The Mission and the Work of the Church – Evangelism

Jesus mission while he was upon the earth was to seek and to save the lost (Luke 19:10). Inasmuch as the church belongs to her Lord (Matt.16:18), she is to be about that same mission as well. Within that mission, there are those who need to be saved and there are those who are saved. Evangelism concerns itself with the former category. There is no doubt that the church needs to be in the business of evangelism. The church is God’s plan for man’s salvation today and as such needs to sound the message of the gospel to those who are not saved. This is epitomized in the great commission. Jesus said, “Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world” (Matthew 28:19, 20 ASV). The twelve had the specific charge to get this done within their lifetimes. The church was the instrument through which this charge was carried out. Today, the church stands as the instrument for world evangelism as well.

Often times when we think of world evangelism we think about supporting evangelists in other parts of the world. While the concept of world evangelism certainly includes this, we should not think of world evangelism as exclusive of our own communities. World evangelism includes THE ENTIRE WORLD. We cannot fulfill the great commission without taking the gospel to our “neck of the woods” as well. We find, in fact, that this is exactly the pattern that Jesus had for the apostles. In Acts 1:8b we read, “�and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.” Notice the order in which Jesus charges the apostles to work: First, Jerusalem, then Judaea, then Samaria, then the rest of the world. They were to start locally and then branch out over time. Herein lies a great principle. Local evangelism ultimately supports foreign evangelism. Do you wish to expand your foreign evangelistic efforts? Expand your local evangelistic efforts.

I am afraid that in the United States we have allowed the general apathy of her citizens to quash our efforts at local evangelism. It is true that there is a great deal of apathy regarding biblical things within the United States, but this should not hinder us. Our job is not to “grow the church” but to plant the seed and water (1 Cor.3:6, 7). God will give the increase! It would be great if every single individual Christian were a personal worker extraordinaire! However, we know from experience that not everyone is able to do this. Moreover, the Bible teaches that different people have different abilities (1 Cor.12:12-25). Thus, it is biblical for different people to have different roles within the church. This is why it is often very expedient for some sort of local evangelistic plan to be put into place. The specifics of the plan are not what is important. There are various methods for doing personal work within one’s local community. What is important is that the plan includes the potential for everyone within the local congregation to aid in the effort. The plan should come from the leadership of the congregation–the eldership. The plan should be something on which these men are united. The congregation should understand and want to be involved in the execution of the plan. The involvement of the local preacher should be participatory and not administrative–it is the work of the church! If the book of Acts teaches anything, it is that when the people worked, the church grew!

Foreign evangelism should not, however, be discounted. A balanced approach is the best here. There are some that say, let’s merely focus on local evangelism and not foreign evangelism. There are some that say we should focus only upon foreign evangelism and not local evangelism. Both would be incorrect in their assessment. The church has an obligation to the local community to preach the gospel locally. However, the church has the additional obligation of expanding beyond the local. The church of Jesus was not created to be a static institution. But how can a local congregation support missionaries in every single country of the world? Simply answered, she can’t. It would be virtually impossible for one congregation with her limited resources to do such. This is why the great commission was given to the church as a whole through the apostles. The church as a whole must cooperate to ensure that the world is evangelized. This means that some local congregations will only have part in specific areas of the world and not the world as a whole. It is not wrong for a local congregation to focus upon one particular area of the world in foreign evangelistic efforts. It would be wrong for the church as a whole to say we are not going to evangelize any particular part of the world. This involves and necessitates cooperation with other churches. We find that this is exactly what the early church did in regard to evangelism. Various congregations supplied various different missionaries to go into the work in various different locations. Paul and Barnabas were associated with Antioch (Acts 13:1, 2). Philip was associated with the church at Jerusalem (Acts 8). Timothy came from the congregation in the area of Derbe and Lystra (Acts 16:1). However, we see that they all worked together to evangelize the world. So must we do today.

Understanding our individual and collective obligations in evangelizing the world goes a long way toward fulfilling those obligations. There is one additional obligation in which each and every person must participate in our efforts at evangelism–prayer. Jesus instructed us to pray that the Lord of harvests would send more laborers into the harvest (Luke 10:2). Paul instructed that we pray that the word of the Lord have “free course” in the world (2 Thess.3:1). He also instructed that we pray that God open doors of opportunity for us to work in His kingdom (Col.4:3). Let each one of us resolve that we will pray for the work of evangelism both locally and foreign as if everything depended upon God and let us work as if everything depended upon us. With God for us, who can be against us?

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on The Mission and the Work of the Church – Evangelism

The Baptism of the Twelve Ephesians

At the end of Acts 18 and the beginning of Acts 19, we have a very interesting account of salvation. The account is one in which those who were candidates of salvation submitted to two different baptisms, the baptism of John, and then, the baptism of Jesus. This account is an interesting one, because it teaches us some things about baptism that are not found anywhere else in the Bible. Let’s study this passage together and see if we can learn some things from God’s word.

First, we see that one can teach that Jesus is Lord, yet teach baptism wrong. We read in Acts 18:24, 25 the following: “And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus. This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John.” Notice the facts that we find here regarding Apollos. First, he was a Jew. Second, he was born at Alexandria. Third, he was an eloquent man. Fourth, he was mighty in the scriptures. Fifth, he came to Ephesus. Sixth, he was instructed in the way of the Lord. Seventh, he was fervent in spirit. Eighth, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord. Ninth, he knew only the baptism of John. Apollos was both instructed in the way of the Lord, and taught the things of the Lord, yet, he did not know the Lord’s baptism? How can this be? Evidently, Apollos had been around Jerusalem sometime during the earthly ministry of both John the baptizer, and Jesus, but Apollos had missed the Lord’s critical teaching about baptism during the period of the Great Commission. Therefore, he did not know that baptism was now being administered by the authority of Jesus. Those who submitted to the baptism that Apollos knew, were not submitting to the authority of the Lord. Did Apollos teach that Jesus was the Lord? Yes. Did he teach others to believe in the Lord Jesus? Yes. It should be obvious that just because one believes in Jesus doesn’t mean that one’s baptism is correct.

Second, we see that if your baptism isn’t right, you’ve got to get it right! It is interesting that Paul came after Apollos to the same city, Ephesus, and inquired about the baptism of these disciples. We read in Acts 19:1-3 “And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples, He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, we have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. And he said unto them, unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John’s baptism.” Paul used a process of discovery to determine if their baptism was valid or not. He first asked if they had received the Holy Spirit since they believed. (Again, we note that the text says that they had believed. They believed that Jesus was the Christ, but their baptism was not right.) Their response was that they had not heard of the Holy Spirit. This response was indicative of their baptism, because Paul then asked, “Unto what then were ye baptized?” They should have heard of the Holy Spirit at their baptism because the baptism that Christ commanded in Matthew 28:18-20 was “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” The fact that they did not hear about the Holy Spirit, indicated to Paul that they were not baptized correctly. Their baptism wasn’t right and they had to get it right!

Third, we see that to get their baptism right, it had to be by the authority of Jesus. Paul explains in Acts 19:4, 5, “Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.” The phrase “in the name of the Lord Jesus” means by the Lord’s authority. John’s baptism was not based upon the authority of the Lord Jesus. Was it based upon the belief that the Messiah was coming? Yes it was (Luke 2:4). Was it based upon repentance unto remission of sins? Yes it was (Luke 3:3). Was it water baptism? Yes it was (Luke 3:16). Was it immersion? Yes it was (John 3:23). What was different about the baptism of John from the baptism of Jesus? The baptism of Jesus was based upon the authority of Jesus as given in the Great Commission. Jesus said, “All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth.” This meant that after this time, John’s baptism had no more authority. Only the baptism commanded by Jesus, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit had the authority of Christ. This authority was powerfully demonstrated in the resurrection of Christ of which baptism is a likeness (Romans 6:1-10). If our baptism is not based upon the authority of Christ, then all we did was get wet like these men at Ephesus. What is baptism based upon the authority of Christ? It is baptism for salvation (Mark 16:16); it is baptism for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38); it is baptism for discipleship (Matthew 28:18-20); it is baptism for washing away sins (Acts 22:16); it is the point at which we believe God forgives us of sins (Colossians 2:11-13); it is baptism that saves (1 Peter 3:21). John’s baptism did not have THIS authority-the authority to grant salvation! We must understand that to be baptized right, we must acknowledge what Christ has authorized baptism to do-forgive sin and grant salvation! The beautiful results of the reception of the Holy Spirit by these disciples indicated this very fact. Verse 6 states, “And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.” The prophecy made by Joel and quoted by Peter in Acts 2:17-21 proved the relationship of the miraculous measure of the Holy Spirit with individual salvation. These men were now saved.

Let us always respect the authority of Christ in baptism and understand that one may teach that Jesus is Lord, yet teach baptism wrong. Let us understand that if your baptism is not right, you’ve got to get it right! And let us understand that correct baptism only comes as authorized by Jesus today and that His authority has placed baptism and salvation together (Mark 16:16).

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , | Comments Off on The Baptism of the Twelve Ephesians

I Don’t Want You to Join My Church

We run into people on a more or less frequent basis that are looking for a church. Many times you will hear people who are undergoing this process say things like, “How do I know which church to join,” and “How do I choose the right church?” It is well understood that these individuals are looking to be a part of a particular church but they just do not know which one they should be a part of. However, I submit to you that this type of terminology when looking for a church is foreign to the Bible. In fact, let me emphatically say that I don’t want you to join my church.

I don’t want you to join my church because it is not my church. It may be the church I attend or the group of people with whom I assembly, but technically speaking, it is not my church–it is the Lord’s church. Jesus said in Matthew 16:18 “And I say unto you that thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my church and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.” The church belongs to Jesus; it is His church; He is the Owner. The Bible also says that Jesus is the Head of the body (Eph.1:22, 23), the Savior of the church (Eph.5:23), the King of the kingdom (1 Tim.6:15), the Husband of the bride (Eph.5:21ff), the Foundation of the church (1 Cor.3:11) and the Chief Cornerstone (1 Peter 2:5, 6). So I want you to be part of the church that belongs to Christ, not “my church.”

I don’t want you to join my church because you can’t join the church. One will search the scriptures all day long and never find an instance of a person “joining a church.” We read of the church having members in 1 Corinthians 12:12ff and Romans 12:4ff. However we never read of someone “joining” the church. Rather we read where God adds a person to the church. In Acts 2:47 we have, “And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.” The Lord adds those who are saved to the church. If you are saved you already have membership within the church. The question that stands before you is whether or not you will worship with God’s church. If you are not a Christian, the question that stands before you is “Will you be added to God’s church?” I don’t want you to join my church; I want you to be added to the Lord’s church.

I don’t want you to join my church because you nor I have a right to determine the characteristics of the church. Many people visit different churches in their search for a church. They look at the church and weigh the differences and then determine which characteristics most please them. This is not, however, how we should view the church. We should look for the church whose characteristics most please God! God has given us His word so that we can know about His church and He has given us His church so that we can know about His word (Ephesians 3:10). It is God’s church that we should be seeking. I don’t want you to join my church; I want you to seek God’s church (Matthew 10:33).

There are some things that I do want. I DO want you to be obedient to God. I DO want you to worship God. I DO want you to be a faithful Christian. I DO want you to be saved. I DO want you to be a member of the Lord’s church for which He shed His blood (Acts 20:28). Take the necessary measures today to ensure that you are part of the church that belongs to Jesus–the church of Christ (Romans 16:16)!

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , | Comments Off on I Don’t Want You to Join My Church

Our Attitude Toward Correction

In our lifetime we are going to sin (1 John 1:7-10). Undoubtedly, some of those sins are going to be committed in the presence of others. There are going to be times when we either do not recognize that what we did was a sin, or that we understand it to be a sin but do not want to take the appropriate action to correct it. In either of these situations, the opportunity for another person to come to us and point out our personal sin exists. What should our attitude be toward someone who approaches us with our sin and suggests correction? Let’s look at some attitudes that we might have toward personal correction in our lives.

“I haven’t done anything wrong.” Often when confronted with personal sin this will be the first response. This attitude, however, is a mistake. Even when we are reasonably sure that we have not done anything wrong, our attitude should not be that of Bart Simpson, “I didn’t do it; nobody saw me do it; you can’t prove anything.” Even popular culture recognizes the error of this fatalistic response. When confronted we should be open to the possibility that we have sinned. When it is demonstrated that we have sinned, many times the difficulty comes in swallowing the hard conclusion that I did something wrong. It takes humility and meekness to even admit the possibility and much more to admit the actuality. At this point a correct response should be, “Let’s sit down and see what the Bible has to say about the subject and if I am wrong, then I will try to make things right.”

“You don’t have a loving attitude.” This is a popular response when we confront someone who needs to be corrected. That is because it is a legitimate concern. The Bible speaks clearly that those who are going to attempt to offer correction to others must have the right attitude when so doing (Galatians 6:1; Ephesians 4:15). We must both look to ourselves and speak the truth in love when engaging in personal correction. However, to use this expression as a statement of defense falls short because it does not deal with the issue at hand. It is a diversion away from the original problem and those who say this generally are trying to avoid the real issue. Some even go to the point of saying that suggesting any form of correction is not loving. The scriptures, however, simply do not teach this and we recognize this to be true in our lives as well specifically in relationship to our children. The parent who wields no discipline upon their child is really the parent who does not love his child (Proverbs 13:24; Hebrews 12:5-11). In loving adult relationships also, reproof is required when sin is involved and this is not an indication that someone does not love another, but that they do (Galatians 4:16). When confronted with correction, we should assume that the person coming to us has the best of intentions in mind.

“The preacher is wrong.” Well, that may be the case. Sometimes preacher’s make mistakes and say things that are not correct. However, the Bible is not wrong. When the preacher sets forth scripture regarding the truthfulness of his statements and one disagrees, the proper course of action is to go discuss things with the preacher. This, however, is the last thing that the one with the incorrect attitude toward correction wants to do because if one sits down and engages in a study of the Bible, one is usually going to find things that one does not want to admit. Part of the requirements the Bible places upon preachers is to rebuke and reprove (2 Timothy 4:2). When this illuminates our personal sin, self-reflection is the appropriate course of action (1 Corinthians 13:5), not castigation of the preacher. Remember that the preacher (if he is a good one) is not setting forth his own personal opinions, but the word of God (2 Timothy 4:1).

“No one cares about me and my problems.” Many times, individuals will state these particular words out of an attitude of selfishness. “Woe is me; no one loves me; aren’t I a wreck!” We used to sing a song in grade school about eating worms. The chorus went like this, “Nobody loves me, everybody hates me, I’m gonna eat some worms.” The point of the song was that self pity usually results in actions that are self destructive. The truth is that someone does care. When we hear teaching on subjects that are uncomfortable to us it is because someone cares enough for us to present what the Bible says on the subject. Since the Bible is the ultimate standard by which we will be judged (John 12:48), it is the ultimate loving and caring thing to do. What is really meant by this statement is that no one is trying to comfort me in my sinfulness. In contrast our attitude should be, “I have problems; help me to resolve my problems.”

“Look at all the other hypocrites who need to repent too.” Similar to the “you are not being loving” line, this is a diversion. When we are confronted with the issue of our own personal sin, we have the responsibility to examine ourselves and make correction (James 1:22-25). Whether or not another person in the church is a hypocrite has nothing to do with our own personal attitude toward correction. The assertion may be true that there are others acting hypocritically, but this does nothing to correct the problems in our own lives. Pointing to others in the church who are acting hypocritically as a defense against our own personal correction simply increases bitterness in our lives toward those around us as well as toward our own personal sin. No doubt if a hypocrite is involved in the correction process, he should recuse himself until he gets his own personal sin resolved (Matthew 7:1-5). However, this does not mean that one is “off the hook” from being confronted with sin. One still must deal with the problem of one’s own personal sin.

“You just are refusing to forgive.” When the result of personal correction ends in the right way there should be forgiveness. This does not imply, however, that there will be further teaching on the subject. To the contrary, usually when a person sins this means that there needs to be additional teaching on the subject. This is the correct and appropriate response. When a child comes home with an “F” on a test paper and asks Mom and Dad for forgiveness, and forgiveness is granted, this does not mean that all study on that particular subject should cease. To the contrary, the parents will probably spend MORE time in the pursuit of that particular subject with the child. Does this mean that they have refused to forgive the child? Of course not, in fact we recognize just the opposite. True forgiveness implies that the one in need of forgiveness needs help and that the one’s who are doing the forgiving have an obligation to help. Additional studies on the subject are the natural result of forgiveness whether it is in regard to a child’s test results or an individual’s personal sin. Unintentional sin many times is due to ignorance. This implies the need for further education on the subject. So when the general subject comes up, it is not because we are refusing to forgive, but because we have actually forgiven in the way that God wants us to forgive (2 Corinthians 2:5-11).

Our attitude toward personal correction will determine our ultimate estate in heaven. It is part of God’s plan that we accept the corrective efforts of our fellow Christian when it comes to personal sin (Matthew 18: 15-17). While it is not comfortable for us to do this and while sometimes it is a painful experience, we can be assured that God will bless those who appropriate display the right attitude toward personal correction. Ultimately, we will stand before God in judgment as to how we received these efforts. On the day of judgment, do we really want to stand before God and say that we were not receptive to other’s efforts to provide personal correction? Do we really want to face God with that attitude? How much more better is God’s plan to face our own peers now and make correction than to face Him when no more opportunity for correction is available.

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Our Attitude Toward Correction

The Salvation of Cornelius

When looking at the cases of conversion within the book of Acts, the case of Cornelius and his household presents some unique challenges to understanding God’s plan for man’s salvation. The account of this conversion is found in Acts chapters 10 and 11. Cornelius conversion was unique in that he was the first Gentile to be converted to Christianity. This was not only revolutionary for the Gentiles, but for the Jews as well and herein lies additional uniqueness in his case. Does the unique nature of Cornelius case point to a unique plan of salvation on his part? Or is the unique nature of his case merely indicative of the need to bring the gospel to the gentiles? Let’s examine his case and see if we can come to an understanding of when Cornelius’ was saved.

First, when looking at the case of Cornelius we first notice that Cornelius was a good man. We read in Acts 10:2 that he was ” A devout man, and one who feared God with all his household, who gave alms generously to the people, and prayed to God always.” However, Cornelius was not saved simply because he was a good man. In Acts 11:14 we read that the angel that was sent to Cornelius said that Peter would “tell you words, by which you and all your household will be saved.” The phrase “will be saved” is in the future tense indicating that in the present, when the angel spoke the words to Cornelius, he was not saved. So Cornelius was not saved simply because he was a good man.

Second, when looking at the case of Cornelius, we notice that Cornelius spoke with an angel. In Acts 10:3, we read, “About the ninth hour of the day he saw clearly in a vision an angel of God coming in and saying to him, ‘Cornelius!'” However, Cornelius was not saved simply because he saw an angel. The angel himself said to Cornelius, “Now send men to Joppa, and send for Simon, whose surname is Peter. He is lodging with Simon, a tanner, whose house is by the sea: he will tell you what you must do” (Acts 10:5, 6). There were some things that the angel said Cornelius needed “to do” and that he would hear these things from Peter. So more was needed than simply the presence of the angel. Moreover, we have divine warning regarding the possibility of angels teaching another gospel in Galatians 1:8. So the gospel had to be preached to Cornelius before he could be saved. The presence of the angel was not enough.

Third, we notice that Cornelius received an apostle into his house. In Acts 10:25 we read, “As Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him and fell down at his feet and worshipped him.” However, Cornelius was not saved simply because he received Peter into his house. In fact, Peter reproved Cornelius for his actions in bowing down to worship him. Acts 10:26 says, “But Peter lifted him up, saying, ‘Stand up; I myself also am a man.'” Other parts of the Bible teach as well that we are not to worship anything but God. John the apostle once fell down before an angel, but the angel said “See that you do not do that. For I am your fellowservant, and of your brethren the prophets, and of those who keep the words of this book. Worship God” (Revelation 22:9). The presence of an apostle was not enough.

Fourth we notice that Cornelius heard the word of the Lord preached. In Acts 10:33 Cornelius said, “Now therefore we are all present before God, to hear all things commanded you by God.” Cornelius was ready to hear the word of the Lord and he did hear the word of the Lord. However, it was not MERELY through hearing the word that they would be saved, for Peter says in Acts 10:43 “that through His name whosoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins.” In fact the Bible teaches in many other places that not only must we hear the gospel message, but also believe it; believing the gospel means so much more than just acknowledging it. Believing the gospel means that one is willing to submit to it in obedience. Hebrews 5:9 says that salvation is only for those who obey Jesus. In Romans 16:26, Paul writes that the gospel is made known for the purpose of people coming to obey it in faith. Without an obedient act of faith, salvation is not complete. Simply hearing the gospel was not enough.

Fifth we see that the Holy Spirit fell on those who heard the word and that they spoke in tongues. In Acts 10:44-46 we read, “While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word. And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God.” Many at this point want to say that Cornelius was saved because the Holy Spirit could not have moved them to speak in tongues if they were not already saved. The argument is that the presence of the Holy Spirit and the ability to speak in tongues indicates that Cornelius and his house were saved. Is this true? First, the text does not even say that at this point Cornelius believed. He was told to believe, but the Bible simply does not say that he believed. One could argue forcefully that Cornelius did not need to believe to be saved if the Holy Spirit falling upon them was all that was needed for salvation (and die hard Calvinists do argue this). This makes faith unnecessary for salvation, which is obviously false. Second, the Bible does not teach that Holy Spirit activity necessarily indicates personal salvation. In fact, the Bible does not even teach that speaking in tongues indicates salvation. In Numbers 22:28-30 the Lord enabled a donkey to speak in tongues; was the donkey saved? Clearly this type of reasoning would indicate that the donkey was saved. However, clear thinking individuals will recognize that divine activity does not necessarily indicate salvation. Another such example is the high priest Caiaphas in John 11:51. Caiaphas had rejected Jesus and was plotting Jesus’ death, yet he prophesied that Jesus would die for the sins of the people. John even says “this he spake not of himself” indicating that the Holy Spirit was involved in the prophesy. Yet who would say that Caiaphas, the one who ordered the murder of Jesus, was saved? Here are two clear examples of Holy Spirit activity where personal salvation is obviously not implied. Third, the Bible teaches that speaking in tongues was a sign for the unbeliever (1 Corinthians 14:22). The unbelievers in this particular context were the Jews present with Peter. They did not believe that salvation was for the Gentiles. The Holy Spirit had to convince Peter and the other Jews that Cornelius and his house could be saved. Once this was done, Peter asks who can forbid baptism. Why would Peter say these words? He said them because he and the others recognized that salvation comes as a result of baptism (as he preached in Acts 2:38) and they could now touch and baptize these gentiles with God’s approval.

This leads us to the sixth event that might indicate the salvation of Cornelius and his household–his baptism. Remember, according to Acts 11:14 Cornelius and his house were going to be saved through WORDS which Peter told them. Moreover, according to Acts 10:33 Cornelius told Peter that they were ready to hear ALL that was commanded of God. Well, Peter had not yet finished giving the words that they needed to be saved and he had not yet finished giving all the commands of God until verse 48 of chapter 10 where we read, “And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.” Saying that Cornelius was not saved until he was baptized is consistent with the immediate context. It is also consistent with the remote context of the New Testament. This is what Jesus commanded his apostles to do in the Great Commission in Matthew 28:18-20 and Mark 16:15, 16. This is what Peter had already preached to the Jews in Acts 2:38. Baptism was the act of faith that Cornelius needed to perform in order to receive remission of sins (Acts 2:38; Acts 10:43). The command to be baptized was part of the words that Peter preached whereby Cornelius and his entire house would be saved (Acts 11:14). The command to be baptized was part of the commands that Cornelius was expecting to hear from the apostle (Acts 10:33). Peter considered it a necessity for Cornelius and the others by token that he did command it. And finally, the Holy Spirit considered it essential within the context of the conversion of Cornelius because he inspired Luke to write it.

The fact is that the rest of the Bible teaches clearly the purpose of baptism. Baptism is part of the process in making disciples (Matthew 28:19-20). Can one be saved without becoming a disciple? Baptism is for salvation (Mark 16:16). Baptism is for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38). Can one be saved without having the remission of sins? Baptism is a command of God (Acts 10:43). Can one be saved without obeying the command of God? Baptism is to wash away one’s sins (Acts 22:16). Can one be saved without having washed away one’s sins? In baptism we crucify the old man to destroy the body of sin (Romans 6:6). Can one be saved without putting to death the old man of sin? In baptism we are raised to walk in a new life (Romans 6:4). Can one be saved without walking in a new life? Baptism is the point where we put on Christ (Galatians 3:27). Can one be saved without putting on Christ? Baptism is for putting off the body of the sins of the flesh (Colossians 2:12). Can one be saved without putting off the body of the sins of the flesh? Baptism now saves us (1 Peter 3:21). Baptism is the response of a good conscience toward God (1 Peter 3:21). Can we be saved without responding in a good conscience toward the call of God? Well, neither could Cornelius.

Cornelius’ case was unique in that he was the first gentile to whom the gospel was preached in the early church. His case was unique in that the Holy Spirit used him prior to his salvation to convince the unbelieving Jews that gentiles were candidates for salvation (Acts 10:45-47) and subsequent to his salvation to convince other unbelieving Jews that salvation had come to the gentiles (Acts 11:16-18). However, his case was not unique in that God provided for Cornelius salvation before he was baptized. The evidence from the scriptures as stated above simply does not warrant this conclusion. To suggest that Cornelius was saved prior to baptism and that all mankind can be saved prior to baptism is to contradict every single scripture in the Bible that teaches us the purpose of baptism. Let us resolve to accept the Bible teaching regarding baptism as an act of faith.

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , | Comments Off on The Salvation of Cornelius