PETER’S CONVERSION AND CALL

When was Peter saved? Was it when Andrew brought him to the Lord Jesus, or was it when the Lord called him on the shores of the sea of Galilee to become a fisher of men?

The mission of John the Baptist was, amongst other things, to “make ready a people prepared for the Lord” (Luke 1:15)," TARGET="_blank">Luke 1:15), and, no doubt, Peter, Andrew and the rest of the apostles were all disciples of John, having been baptized by him with the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins, waiting for the One that was to come. Accordingly, when these prepared ones came in contact with the Lord, they were ready to receive Him as Messiah. In John i, when Andrew brought Peter to the Lord, He did not call him to repentance or faith, for he did already in a manner believe on Him, but gave Him his new name, anticipating the moment when He would build him as a living stone into His Church. This was only the prelude to the scene on the sea of Galilee.

Thus Peter was called by John to repentance and faith in the one coming after him; then by the Lord to a place in His Church, and later to His service. We apply the word “saved” to everyone who has received Christ as personal Saviour, though the word carries with it more than forgiveness, namely, deliverance to and from. Peter could not receive Christ in above sense till the Lord was revealed to Israel, but no doubt all the true disciples of John, though they did not form part of the Church till Pentecost, were saved persons; they were of the people of God, His own, in a very real sense. In this sense Peter was a saved person before he was introduced to the Lord by Andrew, for he had been already introduced to Him by John the Baptist and had doubtless believed on Him as the One “who should come after him” (Acts 19:4)," TARGET="_blank">Acts 19:4), as indeed did the Old Testament saints in a minor degree. The Lord knew him by name and was now calling him out of the Jewish fold, to belong to His flock.

W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

What is demon possession?

What is demon possession?

Demon possession is the act of a demon, a fallen angel, an agent of Satan, moving into the body and mind of a human being.
Christ spoke of this type of possession in Matthew 12:44" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 12:44 and Luke 11:25" TARGET="_blank">Luke 11:25…

Matthew 12:43-45" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 12:43-45 When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none. (44) Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished. (45) Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first. Even so shall it be also unto this wicked generation.

Christ was correcting a problem with empty religion of the Pharisees. A person who is under the control of Satan is described in Ephesians 2:1-2" TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 2:1-2 as someone following the course of this world - unbridled sinful living, ungodly thinking, lust-filled passions, no limits, sensual, greedy, animal-like, selfish passion.

Ephesians 2:1-2" TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 2:1-2 And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience--

Eventually, a person in this state may grow weary of this type of life and seek reformation and religion. But a man who is reformed, but not reborn (as in born again) is not truly a Christian. The key phrase in this passage is verse 44 "unoccupied". The Holy Spirit is not a resident in his heart. He is therefore eventually going to return to his Satanic-driven lifestyle and be even more enslaved to his habits.

Other Examples

There are a number of examples of people who were possessed by a demon, but none of them were believers. The demoniacs of Gadara (Matthew 8:28;" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 8:28; Mark 5:2)" TARGET="_blank">Mark 5:2) are them most startling examples of demon possession. These show us the extreme change that came upon them once Christ had driven the demons from them. These were not mere problems such as "demons of depression" or "demons of mental illness" or "demons of alcoholism", but true possession of a demonic spirit.

Demons may enter the body of an unbeliever and take control of his thoughts and emotions but the Christian is protected from Satan and his angels because he is indwelled by the Holy Spirit (1 John 4:4;" TARGET="_blank">1 John 4:4; Ephesians 1:13-14;" TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 1:13-14; Colossians 1:13-14)." TARGET="_blank">Colossians 1:13-14).

Shad David Sluiter

Other pages in this section

About this site

Is the righteousness of Christ imputed to the believer?

Is the righteousness of Christ imputed to the believer?

No. Many of the best known evangelicals have affixed their signature to a manifesto of Christian belief that espouses this. The consistent teaching of the New Testament is that we have been declared, have been reckoned, or have become "the righteousness of God." For instance, from 2 Corinthians 5:21," TARGET="_blank">2 Corinthians 5:21, some teach that God put our acts of sins on Christs account and He suffered for them. In a perfectly balanced way, they teach, God now puts Christs acts of righteousness on our account. Our sins became His; His righteousness become ours.

What became ours, according to 2 Corinthians 5:21," TARGET="_blank">2 Corinthians 5:21, was "righteousness of God" (without an article, "the"), which is not a term describing Christs righteous life on earth. Furthermore, despite the hymn writers words, "He took my sins and my sorrows; He made them His very own," Christ bore our sins, but was Himself holy; "He knew no sin" before, during, and after the cross. He paid the penalty of our sins, but they did not become His. We have become "the righteousness of God," righteous, as required by God, through Christs death, not His life.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Will the Holy Spirit no longer be working on earth during the tribulation?

Does 2 Thessalonians 2:7" TARGET="_blank">2 Thessalonians 2:7 toach that the Spirit of God will no longer be in the world after the Rapture?

Implicit in the question is the truth that the Holy Spirit of God, in His unique relation to the church (John 14:16)," TARGET="_blank">John 14:16), is the "Restrainer" in verse 7. This restraint will be removed at the Rapture, allowing the Man of Sin to be "revealed in his time" (verse 6). However, John saw in heaven "a multitude, which no man could number" "which came out of great tribulation" (Revelation 7:9, 14)." TARGET="_blank">Revelation 7:9, 14). These, together with the living "sheep" (Matthew 25:33)," TARGET="_blank">Matthew 25:33), were born again in the tribulation after the rapture of the Church. The Spirit must then be operating on earth after the Rapture, otherwise individuals could not be born again (John 3:5)." TARGET="_blank">John 3:5). Further all that is accomplished for God in the testimony of the 144,000 sealed servants (Revelation 7:4)" TARGET="_blank">Revelation 7:4) must be through the energy of the Spirit. The two slain witnesses (Revelation 11:11)" TARGET="_blank">Revelation 11:11) must be resurrected by the Spirit of God (see also Romans 8:11)." TARGET="_blank">Romans 8:11).

W. Skates
Other pages in this section

About this site

What is the difference between "a child is born" and "a son is given"?

What is the difference in Isaiah 9:6." TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 9:6. between the expressions the “child born” and the “Son given”?

There is an important difference, I believe, and one which the exponents of what they term “the New Light,” as to the Eternal Sonship of our Lord, would do well to consider. Why is the “child” said to be “born,” but the “Son” not born, but “given”? We read in Isaiah 7:14" TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 7:14 that God had been pleased to offer to king Ahaz a sign to confirm his doubting soul, that the line of David would not be superseded by the son of Tabeal, according to the Satanic design of Rezin and Pekah, which would have set aside the purpose of God regarding His future King, who must be of the seed of David according to the flesh. Ahaz had liberty of choice; he might ask for any sign in the depth, that is commensurate with the drying up of the Red Sea, or in the height commensurate with the standing still of the sun in answer to Joshua’s prayer. The king who was continually tempting God by his disobedience, refused this offer: He would not tempt the Lord, he said. Very well, then, the Lord will give a sign greater than any other known so far in the history of the world—the Virgin Birth of Him who was God: “Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call His name Immanuel” (v. 14). A great effort of unbelief has been made to show that the word,” ‘almãh,” translated “virgin,” should be rather rendered “young married woman.” Such an objection hardly shows unusual scholarship, so much as a lack of common sense; for the fact of a young married woman having a son would be no sign at all. In this verse, in the phrase “a virgin shall. . . bear a son,” the same verb is used as in chap. 9. 6, “a child is born.” Here the Son is viewed as the Son of Mary in the sense of Matthew 1:25" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 1:25: “She brought forth her first-born Son.” Why then is the “Son” said to be “given” in Isa. 9." TARGET="_blank">Isa. 9. 6? The reason is that there the One born is viewed as the One who had already been Son from all eternity. He could not become that by human birth. The child was born, but God gave His Eternal Son. W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

What is "baptism unto the remission of sins"?

What do passages like Acts 2:38" TARGET="_blank">Acts 2:38 and 22:16 mean?

Three passages speak of "baptism unto the remission of sins." They are Mark 1:4," TARGET="_blank">Mark 1:4, Luke 3:3," TARGET="_blank">Luke 3:3, and Acts 2:38," TARGET="_blank">Acts 2:38, all three relating to Jews. Two of these concern John’s baptism. In Acts 19:1-6," TARGET="_blank">Acts 19:1-6, 12 individuals had been baptized with John’s "baptism of repentance," but they were not saved, having never received the Spirit (Romans 8:9)." TARGET="_blank">Romans 8:9). In fact, Paul states (Acts 19:4)" TARGET="_blank">Acts 19:4) that the purpose of John’s baptism and ministry was that people should believe on the coming Christ. When the people were baptized by John, they turned from their nation’s characteristic resistance to God’s message (Acts 7:51, 52)." TARGET="_blank">Acts 7:51, 52). This prepared the way for their faith in Christ.

In the third passage (Acts 2:38)," TARGET="_blank">Acts 2:38), Peter repeatedly exhorted his Jewish listeners to save themselves "from this perverse generation" (v. 40, JND). Thus when they personally repented and "gladly received his word" (v. 41), being baptized as believers served two purposes: submission to the authority of Jesus Christ ("baptized in [lit., upon] the name of Jesus Christ"); renunciation of their nation’s resistance to God’s message.

Being "baptized unto the remission of sins" was only possible therefore for a Jew. John’s baptism prepared them for faith in Christ. The baptism in Acts 2" TARGET="_blank">Acts 2 proclaimed that they already had faith in Christ. In both cases, the baptism did not remove those sins before God, but renounced before others their previous disobedience. It testified against the nation’s rejection of Christ and released them from any relationship to the coming national judgment that rejection would bring.

The statement in Acts 22:16" TARGET="_blank">Acts 22:16 is to be understood in the same way. Paul was already saved when Ananias spoke to him about baptism (Romans 10:9)." TARGET="_blank">Romans 10:9). He had resisted God’s message and opposed the name of Jesus (26:9). Now as he called on that name and identified himself with the Lord Jesus in baptism, he repudiated his zealous participation in his nation’s rejection of Christ.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Why does the Lord Jesus emphasize the title "Son of Man"?

Why does the Lord Jesus emphasize this title?

In the Gospels, the Lord refers to Himself as the Son of Man on 53 occasions. In all but one of these, the words could be translated literally "the Son of the Man," a form only used of Christ in the Scriptures. On the other occasion, the form is "Son of Man," the same construction used in the Greek translation of the Old Testament on every occasion "son of man" appears. To give some perspective, in the gospel records the Lord referred to Himself as "the Christ" on eight occasions. He referred to Himself as Lord on ten occasions. We have five recorded incidents when He stated He is the Son of God.

But why this emphasis? In Daniel’s prophecy (7:13), at least three truths are related to the Son of Man: His authority, His coming, His rejection. In contrast to others whose dominion would be taken from them, the Son of Man receives authority that will never pass away (v 14). His coming is with the clouds of heaven (v 13). That His rejection precedes His coming is evident in linking two other Old Testament passages with this prophecy. He is a man Who comes from heaven. This is parallel to the teaching of Psalm 110" TARGET="_blank">Psalm 110 (verses 1-3), where the coming ruler has enemies and his own people are unwilling for Him to reign over them while He is sitting at God’s right hand. Add to that verse 17 of Psalm 80," TARGET="_blank">Psalm 80, which appears to be messianic and links "the Man of Thy right hand" (His ascension) with "the Son of Man."

In at least seven of the recorded 53 occasions, He emphasizes His authority: over the Sabbath, the forgiveness of sins, all judgment, and entrance to the kingdom. Comparing Psalm 8" TARGET="_blank">Psalm 8 (v 4) and Hebrews 2" TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 2 (vv 6-9), we conclude that the dominion over all the works of God’s hands was lost by Adam, the son of man, and now belongs to Jesus, the Son of Man, although all things are not yet put under to Him.

On at least 17 of these 53 occasions, the Lord is referring to His coming again - and always His coming to earth. He is anticipating His coming glory.

At least 26 of the occasions when He calls Himself the Son of Man, the Lord is emphasizing His rejection - including His death, burial, resurrection, or ascension. This is then a predominant thought associated with His title as the Son of Man.

As in Psalm 8" TARGET="_blank">Psalm 8 and various other passages, the term "son" does not always refer to physical generation, but refers rather to character (e. g., sons of Belial; see also Eph 2:2" TARGET="_blank">Eph 2:2 JND and Mat 23:31," TARGET="_blank">Mat 23:31, JND). The Son of Man embodies all that God ever intended a man to be.

His reasons for using this title so often, then, may be to emphasize His messiahship, coming glory, rejection, authority, and perfection, showing that He was both like, yet distinct from, every other man.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

We can't have children, but my friends are hinting that it is time. What should I do?

How can a couple who is unable to bear children respond to well-intended hints that it is time for them to be parents?

Those who cannot have children will know how devastating such a comment can be. The example of the Lord and the statements of Scripture teach us to respond to evil with blessing, not responding in kind (1Pe 3:9)." TARGET="_blank">1Pe 3:9). This person probably meant well and was attempting to express interest, encouragement, maybe even confidence. Depending on the Lord to give help, the couple could simply express appreciation for the concern expressed and ask for the help of that person in prayer. The Lord will know how to answer the prayer in ways the person praying may not understand.

For the benefit of the well-intentioned individual who thrust a knife into the heart of this couple, many passages, if heeded, would have sealed his lips. One will do. Christians are to consider the effect of their words on others and to limit their communications to what is beneficial ("good"), strengthening ("edification"), and enabling ("ministering grace to the hearers," Eph 4: 29)." TARGET="_blank">Eph 4: 29). None of us is perfect (James 3:2)," TARGET="_blank">James 3:2), but Christian grace will increase our sensitivity to others.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Should a Christian celebrate Halloween?

Should a Christian celebrate Halloween?

The celebration of holidays for a Christian is addressed in Romans 14:1-23" TARGET="_blank">Romans 14:1-23 and 1 Corinthians 10:1-33." TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 10:1-33. The controversy of special food and special days may have had different names in the times of the apostles, but the principles of how to handle them is still relevant today.

The final decision for a Christian’s participation in Halloween will ultimately lie with the individual believer, but there are a number of factors one should consider.

Dressing a child in a cute costume as a cowboy, princess or a favorite sport’s hero and asking people for candy is of course, an innocent activity. On the other hand, dressing as a witch, vampire, evil spirit or murderous villain is another idea altogether.

The origins of almost all holidays are with national events or Christian-related ideas even if their precise dates are not known. Halloween, on the other hand, is a purely pagan and spiritually dark celebration of the gods of pre-Christian Europe with no association with anything from God.

Christians may choose to avoid any associate with Halloween based on the Old Testament’s prohibition of any form of demon communication or witchcraft

(Exodus 22:18;" TARGET="_blank">Exodus 22:18; Leviticus 19:31; 20:6, 27)." TARGET="_blank">Leviticus 19:31; 20:6, 27). In the New Testament as well, the apostles spoke strongly against fortune telling and mixing with evil spirits (Acts 8:9-24;" TARGET="_blank">Acts 8:9-24; Acts 13:6-11;" TARGET="_blank">Acts 13:6-11; Acts 19:19)." TARGET="_blank">Acts 19:19).

A Christian who chooses not to celebrate any form of Halloween has legitimate concerns and honors God by avoiding any association with a demonic-influenced holiday. There is clearly something to avoid in Halloween. Horror movies, occult practices and haunted houses are grotesque perversions of anything good, moral and godly. However, a parent who encourages his child to dress as a clown or a football player can hardly be faulted for enjoying an innocent party.

Some believers use the opportunity to communicate with their neighbors with gospel tracts or have fall parties in order to share the gospel. Some countries have more drastic demon-influenced traditions than others. Some believers have friends who are more likely to be offended by Halloween celebrations than others. The final decision as to participate in fall parties lies with a well-informed believer who wishes to not cause offense to neither Jew, gentile nor to the church of God.

Shad David Sluiter

Other pages in this section

About this site

What New Testament books are most important as keys to other books?

What New Testament books are most important as keys to other books?

John unfolds truths regarding the Godhead and its interrelationships. He majors on eternal life, faith, and the Word of God. The Lord discloses the Rapture in John; Paul develops this in 1 Thessalonians. The teaching in John 13" TARGET="_blank">John 13-17 lays a basis for most of Pauls epistles. Johns other writings complete his gospels presentation.

Romans develops the foundations of the gospel, introduced in the gospels. Its doctrine and dispensational truths explain Gods ways in the Acts. Its dispensational section argues for Gods dealings with Israel in the Revelation and the Old Testament prophets.

1 Corinthians, "the Charter of the Church," completes the gospel records on the resurrection of Christ and complements 1 Thessalonians regarding the Rapture. Most important, it integrates Matthew, Acts, 1 Timothy and almost all New Testament assembly teaching. It is inseparable from 2 Corinthians.

Ephesians captures Gods eternal purpose for the Church, the Body, and our position in Christ. This relates it to John, 1 Corinthians, Philippians, and Colossians. The Church, as body, building, and bride completes truth from Genesis and climaxes in the Revelation.

Hebrews interprets many Old Testament prophecies and types. It elucidates much of Leviticus. Above all, it unites many Old and New Testament truths regarding Christs person and work.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Main Menu