THOSE THREE THINGS

I graduated Bible School in 1998 from the Pensacola Bible Institute.  I really don't like telling people this for a variety of reasons, but mostly because when I do, they automatically assume they know who I am and what I believe.  You see, in the Independent Baptist Movement (the IBM) there are many groups or camps.  And many of these camps have been founded by men who started Bible Schools, each one teaching certian traditions a little different than the other.  So when a man goes to a school and graduates from a certain school, all he has to do is tell others what school he went to, and they can get a general idea of what he believes and who he is based upon what school he went to.

Now, this is not always the case.  I've met men from Hyles, from Tennessee Temple, from PCC, and other places who are not like the majority of the graduates from those schools.  They went there to learn, but they also studied their Bibles, and where the school taught one thing and the Bible taught another, they chose to stick with the word of God. 

I've learned, then, that just because someone says they went to a certain Bible college, you can't know for certain what that person belives.  You must talk with them, and get to know them, for they just might have gone there but not turned out like little robots like many of the other students of that school do, speaking, preaching, and believing the many traditions they've been taught.

The school I went to is one of those that many other Bible Colleges look down upon.  They not only don't like the founder of the school for some things that happened in his personal life, but they feel he's too dogmatic, and "rough" around the edges.  They also don't like his dogmatical stand on the King James Bible, and his exposing modern day apostates and apostaste teachings.  So when a young man like myself graduates from his school and goes out on deputation, it's not easy to get meetings, especially with Pastors who went to other Bible schools.

As I did deputation, I found there were three main issues almost all Pastors wanted to debate with me, and I found no matter where I went, they consistently asked me what I believe about these three topics.  They are as follows:

1.  Double married Preachers

2.  Alien Baptism

3.  Dispensational Salvation

I also found that their doctrinal beliefs on these topics were not their own.  As I traveled and spoke with them, I soon learned why.  It was because they were all taught to believe the same thing about these topics.  In short, they were taught baptist tradition, rather than bible doctrine in their Bible College.

I spoke to some graduates from my school about this, who were also missionaries, and they said things like, "Oh, well just don't talk about those things.  Just don't bring them up, and if they do, just say what they want to hear so you can get their support!"

I found this to be very deceitful.  Plus, I found I myself have a problem.  I'm not good at keeping my mouth shut, especially when I know and believe what the Bible says, and I believe God's called me to preach the truth. 

I also found, however, that I don't like to debate nor argue.  So this made things interesting.  In other words, I didn't go places looking for a fight, nor was I the one who brought these subjects up.  Instead, it was always the Pastors who brought up these same three things over and over as soon as they learned which Bible Institute I graduated from. 

I'd like to now look at those three things, giving their positions (as they were always the same), and then giving the scriptures that prove their positions false. 

1.  DOUBLE-MARRIED PREACHERS

Many a pastor adheres to the belief that a man cannot be married more than once and be a Pastor.  They are very dogmatic about this.  (But what if a Pastor's wife dies?  Shouldn't he be allowed to get remarried?  They seldom ever discuss that.).  Thier proof text is found in 1 Tim. 3:2 and Titus 1:6, in which the Bible says a Bishop or Pastor should be the husband of "one wife."  True, this is what it says.  But there also a list of many other things too, and those same preachers never mention those, (probably because they are guilty of several of them, and this would make them "disqualified" themselves!)

These Pastors, then, are guilty of judging others based upon their own situations (they've only been married once), something the scriptures calls "unwise"  (2 Cor. 10:12).  They think, "Well, I have only one wife and I'm a Pastor, so every other Pastor must only have one wife as well."

But they seldom look at the reason this was written.  It was common in those days for a man to have two or even three wives all living at home with him.  Thus, Paul said that was wrong.  They should only have "one."  It was one legal wife.

Further, these dogmatic Pastors refuse to look at other verses which speak about what to do when a man's wife divorces him (a sad and all too common practice in America today, especially by modern liberated women who follow the world rather than God).  There are scriptures which speak about this, and they tell us if an "unbeliever" departs, a man is not under bondage in such cases (1 Cor. 7:15).  This means the man is not married, and therefore he has no wife if his lost wife leaves him. 

These men further refuse to look at the verses where a man can biblically remarry after he's been loosed from a wife.  In fact, the Bible says, its not sin (1 Cor. 7:27-28).  

Thus, biblically, a man can have been married more than once and still Pastor.  That is on the following two stipulations:

1. His wife died.

2. His unbeliving wife left him.

Many Pastors don't believe this, however, instead proclaiming that a double-married man should not be allowed to Pastor for any reason whatsoever.  They are free to believe this all they want.  But they should reconsider, for there are many men out there who are qualified in all the other qualifications of a Pastor who have passed through some bad circumstances, and their wives left them, or else their wives died.  These men should have a chance to Pastor if God has called them to do so.  And who do others think they are to stand in judgment of God?  Did you know Moses was double-married?  David was too.  And many others.  God is a God of second chances, and we should be to.  However, we should seek to obey God's word as closely as possible.  For example, if a Pastor does divorce his own wife and then remarries, we should never allow that man to Pastor a church.  He has dishonored God.  Instead of something happening beyond his control, he is the divorcer, not the divorcee.  He therefore should NEVER Pastor a local church, for he is a poor example to others.  This is not only Bible, but common sense.

Pastors, then, should not be so quick to judge other Pastors.  Instead of lamblasting others for being what they call "double-married," they need to find out the details, for a man just might be married more than once, biblically. 

2.  ALIEN BAPTISM

For those who don't know, or have never heard of this term, Alien Baptism is used most often by "Baptist Briders" to describe the act of water baptism done to a professed believer by any preacher or denomination that is not Baptist or "Baptistic."  In other words, if it wasn't done by Baptists or those with Baptist doctrine, they count a person's water baptism as "alien" or "null and void."  To them it just doesn't count.

This is silly to me.  Why does a person have to be baptized by Baptists?  Does this mean if a guy goes to a Bible church and he's saved there and baptized, then that means it doesn't mean anything.  So what, he's still saved!  Right?

Those who preach against alien baptism also are quick to say that baptism is a ritual that must be done not only by Baptists, but also by those who are "authorized" to do so.  And they must be able to trace their roots of authority from church to church all the way back to the apostles.  In other words, they set up sort of an "Apostolic Sucession" in which they claim their right to baptize has been passed down to them all the way clear back to Jesus.

Those who preach this type of baptism find no iota of scripture to support this teaching.  The words "alien baptism" are not found in the Bible, nor do we find Jesus or the apostles discoursing on this subject. 

Instead, we find things like in Acts chapter 8, in which Philip baptizes the Ethiopian Eunuch.  Under what church does he do this?  NONE!

We further see in 1 Cor. 1:17 that Paul said he wasn't sent to baptize, rather to preach the Gospel.  He then proceeds to thank God he baptized no one, but two men and a certain household. 

Why then do modern Pastors put such emphasis on baptism, and why are they so adamant about trying to trace their "authority" to baptize clear back to Jesus?  (Sounds almost like what the Catholic Church does with infant baptism, doesn't it?)

I believe it's only because it's a Baptist "tradition" that's been taught to them and they seek to continue propogating it.  They are very big on being "baptists" and it shows.  And, as I look at many big name Fundamentalist Independent Baptists, I find they are very big on "bragging."  It appears the more they baptize in their church, the more numbers they can brag about in their Fundamentalists magazines, so this teaching does well in helping their numbers.  You see, I've seen and heard time and again of Pastors using this teaching to tell people who want to join their church, you can't join our church unless I baptize you!  It doesn't matter if that person has been baptized before.  The Pastor doesn't recognize it, calling it instead "alien."  So the canidate is told they must be "re-baptized" before they can be made a member of the church.  This not only adds to the "numbers" of baptized that month, but also gets the person used to submitting to the Pastor without the Pastor proving to them what they are doing is correct according to the scriptures.

With this stated, I'll tell you what I would always say to Pastors who asked me what I believed about Alien Baptism.  I'd state: "All I know is if E.T. showed up, I'm not going to baptize him!" 

This usually led to them dropping the subject.  Those who didn't I told them the truth, "I don't find it in the Bible.  But if a person willingly wants to do it as an act of testimony to show the church he's a true believer, they are more than welcome to do so."

This usually made them angry, and led to their cutting off fellowship with me.  But why?  What evil have I done?  I'm still preaching the Gospel!  So why can't we just agree to disagree?

3.  DISPENSATIONAL SALVATION

This one is the one most Pastors become enraged about.  They like to say things like, "I've heard your Bible School teaches five different plans of salvation!" 

The truth is it only teaches the Bible, and is careful to point out how God dealt with different men in different dispensations.  God didn't preach the same thing to everyone throughout the whole Bible.  For example, I'll give some examples of what God said to certain individuals, and you see if you can figure out who God said it to:

Don't eat!

Leave your country!

Build and Ark!

Don't cut your hair!

Follow me!

Do any of these sound like new Testament Salvation to you?  But at one time God spoke each of these to certain men, and each one's salvation was dependent upon whether they obeyed or not.  Thank God, he had grace on each of them, as they all disobeyed eventually.  But do you see how God deals differently with different people in different dispensations?

You see, the Gospel we preach today is not what was preached in the Old Testament.  It couldn't have been, for Christ hadn't even died yet!  How can you preach the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ before he was even born? 

These men who "scoff" at dispensational salvation (i.e. God dealing differently with people in different time periods) are usually the same people who say ludicrious things like, "People are saved the same in the Old Testament as in the New."  Really?  How can this be?  In the Church Age today, we are saved by trusting the blood atonement of Jesus Christ.  How could anyone trust this in the Old Testament, when Jesus hadn't even died yet?  Nor did anyone know the name of Jesus in the Old Testament.  In fact, there are three times the angel of the Lord (Jesus in his pre-incarnate state) shows up, and someone asks him his name.  All three times, he doesn't give it to them.  How can anyone be saved the same today as back then?  How?

Not only that, those who were saved in the O.T. were not saved the same way.  You see, we are saved by grace through faith and we are SEALED with the Holy Spirit.  That means we can't lose it.  But David could in the O.T. That's why he prayed, "Lord, take not thy Holy Spirit from me!"

We who are saved today are "justified" and "imputed God's righteousness" at the same time by faith.

But Abraham wasn't.  He believed in God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness.  But he was "justified" by "works."  Notice that's not the same as how we are saved today!

So as we look at "dispensationalism" in the Bible, we see that salvation is different in different ages.  Adam and Eve's salvation was based upon works:  i.e. DON'T eat the tree.  After they fell, they had to offer sacrifices to God, just like Abel.  Under the law, a man's faith was to be in the blood of his sacrifice, but it took effort to actually slay it (i.e. faith + works).  Today in the church age, it's by FAITH alone a man is saved.  However, in the tribulation, a person can profess to be a Christian, but he can lose it if he takes the mark of the beast.  In the millenium, Jesus Christ reigns on earth.  We are told in Hebrews that faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen.  How then can men have FAITH then, if they can see Jesus literally governing on the earth.  It is then a time of salvation by WORKS, in which people will have to either cut off their hands or put out their eyes rather than be cast into hell fire.  Does this not look like a different plan of salvation then what we have today under the Gospel?

The only way you can say salvation is the same in the O.T. as in the N.T. is to say it's always been by "grace" for it is always by God's grace that a man lives long enough to get saved.

But to scoff at God's different ways of dealing with men through different dispensations, while saying ridiculous things like: "In the O.T. people were saved by looking forward to the cross and in the N.T. people are saved by looking back to the cross," is too much.  First of all, things were DIFFERENT in different times.  Secondly, How could people in the O.T. have looked forward to the cross, when crosses didn't show up until the Romans came on the scene?

So we see then that there are different ways in which God dealt with different people in the Bible.  Not everyone was saved the same way.  To say they are is to willingly mislead someone.  For the only way we can really say God saves everyone the same way is to say we are all saved by grace, because it's been God's grace in every dispensation. 

But we need to give details and look at how God dealt with different people in different times.  Why?  Because it makes us more appreciative of the Gospel and salvation today.  We don't have to eat, do, sacrifice, or build anything to be saved today.  We simply must rely upon the finished work of Jesus Christ by faith. What a great time in which to live!  When the penalty for our sins has been PAID by Jesus Christ!

Why then don't Pastors want to look at the differences between how people were forgiven by God in the Old Testament and how they are saved today in the new?  There are many differences.  For example, we see King Saul getting the Holy Spirit and prophecying several times, but then losing that Spirit.  Does that happen today?  No way!

SUMMARY

So these are the main three issue most Pastors want to dwell upon.  If you are a Missionary trying to get support for your field, no doubt you'll face these same three things as well.  Do you know what you believe about them.  Do you know what the Bible says about them?  Have you studied them out, or are you just going by what your Bible College taught you? 

The saddest thing to me is that most Pastors do not look at whether a Missionary is truly saved (by asking for their testimony), nor do they find out if that Missionary is preaching and presenting the Gospel plainly.  No, most Pastors make their decision based upon whether they will support a Missionary based upon what he believes about these three things.  Can you believe that?  That means you can be LOST and preaching ANOTHER GOSPEL, but as long as you agree with the Pastor on these three things, you'll get his support and be sent to the Mission Field!  God help us!  It's time we got back to the Bible and stopped arguing over little things that don't matter, while overlooking those things that do.