MODE OF BAPTISM Q. What do you understand the Scrip tures to teach in regard to the mode of baptism? A. Romans 6:4 teaches that baptism is a symbol of our identification with Christ in His death and resurrection. “Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.” When a believer submits himself to baptism, he is proclaiming his faith in Christ’s death, burial, and resur rection as the means by which he is saved. As to the mode, John 3:23, as well as other passages, give us light. There we read: “ And John also was baptiz ing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there.” There is no doubt that John baptized by immersion, else there would have been no need of “much water.” The word “baptize” means to “dip” or “ plunge” ; and that can be performed only where there is “much water.” Acts 8:36-38 is another passage which suggests “much water” : “And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water; and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he bap tized him.” I could sprinkle a hundred people with a cupful of water, and it would not be necessary to “ go down into the water” to do that. Immersion cer tainly sets forth beautifully the great truths baptism illustrates — death, burial, and resurrection. However, we must ever bear in mind that water baptism has nothing to do with sal vation. The only water baptism known to Scripture is the immersion of a person after he has already believed unto salvation.
lead Christian Hebrews away from Judaism to Christ Himself. The Aar- onic priesthood had served God’s pur pose, and had been done away in Christ; therefore, why return to Jud aism? That, in fact, is the argument of this entire weighty epistle. Just one further word to show how Melchizedek was greater than Aaron: (1) Abraham, Aaron’s forefather, was blessed by Melchizedek; (2) Abra ham paid tithes to Melchizedek; (3) having no recorded genealogy, Mel chizedek is a type of the eternal High Priest, even Jesus. Moreover, Aaron was only a priest, from the tribe of Levi; Christ was from the kingly tribe of Judah, ac cording to the flesh, and is, therefore, both King and Priest. Again, Aaron and his sons were made priests without an oath (Heb. 7:20, 21); Christ was proclaimed a Priest forever after the order of Mel chizedek — not after the order of Aaron — when the Father confirmed His Word by His oath. Once again, the Levitical priests had to offer sacrifices for their own sins; animal sacrifices; many sacri fices; whereas Christ had no sin for which to atone; He offered Himself; He offered one sacrifice forever! PROPHETIC MEANING Q. What is meant by “Mystery, Bab ylon The Great” in Rev. 17, 18? A. This is a description of apostate Christendom during the reign of the Antichrist. After the true church is translated, professing Christendom will be united in one great body. All true believers will by that time be “with the Lord.” But those who are Christian only in name will form a religious confederacy, called in Rev. 17:5 “The Mother of Harlots,” in contrast with the true bride of Christ, which is the church. For a time this false system will make a great show of their godless, Christless profession. They will be in league with the Antichrist, the beast. Then he will turn on this “mother of harlots” and devour her.
A HUMAN ANGEL? Q. Please explain Heb. 7:1-3. Was Melchizedek an appearance of God in the form of an angel? A. Some Bible teachers do hold the view that Melchizedek was an ap pearance of God in angelic form, bas ing this opinion on Heb. 7:3, but most students of the Word of God hold the other view, that he was merely a man, a type of Christ in His High Priestly Person. I am convinced that this latter interpretation is correct, for the following reasons: 1. Melchzedek was king of Salem, the ancient site of the city of Jeru salem, which means “ the city of peace.” “ Salem” means “ peace” ; therefore, as king of peace, Melchize dek was a type of Christ, the Prince of Peace and King of Peace. 2. He was also “ by interpretation king of righteousness,” a type of the Lord Jesus, who one day will rule in righteousness. 3. As prie„f of the most high God, he was a type of Christ, our Priest. 4. Nothing is written of Melchize dek in all the Bible except the story recorded in Gen. 14:17-20; the state ment that he is a type of Christ in Psalm. 11:4, and the explanation of the type in Hebrews 6:20; 7:1-28. Very evidently the Holy Spirit omit ted all reference to Melchizedek’s parents, in order that he might be used as a type of the eternal Son of God, who verily has “neither beginning of days, nor end of life.” In this connection, please note the Revised Version for the word “des cent” of the Authorized Version of Heb. 7:3. Accurately translated, it means, “without father, without moth er, without genealogy” ; in other words, without recorded genealogy, in order that he might be a type of the eternal Son of God. Let it be remembered that the whole argument presented in Heb rews is that, as Melchizedek was greater than Aaron, the first high priest in Israel, so also Christ is great er than Aaron in His eternal priest hood. The Holy Spirit was seeking to
THE KINO'S BUSINESS
30
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs