Questions and Answers: Why is the Book of Esther in the Bible?

Kyle Butt, D.Min.

Alleged DiscrepanciesDoctrinal MattersBible Interpretation

Q.

Why is the book of Esther in the Bible, since it does not mention God? (cf. Wells).

A.

God operates in many different ways. In the book of Exodus, for example, we read about God working through Moses to part the Red Sea, and to turn a shepherd’s rod into a serpent. During New Testament times, God gave Jesus power to heal all manner of sickness, cure blindness, and even raise the dead.

But miracles were only one way in which God worked. He also worked (and continues to work) through providence, which means that He uses natural laws to accomplish His varied purposes. For instance, in Acts 14:17, the apostle Paul explained to his listeners that God gave them “rain from heaven and fruitful seasons,” thereby filling their hearts “with food and gladness.” How had God given them such blessings? Did He miraculously drop apples out of the sky or turn stones to bread? No, He used the natural forces of this world to accomplish His purposes. God always is at work “behind the scenes” to make sure that His ultimate will is accomplished.

When we study the book of Esther, it is true that we never read God’s name. But many of the things that occurred in the book could not have been “just luck.” Take, for instance, the time that King Ahasuerus could not sleep, and his servant “just happened” to read the records of the time that Mordecai had saved the king’s life (Esther 6:1-3). In fact, the entire book of Esther shows that God’s guiding hand was working behind the scenes to save the Jewish nation. Esther’s guardian, Mordecai, once said to her: “Who knows whether you have come to the kingdom for such a time as this?” (Esther 4:14). His statement shows that he was seeing God’s possible plan for Esther.

Today, no person has been given the power to raise the dead or turn sticks into snakes, but God still is at work through His guiding hand of providence. The book of Esther serves to remind us that we do not need to see God (or even read His name) to know that He is “not far from each one of us” (Acts 17:27).

Reference

Wells, Steve, “Esther for Skeptics,” http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/est/intro.html.

REPRODUCTION & DISCLAIMERS: We are happy to grant permission for this article to be reproduced in part or in its entirety, as long as our stipulations are observed.

What If Someone Dies Just Before Baptism? Video 5 min

https://apologeticspress.org/video/what-if-someone-dies-just-before-baptism/ 

Click on the link above and follow the paths provided.

A Scientific Approach to God Video 5 min

https://apologeticspress.org/video/a-scientific-approach-to-god/ 

Click on the link above and follow the paths provided.

 

Did Jesus Command Infant Baptism?

Caleb Colley, Ph.D.

Doctrinal MattersDifficult PassagesDifficult PassagesDifficult PassagesSalvation

Some suggest that because Jesus welcomed children (Luke 18:15 indicates they were infants), and said of them, “of such is the kingdom of God” (Matthew 19:13-15; Mark 10:13-16; Luke 18:15-17), infants should be baptized just as adults are baptized.

Christ told the disciples not to shun children, because children possess a deep humility that followers of Christ should develop (see Deaver, 1985, p. 9). Adults must receive the Gospel with the same humility and trust that characterize little children (Mark 10:15; see Hendriksen, 1975, p. 383), and there are important things we should learn from the young (see 1 Timothy 4:12). In this instance, Jesus certainly expressed appreciation and affection for infants. But what about baptism?

Jesus did not command His disciples to baptize the children—whoever brought the children did not bring them for the purpose of having them baptized (Matthew 19:13). Furthermore, while we have record of Christ’s disciples baptizing adults (John 3:22; 4:1-2; see Lyons, 2003), we have no record of them baptizing children. In fact, the disciples shunned the children at first, possibly because the disciples thought that the children “interfered” with one of the main objectives of Christ’s ministry: to baptize penitent adults. If those who brought the children did not intend for the children to be baptized, why did they bring them?

First, it is possible that those who brought the children sought a medical benefit for their children, though the text does not so imply. Many people brought their children to Jesus to have them healed of diseases. Some parents incorporate Christianity into the rearing of their children only when their children are afflicted with terrible illness (of course, parents should at all times encourage their children to learn about Christ and to live according to His precepts [see Proverbs 22:6; Henry, 1706, 1:271]).

Second, it is possible that those who brought the children perceived some religious, spiritual, or supernatural benefit available only in the presence of Jesus. However, people who benefited from Christ’s personal presence did so by hearing and applying His message, or by being healed of diseases. By taking the children into His arms, Jesus did not promote or endorse the idea that anything “mystical” happened to people who simply entered His presence.

Before baptism, one must know God (2 Thessalonians 1:8; see Coffman, 1975, p. 186). If one is baptized as an infant, he is baptized without believing that Christ is the Son of God, without repentance, and without confession. There is no New Testament record of the administration of baptism without belief, repentance, and confession (Mark 16:15-16; Acts 17:30; Romans 10:10; see Coffman, 1984, p. 296). Baptism is for forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38). Infants have no sins, so they do not need to have sins remitted. Also, each account of baptism in the New Testament shows that people who were baptized had the option of refusing baptism, but infants do not have that capability.

On December 18, 1964, the New York Times reported that some Anglican Church officials were renouncing infant baptism because, according to Richard A. Vick, preacher for the St. Paul’s Westcliff-on-Sea church, performing infant baptism is “denying adults the privilege of believer’s baptism. We are denying something essential to salvation. [Infant baptism] isn’t agreeable to the word of God” (“More of Clergy…,” 1964).

Young children should be “brought to Christ” today, i.e., reared in the nurture and admonition of the Lord (Ephesians 6:4), though they cannot be scripturally baptized. The responsibility of bringing children to Christ rests on the shoulders of mature Christians.

REFERENCES

Coffman, James Burton (1975), Commentary on Mark (Abilene, TX: ACU Press).

Coffman, James Burton (1984), Commentary on Matthew (Abilene, TX: ACU Press).

Deaver, Roy C. (1985), “Questions/Bible Answers,” Firm Foundation, 102[19]:9, August.

Hendriksen, William (1975), Exposition of the Gospel According to Mark (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).

Henry, Matthew (1706), Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible (McLean, VA: MacDonald).

Lyons, Eric (2003), “The Bible’s Teaching on Baptism: Contradictory or Complimentary?,” [On-line], URL: https://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/617.

“More of Clergy Balk at Infant Baptism in Anglican Church” (1964), The New York Times, page 16, December 18

REPRODUCTION & DISCLAIMERS: We are happy to grant permission for this article to be reproduced in part or in its entirety, as long as our stipulations are observed.

 

What Must I Know to Be Saved?

Eric Lyons

Bulletin ArticlesDoctrinal MattersSalvation

The question frequently is asked by those who are contemplating becoming a child of God, “How much do I have to know in order to become a Christian?” Some feel like they have to know virtually every detail in the Bible before submitting to the Savior to get rid of sin in their lives. Others believe they need every question under the Sun answered before becoming a Christian. Some want to know about the origin of the races. Others want to know whether or not there is life on other planets. The Bible, however, never indicates that for one to become a Christian, he has to know every detail about every book in the Bible, or that a person has to be able to answer every question that arises. But what, if anything, is necessary for a person to know before becoming a disciple of Christ?

First, an individual contemplating his spiritual life must understand that the reason there is even something for him to do is because he has sinned. Everyone who has reached the level of mental maturity (sometimes referred to as “the age of accountability”) so that he or she understands what sin is (cf. 1 John 3:4; 5:17), has sinned (Romans 3:10,23; 1 John 1:8). [The one exception, of course, was Jesus—1 Peter 2:22.] Sin is that which separates man from God (Isaiah 59:1-2). For a person to be saved, he first must have knowledge that he is a sinner, and as such stands in a lost condition. One of the reasons Jesus condemned certain Jewish priests, elders, and sects was because they did not admit their sinfulness after hearing the preaching of John the baptizer (Matthew 21:31-32)—though the tax collectors and harlots (i.e., sinners) did acknowledge their sin, and believed.

Second, the one who aspires to become a Christian must know something about Jesus—the One Who came to save us from our sins (Luke 19:10; John 3:16; Romans 5:6-8). A person does not have to know every one of Jesus’ parables, or be able to quote the Sermon on the Mount, but he must know that Jesus is the Son of God Who died and was raised so that all men might have their sins forgiven and live eternally with Him in heaven (Titus 2:11-14; Hebrews 2:9). In other words, before becoming a Christian, a person must have heard the Gospel (Good News) of Jesus Christ (cf. 1 Corinthians 15:1-4).

Finally, the individual who aspires to become a child of God must realize there is something for him to do (cf. Acts 2:38; 16:30; 8:36). If one understands that the Bible says he must believe that Jesus is the Son of God (John 8:24), repent of his sins (Luke 13:3,5), confess that Jesus is God’s Son (Romans 10:10), and be baptized for the remission of his sins (Acts 2:38), he or she then possesses enough knowledge to put on Christ in baptism (Galatians 3:27) and become a Christian, being added by God to the church that Christ established (Acts 2:47; Matthew 16:18; Romans 16:16).

Contrary to the belief of some, a person who desires to become a Christian does not have to know the whole Bible thoroughly before he takes action. Nor is there a need to have every question imaginable answered. The Ethiopian eunuch heard one Christ-centered lesson from Philip before asking, “What hinders me from being baptized” (Acts 8:35-36)? The three thousand on Pentecost heard only one Gospel sermon before accepting the grace of God and obeying the plan of salvation (Acts 2:41). They did not wait around for years, thinking they were not knowledgeable enough to be followers of Christ. Rather, they were convinced of their sins (Acts 2:37), heard the Gospel, believed it, and obeyed it. It is after one becomes a Christian that God commands us a person to “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 3:18), and to continue to study the Word in order to teach others (Hebrews 5:12; 1 Peter 3:15).

REPRODUCTION & DISCLAIMERS: We are happy to grant permission for this article to be reproduced in part or in its entirety, as long as our stipulations are observed.

 

Preaching "Jesus" Includes Preaching Baptism

Eric Lyons

Bulletin ArticlesDoctrinal MattersBaptismSalvation

It is very common today to hear people say something like, “We just need to preach Jesus and not trouble each other with the Bible’s peripheral teachings.” Or, “We mustn’t get caught up in the details, just in Jesus.” Oftentimes, such things are said in an attempt to avert controversy. “Since all professed Christians believe in Jesus, but not all are united upon His doctrine, let’s just talk about Jesus, and leave the secondary issues alone.”

One of these alleged “secondary” or “peripheral” teachings that frequently is avoided in religious discussions is that of baptism. Since so much controversy has been “caused” by this subject through the years (e.g., Are we to immerse or sprinkle? Should we baptize infants? Is baptism really necessary for salvation?), some believe we can, and should, “teach Jesus” to the lost world, and somehow bring them to Christ, without ever introducing the doctrine of baptism. This may sound like a good idea to some, but we must ask, “Is this a biblical idea?” Did the apostles, prophets, preachers, and teachers of the first century have this mindset? Did they distinguish between “preaching Jesus” and “preaching baptism”?

In Acts 8:26-40, we read how the Spirit of God instructed Philip to approach a non-Christian from Ethiopia, a man of great authority under Candace, queen of the Ethiopians. When Philip came near the Ethiopian eunuch, he sat beside him, and, beginning at Isaiah 53, “preached Jesus to him” (vs. 35). Now, if Philip had the mindset of some twenty-first-century Bible teachers, his preaching would have been limited to only the “central truths” about Jesus (e.g., His death, burial, and resurrection; His deity; etc.). The very next verse, however, indicates that Philip’s preaching of “Jesus” must have included preaching on the importance of baptism, for the Bible indicates that the eunuch asked, “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?” (vs. 36). From this one question, we learn that Philip had to have instructed the eunuch previously concerning the necessity of water baptism. Respected Bible scholar J.W. McGarvey commented on this verse, saying,

He [the Ethiopian—EL] had learned not only that there was such an ordinance, but that it was the duty and the privilege of men to observe it when properly prepared for it. He also desired to be baptized, and his only question was whether he was a suitable candidate. As he had known nothing of Jesus as the Christ up to the moment of Philip’s preaching to him, he had certainly learned nothing definite concerning the baptism which Jesus had ordained; and we are consequently forced to the conclusion that what he now knew he had learned from Philip’s preaching (n.d., pp. 157-158).

Indeed, Philip included baptism in his preaching of Jesus. Unlike some preachers today, there was no hesitation about meshing Jesus and baptism together. Why would there be? After all, Jesus stressed the necessity of baptism before His ascension into heaven (Matthew 28:18-20; cf. Mark 16:15). Peter commanded those who heard him preach on Pentecost to “repent and be baptized” (Acts 2:38). Philip had preached it among the Samaritans (Acts 8:12-13). And it was a part of the lesson Ananias taught Saul (Acts 22:16). As H. Leo Boles once wrote, “No inspired preacher of the gospel then preached Jesus without preaching the baptism that Jesus commanded; no gospel preacher today can preach Jesus without preaching the command to be baptized” (1941, p. 138). Amen.

REFERENCES

Boles, H. Leo (1941), Commentary on Acts of the Apostles (Nashville, TN: Gospel Advocate).

McGarvey, J.W. (no date), New Commentary on Acts of Apostles (Delight, AR: Gospel Light)

REPRODUCTION & DISCLAIMERS: We are happy to grant permission for this article to be reproduced in part or in its entirety, as long as our stipulations are observed.

 

Telling People What to Think

Kyle Butt, D.Min.

Creation vs. EvolutionDoctrinal MattersExistence of GodAtheismAtheismFaith and ReasonFaith and ReasonSecular Humanism

Dan Barker, the ex-preacher who deconverted to atheism, is most famous for his book Losing Faith in Faith: From Preacher to Atheist. In this treatise against God and religion, Barker discussed a book that he wrote for children that contained these words: “No one can tell you what to think. Not your teachers. Not your parents. Not your minister, priest, or rabbi. Not your friends or relatives. Not this book. You are the boss of your own mind. If you have used your own mind to find out what is true, then you should be proud! Your thoughts are free!” (1992, p. 47). Noble sentiments indeed!

But, as one digs deeper into Barker’s book, it quickly becomes clear that those sentiments do not find a willing practitioner in the person of Dan Barker. In his chapter on prayer, Barker wrote:

Don’t ask Christians if they think prayer is effective. They will think up some kind of answer that makes sense to them only. Don’t ask them, tell them: “You know that prayer doesn’t work. You know you are fooling yourself with magical conceit.” No matter how they reply, they will know in their heart of hearts that you are right (1992, p. 109, emp. in orig.).

From Barker’s statement about what should be “told” to those who believe in prayer, it is easy to see that he does not necessarily believe his previous statement that “no one can tell you what to think,” or that a person should use his own mind “to find out what is true.” In fact, what Barker is really trying to say is that a person should only think for himself if such thinking will lead him to believe that there is no God, or that prayer does not work, or that all religion is nonsense. If thinking for himself leads a person to believe in the efficacy of prayer or the existence of God, then that person should be “told” what to believe.

In truth, the Bible demands that each person weigh the evidence for himself or herself. First Thessalonians 5:21 states: “Test all things; hold fast what is good.” Among those things that should be tested are the writings of skeptics like Barker. When blatant inconsistencies pepper their pages like so many spots on a Dalmatian, then those writings should not be “held fast.”

REFERENCE

Barker, Dan (1992), Losing Faith In Faith—From Preacher to Atheist (Madison, WI: Freedom from Religion Foundation).

REPRODUCTION & DISCLAIMERS: We are happy to grant permission for this article to be reproduced in part or in its entirety, as long as our stipulations are observed.

tting God's Permission (Part 3) | Pleasing God in Worship Video Part 3

https://video.wvbs.org/video/getting-gods-permission-part-3/ 

Click on the link above and follow the paths provided.