My Answer: No. 1

INTRODUCTION
"Let your word be always with grace, seasoned with salt, so as to know how ye ought to answer each one", Colossians 4: 6.

My Answer replies to questions as to the Scriptures and as to matters referred to on 'My Brethren' – rather than to the somewhat controversial matters dealt with in My Stand.

• From time to time we hope to be able to feature an 'answer' by one of our guests.

• If you have a question you can send it to MB on the
  Guests: Sign Guest Book Message form.

• If you haven't signed in before, your name will be entered in the Guest Book.

G.A.R.

Page Top

"NOT  THAT  WE  RULE  OVER  YOUR  FAITH"
2 Corinthians 1: 24

From: Daniel Soukoreff
WesternNameplatesATbigfoot.com
Vancouver, BC
Fri, 5 Feb 1999

Dear Gordon,
How do you understand 2 Corinthians 1: 24 "Not that we rule over your faith". What would an example of this be?

Your brother in Christ, Daniel.

Mon, 08 Feb 1999
Dear Daniel,

2 Corinthians 1: 24

Regarding your question: "Not that we rule over your faith" is an integral part of verses 23-24

• which allude to the implication earlier in the chapter that he had been criticized for not coming as he had proposed.

• Coming he would have had to use his apostolic authority to deal with the situation in Corinth but he desired to "spare" them, no doubt hoping his letter would be used to correct them.

• "Not that we rule over your faith" seems to be brought in to soften what may have been criticized by Paul's opposers there – 10: 9-10 – as a harsh approach, as also the use of "fellow-workmen".

• In this Paul was demonstrating the character of Christ – "ministers of the new covenant", 3: 6, and "your bondmen for Jesus' sake", 4: 5 and contrasting his service to those he would expose in chapter 11.

Paul was labouring to bring the brethren back up to the level from which partisanship – 1 Corinthians chapters 1-3 – had dragged them down.

• His statement was an advance preparation for his condemnation of the actions of – as his manner was in contrast to – some locally who were "false apostles … who transform themselves as ministers of righteousness", 11: 13-15.

• The brethren at Corinth were being ruled over by "fools ... For ye bear if any one bring you into bondage …", 11: 19-20.
  • This is what brethren have experienced since 1959 – and some are groaning under it still.

• Peter supports Paul, exhorting the elders, "not as lording it over your possessions, but being models for the flock", 1 Peter 5: 3.

Yours in the Lord, Gordon.

APOLLOS  –  TWELVE DISCIPLES
Acts 18: 24-28; 19: 1-7

From: Karl Paluga
kpalugaATsparak.com
Pelican Rapids, MN
Tue, 23 Nov 1999

Dear Gordon,
I have a question about Acts 18: 24-28 and Acts 19: 1-7, where Apollos is apparently justified and preaching and teaching in Ephesus.

• Since, he is "being fervent in the Spirit", and "he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord", Acts 18: 25.
  • But it also says in the same verse that he knew "only the baptism of John".

Aquila and Priscilla heard his preaching and teaching and "took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly", Acts 18: 26. Then Apollos moved on into Achaia.

Thereafter, Paul arrives in Ephesus and finds twelve "disciples" and is confused, because of their lack of spiritual power.

• He then questions them about receiving the Holy Spirit and "unto what then were the baptized?", Acts 19: 1-3.

• When Paul finds out that they were baptized "unto John's baptism", by hearing it from their own lips, he then baptizes them "in the name of the Lord Jesus", Acts 19: 5,

• correctly identifying them with the Lord Jesus and His death, the person of the Lord Jesus and His finished work as we know Him in this dispensation,

• not according to John's baptism, which identified the baptized person with Christ – the Messiah – of the Kingdom of Israel – a total different aspect of His person and work that is in the future, when He rules and reigns on David's throne in the millenium.

My questions concerning this word are:

• Note: The questions appear at the end of the answer.

Secure, accepted, and complete in Him, Karl.

Thu, 25 Nov 1999
Dear Karl,

Acts 18: 24-28 and Acts 19: 1-7

• On his way to Jerusalem Paul stopped in Ephesus, leaving Pricilla and Aquila there. On his brief visit, according to his custom, "entering himself into the synagogue he reasoned with the Jews" promising to return again. Acts 18:19-21.

• Subsequently Apollos came to Ephesus, "And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue".

• After Apollos went to Corinth Paul returned, "And entering into the synagogue, he spoke boldly during three months".

The "assembly" was a distinct entity in Jerusalem and in Antioch, and there were acknowledged assemblies as the result of Paul's earlier ministry. Acts 14: 23.

• However at the time, there was no assembly, as such, in Ephesus,

• The assembly, though not so designated, could only be considered to be taking form publicly when Paul "left them and separated the disciples, reasoning daily in the school of Tyrannus", Acts 19: 9.

Into this synagogue setting came "a certain Jew, Apollos by name", identified similarly to Aquila. Acts 18: 2.

• Apollos was "an Alexandrian by race". There was a large and well-established Jewish community in Alexandia,
  • perhaps originating with those who went down to Egypt in an attempt to escape the Babylonian captivity. Jeremiah 43: 1-7, etc.

• Apollos would be born anew, but there is no evidence that he had believed in the Lord Jesus as preached by the apostles, had received the Spirit or was "justified".
  • It is doubtful that being "instructed in the way of the Lord" refers to the Lord Jesus, but rather to the substance of John's preaching. Luke 3: 1-20.

  • and "being fervent in the Spirit" is rendered by JND as "being fervent in his spirit".

• As "Aquila and Priscilla … unfolded to him the way of God more exactly", Apollos would, no doubt, believe on the Lord Jesus, receive the Spirit and be baptized – although the Spirit saw fit to omit such details.

The powerful ministry of John the baptist had a great effect on Jerusalem and Judea, and he had made many disciples. John 3: 25; 4: 1.

• It is possible that, after John was beheaded some of his disciples – Matthew 14: 12 – may have feared for their own lives and fled to Alexandria and other places where the Jews were in dispersion. John 7: 35.

• They – and any disciples they later made by John's baptism – would have missed the coming of the Spirit at Pentecost and the testimony to Jesus as "glorified". Acts 2: 33; 3: 13; John 7: 37-39.
  • This would explain the answer to Paul, "We did not even hear if the Holy Spirit was come".

• Through such means, John's call to repentance and his baptism may have reached Apollos, so that
  • "he spoke and taught exactly" i.e., 'accurately' as Luke 1: 3 "the things concerning Jesus," not the Lord Jesus, Acts 2: 36 "knowing only the baptism of John". Luke 3: 1-22.

Now as to your specific questions:

Does this situation still apply and if so when? why? for whom?

The exact situation could not be expected today, but a parallel exists in Christendom:

• the synagogue: the established religious system – John 9: 22, 34; Revelation 3: 9,

• Apollos: devoted but not fully enlightened preachers,

• Aquila and Priscilla: "tent-makers" who do not "mind earthly things" – or earthly religion – but understand Paul's heavenly ministry. Philippians 3: 19-20,

• the twelve men: immature believers as a result of incomplete or defective teaching,

• Paul: the separating and sanctifying power of a complete gospel.

Since there are many false gospels, Galatians 1: 6-9, does the right gospel need to be preached?

Certainly, both publicly and privately!

• Paul's gospel and "all the counsel of God" is needed. Acts 20: 20-21, 27. Romans 1: 1-5 and 16: 25-27.

Since there are many antichrists, 2 John 7, does the right person need to be preached, when presenting the gospel?

The antichrists are "deceivers" – the preachers – not the subjects of the preaching but those who spread error.

• They "do not confess Jesus Christ coming in flesh", i.e., they deny the reality of the incarnation, "the Word became flesh", a Divine Person come in Manhood.
  • Some such deceivers are still around in the cults, but there are other forms of error abroad.

• The "right person" – the Lord Jesus Christ – may be preached but not according to truth of His Person.
  • Some deny His sinlessness, or His full Deity.

  • Some say Christ was united to humanity to renew it; this is the root error of modern theology.

  • Some claim to preach "Christ crucified" but allow the first man in their preaching and manner of life.

Does being baptized "in the name of the Lord Jesus" require an understanding of His finished work and Person? – at least for the head of the house? – i.e., being "baptized into His death", Romans 6: 3 and "concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh", Romans 1: 3.

In "Galilee of the nations" – Matthew 4: 15 – the Lord told the "eleven disciples" to

• "make disciples of all the nations, baptising them to the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit", Matthew 28: 20.

In Acts they went to the circumcision and so did not fulfil this commission to the nations – as it will be later in "the completion of the age" – but they no doubt would use the words of the commission.

• Paul was sent to "the nations" – Galatian 1: 16 – and, with others who served with him, would also doubtless use the words of the commission.

In the few instances in Acts where other words are connected with baptism they seem to express something peculiar to the situation:

• Acts 2: 38: "in the name of Jesus Christ" – in the acceptance of Jesus as the Christ –
  • their Messiah – who had been announced to them as "both Lord and Christ";

• Acts 10: 48: "in the name of the Lord" – used with "commanded" to emphasize the authoritative introduction of the nations;

• Acts 8: 16 and 19: 5: "to the name of the Lord Jesus" – to separate both Samaritans and John's disciples from earthly hopes and link them with the heavenly One.

We can be sure that Paul presented the full gospel of the Person and work of the Lord Jesus to John's disciples for "the Holy Spirit came upon them".

In the two notable instances of baptism of households – Lydia's and the jailer's in Acts 16 – there is no mention of either to whom or to what they were baptized.

• But it is said of Lydia, "whose heart the Lord opened to attend to the things spoken by Paul",

• and Paul said to the jailor, "Believe on the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved, thou and thy house" and of him it is said in the singular, "having believed in God".

Yours in our Lord Jesus, Gordon.

Page Top

A  CHILD  BORN  –  A  SON  GIVEN
Isaiah 9: 6

From: Joseph Stephen
joeflorenceATdove.net.au
Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
Tue, 28 Dec 1999

Dear Gordon,
I have a short query on eternal sonship, after reading your article: I quote:

• "It is certain that our Lord Jesus is the Son in Manhood, and that He will remain Man and Son for eternity. 1 Corinthians 15: 24-28. There is, however, absolutely no Scriptural basis for saying that He was the Son before the incarnation".

  Quoted from Studies: Vital Truths

My comment: Isaiah 9: 6,