spirit of God works within and we can rejoice in this glorious fact. Several years ago a small boy was saved who had gone mourning for some time. After others had waited and prayed with him for a long time suddenly he broke forth into joyful laughing. After much laughing he said, "Don't ask me.to tell you how it was done, I can't tell you, but I know that God has saved me." Thank God it is not ours to explain. It is ours to experience and enjoy and praise God for giving. The mysterious part is His to do. It is ours to experience and enjoy. If men will but give up their own righteousness and submit to Him He will work in them that which will make them to wonder and rejoice. What a blessed thing that God is able to make His people to know of their salvation and rejoice in the same.

Reader, are you inclined to laugh at the above? If you are then go and read where Ishmael mocked when they made a feast unto Isaac, Gen. 21:8-9. Are you going to be found in the seat of the scornful? If you know nothing about such rejoicing, is there not a reason? God has promised to bless mourners, but He nowhere promises to bless scorners. Many a time I have seen Campbellites mock and laugh when God's people were shouting for joy. Beware! Remember how Michal scorned David when he shouted and rejoiced before the Lord when they brought back the ark, II Sam. 6:16-23.

In closing this part of this treatise let me ask if Paul does not say that the account of Abraham's two sons is not an allegory? Does he not make the birth of Ishmael to represent the covenant of works and the religion which is after the flesh? Does he not make the birth of Isaac to represent our new birth? If the birth of Isaac was brought about through the visitation of divine power, then, is not our new birth the product of a divine power? Have you experienced within your heart this divine work that brings joy and peace and gladness? Why should men be content with a counterfeit when the Lord is ready to give the genuine spiritual experience? He promised to give rest to the heavy laden if they will only come to Him.

I have just read an article in which a Campbellite denied that the Spirit of God works directly in a miraculous way on the heart of man in regeneration. This article was printed in the Morrilton Democrat, Dec. 20th, 1945. It is too lengthy to quote here. Let me ask did not God visit Sarah in a miraculous way? Let us remember that three of the miraculous gifts of the Spirit still remain. "Now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three," I Cor. 13:13. The three gifts that remain are as miraculous as the gifts of healing, prophecy, and tongues that passed away. The regeneration of the soul is as miraculous as the resurrection of the body. The same Spirit that now dwells in us is the Spirit and power that shall quicken the believer's body and make it like the body of Christ in the resurrection. "If the Spirit of Him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, He that raised up Christ from the dead shall ALSO QUICKEN your mortal bodies BY HIS SPIRIT that dwelleth in you," Rom. 8:11. This miraculous power, the Spirit of God that now dwells in us because of regeneration, is the same miraculous power that shall give us a glorified body at the resurrection. Regeneration is as much a supernatural thing as the resurrection of the body.

PART TWO

Proof Texts Examined

Let us now examine the proof texts upon which Campbellites depend to prove their unscriptural plan of salvation. We shall find that when closely examined they do not teach that one must be baptized to be saved, except in a symbolic sense. Campbellites hastily glance at these proof texts and jump to the conclusion that they teach what they think. They always ignore the connecting verses and put their own interpretation on the verses they use in the face of the overwhelming plain Bible evidence which shows them to be wrong in their interpretation. When unable to face the overwhelming evidence that men are saved before baptism they ignore the proof texts that are given to prove that salvation comes before baptism by saying, "They say" this or that. In my written debate with Mr. Wilhite, I quoted Rom. 6:20-22 to prove that one must be free from sin before he can bring forth good fruit: "When ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness. What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death. But now BEING MADE FREE FROM SIN, and become servants to God, ye have YOUR FRUIT UNTO HOLINESS, and the end everlasting life." Mr. Wilhite's answer to this was simply "JONES says only the ones free from sin can bring forth good fruit," P-9. The proof text he ignored. Does Jones say it or does the Bible say it? At the present Mr. Webb, a Campbellite, and I are running articles in our county papers. I had an article on election in the Morrilton Democrat. To prove that God elected His people before the foundation of the world, I quoted, Eph. 1:4: "According as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world." In attempting to reply, Mr. Webb said, "They say the ‘elect' were chosen as God's children to be saved from the foundation of the world." Morrilton Democrat, Nov. 16th, 1945. That was his reply to the Scripture, "According as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world." I ask, is this facing a plain Scripture fairly? Are plain statements from the Word of God to be set aside by saying, "They say" as though it was man, and not the Bible that said this? Such dodging of the truth is a plain confession of one's inability to face the proof text fairly and answer it. It shall not be this writer's policy to so handle their proof texts. They shall be faced fairly and examined more closely than any Campbellite ever examines them. In fact Campbellites do not want their proof texts examined too closely. It shall be this writer's policy, like that of the Apostle Paul, to renounce the hidden things of dishonesty. "As we have received mercy we faint not; but have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty not walking in craftiness, nor handling the Word of God deceitfully, but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God," II Cor. 4:1-2.

Acts 2:38

As this is the main proof text on which the Campbellites rely to prove their false doctrine it shall be examined first. If their interpretation of this verse is shown to be wrong then their whole system comes down like a house of cards.

"Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." King James Translation.

"And Peter said unto them, Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins; and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." Revised Version.

For the present these two translations will suffice. These are the ones most generally read by the people. Others will be considered later.

Let the reader take notice to the punctuation. By means of punctuation the translators give to a passage the meaning as they see it in the original language. The punctuation must then be considered. The Revised Version has the pronoun "ye" after the word repent. It is understood in the King James. In both translations a comma follows, cutting off "repent" or "repent ye" from the next clause which is about baptism and remission of sins. Then in both translations a punctuation mark comes after "remission of sins." The King James has a comma, while the Revised Version has a semi-colon following this expression. In due time I shall quote from a Campbellite writer and show how he, in quoting a number of translations, changes the punctuation of the translators. So much for the matter of punctuation at this time.

Leaving off the first clause (Peter said unto them,) we shall proceed to examine the rest of the sentence. Three clauses are to be found in the remainder of the sentence. A. clause is a part of a sentence which has a subject and predicate. It may, or it may not have, modifying phrases or words. The first clause is; "repent ye." The second clause is "be baptized every one of you." The third is "ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." The modifying phrases are "in the name of Jesus Christ," and "for, or unto the remission of your sins." Let us examine these three clauses, and the modifying phrases.

First clause: "Repent ye." The pronoun "ye" is the subject. In English it is the plural form of the pronoun "thou" or "you." It is second person plural. Its verb or predicate is "repent." This would have to agree with its subject. This makes the predicate also second person plural. This is exactly the form of this verb in the Greek language. This cannot be denied successfully.

Second clause: "Be baptized every one of you." The subject of this clause is "every one of you." It is third person singular number. This is so in both English and the Greek. Its predicate, which must agree with it, is also third person singular. It is "be baptized." This is the Greek form. So we see that the first and second clauses differ in both person and number as to their subjects and predicates. The Campbellites’  trick is to try to combine these two clauses into one clause. They throw away the subject "ye" which occurs in the American Revised Version and do not consider it at all. A subject cannot be left standing alone without a predicate. They rob this subject of its predicate and seek to have "everyone of you" as the subject of both "repent" and "be baptized." Then they would have the phrase "for the remission of sins" modifying this compound predicate. Thus they would make repentance and baptism for the same purpose in this verse of scripture. But in making "every one of you" the subject of both "repent" and "be baptized" they would have a singular subject with two predicates, one of which is second person plural, and the other third person singular. This is a grammatical monstrosity. Anyone who knows anything about the rules of language knows that a subject which is third person singular could not have a predicate which is second person plural. So, "repent" cannot be one of the predicates of "everyone of you." We must have two separate clauses. "Repent ye" is the first, and "be baptized everyone of you" is the second. Better informed Campbellites know this but they keep the people in ignorance of this to carry their point. They never, never, tell their people about this difference in number and person. Thus they deceive the people and lead them astray.

Having found that "repent ye" and "be baptized everyone of you" are two different clauses let us take up the modifying phrase "for, or unto the remission of sins." Campbellites say this means in order to obtain the remission of sins. For the sake of argument we will let it be so. Then in which clause shall this phrase modify? It cannot modify in two separate clauses. It will have to modify in one and only one clause. If we make it to modify "be baptized" then we throw out repentance as a condition of receiving the remission of sins. This would leave baptism in this verse as the only condition of pardon. Campbellites would therefore be wrong in teaching that repentance is a condition of pardon. So down they go on the first count. If we make this phrase to modify "repent," then, since it can only modify in one clause, we have eliminated baptism as a condition of forgiveness of sins. So, we see that according to the construction of this sentence, either repentance or baptism must be eliminated as a condition of obtaining remission of sins. Which shall it be? If we throw out repentance the Campbellite is wrong as well as others. On the other hand if we throw out baptism as a condition of remission of sins we prove them wrong on that point. So they are either wrong in teaching that repentance is a condition of pardon, or they are wrong in teaching that baptism is a condition of pardon. Which will they give up?

Now, let us use the phrase "for the remission of sins" as declarative, or because of the remission of sins. In that case either repentance or baptism is declarative. Since baptism comes after repentance then baptism would be declarative. They were to be baptized then because of having their sins remitted, and not in order to have them remitted. In this connection let me say that the verb receive or obtain cannot be found in the Word of God connected with baptism. Let the fellow who thinks he can find it produce the word and tell us where it is and what is the Greek verb from which it is translated. If it could have been found the Campbellites would have found it a long time ago. The fact that they have never found it is proof that this verb cannot be found connected with baptism. Why then will they contend that baptism is for the purpose of receiving the remission of sins when they cannot once find the verb receive connected with baptism? The only place the expression "RECEIVE the remission of sins" is found is in Acts 10:43. "To Him give all the prophets witness, that through His name whosoever believeth in Him shall RECEIVE REMISSION OF SINS." Campbellites would give their last dollar if they could only find where it is said that whosoever is baptized should receive remission of sins. But they cannot find it. They have to infer it.

Since the verb receive is never found connected with baptism let us see about the word manifest. John the Baptist said of Jesus, "I knew Him not: but that He should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water," John 1:31. Here we see that the word manifest is connected with baptism. To manifest means to show or declare or make known. So baptism is for a declarative purpose. Since the word receive is not found connected with baptism, and the word manifest is found connected with it, are we not rather justified in using baptism to declare something rather than to receive it?

The Third clause: The third clause in our sentence is "ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost or Holy Spirit." The subject of this clause is "ye." It is second person plural number. It is the same "ye" we find as subject of the first clause. Its predicate is "shall receive." This predicate is also second person plural in both the English and the Greek. It agrees with its subject "ye." The object of this verb or predicate is "the gift of the Holy Spirit." We see that the subjects and predicates in the first and third clauses are the same in number and person. But the subject and predicate of the second clause "be baptized every one of you" is different from the first and third. Translators have separated the second clause from the first and third with marks of punctuation. The number and person of the subject and predicate of the second clause being different required this. So baptism is not a condition of receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit in this verse. It was promised upon the condition of repentance. As further evidence that this is so I cite the case of the house of Cornelius. They received the gift of the Holy Spirit before baptism, "And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the GIFT OF THE HOLY GHOST.  Then answered Peter, can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?" Acts 10:45-47. So the Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Spirit before baptism. This confirms the argument made above that baptism WAS NOT a condition of receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit. But I am not yet through. Let us read Ezek. 36:26-27. "A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I WILL PUT MY SPIRIT WITHIN YOU, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them." Here we see that the doing of the Lord's commandments is caused by the indwelling Spirit that God gives. This shows that the receiving of the Spirit comes before works and therefore before baptism.

The gift of the Holy Spirit was the main subject of consideration in the whole of the second chapter of Acts. The gift of the Spirit had been poured out on the followers of Jesus. When the multitudes heard them speaking in the tongues of all the nations the works of God they were amazed and asked what these things meant. Peter arose and told them that this was the fulfilment of the promise of God through Joel, the prophet. He said, "The promise is to you, and your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call," verse 39. So the main thought is the gift of the Holy Spirit, the promise the Lord had made, and how to receive that gift. Peter told them that if they would repent they would receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. As we have already seen baptism is separated from the part of the sentence that contains the command to repent, and the part about receiving the gift of the Spirit, with marks of punctuation. The construction of the verse requires that. The fact that the Gentiles received the gift of the Spirit before baptism also proves this to be so. The main part of the sentence is "repent ye and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." The other part "be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for or unto the remission of sins" is parenthetical.

There are two separate commands in this verse. One was addressed to, the whole crowd. They were commanded to repent. "God now commandeth all men everywhere to repent," Acts' 17:30. But God commands only those who have repented to be baptized. The command to repent was to all and carried with it the promise of the gift of the Spirit. The command to be baptized was to only such as should repent. So we see that it is a mistake to try to include repentance and baptism in the same command and try to make, them for the same purpose. Let me say in this connection that repentance is not a work. It is not a doing of works, but a ceasing from works. The Word of God speaks about "repentance from dead works," Heb. 6:1. The works of the man dead in sins are dead works. In repentance a man ceases from working to save himself. We shall have more about this later.

I shall now give an example of how Campbellites handle the punctuation of the translators. I shall copy word for word, punctuation marks and all from several translations from which Mr. E. R. Harper was supposed to quote. Below each translation I shall give Mr. Harper's quotation and his punctuation. I am quoting from Mr. Harper's book "Truth Vindicated" as found on pages 38-47. (I especially request the typesetter to check up on the punctuation and see that in every case it checks with it as I give it below.)

King James Translation: "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."

Mr. Harper's quotation of the same: "Repent and be baptized every one you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins." Notice the comma after the word "repent" was omitted by Mr. Harper.

The American Standard Version: "And Peter said unto them, Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins; and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

Mr. Harper's quotation: "Repent ye and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ UNTO the remission of your sins." We notice here that Mr. Harper omitted the comma after the words "repent ye." Is all this accidental? Let us read further.

Goodspeed's translation: "You must repent, and every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, in order to have your sins forgiven; then you will receive the gift of the holy Spirit."

Mr. Harper's quotation: "You must repent and every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, IN ORDER TO have your SINS FORGIVEN." We see that here Mr. Harper omitted Mr. Goodspeed's comma after "repent." Mr. Goodspeed's punctuation marks separate baptism from repentance and the forgiveness of sins with commas. He makes the forgiveness of sins depend on the word "repent", and not on being baptized. By changing his punctuation the meaning of his sentence is changed. Was this an accident on Harper's part?

American Bible Union translation: "Repent, and be immersed every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins."

Mr. Harper's quotation: "Repent and be immersed each of you UNTO the remission of sins." Notice he left out the comma after "repent" again. He also only quoted a part of the verse and left out the comma before the expression "unto the remission of sins." This translation also separates baptism from repentance and the remission of sins. The punctuation makes remission of sins depend upon "repent" and not "be baptized." All the while Mr. Harper is claiming that these are all with him. We naturally wonder why the change in punctuation in every case.

Dr. Williams' translation: "Peter said unto them, "You must repent—and, as an expression of it, let everyone of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ—that you may have your sins forgiven."

Mr. Harper's quotation: "Peter said unto them. You must repent and as an expression of it let everyone of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ that you may have your sins forgiven." Notice that Mr. Harper left out the dashes which Mr. Williams put after "repent" and "Jesus Christ." He also left out the comma after "and." Below I quote from a letter I received from Dr. Williams concerning the above quotation of Mr. Harper.

3518 Obispo

Tampa, Florida October 2., 1940.

Elder G. E. Jones

Neelyville, Mo.

Dear Bro. Jones:

Yours received concerning Mr. Harper's twisting of my translation of Acts 2:38. I am glad you wrote me to clarify it. . . .

Perhaps, he did not tell the folks how it was punctuated, which gives the INTERPRETATION. He gave my translation WORD FOR WORD. But as you quoted it to me, he did not PUNCTUATE IT AS I DID.

You can see at a glance, I am sure, with my punctuation, it does not substantiate the Campbellite claim that you MUST BE BAPTIZED THAT YOUR SINS MAY BE FORGIVEN, but THE BAPTIST POSITION (and the position of other evangelicals) that baptism is merely an "expression" or symbol of repentance and the work it does in the soul; that repentance is the indispensable condition of the FORGIVENESS OF SIN'S. The two dashes after "repent" and "Christ" separate baptism from forgiveness but make the clause, "That your sins may be forgiven," depend on "repent," not on "be baptized."

With good wishes, I am

Yours in Him Who loves us all,

Chas. B. Williams.

Dr. Weymouth's translation: " 'Repent,' replied Peter, `and be baptized, everyone of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit'."

Mr. Harper's quotation of the same: "Repent, replied Peter and be baptized, every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ FOR the remission of sins."

We notice that Mr. Harper leaves out two commas that Dr. Weymouth uses. He left one out just before "be baptized" and the one just before "for the remission of your sins."

The reader can see that in all six of these translations Mr. Harper changed the punctuation to suit himself. All of these translators have separated "repent" and "be baptized" with marks of punctuation. They knew that the number and person of these two verbs were different and that they could not be put in the same clause. By leaving out their punctuation marks where it is to his advantage Mr. Harper seeks to make it appear that these translators are with him. In these six different translations we find that Mr. Harper made 10 changes in the punctuation. After quoting from a number of translators and changing their punctuation, he says, "It's fine boys to keep company with such men." But we would like to know why Mr. Harper had to change the punctuation of all these translators to make them agree with Him. He boasts that scholars are with him. Mr. Williams, whom he brings in as one of his scholars, said Mr. Harper did not punctuate his translation as he did. He said his punctuation made forgiveness of sins depend on "repent" and not on "be baptized." I ask how can a man who wants to be fair, so handle the works of men and the truth? Does this show a desire for the truth, or to cover up the truth? If all this was accidental why did it always happen at the place where it would be to Mr. Harper's advantage? I exposed Mr. Harper on this in a debate. He claimed they were typographical errors. We naturally wonder why so many typographical errors on Acts 2:38 and all in his favor. I take these quotation from Mr. Harper's book which I have in my possession. He is an educated man. He knows that if the punctuation was left as these men gave it that his position goes down. So, to bolster a false, unscriptural theory, he changes the punctuation and jumbles the meaning of the translations. Such methods of handling the truth is enough to throw suspicion on Campbellism and condemn it as a false system. The truth does not have to be upheld by such questionable methods. Such methods are contrary to the Spirit of our Lord. It rather makes us think of the words Paul wrote about false teachers when he said, "The sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive," Eph. 4:14. Can such methods be prompted by the Spirit of God or have His approval? Do you not think that such as this needs to be exposed and the people need to be warned against it? Paul said, "We are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ," II Cor. 2:17. Now, reader, which spirit prompts such handling of the truth as seen above. Is it the Spirit of the Lord or it is the spirit of evil and darkness?

Instead of going into an analysis of Acts 2:38 as I have done above and showing how "repent" and "be baptized" are different in number and person and belong to two separate clauses the Campbellites try to make their play on the Greek preposition "Eis," which is translated "for" in Acts 2:38, by the King James translation, and "unto" by the Revised Version. They say that this preposition means "in order to" in this place and that it is always prospective or looking forward to something. They claim that it never means "because of." They claim that all scholars are with them. Well, let us see about that. In his "New Short Grammar of the Greek Testament," Dr. A. T. Robertson, A. M. D. D. LL. D., Litt. D., has the following to say about "Eis" in Acts 2:38: "Hence a case like Acts 2:38 eis aphesin ton hamartion can mean either on the basis of forgiveness of sins (cf, Mk. 1:4f. "Confessing their sins") or with a view to the forgiveness of sins. There is nothing in eis to compel either result." P-256. So, Dr. Robertson says it can either mean "On the basis of forgiveness" or "With a view to forgiveness of sins." He said there was nothing in EIS to compel either result. That being the case the whole meaning of the verse must be determined by the construction of the other part of the sentence. That is the very part that Campbellites avoid explaining. Dr. Robertson said it could mean "with a view to." To give the Campbellites the benefit of the doubt let us say that it means that here. Well, since this phrase cannot modify both "repent" and "be baptized." which shall it modify? If we make it modify "be baptized," then we throw out repentance as a condition of pardon. If we make it modify "repent" then we throw out baptism as a condition of pardon. The most sensible and Scriptural view would be to use it in the sense of "on the basis of" or "because of," and make it modify "be baptized." That would make repentance a condition of salvation and baptism a declarative act. We have already seen that the word "manifest" which means to declare, is connected with baptism, while receive is not.

Dr. John Pickering, LL.D. in his lexicon (1858 Adit. pages 269-70) says, "Eis preposition governing the accusative, direction toward, motion to, into—after; BECAUSE OF etc." (My capitals). Anthon's and Jacob's Greek Reader, p. 450, gives "on account of" as one of the uses of "Eis."

Now, let us examine the Bible itself to see how it uses this preposition. In Matt. 12:41, we read where Jesus said the Ninevites "Repented at (Gr. EIS) the preaching of Jonas. The word for "at" in this place is our Greek preposition "Eis." Let us make this word mean "in order to," then we would have the Ninevites repenting in order to the preaching of Jonas. Now, did they? Did it take their repentance to bring about the preaching of Jonas, or was it the other way around? Now, let us make "Eis" mean because of and we have them repenting because of Jonas' preaching. Now, reader, which did they do? Did they repent in order that Jonas might preach, or did they repent because of it?

Now, let us take another: "Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism (Eis) into death," Rom. 6:4. Here is our same Greek word "Eis" which Campbellites tell us is always prospective. It means "in order to," they say. Let us read it that way: "We are buried with Him by baptism (Eis) in order to death." Is that the way things are done? Are people buried in order to be dead? Now, let us read it "because of" and see how it sounds: "Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism (eis) because of death." Now, reader, which makes good common sense? Here we have a second example in the Bible where this preposition is used in the sense of "because of."

Here is a third example: "I indeed baptize you with water (Gr. Eis) unto repentance," Matt. 3:11. Here we have our same little Greek preposition "Eis." Since John demanded repentance before baptism he was not baptizing (Eis) unto repentance, to bring it about, but because they had already repented. So, we see that it means because of here. Campbellites feel the weight of this and say John was baptizing unto the reformation. But the word here is "metanoia." It is always translated repentance. "Repentance (metanoia) and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem," Luke 24:47. "A godly sorrow worketh repentance. (metaoia) to salvation," II Cor. 7:10. Paul said he testified to both Jews and Greeks repentance (metanoia) toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ." Acts 20:21. The word for reformation is another word. It is "diorothis." It is found in Heb. 9:10 where the writer told about meats, drinks, divers washings, and carnal ordinances imposed on them until the time of the reformation. So, the word in Matt. 3:11 is repentance and not reformation. So, John baptized (Eis) unto repentance, not to bring it about but because they had repented.

Now, let us place Matt. 3:11 and Acts 2:38 side by side and look at them. I give Acts 2:38 in the Revised Version.

"I indeed baptize you with water (Gr. Eis) UNTO REPENTANCE."

"Be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ (Gr. Eis) UNTO the remission of your sins."

We have the same preposition "Eis" in each verse. We have the same English preposition UNTO in both places. If we make baptism in order to receive remission of sins we also make baptism in order to repentance. If they were baptized because of repentance they were also baptized because of remission of sins.

Now one more thing before we leave our discussion of Acts 2:38. In Acts 2:37, we find that the people were pricked in their hearts. "Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their hearts, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles. Men and brethren, what shall we do? Do about what? The empty grave of Jesus and Peter's sermon and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit had convinced these people that Jesus whom they had condemned as an imposter was indeed the Christ. Confronted with the greatness of their sins they wanted to know what to do about the thing they had done. Peter told them to repent. That would make them right with God. But they had publicly condemned Jesus as an imposter. To set that right in the sight of men they should be baptized IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST. That would show forth to the world that they had repented or changed their minds and attitude toward Jesus. In their baptism in the name of JESUS CHRIST they would show forth to the world that they had repented or changed their minds and attitude toward Jesus. In their baptism in the name of JESUS CHRIST they would show that they now believed Him to be the Christ. In repentance they turned away from their former attitude. In faith they turn to Him for salvation. By being baptized they would declare to the world their change of mind and their belief that God had now forgiven their sins. Now, let us notice who was baptized on this occasion: "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized," Acts 2:41. Their sorrow of heart had given away to the joy of salvation. They were no longer pricked in heart, but were rejoicing in the Spirit. They were saved before baptism.

Galatians 3:27 and Romans 6:3

I shall consider these two proof texts next. They are similar and help to explain one another. I shall quote them and then take them up one at a time.

"As many of vou as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ," Gal. 3:27.

"Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into His death?" Rom. 6-:3.

Now, let us go into a study of Gal. 3:27. As usual, the Campbellites, when considering this verse, ignore the connecting verses. Let us read it with the verse above it: "For ye are all THE CHILDREN OF GOD by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." The antecedent of YOU in verse 27 is. "The children of God," in verse 26. So as many CHILDREN OF GOD as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

Let us notice that expression "PUT ON" Christ. In verse 24 above, Paul said, "The law was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ." Then he said, "After that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster," Gal. 3:25. Now, let us drop down a few verses and we will see the comparison that Paul is making. "Now I say, that the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all; but is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father. EVEN SO WE, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: but when the fulness of the time was come. God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons," Gal. 4:1-5. The Roman nobleman put his son, during his minority, under tutors or governors, also called schoolmasters. At a certain time selected by the father this young man was made free from the dominion of the schoolmaster. When he was free from this schoolmaster he put on a certain outward garment called the "Toga Virilis" or manly toga. The putting on of this toga declared him to be free from his schoolmaster. There were other kinds of togas. Candidates for office wore white togas to show that they were candidates. The mourner PUT ON a black toga to show mourning. The "TOGA PICTA" was a toga adorned with golden stars, and was worn by a great general. From this has come our present custom of army officers wearing bars and stars on their uniforms to show their rank. The custom of putting on black to signify mourning has also come on down to our day.

After Paul had told about the young heir being put under tutors and governors (or schoolmasters) until a certain time he went on to say, "EVEN SO WE, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world." Here he likens their former relationship to the law to that of the young heir whom his father had put under tutors and governors. When the young Roman heir became free from his schoolmaster he PUT ON his manly toga to declare his freedom. Now, follow the analogy of Paul. When the Galatians became free from the law, their schoolmaster, they were due to PUT ON something to declare that freedom. What was it? They PUT ON Christ in baptism. Here we have the origin of that expression PUT ON. All down through the centuries people have PUT ON certain garments to declare what they were or are. Policemen, bell-hops, nurses, trainmen, soldiers, sailors, bus drivers, mourners and others PUT ON certain kind of garments to show what they are.

Having seen that the expression PUT ON is used in a declarative way and having seen the origin of it and Paul's use of the analogy I shall show that it is children of God, and not lost people, who are commanded to PUT ON something. Paul addressed the Epistle to the Romans to the "Saints," Rom. 1:7. Then he tells those saints "PUT ye ON the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh to fufill the lusts thereof," Rom. 13:14. He tells the church at Colosse to "Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, etc.," Col. 3:12. He tells the Ephesians to "Put on the whole armor of God," Eph. 6:11. They were to show to the world that they were God's children by PUTTING ON mercy or showing mercy; by PUTTING ON a holy life; by PUTTING ON the whole armor; and by PUTTING ON Christ. So it is the child of God who is baptized into Christ and PUTS ON Christ. Again we have seen that baptism is declarative, and not procurative.

Campbellites try to make a play on the English prepositions "Into" and "Unto." They say "Unto" means a coming up to a thing, while "Into" means an actual entrance. They keep the people ignorant of the fact that both of these prepositions in the English came from the same Greek word, which is our word "Eis." If "UNTO" just means a coming up to a thing then try it on Acts 2:38. "Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ UNTO the remission of your sins." R. V. If "UNTO" is just merely an approach unto a thing and does not bring us into it then baptism would be merely an approach toward remission of sins and would not bring us into it. Now read Eph. 4:15, "But speaking the truth in love, may grow up `INTO' (Eis) Him in all things." Here we see the word INTO used. It speaks of growing up INTO (Eis) Christ. So, according to Campbellite logic, we only approach remission of sins when we are baptized UNTO remission of sins, Acts 2:38. (R. V.) We have not yet entered in. We must grow INTO Him. Since INTO and UNTO come from the same Greek word "Eis" this is just a play upon words on their part. Informed Campbellite preachers take advantage of people's lack of knowledge on this point. The Emphatic Diaglot translates Acts 10:43: "Whosoever believeth INTO (Eis) Him shall receive remission of sins." We receive remission of sins when we believe IN or INTO Him. Baptism is declarative, as we have seen. We are baptized into Christ symbolically. At that time the child of God PUTS ON the Lord and declares his freedom EVEN as the young Roman declared his freedom by PUTTING ON his toga.

Now, let us consider Rom. 6:3: "Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into His death." The Campbellites never consider this verse in the light of its connecting verses. First, let me say that this is the first place baptism is found in the Book of Romans. In all of Paul's discourse about justification he has no place for baptism until he comes to talk about how justified people shall live. He asks the question, "Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?" Then he answers, "God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?" Rom. 6:2. A burial usually follows a death. Sometimes a body may not be found to bury it. Some people are cremated and their ashes are scattered to the winds. But the usual thing is for a burial to follow soon after a death. Paul goes on to say, "Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism into death that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life," Rom. 6:4. Here baptism is likened to a burial. It is a picture of it. Since a death must come before a burial then we must first become dead to sin before we are buried by baptism. Now, Paul tells us in this connection, "He that is dead is freed from sin," Rom. 6:7. The revised version reads, "Justified from sin." If the one who is dead is freed from sin then we are freed from sin before baptism because we must be dead to sin before we are ready to be buried in baptism. It is death and not a burial that frees a man from the aches, pains and troubles of this life. So, it is our death to sin, not our burial in baptism that frees us from the old life of sin. Life to this present world ceases before we get to the place of burial. So does our life to the old way of sin and this world cease before we reach burial in baptism. If a child of God dies, the moment the spirit leaves the body, the body is dead. That spirit does not wait around until the body is buried until it is with Christ. To be absent from the body is to be present with Christ, II Cor. 5:6. There is no purgatory or mid-way stopping ground. So the moment one becomes dead to sin he enters a new life with Christ. Death has severed him from the old life. What then is his spiritual status between the time he has died to sin and the time he is buried in baptism? He has died to the sinful state, and cannot be reckoned there any more. Is he spiritually non-existent until he is buried? He cannot be counted of the world, for he has died to it. Where then shall he be placed in the meantime while he is waiting to be buried in baptism? What separates a man from this life anyway? Is it his burial, or his death which comes before the burial? What then separates a man from his old life of sins? Is it his burial by baptism, or is it his death to sin which comes before the burial? If then, he is separated from the old life of sin before baptism, unto what is he separated? Where is he? What is he? Is he non-existent in a spiritual way? If non-existent, is baptism the power that recreates him? Let Campbellites answer this.

Now, let us see how the death to sin is brought about. "Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with Him that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin," Rom. 6:6. Here we see the crucifixion of the old nature to be likened to the crucifixion of Jesus. We are said to be dead with Him. "If we be dead with Christ, we believe we shall also live with Him," Rom. 6:8. We are said to have been crucified with Him. We are said to be buried with Him. Now, how was the death of Christ brought about? It was through having His body crucified. That brought about His death for sin. Then our death to sin is brought about through our crucifixion. Christ's crucifixion came before His burial. So we must be crucified with Him and dead with Him before we are ready for our burial in baptism. And we read, "He that is dead is freed from sin," Rom. 6:7. So we are made free from sin before baptism? The moment Christ died on the cross His spirit went to paradise. It did not have to wait around until the body was buried. It was His death, not His burial that ushered Him into paradise. So our death to sin, and not our burial by baptism, ushers us into a new life with Christ.

But says one, what about the resurrection? I answer that if a man dies he shall be resurrected whether buried or not. In Jer. 25:33, we read of the slain who shall not be gathered, nor buried. Will they not be raised? What about the one whose body has been burned to ashes and never found? He has not been buried. He will have no grave from which to come forth. What about the one who dies just a few minutes or hours before the Lord returns? Every hour of time some of God's children die somewhere. They will not have time to be buried. Will they not have a resurrection? Jesus raised the widow's son from the dead the same as He did Lazarus. Lazarus had been buried, but this man had not. No one will be resurrected because he has been buried, but because he has died. As surely as one dies that surely he will have a resurrection. As surely as a child of God dies he will be in the better resurrection. He may never have a burial but he will be in the resurrection of God's people. Even so our death with Christ, not our burial with Him in baptism guarantees that we shall also live with Him in a glorified body. "Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him," Rom. 6:8. The moment the body of Christ became dead on the cross, and His spirit was separated from it, that moment His spirit lived in paradise. His spirit did not have to wait until they buried His body before it entered paradise. Even so the very moment our old man became dead to sin through the crucifixion of the flesh, that moment we were spiritually alive to God. "Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord," Rom. 6:11. There is an interval of time between when a man dies and when he is buried. There is also an interval of time between when we die to sin and the time we are buried with Christ in baptism. But there is no interval of time between when one becomes dead in the body and when he becomes present with the Lord in the other world. His spirit is not in the body any longer. It is dead or separated from the body. Then where is it? It certainly does not wait until the body is buried before it enters the spirit world to be with Christ. If so, the man whose body may not be found for months will have to linger a long time between the dead body and the paradise of God. So then the very moment we became dead to sin we became alive unto God. There is no interval of time between. Then we bury the man in baptism to show forth the death to sin, not to bring about that death. We bring the man up out of the water to show that he is alive unto God, not to make him alive.

Thus we see that Campbellism does not have a leg to stand on. It is unscriptural unreasonable and contradictory. Since the one who is dead is freed from sin (Rom. 6:7), then he is either freed from sin before baptism, or he is buried in baptism to bring about his death to sin. It is absurd to think that a man is buried to bring about his death. That is not the way it is done. He is first dead, then buried. Campbellites reverse the order. They would bury him to bring about his death. Only people blinded by the god of this world could swallow such an unscriptural, unreasonable theory. They are not consistent with themselves. Let one of their members die and call upon the preacher to hold the funeral service and he will preach that the spirit of that dead person is right then in heaven with Christ. He does not have the spirit waiting until the body is buried to be in paradise. But he will turn around and teach that one who has died to sin has not yet entered into a new life with God until the burial takes place. Why can people be so blinded by a false theory as to lose all reasoning powers?

From what we have learned above we see that we are buried by baptism because of a death. A burial is always because of a death. So we are buried by baptism BECAUSE OF death to sin. Who said baptism was not BECAUSE OF? John baptized them (Eis) because of repentance, Matt. 3:11. We are buried by baptism (Eis) because of death. Then they must have been baptized in Acts 2:38 BECAUSE OF remission of sins.

Romans 6:17 and 18

"But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became servants of righteousness."

Campbellites think that baptism is in this passage. There is no hint of baptism in this verse. Let us outline the passage. First they were servants of sin.  Next, they obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine delivered them. When they obeyed that form of doctrine they were made FREE FROM SIN. At the same time they were made free from sin they became servants of righteousness. They were not servants of righteousness before they became free, but they became servants of righteousness when they were made free. So, before they were made free they were not servants of righteousness. How then could they be baptized, an act of righteousness, before they became a servant of righteousness? Jesus taught that baptism was an act of righteousness. He said to John the Baptist, "Thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness," Matt. 3:14. Campbellites take a lost man, an unrighteous man, a servant of sin, and demand a righteous act out of him. The verses under consideration show us that he is not a servant of righteousness until he is freed from sin. Hence he is not ready for baptism, an act of righteousness, until he is freed from sin. So, instead of this teaching what Campbellites claim, it teaches the very opposite. Strange, strange that they see backwards in the reverse order. No wonder they believe in the burial before the death. I read one time of a boy whose natural eyesight was inverted. He saw everything upside down. That is the way of Campbellites.

Now, let us go on down in this same chapter and we will clinch this argument. For some reason the Campbellites never get down that far. Yet Paul is talking about one and the same thing, that is, being made free from sin: "For when ye were servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness. What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death. But now BEING MADE FREE FROM SIN, and become servants to God, ye have YOUR FRUIT' unto holiness, and the end everlasting life," Rom. 6:20-22. Here we see that they had no fruit as long as they were servants of sin. They had no good fruit until they had been made free from sin and had become God's servants. So the freedom from sin comes before good fruit. John the Baptist demanded good fruit before he would baptize one. "Then said he to the multitudes that came forth to be baptized of him, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance,—every tree therefore which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down and cast into the fire," Luke 3:7-9. From this we see that John demanded good fruit before baptism. From the passage quoted above we see that one has no good fruit until he is made free from sin. Freedom from sin comes before good fruit. Good fruit comes before baptism. Therefore freedom from sin comes before baptism. So, baptism is not that which makes us free from sin, nor any part of it.

Jesus said, "No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one and despise the other," Matt. 6:24. He cannot be the servant of sin, and at the same time the servant of God. He must be freed from one master before he can serve the other. If a man has belonged to one master he does not become the servant of a second master until he is freed from the first one. Therefore, he cannot serve the second one until he has been freed from the first one. Sin was our first master. Jesus is the second. We could not serve Jesus, the second, until we were free from sin, the first master. So freedom from sin must come before we can render one act of service to Jesus. So we must be free from sin before we are ready for baptism. We are not saved by service. We are saved TO service. Campbellites have a slave of one master trying to serve a second master to be made free from the first one. The Bible teaches we must first be freed and made the Lord's servants before we can serve. "How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, PURGE YOUR CONSCIENCE from dead works TO SERVE the living God?" Heb. 9:14. We are purged by the blood of Christ TO SERVE. The purging comes before the serving.

If a man loves God he is saved. "The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us," Rom. 5:5. So we must have the Spirit before we have the love of God in our hearts. The Campbellites take the lost man who does not love God and baptize him. He is still not freed from sin. He is still the Devil's servant. He cannot yet serve Christ because he is not free from his first master, the Devil. So he goes all the way to the water serving the Devil. He goes into the water the Devil's servant and serving him. He goes under the water as the Devil's servant and serving him. The preacher brings him up and presto, change, he is made the servant of God. God had nothing to do with his salvation. He went to the water serving the Devil. The preacher baptized him and he is changed. The Devil and the preacher did it all. What a glorious doctrine is Campbellism!

MARK 16:16

"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned."

Campbellites see only the salvation of the soul in this. And then they do not believe even that. They think that he may be saved, but they are not sure about that. They think no one is saved but their people, and they are not so sure that they will be saved.

Both real salvation and symbolic salvation are under consideration in the above verse. In it we have both the substance and the shadow. We have both the tree and its figure. We learn from I Peter 3:20-2.1, that baptism is a figure. Here Peter tells us the long suffering of God "Waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. THE LIKE FIGURE whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (NOT THE PUTTING AWAY of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ." The Campbellites do not like to quote the part which tells us that baptism does not put away the filth of the flesh. What is the flesh? It is the word for the old sinful lost state in which the man is who has not been born again. The Word of God reads," They that are in the flesh cannot please God," Rom. 8:8. So it has reference, not to the body, but to the unsaved man. When Peter says baptism does not put away the filth of the flesh, he is telling us that baptism did not put away the sins of the old man. "He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still," Rev. 22:11. From this we see that the holy man is the righteous man and the filthy man is the unjust man.

We have seen from the above that baptism does not put away the filth or sins of the flesh. We have seen that it is a figure like unto the flood waters in Noah's day. Noah was in the ark which he prepared to the saving of his house before the water of the flood came. In Heb. 11:7, we read that Noah "Prepared an ark to the saving of his house." So, salvation was in the ark. Noah and his family were in this ark seven days before the water of the flood came and God had shut them in. "There went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male and the female, as God had commanded Noah. And it came to pass after seven days, that the waters of the flood were upon the earth," Gen. 7:9-10. "And they that went in, went in male and female of all flesh, as the Lord had commanded him: and the Lord shut him in," Gen. 7:16. So Noah and his family were in the ark, the place of safety, before the water came. Those who did not get into the place of safety before they got into the water got in the water alright, but they never reached the place of safety. This shows that we must be in Christ before baptism. Noah was in the ark before the water came. So are we in Christ before baptism.

Since baptism does not put away the filth or sins of the flesh, and since it is a figure like to that of the flood, then it saves only in a figure. He that believeth is saved in reality. Paul said to the jailor, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved," Acts 16:31. He that is baptized is saved in a figure.

The last part of Mark 16:16 reads, "He that believeth NOT shall be damned." Now, let us read this in connection with John 3:18. "He that believeth on the Son is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, BECAUSE he hath not believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God." The unbeliever is condemned BECAUSE he has not believed. The one who has believed is not condemned. So we see that unbelief is the cause of one being condemned. When he ceases to be an unbeliever and becomes a believer he is not condemned. So the one who believes is saved in reality. The one who, as a believer, is baptized, is saved in a figure.

ACTS 22:16

"Arise and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord."

These words were spoken to Paul by Ananias. We have found that baptism is just a figure. So Paul was to wash away his sins figuratively by being baptized. He was born again on the road to Damascus. In speaking of those who had seen the Lord after His resurrection, Paul said, "Last of all He was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time," I Cor. 15:8. He could not have referred to his first birth. He did not see the Lord then. So he was talking about his new birth which took place on the Damascus road the day he saw the Lord. That should settle the matter. Peter says that baptism does not put away the filth of the flesh. So Paul's sins were first washed away by the blood of Christ. He washed them away in a figure later. "Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water." The order is to first have the heart sprinkled from an evil conscience. Then comes the washing of the body with pure water. What purges the conscience? "How much more shall the blood of Christ, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God." So we see the blood first cleanses the heart and conscience. Then after that comes the water.

JOHN 3:5

"Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God."

This passage does not even hint at baptism. Christ is talking about a birth. A birth is one thing and a burial is another. While Jesus does not sav; "Except a man be baptized of water and the Spirit." we will read it that way since the Campbellites think this is baptism. If born of water in this verse is water baptism, then born of the Spirit in the same verse is Holy Spirit baptism. That would give us two baptisms. Paul says, "One Lord, one faith, one baptism," Eph. 4:5. To make born read baptism here would give us two baptisms. The Campbellites would have to have Holy Spirit baptism also to be saved. They deny that. So they must concede that Jesus is not talking about baptism here. A Campbellite said to me once "if Jesus did not mean water, why did He say water?" I said, "If Jesus meant baptism why did He not say baptism?" He did not say be baptized of water in this verse.

John was said to baptize in water, Matt. 3:11, "I indeed baptize you in water." (R. V.) But no where do we read about people being baptized of water. Born of water in John 3:5 is "Ek hudatos" and is genetive case. The baptized in water in Matt. 3:11 is "Ev hudati" and is in the dative case.

We find the water of which a man is born in John 4:10-14. Here Jesus said to the Samaritan woman, "If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldst have asked of Him, and He would have given thee living water." This was not literal water Jesus was to give to the woman, but spiritual or living water. Here is water that has life. Life comes from life. A thing cannot be born of a lifeless thing or object. The water in Jacob's well and the kind in the creek was not living water. The kind Jesus was to give was living. It could impart life and bring about a spiritual birth. Jesus went on to say, "Whosoever shall drink of this water (literal water) shall thirst again: but whosoever shall drink of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but it shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life." In the new birth we are born of God and partake of His life which is everlasting life. Well, Jesus said this living water in Him would be the thing that sprung up into everlasting life. 1-11 the new birth, we are born of God and receive everlasting life. So, since this living water which Jesus gives brings about everlasting life, it is the water that brings about the new birth about which Jesus spoke in John 3:3-5.

The Blind Man Healed

Sometimes Campbellites bring up the case of the blind man whose eyes were opened by washing them to prove their point. They snatch at anything to bolster a faltering cause. But as usual they get caught. We find the case of this blind man in John 9:1-38. This man was born blind. "And as Jesus was passing by, He saw a man which was blind from his mother's womb," John 9:1. This man came into this world blind, so he is a picture of the sinner who is spiritually blind from his birth. That teaches too much for Campbellites. That is old fashioned Bible doctrine of natural depravity. Jesus anointed his eyes and sent him to the pool of Siloam to wash. The man was still unable to see when he went to the water to wash. Does this represent a candidate for baptism? Then the candidate for baptism is spiritually blind. Mr. Harper in trying to answer an article of mine, said in his book, concerning II Cor. 4:3, 4: "Notice it did not say that the gospel is hid to them that are lost. He said, 'If it be hid, it is hid to them that are lost'." So you see that Mr. Harper does not believe the lost man, the candidate he has for baptism, is spiritually blind. Well, this man who went to the pool of Siloam to wash was literally blind. If this represents the candidate for baptism the candidate goes to the water in a blinded state. Will Campbellites have it? No. Will they have it that men are born spiritually blind as this man was born naturally blind? No. Mr. Harper said (page 11), "They have become blinded. They were not born that way." Well, this blind man whose eyes Jesus opened was born blind. If he represents the sinner seeking salvation then his being born blind shows that the lost man is spiritually blind from birth. Their man represents too much for them.

We notice that the water was only applied to the eyes of this blind man and it removed his blindness. His eyes were opened and he could see. This then represents the opening of the lost man's understanding, by the Spirit of God. "But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which veil is done away in Christ. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the veil is won their heart. Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away. Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty," II Cor. 3:1.4-17. This shows us that the Spirit of God removes the veil from over man's heart when his heart turns to the Lord. So instead of representing baptism this pictures the work of the Holy Spirit in removing the blindness from the understanding of the sinner, which blindness he has had from his birth.