The Spoils of the Servant: How Isaiah 53:12 and Ephesians 1:3 Tell One Story

Brent Pollard

Picture a king returning from battle in the ancient world. His enemies have been defeated. Behind him stretches a long train of wagons, loaded with gold, grain, armor—everything his enemies once owned and will never see again. No one in that city fought for the king’s victory, but everyone eats from it. The battle was his; the bounty is theirs.

Scripture describes such a victory in two places, each from a different vantage point. Isaiah 53.12 stands beside the Victor: “Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great, and He will divide the [spoil] with the strong; because He poured out Himself to death, and was numbered with the transgressors; yet He Himself bore the sin of many, and interceded for the transgressors.”

Ephesians 1.3 stands among those who receive the spoil: “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ.”

Paul isn’t quoting Isaiah in Ephesians 1. Yet Isaiah’s picture of a triumphant Servant holding spoil and Paul’s picture of believers blessed with every spiritual blessing in the ascended Christ belong to the same story.

Isaiah’s Vantage Point: What the Victory Cost the Servant

Isaiah tells the story from the Servant’s perspective, and it turns on two words. The first is “because.” The reward has a reason; the crown has a cause. Isaiah names four costly things the Servant did.

He poured out His soul unto death. Unlike the familiar image of a conqueror who defeats others, this Servant triumphs through self-giving. He did not prevail by shedding others’ blood, but by pouring out His own soul. He was numbered with the transgressors. At the center cross, the world saw a criminal die alongside criminals (Mark 15.27). He bore the sin of many. The Servant did more than defeat our enemies; He carried our guilt. And He interceded for the transgressors, praying even as He died: “Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing” (Luke 23.34).

The second word is “therefore.” “Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great, and He will divide the [spoil] with the strong.” Portion. Spoil. The great. The strong. This is the language of the battlefield—the vocabulary of a conquering king returning with plunder. Isaiah deliberately applies it to the Man who poured out His soul unto death. The world saw a condemned criminal; the Father saw a Conqueror returning home.

Isaiah’s account ends with the Servant’s hands full, but it does not yet reveal what they hold.

Paul’s Vantage Point: What the Victory Won for Us

The New Testament shows us what the exalted Christ does with His victory. Psalm 68.18 says, “You have ascended on high, You have led captive Your captives; You have received gifts among men.” Paul cites that very psalm in Ephesians 4.8 and applies it to the ascended Lord Jesus: “When He ascended on high, He led captive a host of captives, and He gave gifts to men.” The risen Christ receives—and the risen Christ gives. He returns from the campaign with His hands full and opens them to His people.

Ephesians 1 tells the story from the receiving end. First, the blessings are “in Christ”—that little phrase is the key. These aren’t scattered gifts we hunt down one by one; they’re everything the Father gives us in His Son, and we have them because we’re joined to Him. Second, they are “every spiritual blessing”—not some, not most, but every one. Third, they are “in the heavenly places”—blessings from the realm where Christ now reigns.

Isaiah counts the cost. Paul takes inventory. And item by item, the inventory is measured against the cost.

Where Isaiah 53 and Ephesians 1 Meet

The Elect Servant and a chosen people. “…He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him.” (Ephesians 1.4). The choice is made “in Him.” And who is God’s chosen One? Isaiah tells us: “Behold, My Servant… My chosen one in whom My soul delights” (Isaiah 42.1). The cross did not create the Father’s love; it reveals a love that was already there. Those counted among the transgressors become sons whom the Father adopts (Ephesians 1.5).

The Sin-Bearer and our redemption. “In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace” (Ephesians 1.7). Set Isaiah 53.12 beside that verse: “He Himself bore the sin of many.” The connection between these passages runs deep. The spoil the Servant shares includes pardons. The plunder won at the cross includes the cancellation of our record—the “certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us,” nailed to His cross (Colossians 2.14).

The Servant’s portion and our inheritance. In Him, “also we have obtained an inheritance” (Ephesians 1.11). The Servant receives “a portion with the great”—and in Him, we receive an inheritance. Paul makes the same point to the Romans: “if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ” (Romans 8.17). What belongs to the Victor belongs to His people. The portion is His; its enjoyment is ours.

The Victor’s gift and our seal. Believers “were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession” (Ephesians 1.13–14). At Pentecost, Peter preached, “Therefore, having been exalted to the right hand of God and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He has poured forth this which you both see and hear” (Acts 2.33). Exalted, having received, poured out: the Spirit is the Victor’s gift and the first installment of what He won. Some of the spoil is already in hand; some still lies ahead.

One Story, Two Vantage Points

Set the two passages side by side, and the story reads as a great reversal. He was numbered among the transgressors — so that, in Him, transgressors could be adopted as sons. He poured out His soul unto death — so that we could be blessed with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places. He bore the sin of many — so that, in Him, we could have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins. He received a portion with the great — so that, in Him, we who were weak could obtain an inheritance. His suffering, our blessing. His victory, our inheritance. His grace, our praise.

Neither passage tells the whole story on its own. Isaiah without Ephesians shows a victory whose spoil we never see shared; Ephesians without Isaiah reveals a treasury whose cost we never count. Read together, they show what the blessings cost and what that cost bought—all of it, as Paul says three times, “to the praise of His glory” (Ephesians 1.6, 12, 14).

What Is Partial Preterism? Matthew 24, AD 70, and Christ’s Return

Brent Pollard

In a previous article, I argued that the church is Christ’s kingdom, established at Pentecost, ruled by the risen King, and not deferred until a future earthly millennium.

This understanding also shapes how I approach prophecy. I favor a partial-preterist reading: many passages often understood as referring to our future describe events that have already been fulfilled, particularly judgments involving first-century Jerusalem and the enemies who opposed the early church. “Preterist” refers to past fulfillment. “Partial” distinguishes these fulfilled judgments from Christ’s still-future return, bodily resurrection, final judgment, and everlasting consummation.

Matthew 24 and the Destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70

Matthew 24 must first be understood in its original context. Jesus had announced the temple’s destruction, prompting His disciples to ask about it (Matthew 24.1–3). His warning told people in Judea to flee and addressed concerns about rooftops, fields, pregnancy, winter, and travel on the Sabbath (verses 15–20). He also said that “all these things” would be fulfilled within “this generation” (verse 34). These details should guide our interpretation before we connect the passage to modern headlines.

Luke’s parallel makes the historical setting especially clear: Jerusalem’s encirclement by armies would signal its impending desolation (Luke 21.20–24). I understand these warnings to refer to the catastrophe that culminated in Jerusalem’s destruction in AD 70. That destruction vindicated Jesus’ prophetic warning; it did not establish a kingdom that had not existed before. His kingdom already existed.

Understanding “Coming” Language in Bible Prophecy

Prophetic language should also be understood against its Old Testament background. Isaiah describes God’s judgment on Egypt as the Lord riding on a cloud (Isaiah 19.1), a phrase that can refer to God intervening in history without implying a visible bodily descent. Likewise, Daniel 7.13–14 depicts the Son of Man approaching the Ancient of Days to receive dominion and moving toward the heavenly throne. These passages caution against treating every reference to divine “coming” as the same description of the final return.

Revelation’s Message to Its First-Century Readers

Revelation also spoke to real congregations facing real pressures. Its opening and closing affirm that the events it reveals were near (Revelation 1.1–3; 22.6, 10)—a point that mattered to its first readers. Its images must be understood in the context of their world before being applied to ours. Christians may differ over particular symbols, the book’s date, and how much it concerns Jerusalem or Rome, yet still recognize that its message spoke directly to the churches that first received it.

Partial Preterism vs. Full Preterism: What Is Still Future

Partial preterism doesn’t mean every promise has already been fulfilled, nor is it another term for amillennialism. The former concerns how prophecy is fulfilled; the latter concerns the interpretation of the millennium. The two can be compatible, but each conclusion must be established from the relevant passages.

For that reason, the claim that “everything is fulfilled except the second coming” needs qualification. Christ’s return involves events that are still genuinely future: the dead will be raised, everyone will face judgment, and death itself will be abolished (John 5.28–29; Acts 17.31; 1 Corinthians 15.26, 51–54). These promises cannot be reduced to the fall of a city or a change in covenantal circumstances.

Full preterism crosses that boundary by placing the final coming and resurrection in the past—a conclusion I reject. Paul condemned the claim that the resurrection had already taken place (2 Timothy 2.17–18). Our hope includes the redemption of our bodies (Romans 8.23), and Jesus promised to return (Acts 1.9–11). The Christian’s future holds more than the indefinite continuation of present suffering.

Already and Not Yet: Christ’s Kingdom and His Return

The kingdom’s present reality and future fulfillment therefore belong together. Christ already holds all authority (Matthew 28.18), yet we still await the defeat of every enemy. His church already enjoys forgiveness, reconciliation, and citizenship under His rule, yet we still await resurrection life beyond the reach of death.

Paul’s sequence in 1 Corinthians 15.23–28 is decisive for my understanding: Christ’s people are raised at His coming, and then the end comes, when He delivers the kingdom to the Father. His reign continues until every enemy is subdued. The passage points to the completion of His royal work. He returns with a kingdom to deliver, and death is the last enemy to be destroyed.

Living as Citizens of Christ’s Kingdom Today

This conviction gives the church both dignity and responsibility: we already belong to the King. Our worship, obedience, holiness, love, and proclamation of the gospel express an allegiance we already owe. Jesus said His kingdom draws neither its authority nor its methods from this world (John 18.36). Its spiritual character does not make its demands on our lives any less real.

The church is God’s redeemed assembly, the people of His Son’s kingdom. It was part of His eternal purpose, established under the risen Christ, and entrusted with proclaiming His victory. We await the King’s return even as we confess His authority.

The throne is occupied. The kingdom is here, and the King will come again.

Is the Church the Kingdom of God? Why Christ Reigns Now (Part 1 of 2)

Brent Pollard

Jesus succeeded in establishing His kingdom. The church is not just a temporary solution or a substitute for God’s original plan. Christ reigns today, and His church is made up of people redeemed by His blood who live under His authority.

This belief shapes how I see both the church and biblical prophecy. I do not expect a future earthly millennium where Jesus will start the kingdom He spoke about. I also do not think that denying such a millennium means denying the kingdom itself. The kingdom is real. Its King reigns. Its citizens are already here.

Church and Kingdom: Two Descriptions of One Redeemed People

When we say the church is the kingdom, it helps to see what each term highlights. “Church” refers to Christ’s gathered people. The Greek word ekklēsia means “assembly,” and the New Testament describes this as people God has called through the gospel, out of darkness and into His light (2 Thessalonians 2.14; 1 Peter 2.9). “Kingdom” focuses on Christ’s royal authority and those He rules. The church is these redeemed people seen as an assembly, while the kingdom is the same people seen under Christ’s rule.

These words do not always mean the same thing in every Bible passage. God’s rule covers all creation, even those who resist Him. But when we talk about Christ’s redeemed people on earth, we are not talking about two different groups with separate futures. The people Christ saves and adds to His church are the same ones He brings into His kingdom.

Jesus brought these ideas together. In Matthew 16.18–19, He promised to build His church and then promised to give Peter the keys of the kingdom. This shows a clear link between the community He would build and the kingdom that the gospel would welcome people into. If we separate the church from the kingdom by thousands of years, we lose that connection.

When Did the Kingdom Come? From Mark 9.1 to Pentecost

The timing is important. In Mark 9.1, Jesus said that some people standing with Him would live to see God’s kingdom come in power. Even if the transfiguration that follows is a preview of His glory, this promise means the kingdom would arrive during the lives of those listening. It does not make sense to say the kingdom would wait thousands of years to be established.

Acts tells us that the risen Christ promised the Spirit’s power (Acts 1.8), which was fulfilled at Pentecost (Acts 2.1–4). Peter explained Jesus’ resurrection and exaltation by referring to God’s promise about David’s throne and to Psalm 110 (Acts 2.29–36). On that same day, those who accepted the gospel repented, were baptized, and the Lord added them to His people (Acts 2.38–47). These passages together show that Pentecost was when the church was established under the risen King.

New Testament Evidence That Christ’s Kingdom Exists Now

Other New Testament passages clearly show that the kingdom exists now. Paul told Christians that God had already moved them into His Son’s kingdom (Colossians 1.13). John said he shared in the kingdom with his readers, even while they faced hardship (Revelation 1.9). Hebrews says believers are receiving an unshakable kingdom (Hebrews 12.28). These Christians were already citizens of a real kingdom, not just waiting for one to be created.

Amillennialism and Revelation 20: Christ’s Reign and the Thousand Years

This is why I think the term “amillennialism” can be confusing. It might sound like it simply denies the millennium, and maybe even the kingdom. But this view actually affirms that Christ is reigning now. It sees the thousand years in Revelation 20 as a symbol for the full period of Christ’s reign and His people sharing in His victory, not as a literal future period of exactly one thousand years on earth.

Revelation uses many symbols, like a dragon, beasts, lampstands, a chain, and numbers. Interpreting the thousand years as a symbol fits with this style. The real question is what the symbol means. In this view, John’s vision encourages persecuted Christians that even death cannot take away their life and victory with their King. The martyrs who seem defeated by earthly rulers actually live and reign with Christ.

Satan’s binding has a clear purpose: to limit his ability to deceive the nations (Revelation 20.1–3). This does not mean he is completely inactive. Peter still warned Christians about the devil’s dangerous activity (1 Peter 5.8), which does not go against Christ’s victory over him. Satan’s power is limited, his opposition continues, and his final defeat is certain. The spread of the gospel around the world shows that the enemy cannot keep the earth away from Christ.

For these reasons, I do not believe in a future earthly millennium, but this does not mean I deny the kingdom or Christ’s victory. I also do not accept the postmillennial idea that a golden age must happen before Christ returns. The church’s confidence is based on Christ’s current authority and His promised return, not on the idea that the world must first become mostly Christian.

Was the Kingdom Postponed? Why the Church Is Not Plan B

My main objection is to the idea of a postponed kingdom, especially as taught in classical dispensational premillennialism. This view says that because Israel rejected the kingdom, God delayed its establishment and the church filled the gap in the meantime. Not all premillennialists believe this, and those who do usually affirm God’s sovereignty and foreknowledge. My issue is with the explanation itself: the Bible shows the church as the fulfillment of God’s purpose, not as a backup plan because He could not establish His kingdom.

Ephesians 3.10–11 places God’s work through the church within His eternal purpose, fulfilled in Christ. Acts 2.23 shows that even the crucifixion was part of God’s predetermined plan. The cross was not an emergency response to an unforeseen rejection. Through the very event in which His enemies seemed to triumph, Christ defeated the powers opposing Him (Colossians 2.15; Hebrews 2.14).

I cannot see how Christ’s victory fits with the idea that the church is just a substitute for a kingdom that Satan and human unbelief managed to stop. If opposition could block the promised kingdom once, what would make it succeed the next time? Those who support postponement would say God was not frustrated. Still, I think the New Testament gives a better answer: God fulfilled His purpose through Jesus’ rejection and crucifixion. The King rose, ascended, and now reigns.

To be continued…

Baptism And Salvation: What Does The Bible Actually Teach

Today’s blog post is much longer than usual, but I believe it will be a resource that you will want to download and keep as a helpful tool to refer back to.

Carl Pollard

There are few subjects in Christianity that generate as much disagreement as baptism. Nearly everyone who professes to follow Jesus acknowledges that baptism is important. Most agree that Jesus commanded it, that the apostles practiced it, and that Christians should submit to it. The disagreement begins when we ask a much more specific question: What does baptism actually accomplish, and what relationship does it have to salvation?

Some believe baptism is an outward demonstration of a salvation that has already occurred. Others believe it is a symbolic testimony of faith, an ordinance that Christians obey after being saved. Still others teach that baptism is the moment at which God forgives sins, unites a believer with Christ, and brings that person into a new relationship with Him.

These positions can’t all be correct in every respect. They make different claims about what God does, when He does it, and what He requires of those who come to Him.

Our responsibility is to examine those claims in light of Scripture.

The question deserves more than a few isolated verses. We need to consider the teachings of Jesus, the preaching of the apostles, the conversions recorded in Acts, and the explanations of salvation found throughout the New Testament. We also need to understand how baptism relates to grace, faith, repentance, confession, the blood of Christ, and the work of the Holy Spirit.

And we must be willing to ask difficult questions of our own understanding.

If the Bible teaches that baptism is necessary for the forgiveness of sins, we must accept that teaching regardless of how unpopular it becomes. If the Bible teaches that baptism merely follows salvation, we must accept that instead. Our convictions should be determined by the meaning of Scripture.

Jesus said in John 12:48 that His word will judge us on the last day. That makes the words of Christ and His inspired apostles the standard by which every teaching must be measured.

1. We Must Begin With the Authority of Jesus

Before considering what baptism accomplishes, we need to establish who has the authority to determine its purpose.

Following His resurrection, Jesus said, 

“All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.” (Matthew 28:18–20)

Notice how Jesus introduces this command. He begins by declaring that all authority belongs to Him.

The command to baptize comes directly from the risen Lord, who possesses authority over heaven and earth. Baptism was therefore part of the mission Jesus entrusted to His apostles. They were commanded to make disciples, baptize them, and teach them to obey everything He had commanded.

Mark records another statement of Jesus, “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” (Mark 16:16)

There is a textual issue worth acknowledging. Mark 16:9–20 is absent from some of the earliest Greek manuscripts, and many modern translations identify this passage as textually disputed. Consequently, our understanding of baptism should not depend exclusively on Mark 16:16.

Nevertheless, the relationship between faith, baptism, and salvation expressed in this verse is also addressed in undisputed New Testament passages.

Matthew 28 establishes that baptism is commanded by Jesus. Acts 2:38 connects baptism with forgiveness. Acts 22:16 connects it with the washing away of sins. Romans 6 connects it with participation in Christ’s death and resurrection. Galatians 3 connects it with putting on Christ. First Peter 3:21 explicitly says that baptism saves.

The question is whether we will allow these passages to speak with their full force.

2. What Is Baptism?

The Greek word commonly translated baptize is baptizō, which frequently carries the meaning of immersing, dipping, or submerging. The word itself should be understood in its context, but the New Testament’s descriptions of Christian baptism strongly support immersion in water.

Consider what happened when Philip baptized the Ethiopian official, “And they both went down into the water, Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him. And when they came up out of the water…” (Acts 8:38–39)

Both men went into the water, and both came out afterward.

John 3:23 tells us that John the Baptist was baptizing at Aenon near Salim because “water was plentiful there.” While John’s baptism was preparatory and distinct from baptism into Christ, the description is consistent with immersion.

Paul’s language provides another important connection, “We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.” (Romans 6:4)

Paul describes baptism as a burial and resurrection.

Colossians 2:12 similarly speaks of believers being “buried with him in baptism” and raised with Him through faith in God’s powerful working.

Immersion provides a particularly fitting expression of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ.

The biblical pattern is a believer being immersed in water in response to the gospel of Jesus Christ.

The New Testament does not prescribe a particular river, pool, building, or baptistry. The significance lies in what Christ has commanded and what God promises to do.

3. Baptism and the Forgiveness of Sins: Acts 2:38

On the Day of Pentecost, Peter preached to a Jewish audience in Jerusalem. He demonstrated from Scripture that Jesus was the promised Messiah and declared that the very Jesus they had crucified had been made both Lord and Christ. The audience was deeply convicted. “Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, ‘Brothers, what shall we do?'” (Acts 2:37)

Their question was urgent. They recognized their guilt and wanted to know how to respond.

Peter answered:

“Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” (Acts 2:38)

We should carefully observe several details.

First, Peter commanded repentance and baptism. Both were included in his answer.

Second, the command applied to “every one of you.” Peter did not describe baptism as an optional practice for particularly committed believers.

Third, Peter connected repentance and baptism with “the forgiveness of your sins.”

Fourth, he attached the promise of the Holy Spirit to this response.

The Greek phrase translated “for the forgiveness of your sins” is eis aphesin tōn hamartiōn. The preposition eis commonly indicates movement toward a goal or result, although its meaning depends on context.

The identical expression “for the forgiveness of sins” appears in Matthew 26:28, where Jesus says His blood is poured out for the forgiveness of sins. In that passage, the phrase naturally expresses the purpose or result of His sacrifice.

The most straightforward reading of Acts 2:38 is that Peter commands his hearers to repent and be baptized with forgiveness of sins in view.

Some object that eis should be understood as “because of,” making baptism a response to forgiveness already received.

However, this interpretation faces difficulties.

Peter’s audience had just asked what they needed to do in response to their guilt. Peter’s answer directs them toward forgiveness. Nothing in the immediate context says their sins had already been forgiven.

Others point out that “repent” is grammatically plural while “be baptized” is singular. That distinction is true, but it does not establish that baptism is unrelated to forgiveness. The singular command distributes the action individually to each person, while the promise of forgiveness concerns the people being addressed.

The verse connects both repentance and baptism to the response Peter commands.

What happened next?

“So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls.” (Acts 2:41)

They heard the gospel, accepted Peter’s message, and were baptized.

The text never describes these people as having already received forgiveness and then being baptized simply to announce it publicly.

Instead, baptism is presented as part of their immediate response to the gospel.

If baptism had no connection to receiving forgiveness, why did Peter include it in his direct answer to people asking what they needed to do?

4. Saul of Tarsus: Why Was a Believing, Praying Man Told to Be Baptized?

The conversion of Saul is particularly important because Scripture provides several accounts of the same event.

In Acts 9, Saul encountered the risen Jesus on the road to Damascus.

He became convinced that Jesus was Lord. He obeyed the instruction to enter Damascus and wait for further direction.

For three days he was blind, neither eating nor drinking (Acts 9:9).

Acts 9:11 also tells us that Saul was praying.

Consider his condition. Saul believed that Jesus had risen. He recognized His authority. He obeyed His instruction. He was praying and fasting. Yet when Ananias came to him, he said, “And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on his name.” (Acts 22:16)

This statement creates a serious difficulty for the idea that sins are necessarily forgiven at the moment someone first believes.

Saul had already encountered Jesus, submitted to His instruction, and begun praying.

Nevertheless, Ananias told him to be baptized and wash away his sins.

The text associates baptism, the washing away of sins, and calling on the Lord’s name.

Of course, water itself cannot remove moral guilt. Scripture teaches that Christ’s blood provides redemption and forgiveness (Ephesians 1:7).

The question is how God has instructed believers to receive the benefits of that sacrifice. Acts 22:16 identifies baptism as part of Saul’s response.

Some argue that “wash away your sins” refers only to a symbolic demonstration of forgiveness Saul had already received.

But the text never states that Saul’s sins had already been forgiven. Ananias uses an imperative directed toward something Saul is to do.

Others point to the grammatical connection between “calling on his name” and washing away sins. Calling on the Lord is unquestionably important. Yet that observation does not remove baptism from the command. Ananias explicitly tells Saul to arise and be baptized.

In the account of Saul’s conversion, calling upon the Lord and baptism belong together.

This is especially significant when compared with Romans 10:13, “For everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

Acts 22:16 provides an example of what calling upon the Lord involved in an actual conversion. Saul was instructed to call on the Lord’s name as he arose, was baptized, and had his sins washed away.

5. Baptism Into Christ: Romans 6:3–7

Romans 6 offers one of the deepest explanations of baptism in the New Testament. Paul writes, “Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?” (Romans 6:3)  Paul describes baptism as entering into union with Christ and His death.

He continues, “We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.” (Romans 6:4)

Notice the progression.

  • Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection
  • The saving work of Jesus
  • Baptized into Christ’s death
  • Buried with Him through baptism
  • Raised to walk in newness of life

Paul’s argument assumes that his readers have undergone a decisive change in their relationship with sin. He reminds them of their baptism because it represents their participation in Christ’s death and resurrection. Verse 6 explains that the old self was crucified with Christ so that believers would no longer be enslaved to sin.

Verse 7 adds, “For one who has died has been set free from sin.”

Baptism is therefore deeply connected to the believer’s death to sin and new life in Christ.

Some argue that Romans 6 refers only to a spiritual baptism that occurs at the moment of faith.

It is certainly true that the spiritual realities described in this passage are accomplished through God’s power. Yet Paul appeals to an event his readers would recognize as part of their conversion. His description also corresponds with the water baptisms repeatedly recorded in Acts.

The passage does not explicitly discuss the amount of water used, but its burial imagery supports immersion. Most importantly, Paul treats baptism as a meaningful participation in the saving work of Christ. If baptism merely announces a spiritual resurrection that has already occurred, we should ask why Paul describes the believer as being buried with Christ through baptism so that he may walk in newness of life.

6. How Does Someone Put On Christ? Galatians 3:26–27

Paul writes, “For in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.”  These verses deserve to be read together. Verse 26 says believers become children of God through faith. Verse 27 explains that those baptized into Christ have put on Christ. Paul does not present faith and baptism as competing means of salvation. He connects them. Faith is essential. Baptism is the faith-filled response through which believers are described as putting on Christ.

Notice that Paul says “baptized into Christ.”

This language is similar to Romans 6:3.

We should also consider the spiritual blessings found in Christ. Ephesians 1:3 teaches that every spiritual blessing is in Christ. Ephesians 1:7 says redemption and forgiveness are found in Him. 2 Timothy 2:10 speaks of salvation “that is in Christ Jesus.”

Romans 8:1 declares that there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. Paul explicitly connects baptism with putting on Christ. A fair reading must also recognize that Paul emphasizes faith throughout Galatians. Baptism does not replace faith, and a person does not earn sonship through performing a ceremony.

Rather, Paul describes baptism within the experience of coming to Christ through faith.

The New Testament never requires us to choose between genuine faith and obedient baptism.

7. Does Baptism Actually Save? First Peter 3:21

Perhaps no passage states the relationship between baptism and salvation more directly than 1 Peter 3:21.

Peter writes, “Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” We must consider the entire statement. Peter begins by discussing Noah and the flood. Eight people were brought safely through water (1 Peter 3:20).

He then draws a correspondence between that event and Christian baptism.

Peter explicitly states that baptism now saves. But he immediately explains what he means. Baptism isn’t washing dirt from the body. The saving significance is spiritual, involving an appeal to God for a good conscience through the resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Greek term eperōtēma is sometimes translated “appeal” and sometimes understood as “pledge.” The precise nuance is debated. Both readings recognize that baptism has a spiritual significance extending beyond physical washing. Most importantly, Peter identifies the resurrection of Jesus as the basis of baptism’s saving significance.

Baptism possesses no independent power to save apart from Christ. It is effective because of what Jesus accomplished through His death and resurrection. An objection frequently raised is that Peter is only discussing an outward symbol of an inward salvation. Yet that explanation must account for the words “baptism … now saves you.”

Peter doesn’t say baptism merely represents salvation. He uses the language of salvation and then clarifies the source and nature of its effectiveness. The passage can’t responsibly be reduced to a statement about water physically removing sin. Peter explicitly rejects that idea. At the same time, it should not be reduced to a purely symbolic ceremony with no relationship to salvation.

Peter connects baptism, the appeal to God, the resurrection of Jesus, and salvation.

8. Baptism and the Work of God: Colossians 2:11–13

One of the most common objections to baptism concerns works.

The argument usually sounds something like this, “If baptism is something a person does, then requiring baptism for salvation means salvation is earned by human effort.”

Colossians 2 directly addresses the relationship between baptism, faith, and divine power. Paul writes, “Having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead.” (Colossians 2:12)

Who performs the saving work in this passage? God does. Paul specifically identifies “the powerful working of God.”

The person being baptized places faith in God’s power. Verse 13, “And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses.” God makes the sinner alive. God forgives trespasses. God accomplishes the spiritual transformation. Baptism is the context in which Paul describes the believer being buried and raised with Christ through faith. A person can submit to something God commands without believing that his obedience earns salvation. When Naaman was instructed to wash seven times in the Jordan River, he was healed only after obeying the prophet’s instruction (2 Kings 5:10–14). The river didn’t possess miraculous healing power. Naaman’s actions didn’t earn a miracle. God healed him when he submitted to the command given through God’s prophet. This is an illustration of the relationship between obedient faith and divine grace, although Naaman’s cleansing is not itself a New Testament doctrine of Christian baptism. Similarly, Joshua and Israel marched around Jericho as God commanded (Joshua 6; Hebrews 11:30). The walls fell by God’s power. Obedience to a divine instruction does not automatically make the resulting blessing a wage earned.

The crucial distinction is between earning salvation and receiving salvation through the response God has commanded.

Colossians 2 describes baptism as an expression of faith in God’s powerful working.

9. Is Baptism a Work That Contradicts Salvation by Grace?

Ephesians 2:8–9 says, “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.”

This passage is central to understanding salvation. We are saved by grace. Salvation is God’s gift. No sinner can earn redemption through personal goodness, religious accomplishments, or obedience to a system of law. Romans 3:23 teaches that all have sinned. Romans 6:23 says the wages of sin is death, while eternal life is God’s gift in Christ Jesus. The blood of Christ is the basis of our forgiveness. Hebrews 9:22 emphasizes the necessity of blood for forgiveness, and Hebrews 9:26 describes Christ’s sacrifice as the means by which sin is put away. The question is whether submitting to baptism contradicts these truths. Consider the nature of faith itself.

In John 6:28–29, the crowd asked Jesus, “What must we do, to be doing the works of God?” Jesus answered, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.” Jesus calls believing a “work” in response to their question, yet faith does not become a meritorious human achievement that earns salvation. This does not mean faith and baptism are identical. It demonstrates that merely identifying something as an action does not settle whether it constitutes the kind of works excluded by Ephesians 2:9. Repentance also requires a human response. Jesus said, “Unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.” (Luke 13:3) Paul declared that God commands all people everywhere to repent (Acts 17:30). If repentance is necessary, does repentance earn salvation? No. Repentance involves turning away from sin and toward God. It is a response to God’s gracious call.

Confession likewise involves action. Romans 10:9 speaks of confessing Jesus as Lord and believing in His resurrection. Yet Christians who affirm salvation by grace generally do not regard confession as an attempt to purchase forgiveness. We must apply the same careful reasoning to baptism. The issue is whether God has commanded it as part of the response of faith. Titus 3:5, “He saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit.” The identity of the “washing of regeneration” is debated. Many Christians understand it as a reference to baptism, while others understand it primarily as spiritual cleansing accomplished by the Holy Spirit. Regardless of that debate, Paul’s emphasis is unmistakable. Salvation comes from God’s mercy and renewing power.

If baptism is involved in this washing, it remains entirely consistent with salvation by mercy because God is the one who saves.

We should therefore reject two errors.

The first is the belief that water or human effort possesses the power to earn forgiveness. The second is the assumption that any action commanded by God must be a meritorious work. The New Testament consistently teaches that salvation is grounded in grace, received through faith, and accompanied by the obedience that genuine faith produces.

10. What About the Thief on the Cross?

One of the most frequently cited objections involves the criminal crucified beside Jesus.

Luke 23:42–43 records his request, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” Jesus responded, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise.”

The thief was promised paradise, and Scripture never records his baptism.

Does this prove that baptism has no relationship to salvation? We need to consider several facts. First, the text does not tell us whether the thief had ever received John’s baptism. Large numbers of people had been baptized by John (Matthew 3:5–6). We cannot establish that this particular man had or had not been baptized. However, the strongest response does not depend on speculation about his past. Second, Jesus possessed authority to forgive sins during His earthly ministry. In Mark 2:5, Jesus told the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven.”

The scribes questioned His authority, and Jesus demonstrated that the Son of Man had authority on earth to forgive sins (Mark 2:10).

Jesus could forgive the thief directly. Third, the thief died before Jesus’ resurrection and before the apostles began proclaiming the gospel under the Great Commission. Hebrews 9:15–17 discusses Christ’s death in connection with the inauguration of the new covenant, using the language of a covenant or will. The exact relationship between covenant inauguration and every individual command should be handled carefully. Nevertheless, the thief’s situation occurred before the post-resurrection commission of Matthew 28 and before the Pentecost preaching of Acts 2. The thief received a direct promise from Jesus during a unique historical moment. That event establishes the authority and mercy of Christ. It does not necessarily establish what people should do after the risen Lord commissioned His apostles to preach the gospel and baptize disciples. Even if we knew with certainty that the thief had never been baptized, his salvation would demonstrate that Jesus can save someone apart from the ordinary pattern of Christian conversion.

It would not, by itself, prove that Christians are free to disregard a command Jesus subsequently gave. We should learn from the thief’s trust in Christ without using his exceptional circumstances to dismiss the instructions Christ gave His church.

11. Why Did Paul Say Christ Did Not Send Him to Baptize?

First Corinthians 1:17 is another common objection. Paul writes, “For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.”

Some reason that if baptism were connected to salvation, Paul could never have said Christ did not send him to baptize. The context is essential. The Corinthian congregation was divided over allegiance to different teachers. Some claimed to follow Paul, others Apollos, others Cephas, and others Christ (1 Corinthians 1:12). Paul challenged this division, “Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?” (1 Corinthians 1:13) His argument centers on the identity of the one to whom Christians belong.

They were baptized in the name of Christ.

Paul was relieved that he had personally baptized only a few of them because he did not want anyone claiming to have been baptized in his name. He specifically mentions baptizing Crispus, Gaius, and the household of Stephanas (1 Corinthians 1:14–16). Paul did baptize people. Furthermore, Acts 18:8 describes his ministry in Corinth:

“And many of the Corinthians hearing Paul believed and were baptized.” Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians 1:17 distinguishes his primary commission to proclaim the gospel from personally performing every baptism.nPreaching was his central task. Others could administer baptism. This interpretation fits the context of a congregation struggling with personality-driven division. Paul’s words do not establish that baptism is unnecessary. In fact, his argument assumes that baptism into Christ was a recognized part of the Corinthians’ conversion. If the person performing the baptism had been spiritually decisive, their loyalty might have attached to that individual. Paul wanted their loyalty directed toward Christ. The passage teaches that the identity of the human administrator is unimportant compared with the Lord into whose name the person is baptized.

12. Does John 3:16 Prove That Faith Alone Saves?

John 3:16 is among the most familiar verses in Scripture. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.”

The verse clearly teaches that salvation is available through faith in Jesus Christ.

But does it teach that baptism is unnecessary? That conclusion requires adding a limitation the verse does not express. John 3:16 does not say that repentance is unnecessary. It does not say confession is unnecessary. It does not say obedience is unnecessary. The verse emphasizes faith as the means by which people receive life in Christ. We must interpret that emphasis alongside the rest of Scripture. Earlier in the same conversation, Jesus told Nicodemus, “Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” (John 3:5) The interpretation of “water and the Spirit” has been debated throughout Christian history.

Some understand it as a reference to Christian baptism and the regenerating work of the Spirit. Others connect the language with Ezekiel 36:25–27, where cleansing water and God’s Spirit appear together in the promise of a renewed people. Still others propose a contrast between physical birth and spiritual birth. The passage should not be presented as though every interpretive question has been settled. Nevertheless, the connection between water, the Spirit, and entrance into God’s kingdom deserves consideration in light of the New Testament’s later teaching on baptism.

John 3:16 must also be read alongside John 3:36, “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.” The Greek verb translated “does not obey” is apeitheō, which can convey disobedience or refusal to believe. Its use underscores the close relationship between faith and responsiveness to God’s revelation. Biblical faith is more than agreeing that Jesus exists. James 2:19 observes that even demons believe certain truths about God. James 2:17 says faith without works is dead. James is discussing the active character of genuine faith, especially as demonstrated in a life of obedience and love. He is not specifically writing a treatise on baptism. Nevertheless, his teaching challenges the idea that saving faith can be separated from obedience to God.

The proper question is whether baptism belongs to the response Jesus commands of those who believe. The examples in Acts repeatedly answer that question by showing believers being baptized.

13. What About Romans 10:9–10?

Paul writes, “Because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” (Romans 10:9)

Verse 10 continues, “For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.” Some argue that because Paul mentions belief and confession without mentioning baptism, baptism cannot be necessary. But we should examine the purpose of the passage.

Romans 10 addresses righteousness through faith and the accessibility of the gospel to Jews and Gentiles. Paul emphasizes that salvation is available to all who call upon the Lord. His purpose is not to provide a comprehensive chronological account of every element involved in conversion.

Consider that Romans 10:9 does not explicitly mention repentance. Yet Jesus commands repentance in Luke 13:3, and Paul commands it in Acts 17:30. Would we conclude that repentance is unnecessary simply because it is not mentioned in Romans 10:9?

Of course not. The omission of a command from one passage does not automatically cancel its presence in another. Furthermore, the same apostle who wrote Romans 10 also wrote Romans 6:3–4, where he connected baptism with being buried with Christ and walking in newness of life. We must interpret Paul’s statements consistently. Romans 10 teaches the necessity of faith in the risen Lord and the importance of confessing Him.

Romans 6 teaches the significance of baptism into Christ. Both passages belong to the same letter. The most coherent interpretation allows both to contribute to our understanding of salvation.

14. What About the Sinner’s Prayer?

Many people have been taught that salvation comes through repeating a prayer such as, 

“Lord Jesus, I know I’m a sinner. I believe You died for me. Come into my heart and save me.” There is nothing wrong with confessing sin, expressing faith in Christ, or asking God for mercy. Prayer is repeatedly encouraged throughout Scripture. The question is whether the New Testament teaches that an unbaptized sinner receives forgiveness simply by repeating a particular prayer.

There is no recorded conversion in Acts where the apostles instruct someone to repeat a sinner’s prayer as the means of receiving forgiveness. Instead, consider their responses. On Pentecost, Peter commanded repentance and baptism (Acts 2:38).

When the Ethiopian official believed, he was baptized (Acts 8:36–39). When Saul believed, Ananias commanded him to be baptized and wash away his sins (Acts 22:16). When the Philippian jailer asked what he must do to be saved, Paul and Silas told him to believe in the Lord Jesus, taught him the word of the Lord, and baptized him that same night (Acts 16:30–33). We should also distinguish between an unbeliever seeking salvation and a Christian who has sinned.

In Acts 8:22, Peter instructed Simon, who had already believed and been baptized (Acts 8:13), to repent and pray for forgiveness.

First John 1:9 likewise speaks of confession and forgiveness within the Christian life.

These passages provide strong biblical grounds for prayer and confession by Christians seeking forgiveness. They do not establish a sinner’s prayer as a replacement for the conversion response described in Acts. If we want to teach people how to respond to the gospel, the clearest examples are the conversions recorded by the inspired apostles.

15. What About Cornelius Receiving the Holy Spirit Before Baptism?

Acts 10 presents one of the strongest objections to the view that baptism is necessary for salvation. Cornelius was a Gentile centurion who feared God, prayed, and gave generously. An angel instructed him to send for Peter. According to Acts 11:14, Peter would declare a message by which Cornelius and his household would be saved.

While Peter was preaching, the Holy Spirit fell on those who heard the word (Acts 10:44).

The Jewish believers accompanying Peter were astonished because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on Gentiles.

Peter then asked, “Can anyone withhold water for baptizing these people, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” (Acts 10:47) Verse 48 says, “And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.” The obvious objection is this, If Cornelius received the Holy Spirit before baptism, was he not already saved?

This is a serious question and should not be dismissed. We should begin by recognizing the purpose of the event. Acts 10 and 11 emphasize God’s acceptance of Gentiles into the people of God. The extraordinary outpouring of the Spirit demonstrated to Jewish believers that God was extending the gospel to Gentiles. Peter later explained, “As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them just as on us at the beginning.” (Acts 11:15)

He connected this event with the promise of baptism in the Holy Spirit and concluded that God had granted Gentiles repentance leading to life (Acts 11:16–18). The Spirit’s coming served as powerful divine confirmation that Gentiles were to be received. The question is whether this extraordinary manifestation necessarily proves that Cornelius had already received forgiveness before baptism.

That conclusion is possible within certain theological interpretations, but Acts does not explicitly state the precise moment at which Cornelius’s sins were forgiven. We should remember that miraculous activity and personal salvation are not always identical categories in Scripture. For example, Matthew 7:22–23 describes people claiming to have performed mighty works in Jesus’ name, yet Jesus declares that He never knew them. That passage does not directly settle Cornelius’s condition, but it cautions us against assuming that the presence of a miraculous manifestation automatically establishes every aspect of someone’s spiritual standing. Acts 10 does explicitly tell us that Peter commanded Cornelius and his household to be baptized. Peter did not regard the Spirit’s coming as a reason to omit baptism. He treated it as evidence that water baptism should be administered. This account presents an extraordinary order of events for a particular purpose in salvation history. It should be studied alongside the broader conversion pattern in Acts.

We must acknowledge that Christians disagree over what the Spirit’s reception establishes about Cornelius’s salvation. The text clearly establishes God’s acceptance of Gentiles and the continuing command to baptize them; it does not provide a separate, explicit statement identifying the precise instant of forgiveness.

16. Why Are People Sometimes Said to Be Saved by Faith Without Baptism Being Mentioned?

Throughout the New Testament, salvation is described in different ways. We are justified by faith (Romans 5:1). We are saved by grace (Ephesians 2:8). We are redeemed by Christ’s blood (Ephesians 1:7). We are saved through the gospel (1 Corinthians 15:1–2).

We are saved through the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit (Titus 3:5). We are saved by baptism (1 Peter 3:21). These statements describe different aspects of salvation. They do not necessarily compete with one another. Suppose a doctor tells a patient that a particular treatment saved his life. The patient might also say the physician saved him. Someone else might say the medicine saved him.

Those statements identify different aspects of the same event. In a much greater way, Scripture can identify God’s grace as the source of salvation, Christ’s blood as its sacrificial basis, faith as the means of receiving it, and baptism as part of the commanded response through which a believer enters Christ. Of course, this illustration cannot establish the doctrine by itself. Scripture must determine whether baptism actually occupies that role. But the illustration shows why multiple statements about salvation do not automatically contradict each other. We should resist the temptation to treat every passage as though it must contain every element of conversion.

The proper approach is to gather all the relevant passages and determine how they fit together.

17. What Does the Book of Acts Actually Show?

The book of Acts provides the clearest narrative record of how people responded when the gospel was first preached.

The following table summarizes major conversion accounts. Several observations emerge. Baptism repeatedly occurs in direct connection with conversion.

The people in these accounts do not wait months or years before being baptized.

The Ethiopian official was baptized during his journey. The Philippian jailer was baptized during the night, after hearing the gospel.

The Corinthians were baptized as they responded to Paul’s preaching. If baptism were merely a public ceremony intended to demonstrate salvation before an assembled congregation, why did the jailer need to be baptized in the middle of the night?

Why did the Ethiopian official request baptism immediately upon encountering water? These accounts do not prove that public testimony is never associated with baptism. Baptism often occurs in the presence of others. But they demonstrate that the New Testament does not require a scheduled church service, a large audience, or a lengthy waiting period. The emphasis falls on responding to the gospel.

18. Does the Ethiopian Official’s Conversion Prove Baptism Was Part of Preaching Jesus?

Acts 8 records Philip’s encounter with an Ethiopian official who was reading Isaiah 53.

The man asked whom the prophet was describing. Luke writes, “Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning with this Scripture he told him the good news about Jesus.” (Acts 8:35) Immediately afterward, as they traveled, they came to water. The official said, “See, here is water! What prevents me from being baptized?” (Acts 8:36) This raises an interesting question. If Philip had been preaching Jesus, why did the Ethiopian official suddenly ask about baptism?

Luke does not provide a transcript of Philip’s sermon. We cannot quote Philip as having said specific words about baptism that Luke did not record. However, the narrative strongly suggests that baptism was included in Philip’s explanation of the gospel or was otherwise understood by the official as the appropriate response. The official’s immediate request is difficult to explain if baptism had no connection to the message he had just heard. Philip baptized him, and the official went on his way rejoicing (Acts 8:38–39). The joy follows his response to the gospel. This account reinforces the connection between hearing Christ proclaimed, believing His message, and submitting to baptism. A textual note is also appropriate. Acts 8:37, which contains an explicit confession of faith in some Bible translations, is absent from many early manuscripts and is generally regarded as a later addition to the text. The surrounding narrative, however, remains clear without it.

19. What About the Philippian Jailer Being Told Simply to Believe?

In Acts 16:30, the Philippian jailer asked Paul and Silas, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”

They answered, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.” (Acts 16:31) Some stop reading there and conclude that belief alone, without baptism, is all that was required.

But Luke continues, “And they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house.” (Acts 16:32) The jailer needed to hear the gospel so that he could believe.

Then Luke writes, “And he was baptized at once, he and all his family.” (Acts 16:33)

This happened during the same night.

Verse 34 says the jailer rejoiced because he had believed in God, along with his entire household. Notice how Luke summarizes the conversion. He says the jailer believed.

Yet the fuller narrative shows that the jailer’s response included hearing the word and being baptized. This is an important example of how the New Testament can use “believe” to summarize a conversion that also includes baptism.The same principle helps explain why some passages emphasize faith without separately mentioning every aspect of the response.

20. Is Baptism Merely an Outward Sign of an Inward Change?

This is probably the most widespread explanation of baptism in contemporary evangelical Christianity. The argument is that a person is saved internally by faith, and baptism subsequently displays that salvation outwardly. There is truth in recognizing baptism’s visible, symbolic character.

Romans 6 associates baptism with Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection.

Baptism visibly expresses identification with Christ. It can also function as a public declaration of allegiance to Him.

The question is whether Scripture limits baptism to those functions.

Acts 2:38 connects baptism with forgiveness.

Acts 22:16 connects it with washing away sins. Romans 6:3–4 connects it with being baptized into Christ’s death and walking in newness of life. Galatians 3:27 connects it with putting on Christ. Colossians 2:12 connects it with burial and resurrection through faith in God’s power. First Peter 3:21 connects it with salvation through Christ’s resurrection. The New Testament uses language that goes beyond public symbolism. Someone who believes baptism is exclusively symbolic must explain why the apostles repeatedly describe it in connection with forgiveness, union with Christ, spiritual cleansing, and salvation. A symbol can certainly be meaningful. But calling baptism a symbol does not settle whether God also uses it as part of His appointed means of bringing a believer into Christ. The issue is whether we should reduce baptism to symbolism when Scripture assigns it a broader spiritual significance.

21. Can Someone Be Baptized Without Being Saved? Yes. The New Testament gives us reason to recognize that merely undergoing a physical ceremony does not guarantee salvation. Consider Simon in Acts 8.

He believed Philip’s preaching and was baptized (Acts 8:13). Later, however, he attempted to purchase the ability to impart the Holy Spirit. Peter rebuked him severely, “For I see that you are in the gall of bitterness and in the bond of iniquity.” (Acts 8:23)

Peter instructed Simon to repent and pray for forgiveness. The account shows that baptism does not eliminate the need for continued faithfulness. It also raises questions about the sincerity and character of Simon’s faith.

First Peter 3:21 specifically distinguishes saving baptism from merely washing the body. Colossians 2:12 connects baptism with faith in God’s powerful working. A person who enters the water without faith, repentance, or genuine submission to Christ has not demonstrated the response described in these passages. This matters because baptism should never be treated as a mechanical ritual. God is not obligated to save someone merely because that person has undergone a physical action while rejecting the gospel. Baptism belongs to a response of faith and repentance. It cannot be separated from the heart’s submission to Christ.

22. What About Infant Baptism?

Infant baptism is practiced by several major Christian traditions. Those who defend it often appeal to God’s covenant promises, the inclusion of children in believing households, and the relationship between baptism and circumcision. Some understand baptism as a sign of covenant membership that should be administered to the children of believers.

Others emphasize baptism as a means of grace through which God acts even before a child can consciously profess faith.

These arguments deserve accurate representation. Nevertheless, when we examine the explicit conversion accounts in Acts, a recurring pattern appears. People hear the gospel, believe, repent, and are baptized. Acts 8:12 says, “But when they believed Philip as he preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.” The text explicitly connects baptism with personal belief. Acts 18:8 likewise records Corinthians hearing, believing, and being baptized.

The New Testament also records household baptisms, including Lydia’s household, the jailer’s household, and the household of Stephanas. These passages do not explicitly identify the ages of every household member.

Consequently, they cannot establish with certainty that infants were present.

Nor should we claim that every household baptism explicitly states that no infants were present. The strongest argument for believer’s baptism is the repeated connection between baptism and personal response to the gospel. The New Testament does not contain an unambiguous example of an infant being baptized. It also does not provide an explicit command instructing Christians to baptize infants. The burden of proof therefore rests on establishing infant baptism from broader covenant theology rather than from a direct New Testament command or an unmistakable example. From the perspective of the conversion accounts in Acts, baptism is administered to people who respond to the message of Christ.

23. Does Baptism Have to Be Performed by a Preacher or Elder?

The New Testament does not establish a requirement that only an ordained minister, preacher, or elder can administer baptism.

Philip baptized the Ethiopian official (Acts 8).

Ananias was sent to Saul, who was then baptized (Acts 9). Paul baptized some of the Corinthians, while others were apparently baptized through the work of his fellow laborers (1 Corinthians 1:14–17). The New Testament’s emphasis falls on Christ, the gospel, and the response of the person being baptized. There is no passage stating that baptism becomes invalid because the administrator lacks a particular ecclesiastical title. The authority for baptism comes from Jesus Christ. The person administering it acts in obedience to His command. This also explains why the physical location is not decisive. Baptism may occur wherever sufficient water is available for the action described in Scripture.

24. Must Someone Understand the Purpose of Baptism?

This question is especially important when considering people who were baptized as children or in religious traditions that taught baptism was merely symbolic. How much must a person understand for baptism to be valid? The New Testament does not provide a detailed examination that every candidate must pass. It does, however, establish that baptism belongs to a response of faith in Jesus Christ. Acts 8:12 connects belief and baptism. Colossians 2:12 connects baptism with faith in God’s powerful working. Romans 6 connects baptism with participation in Christ’s death and resurrection. Acts 2:38 connects it with repentance and forgiveness.

We should distinguish between incomplete understanding and a fundamentally different understanding of the action being performed.

No new Christian understands every implication of baptism. Even mature Christians continue learning about the richness of union with Christ. Therefore, it would be unreasonable to require perfect theological knowledge before baptism.

But there is a legitimate question when someone undergoes baptism while explicitly believing that it has no relationship to receiving forgiveness and that salvation was fully completed beforehand. Does that person’s misunderstanding invalidate the baptism? Christians who affirm baptism for the forgiveness of sins disagree on how to answer that question. Acts 19:1–5 is relevant because Paul encountered disciples who had received John’s baptism. After learning more about Jesus and the Holy Spirit, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

The fullest biblical teaching should be presented so that the person understands baptism’s connection with forgiveness, union with Christ, and new life.

25. What If Someone Believes but Dies Before Being Baptized?

This is one of the most emotionally difficult questions in the entire discussion. Suppose someone hears the gospel, believes in Christ, repents, and sincerely intends to be baptized.

Before baptism can occur, the person dies.

What happens to that individual? We must distinguish between what God has revealed as the ordinary response to the gospel and what God may do in circumstances Scripture does not explicitly address. The New Testament commands baptism. It connects baptism with forgiveness and salvation.

It records converts being baptized without unnecessary delay. Those teachings should guide our actions. However, Scripture does not provide a direct account of a post-Pentecost believer who sincerely intended to be baptized, died before the opportunity, and then had his eternal destiny revealed.

Consequently, we should be careful about making absolute claims concerning that hypothetical individual. Genesis 18:25 asks, 

“Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?” God is perfectly just. He knows the heart, the circumstances, and the intentions of every person. We can trust His judgment without claiming authority to make exceptions to His commands. The uncertainty surrounding an extraordinary situation does not justify disregarding what Scripture clearly instructs us to do when baptism is available.

A person who sincerely wants to obey Christ should be encouraged to do so without delay.

The repeated urgency of baptism in Acts is worth following.

26. What About Someone Who Was Never Taught the Truth About Baptism?

Many sincere people have been taught that baptism has nothing to do with receiving forgiveness. They love Jesus, study the Bible, pray, serve others, and strive to live godly lives. How should we think about them? We should begin by recognizing that sincerity is meaningful, but sincerity alone does not determine whether a belief is correct.

Saul of Tarsus sincerely believed he was serving God when he persecuted Christians.

In Acts 23:1, he said that he had lived before God in good conscience. Yet he later acknowledged that he had acted ignorantly in unbelief (1 Timothy 1:13). His sincerity did not make his actions right. Likewise, Apollos was described as eloquent, competent in the Scriptures, fervent in spirit, and accurate in teaching about Jesus, though he knew only John’s baptism (Acts 18:24–25). Priscilla and Aquila explained the way of God to him more accurately (Acts 18:26). The appropriate response to incomplete understanding was further instruction. We should treat sincere believers with the same concern and patience. We can recognize their devotion while carefully examining whether their understanding agrees with Scripture.

We should avoid assuming that everyone who disagrees is dishonest or deliberately rebellious. At the same time, sincerity should never become a reason to ignore a biblical command. Our goal should be to teach the whole counsel of God and encourage every person to follow Christ as faithfully as possible.

27. Does Baptism Replace the Blood of Christ?

Absolutely not. This objection misunderstands the claim that baptism is connected to salvation. The New Testament consistently teaches that forgiveness comes through Christ’s sacrifice. Ephesians 1:7 says, “In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace.”

First Peter 1:18–19 explains that Christians were redeemed through the precious blood of Christ. Revelation 1:5 praises Jesus, who loves us and has freed us from our sins by His blood. Hebrews 9:14 teaches that Christ’s blood purifies the conscience. Nothing in Scripture suggests that ordinary water possesses the power to forgive sin independently of Jesus. The question concerns the relationship between His saving blood and the believer’s response.

Romans 6:3 says believers are baptized into Christ’s death. It was in His death that Christ shed His blood. Colossians 2:12 connects baptism with faith in God’s power. First Peter 3:21 connects baptism’s saving significance with Christ’s resurrection. These passages consistently direct attention to Jesus. A person who believes baptism earns salvation through human effort has misunderstood grace. A person who believes water itself possesses independent saving power has misunderstood Christ’s sacrifice. The biblical case for baptism’s necessity rests on God’s promise to act through the response He has commanded. Christ provides the salvation. The believer submits to Christ. The saving power belongs entirely to God.

28. Is Baptism Part of the Gospel?

First Corinthians 15:1–4 identifies the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ as the central historical events of the gospel.

Paul emphasizes that Christ died for our sins, was buried, and was raised on the third day.

Those events are the foundation of Christian salvation. Baptism does not add another saving sacrifice to the gospel. Instead, Romans 6 describes baptism in relation to those very events. The believer is buried with Christ and raised to walk in newness of life.

Acts 8:35–36 also demonstrates that preaching Jesus led directly to a request for baptism. Acts 16 shows that preaching the word of the Lord led to immediate baptism.

The Great Commission places baptism within the task of making disciples. We should therefore distinguish between the saving events that constitute the heart of the gospel and the response Christ commands when that gospel is preached. Christ’s death and resurrection accomplish salvation. Faithful gospel preaching calls people to respond to Him. The New Testament repeatedly includes baptism in that response.

29. Does the Bible Teach Faith Alone?

This question requires precision because Christians use the expression “faith alone” in different ways. Many Protestant theologians use it to mean that sinners are justified by faith apart from meritorious works, with genuine faith necessarily producing obedience. Others use the phrase to mean that a person receives salvation at the instant of belief, before baptism, and that baptism has no role in receiving forgiveness. Those claims are not identical. Scripture clearly teaches that sinners cannot earn justification through their own works. Romans 3:28 says, “For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law.” Paul’s argument excludes reliance upon law-keeping as the basis of justification. But we must also consider James 2:24, “You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.”

James is addressing a faith that claims to exist while producing no corresponding action. His examples include Abraham and Rahab, whose faith was demonstrated through obedience. Paul and James address different errors. Paul opposes reliance on works as the basis for justification. James opposes a lifeless profession of faith that produces no obedience. Neither passage should be isolated from the rest of Scripture.

Hebrews 11 repeatedly describes faith expressing itself through action. Noah prepared an ark by faith. Abraham obeyed when called to leave his home. The Israelites crossed the Red Sea by faith. Faith trusts God enough to respond to His word. That principle is directly relevant to baptism.

When someone believes in Christ and submits to baptism because Christ commanded it, that person is expressing trust in God’s promise. Colossians 2:12 explicitly connects baptism with faith in God’s powerful working. The biblical question is therefore whether baptism is among the actions Christ has instructed believers to undertake in coming to Him. The teaching of Acts, Romans, Galatians, Colossians, and First Peter provides substantial evidence that it is.

30. What Does It Mean to Be Baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ?

Acts 2:38 commands baptism in the name of Jesus Christ. Acts 8:16 speaks of baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus. Acts 10:48 likewise describes baptism in Jesus’ name.

Matthew 28:19 commands baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Do these passages contradict one another?

No. The phrase “in the name of” frequently expresses authority, identification, or allegiance. To be baptized in the name of Jesus is to submit to His authority and identify with Him as Lord. Matthew 28:19 gives the Trinitarian language of Jesus’ commission. Acts emphasizes that baptism is performed under the authority of the risen Christ. The New Testament does not provide a detailed transcript of the exact words spoken during every baptism. Therefore, we should be cautious about claiming that baptism is invalid merely because the administrator used one biblical expression rather than another. The essential concern is whether the baptism is performed in submission to Christ and in accordance with His command. The words spoken by the administrator are not presented as a magical formula that independently produces salvation.

31. Does Baptism Automatically Guarantee Eternal Salvation?

No. The New Testament repeatedly warns Christians against abandoning their faith.

Jesus said, “The one who endures to the end will be saved.” (Matthew 24:13) Paul warned believers in Romans 11:20–22 to continue in God’s kindness. Galatians 5:4 speaks of people who have fallen away from grace through seeking justification by law.

Hebrews 3:12 warns against an evil, unbelieving heart that leads someone to fall away from the living God. 2 Peter 2:20–22 describes the danger of returning to corruption after escaping the defilements of the world. Christians interpret some of these warning passages differently regarding the possibility of losing salvation. Nevertheless, they agree that Scripture calls believers to persevering faithfulness. Baptism is the beginning of a life of discipleship. Matthew 28:20 commands the apostles to teach baptized disciples to observe everything Jesus commanded. Romans 6 emphasizes that those baptized into Christ must no longer live as slaves to sin. A person who has been baptized should continue growing in faith, holiness, love, repentance, and obedience. Baptism is never presented as permission to live in deliberate rebellion against God.

32. Can Baptism Be Repeated?

The New Testament does not present Christian baptism as a ritual that must be repeated whenever a believer sins.

Ephesians 4:5 speaks of “one Lord, one faith, one baptism.” Acts 8:22 instructs Simon, who had already been baptized, to repent and pray for forgiveness. 1 John 1:7–9 emphasizes continuing fellowship with God through walking in the light and confessing sins. The normal New Testament pattern is one baptism into Christ followed by a life of repentance and faithfulness. Acts 19:1–5 provides an important exception involving people who had received John’s baptism.

After Paul explained the fuller revelation of Jesus Christ, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. That account demonstrates that not every religious washing is equivalent to Christian baptism.

Someone who has only undergone an infant ceremony, a non-Christian ritual, or John’s preparatory baptism faces a different question from a Christian who has already been baptized into Christ and subsequently sins. Whether a person baptized under an incomplete theological understanding should be baptized again requires careful examination of the original baptism, the person’s faith, and the biblical purpose of baptism. The goal should be obedience to Scripture, free from both careless assumptions and unnecessary fear.

33. Does the Order of Salvation Matter?

The New Testament gives several commands and descriptions connected to salvation.

We should avoid turning them into a rigid mechanical formula in which every conversion must be described using exactly the same words. Nevertheless, the broad pattern is clear. People hear the gospel (Romans 10:17). They believe in Jesus Christ (John 3:16; Acts 16:31). They are called to repent (Acts 2:38; 17:30). They confess Christ (Romans 10:9–10). They are baptized into Christ (Romans 6:3–4; Galatians 3:27).

They continue in faithful discipleship (Matthew 28:20; Colossians 1:23).

These responses should be understood as belonging together. The New Testament does not teach that someone can earn salvation by completing a checklist. Nor does it encourage us to separate faith from the obedience Christ commands. The central question is what God promises to those who respond to His gospel. When Peter was asked what to do, he commanded repentance and baptism for forgiveness (Acts 2:38). When Saul was instructed, he was told to be baptized and wash away his sins (Acts 22:16). When Paul explained baptism, he described burial and resurrection with Christ through faith in God’s power (Colossians 2:12). When Peter explained baptism, he said it saves through the resurrection of Jesus Christ (1 Peter 3:21). These statements form a consistent pattern.

34. Why Does This Subject Matter So Much?

It matters because Jesus commands baptism. It matters because the apostles included baptism in their preaching.

It matters because the New Testament repeatedly connects baptism with forgiveness, union with Christ, and new life.

It matters because we should never encourage people to disregard something God has commanded. But there is another reason this subject matters. How we approach baptism reveals something about how we approach Scripture itself. Are we willing to reconsider a belief when a passage challenges us? Will we read the surrounding context? Will we examine every relevant passage, including those that complicate our position? Will we distinguish what Scripture explicitly teaches from what we have inferred? And will we extend patience to people who are sincerely trying to understand God’s word? 2 Timothy 2:24–25 says that the Lord’s servant must be kind, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, and correcting opponents with gentleness. A biblical conviction should produce both courage and humility. We should be confident enough to teach what Scripture says and humble enough to admit when a passage raises questions we cannot completely resolve.

This is especially important when discussing baptism with people who have spent their entire lives in religious traditions that understand it differently. Our responsibility is to reason from Scripture with patience and love. The goal is to help people follow Jesus.

35. Bringing the Evidence Together

When all the passages are considered, several conclusions emerge. The New Testament teaches unequivocally that salvation is made possible by the grace of God through the saving work of Jesus Christ.

His death and resurrection are the foundation of redemption. Faith is indispensable. Repentance is commanded. Confession of Christ is significant. And baptism is repeatedly presented as part of the response to the gospel. Peter commands baptism for the forgiveness of sins in Acts 2:38.

Ananias tells Saul to be baptized and wash away his sins in Acts 22:16. Paul describes baptism into Christ’s death in Romans 6:3–4.

He connects baptism with putting on Christ in Galatians 3:27. He describes baptism as burial and resurrection with Christ through faith in God’s power in Colossians 2:12.

Peter states that baptism now saves through the resurrection of Jesus Christ in 1 Peter 3:21. These are substantial biblical statements. They deserve more than an explanation that baptism is simply an optional symbol of a salvation already completed. At the same time, none of these passages teaches that water possesses independent saving power or that human obedience earns forgiveness. God saves.

Christ’s blood redeems. The Spirit renews.

Faith trusts God’s promises. Baptism is presented as an obedient response to the gospel, intimately connected with receiving the blessings accomplished by Christ. There are legitimate interpretive disagreements about particular passages, including John 3:5, Cornelius’s reception of the Spirit, and the precise relationship between faith, regeneration, and baptism. Those disagreements should be acknowledged rather than ignored. But the cumulative evidence of the New Testament strongly supports the conclusion that baptism is an integral part of the conversion response commanded by Jesus and preached by His apostles.

Why Would We Separate What Scripture Joins Together?

Imagine standing in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost. You have just heard Peter declare that Jesus, whom your nation crucified, is both Lord and Christ. You recognize your guilt. Your heart is pierced. You ask the apostles what you must do. Peter answers, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” (Acts 2:38) Would you have understood baptism to be an unnecessary ceremony that could be postponed indefinitely? Would you have concluded that forgiveness had already occurred before you responded? Would you have told Peter that baptism was a work and therefore could have no connection to salvation? The people who heard his message did something remarkably simple. They received the word. They were baptized. About three thousand souls were added that day. Throughout Acts, we encounter people from different backgrounds. Jews and Gentiles. Religious people and pagans. Wealthy people and prisoners. Men and women. Individuals and households. They heard the same gospel of Jesus Christ. They responded in faith.

And baptism repeatedly accompanied their conversion. We should not make baptism more than Scripture makes it. We should not make it less than Scripture makes it. We should never place our confidence in the water, the person administering the baptism, or the goodness of the individual being baptized. Our confidence belongs in Jesus Christ, whose blood makes forgiveness possible and whose resurrection gives us the hope of eternal life. But trusting Jesus also means taking His words seriously.

He commanded baptism. His apostles preached it. The early Christians practiced it.

And the inspired writers repeatedly connected it with the saving work of God.

The most important question is not what our parents believed, what our favorite preacher teaches, or what religious tradition we inherited. The question is what Scripture says. If Jesus has told us what to do, why would we hesitate to obey Him? And if the apostles taught that baptism is connected with forgiveness, union with Christ, and newness of life, why would we teach people that it has no relationship to receiving those blessings? The invitation of the gospel is an invitation to trust Christ completely. To believe His promises. To turn away from sin.

To confess Him as Lord. To be baptized into His death. And to rise to walk in newness of life. “For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” (Galatians 3:27) That is a promise worthy of our confidence, because it rests on the authority of Jesus Christ.

Free workshop at the Cumberland Trace church of Christ, 4/22-4/25, 2027

The Sermon Jesus Never Finished

Carl Pollard

Have you ever wondered what it would’ve been like to hear Jesus preach? Imagine sitting in a synagogue, listening to the Son of God open the Scriptures and explain their meaning.

In Luke 4, we get a glimpse of that very thing. Jesus returned to Nazareth, the town where He grew up. On the Sabbath, He entered the synagogue, stood up to read, and was handed the scroll of Isaiah.

He found the passage we know as Isaiah 61 and began reading about the One who would bring good news to the poor, proclaim liberty to captives, give sight to the blind, and set the oppressed free.

Then, Jesus rolled up the scroll, handed it back to the attendant, and sat down. Luke tells us that every eye in the synagogue was fixed on Him.

Can you imagine the silence in that room?

Then Jesus said, “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing” (Luke 4:21).

For centuries, Israel had waited for the promised Messiah. Generations had read those words, prayed for their fulfillment, and longed for the day when God would send His Anointed One.

And now, sitting in their synagogue, was the fulfillment of everything Isaiah had written.

Initially, the people marveled at His gracious words. But their amazement quickly turned into questions. They knew His family, and they knew where He’d grown up. They couldn’t understand how someone so familiar could make such an extraordinary claim.

Jesus continued by reminding them of two Old Testament accounts. During a terrible famine, God sent Elijah to a widow in Sidon. During Elisha’s ministry, Naaman the Syrian was cleansed of leprosy.

Both examples showed that God’s mercy had reached people outside Israel, and His blessings weren’t limited by the expectations of those listening.

In that moment, everything changed. Luke 4:28 says, “When they heard these things, all in the synagogue were filled with wrath.”

The congregation became so furious that they drove Jesus out of town and attempted to throw Him off a cliff. The people who had gathered to hear God’s Word became angry when God’s Word challenged them.

That’s a very real possibility for us, too! We can spend years attending worship, studying Scripture, and listening to sermons. We can become familiar with the language of faith and still struggle when the Bible exposes something in our own hearts.

The people of Nazareth had an incredible opportunity. Jesus was standing right in front of them, opening the Scriptures and revealing God’s purpose. Yet their familiarity with Him and their unwillingness to accept His message kept them from receiving what He offered.

Jesus eventually passed through their midst and went away. Luke never records the rest of what Jesus might’ve taught that day. The sermon was interrupted by the anger of the people listening.

So that forces us to ask, when Scripture challenges something we’ve always believed, something we’ve always practiced, or something we don’t want to change, how do we respond?

The people of Nazareth remind us how dangerous it is to become so comfortable with our understanding of God that we stop allowing His Word to correct us.

May we always have hearts willing to listen, even when what God says is difficult to hear.

“Each Man Must Remain In That Condition In Which He Was Called”

Neal Pollard

Yesterday, as part of a Bible class on 1 Corinthians, it fell my lot to teach chapter seven. This tends to be a controversial chapter, one in which too many teachers, preachers, elders, and other church leaders have misled people and asserted a doctrine known as “The Pauline Privilege.” Among the arguments used to defend this position, people say:

  • “Not under bondage” (15). If an unbeliever departs, the believing mate who is abandoned is free to remarry.
  • “God has called us to peace” (15). Peace includes the idea that the abandoned is free to remarry (this is not seriously or widely taught as credible).
  • “Each man must remain in that condition in which he was called” (18-24).

We spent our time in class dealing with the main argument, the first argument concerning “not under bondage” (watch class here). This position cannot be right, as it has Paul contradicting himself (see 7:10-11) and, in doing so, contradicting Jesus (see Matthew 19:1-9). “Under bondage” means enslaved and is never used in the New Testament as the marriage bond. Paul uses a different word for the marriage bond (cf. Romans 7:2; 1 Corinthians 7:27,39). Paul is saying one is not enslaved to his or her unbelieving spouse, and the Christian should not choose the spouse over Christ. Paul had said not to leave the non-Christian mate (12-14), but if divorce occurred he had already given the two options available in verses 10-11: “remain unmarried…or be reconciled.”

One other matter that is often used in arguing a broader acceptance of divorce and remarriage than Jesus taught in Matthew 5 and 19. The argument is made that a person is allowed to stay in whatever condition they are in when they obey the gospel. So, if one has been married and divorce multiple times when they become a Christian, Paul is saying it is acceptable to stay in that situation. He compares it to circumcision and slavery, so the argument goes.

The central problem with this is that it also makes Paul contradict himself and Jesus in the explicit teaching on marriage, divorce, and remarriage. Remember that after Jesus states His authoritative position, the apostles lament that if such was the case it would be better not to marry. No one would conclude this of this position.

It also misunderstands the point Paul is making. It is a summary of the position he set forth in verses 12-14. If you become a Christian and are married to a non-Christian, don’t dissolve the marriage. Under the Old Law, “mixed marriages” were forbidden (Exodus 34:16) and those that were formed had to be dissolved (Ezra 10, Nehemiah 9). These new Christians may have been influenced by such teaching and wondered if that applied to them. Whatever they may have thought, Paul makes clear that they should stay married.

Without a doubt, sorting through and untangling the real-life circumstances of people’s marriages is among the hardest challenges to face in being faithful to Jesus and His will. Our task is to show the compassion of Christ and lovingly minister to all who are confronted with challenges and struggles. While our hearts break for difficult situations, we are not at liberty to pick and choose which commands and teachings of His to teach and which to ignore or change.

Who’s Gonna Feed Them Hogs?

Brent Pollard

On a recent drive home, Tom T. Hall’s “Who’s Gonna Feed Them Hogs” played on the radio. The song’s story of a hog farmer whose life is unexpectedly imperiled strikes a chord with people of faith, who can identify at least three salient points from Scripture in its lyrics. The old man decides that because his pens are full of hogs needing tending, he cannot die, and he makes a remarkable recovery.

1. Feed the Hogs: Responsibility as Biblical Stewardship (Proverbs 27.23)

First, the song touches on responsibility. Someone has to feed all those hogs. The farmer’s concern is not inherently wrong. He has 400 hogs that require tending. As good stewards of what God has entrusted to us, we see that a righteous man cares for his animals (Proverbs 12.10a). Solomon advises: “Know well the condition of your flocks, and pay attention to your herds” (Proverbs 27.23). Biblical faith is not an excuse for irresponsibility. We have families to provide for, work to perform, congregations to serve, and promises to keep. In this, Tom T. Hall’s farmer deserves commendation. He cares about what has been entrusted to him.

2. Tomorrow’s Plans Are Written in Pencil (James 4.13-17)

However, the farmer’s awareness of his mortality should also have led him to reflect on the truth James points out in the fourth chapter of his epistle (vv. 13-17). Whereas the farmer had expected a routine day of chores, he is unexpectedly hospitalized and facing death. The merchants in James 4 say, “Today or tomorrow we will go to such and such a city, and spend a year there and engage in business and make a profit” (13). James replies: “…you do not know what your life will be like tomorrow” (14). The Parable of the Rich Fool (Luke 12.16-21) dovetails nicely with this thought.

Full Barns and Full Pens: The Parable of the Rich Fool (Luke 12.16-21)

The rich fool had barns full of crops. In fact, he had to build more barns to house his surplus. The hog farmer of Hall’s song had pens full of 400 hogs. Death says to both of them, in effect: “What happens to all of this if tonight is your last night?” However, a key difference remains. The rich fool trusted his possessions. As such, he showed where he invested his heart (Luke 12.34). Jesus warns that only hearts invested in heaven have eternal security (Matthew 6.19-21). In contrast, the hog farmer was worried about responsibilities. Yet both confront the same fact: Tomorrow’s plans are always written in pencil.

3. The Delusion of Being Indispensable (Matthew 6.25-34; Psalm 127.1-2)

Ultimately, we arrive at our strongest application for this illustration. The farmer’s anxiety arose from his delusion that he was indispensable. He asks: “If I’m not there, who’s gonna feed them hogs?” Metaphorically speaking, we all have our hogs. Who will take care of my family? Who will teach my class? Who’s going to do this job? Who will carry out this church program? Who will solve this problem if I don’t? This brings us to Matthew 6.25-34 and Psalm 127.1-2. Don’t give in to anxiety and let God build the house.

When Stewardship Mutates Into Anxiety

I am confident in making this point, having already stressed responsibility. We should work diligently. But stewardship can mutate into anxiety, and we can begin to behave as though everything depends on us. “God has given me something to do” becomes “Nothing can function without me.” The first is stewardship, and the second is a burden God never gave. That gives us a memorable progression and our three points.

  • Feed the hogs.
  • Don’t presume you will be here to feed them tomorrow.
  • Trust God when it’s time for someone else to feed them.

What Falls Under These Three Points

Other issues lurk around the periphery—worry, priorities, life’s brevity, wealth, legacy, even preparing others to assume our responsibilities (see 2 Timothy 2.2). However, these all fall beneath the umbrella of the three areas we have already discussed, not creating new categories.

The Hogs Will Get Fed Without Us

The song’s humor makes the third point especially effective. The old hog farmer essentially tells death, “You’ll have to come back for me later because I have 400 hogs depending on me.” And sooner or later, everyone must learn that the hogs will get fed without us. That, too, is God’s providence. It’s not an argument that our lives don’t matter, far from it. It is the argument that God remains God even when our shift is finally over.

Naming Your Own Hogs

So, what are your hogs? Name them honestly, then tend to them faithfully. Work like the task matters, since it does. Yet hold it loosely enough to lay it down when the time comes, trusting that the God who entrusted you with the work will not abandon it when you are gone. God requires faithfulness in our shift, not permanence in it.

Love Your Enemies

Carl Pollard

When we hear the word “enemy,” we tend to think of somebody extreme, like a terrorist, a criminal, or someone actively trying to destroy us. But most of us have enemies in a much more ordinary sense.

An enemy might be someone who embarrassed you, lied about you, betrayed your trust, or hurt your family. It might even be someone you secretly enjoy seeing fail because of how they’ve treated you.

Jesus gave us an incredibly difficult command, “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Matthew 5:44).

This command would be easier if Jesus just told us to leave our enemies alone. But He tells us to LOVE them! But the question is, what does that actually look like?

First, it means praying for people who have wronged us. While Jesus was being crucified, He prayed, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do” (Luke 23:34). Stephen prayed for the very people stoning him (Acts 7:60). It’s difficult to sincerely pray for someone’s salvation while secretly hoping for their destruction.

Second, it means loving people who don’t deserve it. Jesus reminds us that God sends sunlight and rain on the righteous and unrighteous alike (Matthew 5:45). God shows goodness every day to people who curse His name. Our natural instinct is to treat people according to how they treat us. Jesus teaches us to treat people according to the character of our Father.

Romans 5:10 says, “While we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son.” At one point, WE were the enemies! 

God didn’t wait for us to become lovable before demonstrating His love. Christ died for us while we were still sinners (Romans 5:8).

So here’s the question for you. Is there someone you would struggle to see God forgive? Someone whose salvation would bother you because of what they’ve done?

Sometimes our greatest struggle isn’t believing God will forgive us. It’s accepting that He’s willing to forgive them.

Jesus doesn’t ask us to call our enemies good. He asks us to do good to our enemies.

We love our enemies because our Father loved His.

A PROVEN RECIPE FOR PEACE

Gary Pollard

Peace conjures a number of different images in our minds; from hippies to nature’s beauty to inner calm to lack of anxiety. Nearly every group of people in the world craves peace – no rational human being wants to live in constant upheaval. We all want to have peace, but our world somehow is still getting worse and worse. Why is this? The prince of this world is not a being who desires peace (II Corinthians 4.4; Ephesians 2.2; John 12.31). His very existence is dedicated to bringing down anyone who believes in God (I Peter 5:8) and he has no care or concern for the fate or well-being of anyone on this earth. Total, lasting world peace will never be possible as long as time continues (see Romans 8.18-25: sin caused the earth to be subjected to futility). 

Total, lasting world peace may not be possible in this life, but this does not mean the world cannot experience any peace at all. How can we experience peace in our lives? 

Firstly, it has to come from us. The world will never act in a way that brings peace. Anytime the world wishes to better its conditions, it incites civil unrest, riots, protests, and other not-very-peaceful behaviors. Christians, however, are called to be different. I Timothy 2.1ff tells us that praying to God on behalf of all men, for kings, and all who are in authority will allow us to lead quiet and tranquil lives in all godliness and dignity. We can have peace by being obedient to government authorities – even if we do not agree with them politically – because God put them in place (Romans 13). If we want peace, we have to show that peace by how we live. Since man is naturally attracted to peace, our quiet, godly lives will draw others to Christ. 

Secondly, even if our world is in chaos we can have inner peace. Philippians was written to break up a nasty fight between Euodia and Syntyche. To have the “peace beyond what we can understand,” they had to rejoice in the Lord, be reasonable, not be anxious, and reach out to God for their every need. The same applies to us today! Do we get our joy from God or from worldly pursuits? Are we worried about meeting personal needs or do we rely on God (see Phil. 4.19; Matt. 6.25)? Do we try to fix our own problems, relying on our own strength, or do we place them in God’s hands and work with His guidance and providence? The Christian life is not easy, nor is it always peaceful, but the inner peace that a faithful Christian experiences, knowing that their name is in the book of life and that nothing in this short life can disrupt God’s love for them, makes every struggle in this life worth the pain. 

If we want peace, we have to be that peace. We have to live peaceful lives. We have to submit to governing authorities (as long as it is within the parameters of godliness). We have to be unified as a church. We have to look to God for all of our needs. We have to trust that He will take care of us, even if that isn’t in this life. If we can do these things, we will have peace.

Pointless Baggage

Dale Pollard

On Paul’s third missionary journey he would write to a congregation in Rome. Today this letter is viewed as sone of the most theologically deep books in our New Testament. Some think that there are portions of Scripture that are best left alone, or that only a preacher or Bible teacher can decipher the “code.” When we do some digging into the original audience that Paul was writing to, we see something interesting. He was delivering these deep theological concepts to a church that seemed to be largely lacking in spiritual knowledge. In fact, some of the members of this 1st-century church believed that God was glorified through their sins! Clearly they had some growing to do. Paul didn’t say they needed to stick with simple Christian concepts or the basics; he still tries to teach them the difficult and more complicated aspects of Christianity.

This is a call for us to challenge ourselves in our daily studies. The Bible was meant to be understood, but that doesn’t mean that it won’t take some effort on our part. The book of Romans is a rewarding book to study. In fact, it’s difficult to find another book that can give the Christian more joy and confidence in their salvation. In Romans 8:1, Paul writes, “There is therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.” At first glance this may just be a verse that many skim past because of how familiar we are with it. When we study the application of such a simple verse, in context, the benefits are incredible.

There’s no need to agonize over our relationship with Christ, if we’re in Christ. Paul simplifies our salvation by telling us that if we have obeyed the gospel and we’re striving to follow Jesus, we don’t have to live in fear of our standing before God. In fact, this phrase, “in Christ,” appears 172 times in the New Testament, but it’s a phrase that is largely misunderstood. Some Christians believe that through the course of their week they bounce from “saved” to “lost” on a daily basis. The idea of being “in” Christ is really describing a spiritual union— much like marriage! You don’t wake up everyday and ask your spouse,  “Are we still married?” and then worry throughout the day that despite your spouse’s confirmation, you’re just not convinced that you’re really married to them. If we haven’t done anything to separate that union with Christ, we can live confidently knowing we are saved.

What a wonderful feeling. The book of Romans is one that helps us to let of any pointless baggage and live a life of peace and joy. 

The Liar Everyone Believes and the Savior Everyone Doubts

Brent Pollard

Two men stand in the background of a single verse. One wrote a proverb about liars. The other rose from the dead. Guess which one the world finds easier to believe.

The Apostle Paul quotes a man often regarded as semi-mythical, believed to have lived roughly 650 years before Paul’s letter to Titus. In Titus 1.12-13, Paul mentions that this man, Epimenides, gave a truthful statement when he said, “Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons” (NASB95). The irony is that, although considered semi-legendary, most people accept Epimenides’ existence without question. In contrast, the historical Jesus of Nazareth, whom Paul urged Titus to teach about faithfully, is often doubted despite the wealth of textual evidence supporting His existence.

Why? The reason for this is likely the difference in the moral implications of Epimenides’ and Jesus Christ’s existence. The former makes no spiritual demands of the one accepting his existence. The latter, of course, purports to be the Son of God and the Savior of mankind. In other words, the reality of Jesus has a far greater impact on the life of the individual than the reality of Epimenides.

Historical Evidence for Jesus Is Not the Real Obstacle

No scholar loses sleep over Epimenides. He costs nothing. A Cretan poet who called his own countrymen liars demands neither repentance nor worship; he asks only for a footnote. Jesus asks for everything. Paul understood this. Standing before Agrippa, he could insist that “this has not been done in a corner” (Acts 26.26). Luke opened his Gospel by anchoring the story to named emperors, governors, and a census (Luke 2.1-2; 3.1), because he wrote for a man who wanted certainty, not myth. Why, then, does a person weigh the same kind of evidence, accept the poet, and refuse the Lord? Jesus told us. “Men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil” (John 3.19). Unbelief rarely arrives as an intellectual conclusion. It usually arrives as a moral preference wearing a scholar’s gown.

Cost of Believing in Christ

Consider the mechanics of the heart. Admit Epimenides existed, and you may go on eating, sleeping, and sinning exactly as before. Admit that Jesus existed—truly existed, did what the Gospels record, rose as the apostles swore He did—and the floor tilts. Every appetite must answer to Him. Every ambition must kneel. Peter’s hearers felt that tilt on Pentecost when the word “pierced” them, and they cried, “Brethren, what shall we do?” (Acts 2.37). Note the sequence: the fact came first, then the demand. Peter offered no philosophy to admire; he preached a Lord to obey, and three thousand submitted to baptism that day (Acts 2.38, 41). Belief that costs nothing changes nothing. James reminds us that even the demons believe and shudder (James 2.19). The demons hold better theology than the skeptic and worse obedience than a child.

Why the Demands of Jesus Are Good News

Here, the Cretan proverb turns a corner. Paul agreed with Epimenides: the Cretans lied and gorged themselves. Then he told Titus to reprove them “so that they may be sound in the faith” (Titus 1.13). Diagnosis served as a cure. The demands of Christ do not tax the reluctant; they trace the shape of the life He died to give. “The grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men, instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age” (Titus 2.11-12). Grace instructs. Grace does not merely excuse the glutton; it feeds him on something better until the old husks lose their savor. The man who fears Jesus’ claims has the matter backward. He guards his little kingdom of appetites as though God came to rob him, when God came to enlarge him. Every demand of Christ invites us into a joy the Cretan never tasted: “In Your presence is fullness of joy” (Psalm 16.11).

Faithful Christian Living Begins with Honest Belief

So examine what you actually believe. Not what you affirm on a Sunday morning, but what governs you when you’re not assembled with the church. If Jesus remains a historical curiosity to you, you have received Him as the world receives Epimenides: acknowledged, cataloged, ignored. If He is the risen Son of God, then Paul’s charge to Titus becomes your charge: teach sound doctrine, adorn it with sound living (Titus 2.1, 10), and let no appetite call itself master. The evidence was never the problem. The throne was the problem. Surrender the throne, and the gluttons of Crete—and of your own heart—become “a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds” (Titus 2.14). Believe Him. Then obey Him. The world may keep its comfortable poets. We will keep our costly Christ.

The Observations About Self-Righteousness

Neal Pollard

The word “self-righteous” does not appear in scripture.  The dictionary defines the word as “filled with a conviction of being morally superior to others; smugly virtuous.”  That attitude is certainly found and discussed in scripture.  Jesus told a parable “to some who  trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and viewed others with contempt” (Luke 18:9; the NIV has “confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everybody else”).  In Luke 16, Jesus tells the Pharisees, “You are those who justify yourselves in the sight of men” (15).  Much of what Jesus says in Matthew 23 is devoted to confronting the scribes and Pharisees’ feelings of moral superiority.

There are some common traits among the self-righteous.  It is not a question of one’s sincerity or conviction, but of how one behaves under the guise of either.  None of us should want to fall into the category of the self-righteous.

First, the self-righteous often see others’ failings, but not their own.  Such a one could fill a book with what the other one is doing wrong, but spend very little time in meaningful self-examination (cf. 2 Cor. 13:5).  Self-righteousness can display itself in constant criticism or hypercriticism of others.  It is easier to pick apart the actions of others than to be self-aware.  Yet, reminding ourselves that all sin will add humility to the way we handle their perceived faults and flaws.

Also, self-righteousness is not true righteousness.  There is a big difference.  True righteousness can be classified with goodness and truth (Eph. 5:9), but self-righteousness is neither good nor true.  True righteousness is coupled with peace and joy, but self-righteousness works against both (Rom. 14:17).  True righteousness can be mentioned in the same breath with self-control (Acts 24:25), but self-righteousness is often devoid of it.  That is the irony of self-righteousness.  It really is not righteous at all.

Further, self-righteousness is often  a product of pride.  It is often a byproduct of one elevating his or her judgments, opinions, and feelings to the level of law.  One’s own preference can become what all should do.  One’s conviction can become the best or the only way.  If we are not careful, conviction and preference can become self-righteousness.

God wants His people righteous.  There is too much worldliness and embracing of sin among even children of God.  This is unrighteousness and no one should aspire to that.  Yet, let us be careful to place our trust in God’s rather than our own righteousness.

The Blood That Is Never Anemic

Brent Pollard

A hematologist once quipped that the bone marrow is like a brick-making factory. The bricks are blood cells. He told me that my body made poor bricks.

Hence, anemia has been an issue I have dealt with for a long time. I have sometimes joked that if “the life is in the blood,” then there have been periods when I must have been partially dead.

Obviously, that is only a joke. When Moses wrote, “the life of the flesh is in the blood” (Leviticus 17.11), he was not saying that someone with a low hemoglobin count possesses only part of a life. Nor was he giving Israel an advanced lesson in modern hematology.

His point concerned sacrifice.

The Life of the Flesh Is in the Blood

God continued: “I have given it to you on the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood by reason of the life that makes atonement” (Leviticus 17.11).

Blood represented a life surrendered.

Anyone in the ancient world could observe the connection between blood and death. An animal whose blood poured out soon ceased to breathe. Long before anyone understood hemoglobin, oxygen transport, or circulation, people understood the more basic truth that blood was intimately connected with life.

But God took that observable reality and gave it theological significance. He did not describe biology; He assigned meaning.

The blood placed upon Israel’s altar said, in effect, that a life has been given.

That explains why blood was treated with such seriousness under the Law. Israel was forbidden to consume it because “the blood is the life” (Deuteronomy 12.23). It belonged to God, who had appointed it for the altar. Hebrews compresses the arrangement into a clause: “without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” (Hebrews 9.22). Sin has never been cheap.

Sacrificial Anemia: Bulls and Goats Fell Short

Yet there was a problem.

An animal’s blood represented a life, but it could never equal the human life stained by sin. Hebrews states the limitation plainly: “For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins” (Hebrews 10.4).

Those sacrifices were not mistakes. God commanded them. They taught Israel holiness, guilt, substitution, death, and atonement. But they were shadows pointing beyond themselves.

A bull could die. A goat could bleed. A lamb could be offered. But none of them could provide the final answer to human sin.

They were, in a sense, sacrificially deficient.

That brings us back to anemia.

When a person is anemic, the blood is deficient in something the body needs. Perhaps too few healthy red blood cells, perhaps too little hemoglobin. Whatever the cause, the blood cannot do its work, and the person may grow weak, tired, dizzy, or short of breath.

Israel’s altar carried a comparable deficiency. Every priest stood “offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins” (Hebrews 10.11). Standing. Always standing. The tabernacle held no chair because the work was never finished.

Human blood can be deficient. The blood of Jesus Christ never is.

Blood and Water at Calvary

John brings us to Calvary in his nineteenth chapter. Because the Sabbath was approaching, the soldiers intended to hasten death by breaking the legs of the crucified men. They broke the legs of the two beside Jesus.

“But coming to Jesus, when they saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs” (John 19.33).

Then John records the detail we cannot forget: “One of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out” (John 19.34).

Notice the order.

The soldier did not take Jesus’ life. Jesus was already dead. Earlier, He had said of His life, “No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative” (John 10.18). Rome furnished the spear. Rome did not furnish the sacrifice.

The spear demonstrated what had already happened. Jesus had truly given His life, and Calvary fulfilled the principle God had taught Israel through centuries of sacrifice.

The blood represented life. And this time, the life offered was not that of a bull, goat, or lamb. It was the life of the Son of God.

Jesus anticipated this when He took the cup and said, “This is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins” (Matthew 26.28). Peter described Christians as redeemed “with precious blood, as of a lamb unblemished and spotless, the blood of Christ” (1 Peter 1.19). Weigh the adjective. Precious. Paul wrote that in Him “we have redemption through His blood” (Ephesians 1.7). Hebrews says Christ entered the holy place “through His own blood” and obtained “eternal redemption” (Hebrews 9.12).

The Blood of Christ Never Runs Low

Moses’ sacrifices continued to be offered because their work was never complete. Jesus did not need to repeat His sacrifice. His offering was sufficient, and He “sat down at the right hand of God” (Hebrews 10.12).

Once was enough.

Yet here is the wonderful paradox: the sacrifice happened once, but its cleansing power continues. John writes: “If we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin” (1 John 1.7).

John writes to Christians—people who have already come to Christ. Yet they still need the cleansing His blood provides.

Christ’s blood does not become less effective with the passing of time. It does not weaken after cleansing a certain number of sins. It does not become depleted because millions have appealed to its power. It does not cleanse yesterday’s sins only to prove insufficient for today’s.

There is no shortage in the supply God has provided. Stop rationing your repentance as though the fountain might run dry.

Walking in the Light

John does not teach that Christians may deliberately live in darkness while presuming upon that sacrifice. The promise belongs to those who “walk in the Light.” Neither does it mean sinless perfection; John immediately acknowledges that Christians still sin. “If we confess our sins,” he writes, God “is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1.9).

So walk. Confess quickly. Forgive the brother whose debt costs far less than yours.

The Christian lives, therefore, not in terror that Christ’s sacrifice may someday prove insufficient, but in grateful dependence upon the blood that never loses its sufficiency.

My bone marrow may occasionally make poor bricks. My blood may sometimes fail to carry what my body needs as efficiently as it should. I can joke that there have been times when, if life is in the blood, I must have been only partially alive.

But there is nothing deficient about the blood upon which my spiritual life depends.

The blood of bulls and goats could point toward forgiveness but could never finally provide it. The blood of Jesus does what theirs could not. It cleanses. It redeems. It reconciles.

And for those who continue walking in the light, it continues to cleanse “from all sin.”

Human blood may become anemic. The blood of Christ never will.

Two Faces

Neal Pollard

Recently, I witnessed something I have seen before but that never gets easier to watch.  A person who on several occasions has had something negative and disparaging to say about another person when he was not around was speaking to him, using sweet, flattering and complimentary words.  The same person has used similar words in speaking to me.  It left me cold, certain that I cannot trust the kind words this person directs my way.

By definition, one is two-faced who is “marked by deliberate deceptiveness especially by pretending one set of feelings and acting under the influence of another” (Princeton University, Wordnet).  One etymology source says the first recorded use of “two face” was in 1619, though nothing more is said of that record (www.etymonline.com).  But, many scholars see the origin of the concept in Roman mythology and the god Janus for whom the month January is named.  He is said, as a symbol of change, to see into the past with one face and into the future with another face.  His faces pointed in the opposite direction (en.academic.ru).  Apparently, the concept morphed from looking two directions to showing two sets of feelings, being duplicitous, deceitful, and hypocritical.

When you do a New Testament word study, the word most closely akin to “two faced” is “hypocrisy.”  In fact, the word itself is simply a transliteration (writing or printing out a letter or word using the closest corresponding letters of a different alphabet or language) of the Greek word.  The original word first was theatrical language meaning “playacting.”  Thus, the verb form of the word, found in Luke 20:20, is used to describe how the scribes and high priests pretended to be sincere in order to trap Jesus.

Such a practice is dishonest, for it makes the subject of the hypocrisy think you feel or believe one way when in reality you do not (cf. Mt. 23:28).  Such a practice is harmful to influence, because in showing others your “second face” you reveal yourself as not genuine, trustworthy, or honorable (cf. Gal. 2:13).  Such a practice is sinful and, thus spiritual darkness.  Peter says to “put it aside” (1 Pet. 2:1).

Let us be careful that we do not confuse attempted tact and diplomacy with dishonesty, evil influence, and sin.  Let us keep our ethics aboveboard and our integrity intact.  Let us have one face, the same face, for everyone wherever we are and to whomever we speak.

Turn The Other Cheek

Carl Pollard

Few statements of Jesus have been misunderstood more than Matthew 5:39, “But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.” 

Some have tried to soften Jesus’ words until they mean almost the opposite of what He said. But we need to allow the context to determine the meaning.

Jesus is addressing personal retaliation. Just before this, He quotes the Old Testament principle, “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” (Matthew 5:38). That command was originally given as a standard of justice (Exodus 21:23–25). The punishment was to fit the crime. It wasn’t permission for an individual to take revenge.

By Jesus’ day, however, people could use that principle to justify getting even, “You hurt me, so I have the right to hurt you.”

Jesus says His followers must live differently. The slap on the right cheek is important. For a right-handed person to strike someone on the right cheek would most naturally involve a backhanded slap. In that culture, this could function as an insult and humiliation. Jesus describes someone attacking your dignity and says essentially, you don’t have to answer every insult with another insult.

That doesn’t mean Christians can never protect themselves, protect their families or flee from danger. Scripture recognizes the legitimate role of civil authorities in punishing wrongdoing (Romans 13:1–4). Jesus Himself sometimes withdrew from those seeking to harm Him (John 8:59). Paul appealed to his legal rights when he was mistreated (Acts 22:25).

Matthew 5:39 is about revenge, retaliation, and the heart that demands payback.

Peter explains it perfectly. When Jesus, “was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten” (1 Peter 2:23).

Jesus isn’t teaching cowardice. He’s teaching extraordinary self-control. Anybody can return insult for insult. Anybody can strike back when their pride has been wounded. Anybody can demand the last word.

Jesus calls His followers to something harder. When someone insults you, you don’t have to destroy them. When someone embarrasses you, you don’t have to embarrass them. When someone wrongs you, vengeance doesn’t belong to you.

Turning the other cheek doesn’t mean pretending evil is good. It means refusing to become evil because someone was evil to you.

The World’s Most Venomous Snake?

Neal Pollard

As one who could not be more afraid of snakes, I was thrilled when one of my sons told me what was the deadliest snake in the world.  The Inland Taipan, native to Australia, is the most venomous land snake on earth, and it has the most toxic venom known to exist.  Yet, it is a shy snake, not known to be aggressive toward humans.  Far more people die from cobras, rattlesnakes, and mambas than reclusive, though deadly, snakes like the Taipan, the boomslang, and the tiger snake.

Mike O’Shea, author of Venemous Snakes of the World, was interviewed by Princeton University Press, and in the course of the conversation he mentioned many of the fables and myths about treating poisonous snake bites that actually do more harm than good.  He listed tourniquets, razor-cuts, venom extractors, and herbal, magical, or traditional treatments, and all of us have heard of some or all of these suggested “cures,” as wrong ways to treat such a bite.  Then he said what was most effective: keep the bite area and the victim still, keep the victim awake and as reassured as possible, keep pressure on neurotoxic bites, keep the airways clear, and perform CPR as needed.  Obviously, in all cases, the biggest, best thing to do is get the victim medical help and get a description of the offender if unable to kill and bring it with you and the victim to the hospital.

The Bible calls the devil “the serpent of old” (Rev. 12:9; 20:2).  It also draws some correlation between the serpent and the devil in 2 Corinthians 11:3, 13-14 (deceiving and craftiness).  Most feel certain that the devil was involved in the Eden events in which a serpent beguiled Eve.  Likening the work and effects of the devil to that of a deadly snake is not a stretch.

If a species of snake enjoyed in physical terms the success the devil enjoys in spiritual terms, every health and emergency services agency in every nation around the world would rise up today and make its eradication their top priority.  They would not rest until this creature was fought and defeated.  To say they would be diligent would be to grossly understate the matter.

Yet, the devil is inserting his toxic poison into the hearts of willing victims every second of time.  If only the worst he could do was kill the body.  He is ruining souls (cf. 2 Tim. 2:25-26), which impacts eternity.

We should avoid places where he is likely to be (1 The. 5:22).  We should take precautions (1 Pet. 5:8).  We should know his habits and methods (2 Cor. 2:11).  We should fight him (1 Pet. 5:9; Js. 4:8; Eph. 6:11).

If we are “bitten” by him, we need to seek help, being reassured that Christ has the power to heal us if we properly treat the “wound.”  As scary as the devil can seem, God is more powerful.  We have the help of others at our disposal, but more importantly we have God’s help and His cure is 100% successful if applied.

Wounds Without a Cause

Brent Pollard

Solomon buries a strange phrase inside a warning about strong drink, and most readers hurry past it.

“Who has woe? Who has sorrow? Who has contentions? Who has complaining? Who has wounds without cause? Who has redness of eyes? Those who linger long over wine…” (Proverbs 23.29–30 NASB95)

Wounds without cause. The phrase arrests me.

Recently, I found myself thinking about those words after developing a painful hematoma. There had been no fall, no bump into a table, no memorable injury. It simply appeared. As someone taking blood thinners, I know there is a medical explanation, even if I cannot point to a particular moment and say, “That is when it happened.” Even so, Solomon’s phrase echoed in my mind for days. Somewhere in my body, a small vessel failed. I never felt it. I only saw the aftermath.

That experience sent me back to the proverb, and the proverb sent me somewhere I did not expect to go.

What Proverbs 23.29–30 Actually Describes

Solomon was not writing about medication or fragile capillaries. He was sketching a portrait of the drunkard who wakes bruised, battered, and unable to account for his injuries. The wounds are not genuinely causeless. The man cannot trace them, because the wine that battered him also stole his judgment, his awareness, and his memory.

Read the end of the chapter, and you hear him speak for himself: “They struck me, but I did not become ill; They beat me, but I did not know it. When shall I awake? I will seek another drink” (Proverbs 23.35). There is the horror of it. Sin anesthetizes the very faculty that would identify sin as the culprit. It leaves scars and then erases the fingerprints.

Every generation invents new anesthetics. The substance changes; the mechanism does not. Whatever dulls conscience will eventually dull the ability to name what has gone wrong. That is why the wise man begs us to stay awake.

When Suffering Has No Explanation: Job and the Man Born Blind

But the phrase carries a second freight, and Scripture will not let us set it down.

Sometimes life wounds us in ways we cannot explain, and no moral arithmetic will balance the ledger.

Job’s friends tried the arithmetic. They reasoned that extraordinary suffering must indicate extraordinary sin, and they pressed that logic on a shattered man for chapter after chapter. God’s verdict on their theology was withering: “My wrath is kindled against you and against your two friends, because you have not spoken of Me what is right as My servant Job has” (Job 42.7). They defended God with arguments God rejected. Zeal did not excuse them.

Centuries later, the disciples made the same mistake with a beggar’s face before them. “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he would be born blind?” Jesus answered, “It was neither that this man sinned, nor his parents; but it was so that the works of God might be displayed in him” (John 9.2–3). He refused the question as framed. He did not assign blame; He gave sight.

Jesus dismantled the same reasoning again when men brought Him news of Galileans slaughtered at their sacrifices and eighteen crushed beneath a falling tower. Were they worse offenders than everyone else in Jerusalem? “I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish” (Luke 13.5). Tragedy is not a scoreboard. Tragedy is a summons.

Why Christians Must Not Invent Reasons for Pain

Here is the practical discipline this demands of us.

Christians should be careful not to invent explanations where God has revealed none. A diagnosis is not necessarily divine punishment. An accident is not always the consequence of poor decisions. A chronic illness is not proof of weak faith. We live in a fallen creation where bodies weaken, diseases develop, blood vessels rupture, bones break, and hearts fail. These realities are not always traceable to a specific personal failing.

When we manufacture a reason for another believer’s affliction, we are not comforting them. We are prosecuting them. And we do it, usually, because their unexplained pain unsettles our tidy assumptions about how God runs the world. Silence feels like weakness, so we fill it with explanation.

Note what Job’s friends did right before they did everything wrong. They sat with him on the ground seven days and seven nights, “and no one spoke a word to him, for they saw that his pain was very great” (Job 2.13). That week was ministry. The speeches were not.

Sit down. Bring food. Say less. Weep with those who weep (Romans 12.15). You are not required to explain the wound to bind it.

A Groaning Creation and the Redemption of the Body

That does not mean God is absent.

Paul teaches that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now, and that we ourselves groan within, “waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body” (Romans 8.22–23). Every unexplained ache, every mysterious diagnosis, every wound that seems to appear from nowhere testifies that this world is not the one God originally intended and not the one He will finally leave us in. Groaning is not faithlessness. Groaning is the sound of hope straining forward.

So Paul can look straight at a wasting body and call the affliction momentary and light, because he weighs it against an eternal weight of glory and fixes his eyes on what cannot be seen (2 Corinthians 4.16–18). That is not denial. That is accurate accounting. He also carried a thorn he never had explained to him, only answered: “My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness” (2 Corinthians 12.9). God gave him Himself instead of information, and Paul counted it the better bargain.

We are pilgrims desiring a better country (Hebrews 11.16). Pilgrims do not demand that the road make sense. They keep walking because they trust the One who mapped it.

Trusting the Great Physician Until Every Wound Is Healed

One day the Great Physician will complete His work. There will be no unexplained bruises, mysterious illnesses, failing lungs, aching joints, or wounded hearts. “He will wipe away every tear from their eyes; and there will no longer be any death; there will no longer be any mourning, or crying, or pain” (Revelation 21.4). Every effect of sin and death will finally be undone, and the undoing will be thorough.

Until then, entrust your soul to a faithful Creator in doing what is right (1 Peter 4.19). Not in understanding what is right. In doing it. Worship on Sunday with a body that hurts. Serve someone whose suffering makes less sense than yours. Refuse bitterness the way you would refuse a drink that promised to make you forget.

Some wounds will still seem to come without a cause. They may puzzle us, inconvenience us, or frighten us. They are never outside the knowledge of our heavenly Father.

We may not always understand our wounds, but we can always trust the One who does.

When God Says, “Grow Up”

Neal Pollard

It does not matter how long a church has existed at a location. Nor does it matter how long an individual Christian has been a baptized believer. It is still possible for a Christian or a congregation to be deemed immature or in need of growing up. To a congregation that had been established for some time, Paul writes, “And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ” (Ephesians 4:11-15). 

This is a rich passage of Scripture, from which we can draw so much application. However, notice the specific thing Paul writes about achieving spiritual maturity. The way to avoid being spiritual infants, according to the context, is three-fold.

No longer be tossed here and there by waves. The imagery is of instability and lacking an anchor. Know what you stand for and stand there! Follow God’s Word and reject anything else. Because many don’t know God’s Word, they accept every new teaching that comes along without studying it through and examining it critically.

No longer be carried about. The imagery is of being easily led and duped. The old circus mogul, P.T. Barnum, liked to put it, “There’s a sucker born every minute!” Paul says no longer be carried about “by winds.” There were others claiming to have the truth and who denied Jesus. No longer be carried about “by tricks.” There were others trying to back up their message with false proofs and perhaps claims that were meant to trick those not grounded in the truth. No longer be carried about “by schemes.” There were strategies and ploys attempted to try and truth people from God’s grace. 

Speak the truth in love. Paul says that if the Ephesians believed what he was saying about Christ, the blessings in Christ, and the blessings of the church of Christ, they would be a grown up church. Notice that by not only rejecting all other ways but by doing what they can to teach and live the right message, they were going to be a full-grown, mature church. The right message produces the right kind of response in the right kind of hearts. 

Ephesians 4:16 says that the whole body causes the growth of the body. This growth relies on good joints and individual working parts. In other words, we’ve got to work together and realize our interdependency,. A few people cannot do the work of the whole body. Imagine how you’d go through life in only three or four of the parts of your body functioned. You might be able to chew, blink, and smell, but what if that was it? There’s not a part of your body that is not important and necessary. Try walking without a big toe or wearing glasses without an ear lobe.

The church can’t grow like it should if you and I aren’t doing our part. Paul has spent three and a half chapters talking about how important the church is. Then he writes these words. It is Christ’s body, it was in God’s mind from eternity, and it is how God is glorified. He wants each congregation, and every individual member of it, to do what it takes to grow up! 

Never Assume Someone Is Beyond Saving

Brent Pollard

Never assume someone is beyond saving.

The Deadliest Single-Aircraft Accident in History

On August 12, 1985, on the eve of Japan’s Obon holiday—when millions travel to their hometowns to honor departed loved ones—524 people, many of them families, boarded Japan Airlines Flight 123 from Tokyo’s Haneda Airport bound for Osaka. Seven years earlier, an improper structural repair to the aircraft’s rear pressure bulkhead had unknowingly planted the seeds of disaster. After more than 12,000 pressurization cycles, the weakened bulkhead failed just 12 minutes into the flight at an altitude of 24,000 feet. The aircraft’s vertical stabilizer tore away, all four hydraulic systems were destroyed, and the pilots had almost no means of controlling the airplane.

For the next 32 minutes, the crew fought to keep Flight 123 airborne as it oscillated in a violent Dutch roll while repeatedly climbing and diving in what aviators call a phugoid cycle. The aircraft lurched through the sky in a terrifying, three-dimensional motion that made it nearly impossible to maintain a steady heading. At 6:56 PM, it slammed into Mount Osutaka in Gunma Prefecture. Only four people survived. To this day, Flight 123 remains the deadliest single-aircraft accident in aviation history.

At first glance, this sounds like nothing more than another aviation disaster. It wasn’t. It is also a story about what can happen when people conclude there is no one left to rescue.

A Tragedy That Hits Close to Home

This tragedy also strikes an oddly personal note for me. Mount Osutaka lies in Gunma Prefecture, the birthplace of my late Aunt Maki Mitchell (née Iishi). Her hometown is only about sixty-six miles from the crash site. Since she married a U.S. Air Force airman stationed in Japan, other parts of this story resonate personally as well.

When Rescuers Concluded No One Was Left to Rescue

Survivors of the Flight 123 crash were seated in the back, as the front absorbed most of the impact with the mountain, acting as a crumple zone that reduced G-forces at the rear. One survivor was off-duty stewardess Yumi Ochiai, who noted that there were more survivors initially. Some believe that additional lives were lost because the JSDF helicopter reported seeing no signs of life from the air, reducing the perceived urgency of the rescue. The principal rescue force spent the night approximately thirty-nine miles from the crash site and did not reach the wreckage until daylight.

The tragedy worsened as the U.S. Air Force, based in Western Tokyo’s Tama Area, monitored the doomed flight on radar. Unaware of the damage, they offered their 11,000-foot runway for a landing. After the crash, a C-130 located the wreckage in 20 minutes and, at 7:17 PM, informed Japanese authorities and Yokota, triggering the deployment of a rescue helicopter. By 8:30 PM, a Marine helicopter arrived to lower two pararescuemen. The crew searched for a drop site with searchlights. At 9:15 PM, Japanese authorities claimed full jurisdiction over the incident, and at 9:20 PM, U.S. personnel were ordered to leave despite their willingness to assist.

Spiritually, we can make the same mistake by looking at someone’s life and concluding there is no one left to rescue.

Waving in the Darkness

Meanwhile, Yumi Ochiai lay on the ground. She had heard the helicopters and could see the probing lights. Yet she was too pained to yell loudly, so she waved her hand, hoping to attract their attention. Other survivors called out to the lights in the sky above, all in vain. The helicopter hovered over the canopy, and the engine noise kept U.S. personnel from hearing their cries. Personally, I cannot imagine what the poor souls lying on the mountain below must have thought when they were suddenly left in darkness again.

Imagine waving with what little strength you have left while those sent to help cannot see you. There are people around us who are doing the spiritual equivalent every day.

As Long as There Is Breath, There Is Hope

Eight-year-old survivor Mikiko Yoshizaki and her mother, 34-year-old Hiroko Yoshizaki, took turns yelling at each other to stay awake during the 14 hours they waited for rescuers. Sadly, Hiroko’s husband and two other children seated beside them had perished in the crash. Twelve-year-old Keiko Kawakami spoke to her father and sister in the wreckage before they finally grew cold and quiet in the early morning.

As long as there was breath in their lungs, there was hope. As long as a sinner is alive, there is hope.

The Great Physician Never Gives Up on a Soul

Jesus never assumed anyone was beyond saving. He sought tax collectors, prostitutes, Samaritans, thieves, and even the persecutor Saul of Tarsus. While others saw hopeless cases, our Lord saw souls worth rescuing. “For the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost” (Luke 19.10).

The heartbreaking part is that this may not have been inevitable. A Japanese physician whose identity remained anonymous said that dozens of victims did not suffer fatal internal trauma from the impact itself. They died from hypovolemic shock (severe blood loss) and extreme hypothermia caused by the cold, damp mountain air at 5,135 feet. He said that if rescuers had arrived only ten hours earlier, they could have saved more lives.

Let us not end with the thoughts of one physician, but the teachings of the Great Physician.

Seek the Lost and Leave the Results to God

Every congregation has someone others have quietly given up on.

Every family has someone everyone assumes will never change.

Every community has people whose lives appear beyond repair.

Yet as long as there is breath, there is hope. As long as a sinner lives, the gospel still has work to do.

Christians have never been commissioned to decide who is salvageable. We have been commanded to seek the lost (Luke 15.4ff), proclaim the gospel (Matthew 28.19–20), and leave the results to God (1 Corinthians 3.6; Isaiah 55.11).

Never assume someone is beyond saving.

Many Will Say to Me, “Lord, Lord”

Carl Pollard

Few passages in Scripture are as sobering as Jesus’ words in Matthew 7:21–23. Throughout the Bible we find warnings like, “Depart from Me,” “The door was shut,” and “You fool! This night your soul is required of you.” But perhaps the most unsettling is Jesus describing people who fully expected to enter paradise only to hear, “I never knew you; depart from Me.”

These weren’t atheists or people who openly rejected Christ. They called Him “Lord.” They believed they belonged to Him and even pointed to a lifetime of religious accomplishments. Their confidence was real, but it was misplaced.

Jesus spoke these words at the conclusion of the Sermon on the Mount. After teaching about anger, purity, prayer, generosity, worry, and judgment, He ends with a series of contrasts: two gates, two roads, two trees, two builders, and ultimately two kinds of disciples. His message is that appearances can be deceiving. The road to destruction can look remarkably religious.

From Matthew 7:21-23 we learn first that saying the right words isn’t enough. Jesus says, “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven.” Calling Jesus “Lord” means recognizing His authority. But many want the comfort of calling Him Savior without submitting to Him as Master. As Jesus asked in Luke 6:46, “Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and not do what I tell you?” Genuine faith is demonstrated when we surrender our will to His, especially when obedience is difficult.

Second, religious activity isn’t enough. Those standing before Jesus had an impressive spiritual résumé. They prophesied, cast out demons, and performed mighty works in His name. Today, someone might point to years of church attendance, teaching Bible classes, preaching sermons, or serving in leadership. None of those things are wrong, but none of them save us. Religion becomes dangerous when our confidence rests in what we’ve done rather than in Christ. It’s possible to preach about prayer without praying or teach God’s Word while neglecting to obey it! As a preacher, this scripture is a needed reminder to me. 

Jesus’ statement, “I never knew you,” reveals the heart of the issue. Scripture often uses the word “know” to describe a relationship. These people knew about Jesus, but they never truly belonged to Him. Outward religion had hidden lives that were never genuinely surrendered to God’s will. On the Day of Judgment, appearances will disappear, and only reality will remain.

Jesus tells us what separates the true disciple from the false one, “The one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.” Obedience doesn’t earn salvation, but it reveals genuine faith. Christians aren’t perfect. We stumble, repent, and depend daily on God’s grace. The difference is between a heart that struggles to obey and a heart that refuses to obey.

This truth is reinforced immediately afterward in the parable of the wise and foolish builders. Both heard Jesus’ words, but only one obeyed them. Before the storm, both houses looked secure. Only when the storm came was the foundation revealed. Judgment Day will expose what our confidence has truly been built upon.

Matthew 7 challenges every one of us to examine the foundation of our assurance. Our confidence can’t rest on feelings, family heritage, years in the church, or even a list of good works. It has got to rest on Christ alone as we walk in obedient faith. The question Jesus leaves us with is simple but essential. Does my life match my confession? If I call Him Lord, does He truly have authority over my life? Genuine assurance doesn’t belong to the ones with the most impressive résumé, but to those who trust Christ, submit to His rule, and faithfully follow Him.