One Book...Rightly Divided
Expanded Edition
By Dr. Douglas D. Stauffer
Chapter 17
(Part II of II)
Questions and Answers
The Answers to 32 of the most frequently Asked Dispensational Questions
14. John’s Baptism
Q14—What is "John’s baptism" in Acts 19:3?
A14—John’s baptism is not the same as the baptism of the New Testament convert. The local New Testament church baptizes a new believer following salvation. However, John was the forerunner of Christ and baptized those that came to him prior to the cross. In Acts chapter 19, Paul restates John’s message that accompanied his baptism saying "...that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus" (Acts 19:4).
When John’s disciples heard THIS—that they were to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ—presumably they acted upon this new information, believed and were re-baptized following their salvation. The next verse continues the account: "When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus" (Acts 19:5). You might picture a gap of missing information following "this" indicating that they were not simply hearers of the word, but doers also. They heard "this," trusted in the Saviour and then followed Him in believer’s baptism.
15. Tongues Defined
Q15—What is tongues?
A15—The gift of tongues is generally a language, as seen in the following verses:
Acts 2:6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
Acts 2:8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
Acts 2:11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.
The word of God emphasizes that the tongues spoken of in Acts chapter 2 were recognized languages. Every person heard the apostles speak in his own language. Thus, God supernaturally gave each person an understanding of the words being spoken, in his own language. The miracle was the fact that the others could hear these apostles speak in their own language.
Acts 10:46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
How did the people recognize the tongues as a gift from God? The hearers could recognize and understand what was being said. They knew that the words being spoken glorified God.
16. Unknown Tongues
Q16—Do unknown tongues, like those referred to in First Corinthians chapter 14, really exist?
A16—Yes, Corinthians refers to a language as an unknown tongue when it is a tongue unknown to the speaker, and perhaps the hearer. Paul says that a person that speaks in an unknown tongue:
-
Speaks to God (I Corinthians 14:2)
-
Does not speak to man (I Corinthians 14:2)
-
Is understood by no man (I Corinthians 14:2)
-
Edifies himself and not the church (I Corinthians 14:4)
Consider the following guidelines given by the Apostle Paul concerning unknown tongues:
-
Paul said he would rather speak five words with understanding than 10,000 in an unknown tongue (I Corinthians 14:19).
-
If a person were going to speak in an unknown tongue:
-
It was to be only two or three that spoke (I Corinthians 14:27).
-
It was to be by course—one at a time (I Corinthians 14:27).
-
There was to be an interpreter (I Corinthians 14:27). [This is not a translator!]
-
The women were not to speak in tongues in the church (I Corinthians 14:33).
In this instance, the term unknown is used to communicate that a language is not known by those who speak it (I Corinthians 14:14) or hear it (I Corinthians 14:2), except by means of supernatural interpretation (I Corinthians 14:13). The fact that certain tongues were unknown cannot be incorrectly construed to mean that these languages did not exist. The hearers were merely unaware of the meaning of these languages and an interpreter was necessary.
We can more easily understand the use of the word unknown in this passage by considering another occurrence of the same word. The Athenians had an altar with the following inscription:
Acts 17:23 For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.
The altar was built to recognize a god that was unknown to the Athenians. Paul knew Who that God was and made the Athenians aware of Him. This same concept should be applied to the issue of the unknown tongues. An interpreter was necessary because the hearers were ignorant of a particular language. The fact that the hearers failed to understand a language does not necessarily mean that the language did not exist. The interpreter interpreted the meaning.
17. Acts Named
Q17—Why was the book of Acts given its name?
A17—The book was so-named because of its content. The book contains the actions of the apostles. It is a historical book depicting the acts of the apostles from the ascension of the Lord Jesus Christ to Paul’s imprisonment. The book of Acts details the ministry of the Apostle Peter until a time soon after the conversion of the Apostle Paul. After this point, the primary focus of the book is Paul’s missionary journeys. The details concerning these journeys begin in Acts chapter 13 and follow through the end of the book (chapter 28).
18. Transition Book
Q18—What do people mean when they describe Acts as a transition book?
A18—The book of Acts clearly has many transitions. A few of these transitions are as follows:
· From Peter to Paul
· From law to grace
· From Jerusalem to Rome (a Gentile city)
· From Jew to Gentile
The term transitional is often applied to the book of Acts since it begins with the first and moves over (transitions) into the second. During this time of transition, change is the key word. New patterns replace the old ones.
19. Pentecostal Experience
Q19—Some churches make an invitation by saying that you should come to their church to experience Pentecost. Is Pentecost an experience?
A19—Pentecost is a Jewish feast day similar to Passover . . . John 6:4 And the passover, a feast of the Jews, was nigh. Pentecost has absolutely nothing to do with the Gentiles’ hearing the word of God. The book of Acts alone covers over thirty years of Jewish Pentecost feast days. God probably used this special day (Pentecost in Acts chapter 2) because He knew that the Jews would be gathered together from every nation on this occasion (Acts 2:5). The feast of Pentecost was a prime opportunity for God to use the sign of tongues to reach many of the Jews with the truth. This truth was confirmed by the signs (Mark 16:20).
Acts chapter 2 records the one and only day of Pentecost anywhere in the Bible in which any supernatural experience occurred. Pentecost is simply one of the seven feast days listed in Leviticus chapter 23. These feast days include the following:
Feast of the Passover (verse 5)
Feast of Unleavened Bread (verse 6)
Feast of the First Fruits (verse 11)
Feast of Pentecost (verse 16)
Feast of Trumpets (verse 24)
Day of Atonement (verse 27)
Feast of Tabernacles (verse 34)
In Acts chapter 2, God emphasizes those individuals present at this Jewish feast day of Pentecost in at least four different places. Here, the Apostle Peter speaks to these Jews and tells them that they must repent, both individually and collectively as a nation.
Acts 2:5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
Acts 2:14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:
Acts 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:
Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
These passages clearly indicate that Peter was predominantly speaking to Jews. For Gentiles to go into the book of Acts and attempt to repeat the events of this one particular day is as logical as attempting to repeat some of the occurrences recorded in the book of Exodus. Two examples should cause the reader to ponder. Simply because the instance of Moses and the burning bush is recorded in the Bible, can we somehow repeat that experience today (Exodus 3:2)? What about Moses’ turning the water into blood (Exodus 7:19)? It makes no more sense to attempt to repeat the events of Acts chapter 2 than it does to attempt to repeat the occurrences recorded in Exodus chapters 3 or 7.
20. Literal Fire in Acts Chapter 2
Q20—My question concerns the fire that came down from heaven in Acts chapter two on the day of Pentecost. Some say that it was not a literal fire. Was it?
A20—The fire that came down was not a literal fire. The Bible says it was like as of fire. "And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them (Acts 2:3). Something that is "like" fire is not literal fire. Satan wants to condition people to be looking for fire from heaven. He will cause fire to come down from heaven to deceive the nations during the Tribulation.
Revelation 13:13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men, 14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.
21. Baptize with the Holy Ghost and Fire
Q21—I thought the Lord said He was going to baptize with the Holy Ghost and fire. Where in the Bible is this found and what does it mean?
A21—Matthew chapter 3 contains the particular scripture in question. John the Baptist told those around him that he was baptizing with water, but that the Lord Jesus Christ would not be baptizing with water. Instead, the Lord would baptize some with the Holy Ghost and baptize others with fire.
Matthew 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
Many people miss the point of this scripture. The Lord differentiates between the saved and the lost by using the two baptisms to illustrate His point. The saved would be baptized with the Holy Ghost. The lost would be baptized with fire. The next verse (verse 12) explains the nature of the fire to which the second baptism refers:
Matthew 3:12 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.
Verse 12 defines the fire mentioned in verse 11. Anytime the Bible mentions an unquenchable fire, it refers to "hell fire." Therefore, the baptism with fire is a submerging of the lost person into the flames of hell, never to be quenched. Churches misapplying this verse usually connect the fire spoken of here in Matthew to the tongues like as of fire spoken of in Acts chapter 2. The nature of the "fire" referred to in Acts chapter 2 has already been addressed; it is not a literal fire. Because of the confusion surrounding this "fire," Satan will have no difficulty deceiving the world with his literal fire from heaven during the Tribulation.
22. Lord’s Supper
Q22—Where can you find the pattern for the Lord’s Supper?
A22—Churches follow the pattern of the Lord’s Supper given in First Corinthians chapter 11.
23. Frequency of the Lord’s Supper
Q23—How often are we to partake of the Lord’s Supper?
A23—The Bible does not give a definite answer to this question. Of course, ritualism must be avoided. Our spokesman gives the guidelines concerning the frequency of the Lord’s Supper. He says "for as oft as," meaning that the local church should administer the Lord’s Supper as often as they feel God leads them to do so. Therefore, churches have no scriptural basis for claiming that the Lord’s Supper must be administered weekly, monthly or on any set schedule.
However, the administration of the Lord’s Supper serves as a good time for members of the local church to reflect on their relationships with the Lord and with their fellow brethren. This ordinance of the church should not be taken lightly. Yet, the ordinance should not be administered in a ritualistic fashion that lessens its effectiveness to be used to convict backslidden church members.
24. Required Every Sunday?
Q24—Are the churches which require administration of the Lord’s Supper every Sunday correct?
A24—Absolutely not, if they are attempting to use scripture to justify their position.
25. Why Every Sunday?
Q25—What basis do these churches use to justify partaking of Lord’s Supper every Sunday?
A25—These churches misapply verses from the book of Acts by taking them out of context. Consider the following, for example:
Acts 20:7 And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.
These churches teach that one of the purposes for the church to come together "on the first day of the week" is to break bread. They define breaking of bread as the observance of the ordinance of the Lord’s Supper. However, the reference to breaking of bread here has absolutely nothing to do with the Lord’s Supper. In this case, the disciples simply came together to eat (fellowship) and to bid farewell to Paul.
Paul proceeds to preach. He preaches until midnight. Eutycus falls asleep and falls from the third story loft and is taken up dead. Notice what he does when Paul raises him from the dead. He breaks bread!
Acts 20:10 And Paul went down, and fell on him, and embracing him said, Trouble not yourselves; for his life is in him. 11 When he therefore was come up again, and had broken bread, and eaten, and talked a long while, even till break of day, so he departed. 12 And they brought the young man alive, and were not a little comforted.
The breaking of bread in verse 7 was no more an observance of the Lord’s Supper than were Eutycus’ actions in verse 11 following his resurrection from the dead.
26. Apostles Breaking Bread
Q26—Doesn’t the Bible refer to the apostles breaking bread?
A26—Yes. See Acts 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.
In Acts chapter 2, the apostles were breaking bread; however, they were not observing the Lord’s Supper as some teach. Four verses later, the reader finds that by taking the incorrect position on verse 42, one could "prove" that a person must participate in the Lord’s Supper daily. To apply one verse and ignore the other is scriptural infidelity.
Acts 2:46 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,
The reader should take note that the apostles were breaking bread daily. Furthermore, the breaking of bread occurred from house to house. There is no mention of any Sunday morning church service. Another consideration is that the name of the ordinance is the Lord’s Supper. Supper is the evening meal; thus, the Lord’s Supper should be administered in the evening service!
27. Other References
Q27—Are there other verses that prove that "breaking bread" is not a reference to the Lord’s Supper, but simply mention of a meal?
A27—Yes. Consider the following examples:
Luke 24:35 And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread.
A few verses earlier, we find a very clear record of exactly what occurred.
Luke 24:29 But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them. 30 And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them.
Read Acts 27:33-35 for another account of breaking bread apart from any observance of the Lord’s Supper. The Lord’s Supper is one of the two ordinances of the local church (I Corinthians 11:1-2). Churches should administer this ordinance in accordance with the guidelines given in First Corinthians chapter 11. Those that claim that it must be observed every week are unscriptural.
28. Division of the Church Age Epistles
Q28—Some teach that the Church Age continues through Revelation 4:1. How should one deal with this matter?
A28—Addressing this issue is simply a matter of approach. If the teacher of the word of God includes Hebrews through Revelation chapter 4 in the Church Age, certain books or passages must be excluded as Tribulational. If the split is made between Philemon and Hebrews, then allowances must be made for any Church Age application within the books of Hebrews through Revelation. The general rule to keep in mind is that doctrine within the books of Hebrews through Revelation can have Church Age application as long as it does not contradict the doctrine prescribed by the Apostle Paul to the Gentiles.
29. Application within this Book
Q29—Why does this book choose to take the Church Age through Philemon?
A29—The author believes that the greater danger lies in the potential misapplication to the Church Age of the explicit Tribulational passages found in Hebrews and James to the Church Age. Therefore, the division is made after Philemon in order to emphasize that the books following Philemon contain doctrine with application during the Tribulation period. We are commanded to rightly divide because of the inherent danger of such misapplication.
30. Paul out of God’s Will?
Q30—Was Paul out of the will of God for going to Jerusalem after being warned not to go?
A30—Some claim that Paul was out of the will of God as a result of this action. Your guess is as good as mine.
1. He spent two years in silence because of it (Acts 24:27).
2. Paul purposed to go to Jerusalem (Acts 19:21) and then on to Rome. The scriptures point out Paul’s desire to go to both places. However, God’s timing remains critical.
Why would God not want Paul to go to Jerusalem and then to Rome at this time? Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome (Acts 18:1). At this time, Paul was still attempting to reach the Jew. God did not want Paul to go to Rome until he had completed reaching the Jewish remnant. The remnant at this time consisted of the Jews that would be saved before the nation was broken off (Romans 11:20).
3. Paul was warned of God, through man, not to go.
a. The disciples tell Paul (through the Spirit) that he should not go to Jerusalem (Acts 21:4).
b. The Prophet Agabus warns Paul not to go to Jerusalem (Acts 21:10-13). Thus saith the Holy Ghost . . .both we, and they of that place, besought him not to go up to Jerusalem.
4. Paul goes to Jerusalem. There, James (the leader in the Jerusalem church) instructs Paul to go through some Jewish rituals and show that he is walking orderly and keeping the law (Acts 21:18-26). This is critical.
Do we find Paul out of the will of God in Jerusalem? He did not finish his purification (7 days) (Acts 21:27) and my guess is that we see that Paul is as human as we are.
31. Paul’s Citizenship
Q31—Was Paul a Roman citizen?
A31—Yes, Paul says he was a Jew, a Roman, and a Pharisee.
1. Paul says in Acts 21:39 "I am a Jew"
2. Paul says in Acts 22:27 "I am a Roman"
3. Paul says in Acts 23:6 "I am a Pharisee"
Paul used each of his various positions to attempt to bring about the glory of God (I Corinthians 9:22).
32. Paul Only?
Q32—Are we to consider only what Paul says?
A32—No. Any person attempting to follow solely the Apostle Paul will miss many important doctrines and Bible truths. For instance, the virgin birth and hell—among many other critical doctrines—are not mentioned in Paul’s epistles. However, Paul does allude to hell without mentioning it by name in II Thessalonians 1:6-9.
33. Most Important Scripture
Q33—It seems that II Timothy 2:15 might be the most important verse in the Bible about studying the scriptures. Why doesn’t the version of the Bible I am using include the words "rightly divide" or "study" in this passage?
A33—The only version of the Bible that contains both commands—to study and to rightly divide—is the King James AV 1611 Bible. This is the only verse in the Bible that gives the command to study and the only one that reveals how to study (by rightly dividing).
34. Modern Versions
Q34—Is this the only problem with the modern versions?
A34—Well, that’s another book . . .
For an in-depth study on the modern versions, check out One Book Stands Alone by the same author. It contains over 400 pages of comparative analysis of this issue.
|
