I'm sending you a paper which recently came into my hands. The one who sent it believes that the Lord's supper and baptism were for the Jews only. This has bothered me somewhat. I want to be established in the truth.
ANSWER: Dear reader, the paper you sent us contains numerous inaccuracies and misstatements. Its erroneous teaching is a part of a system that has been built upon false premises. The foundation of sand upon which it stands is that there was a separate dispensation in the early Church—during the time mentioned in The Acts—which was for Jews only, and that to this period belong the miracles, gift of tongues, baptism, and the Lord's supper. We unhesitatingly say that this is without basis in fact. Certainly the sign gifts—tongues and miracles—ceased after a time, for they were only to introduce Christianity; after it was established they were altogether unnecessary. But the truth for the Church has never been affected; it stands today as perfectly as in the days of the apostles.
We would refer you to Leviticus 23 where God has given us a panoramic view of His ways from the death of Christ on to and through the Millennium. There you will find the Church's formation pictured on the day of Pentecost as the "two wave loaves" presented to the Lord. From that day in the third month there were no more feasts until the seventh month. Then the first one in the seventh month symbolizes the calling of the Jews back to their land by their Messiah when He returns to the earth (Isa. 27:13 and Matt. 24:31). There is no place during the Church period for another dispensation.
The Church of God was and is composed of believers from among both Jews and Gentiles, although the ratio has changed. The Acts gives accounts of the bringing in of the Gentiles, and of the work of the great Apostle to the Gentiles, and of one assembly that was predominantly Gentile—Antioch, Syria. If the saved Jews of that day clung to the old forms and ceremonies, it was because of their failure to apprehend their new estate; it was not because they were in a special dispensation. Such failure is still prevalent in Christendom.
Baptism never saved anyone's soul, and millions have been baptized and died in their sins. It is, however, the outward mark of Christianity, and many converted and baptized Jews and pagans have felt the sting of this very keenly, for their families have borne with them until that moment. Baptism for them has been the dividing point between them and their unsaved relatives.
The paper you sent confounds John's baptism, Christian baptism, and the baptism of the Holy Ghost. It would be charitable to attribute this hopeless confusion to ignorance. John's baptism was unto repentance; Christian baptism is unto the death of the Lord Jesus. Acts 19:1-5 is irrefutable testimony to their being different. Certain disciples at Ephesus had been baptized unto John's baptism, but when Paul instructed them, they were baptized with Christian baptism. (Contrary to your paper, a Jew's being baptized with John's baptism was not fulfilling the law in any wise—it was a confession that he was a sinner and had broken it.) The baptism of the Holy Ghost is again another thing, and was what took place on the day of Pentecost in the upper room when the Holy Spirit came down and indwelt the believers (Acts 2). Prior to that moment they were individual believers; after it, they were all united together, and to the Head in heaven—the Church had been formed.
In conclusion we would add, we would have every right to refuse to recognize anyone as a Christian who refused the outward sign of Christianity.
As for the Lord's supper not being for us, we believe the very suggestion comes from the enemy of our adorable Lord and Savior. It is the most blessed privilege a saint of God can have on earth. What must be the state of one who claims to be sheltered by His precious blood who can slur or lightly esteem such a privilege?
On the "night in which He was betrayed" the Lord Jesus kept the last Passover feast with His disciples; the Passover had looked forward for centuries to His death. At the conclusion of that Passover feast, the Lord instituted the remembrance of Himself in death, which memorial was to look back to the same great central point—the cross. The truth of Christianity had not yet come in, and the Lord made mention of the coming kingdom, but later the Apostle Paul was given a special revelation for the Church, and he was told that it was to continue "till He come." Read 1 Cor. 11:23-26 and note how he says, "I have received of the Lord"; he did not get it from Peter, James, or John; they could not have given him what he received. Yes, it is to go on until that blessed moment when He calls His Church home to be with Himself. Happy thought for every true heart! (Note that 1 Corinthians was not written to converted Jews—it says, "Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols." Chap. 12:2.)
We might note that the cup is spoken of as the blood of the new covenant, for surely that shed blood is the basis upon which will rest the new covenant with the House of Israel and the House of Judah. In fact, every blessing for man must stand on it. While Christians are not under the new covenant, we come now in all the value of the same precious blood of Christ; and who have more right than we to remember His body given unto death for us, and His blood shed for us? Cold indeed must be the heart of one who can hide behind a theory, a doctrine, an interpretation, or anything else, to give up that which recalls to us His death. Shall not even the contemplation of it cause our hearts to rise up and say, "Unto Him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in His own blood,... to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever"? Let us say with the poet:
We would also caution our correspondent to beware of all such literature. There are many religious nostrums abroad in the land, and their labels are deceptive. It is wise to "avoid it, pass not by it, turn from it, and pass away."
We haven't time or space to go on into all the gross errors contained in the paper you sent, but the statement that the righteousness that the Lord Jesus had as a Jew under the law is credited to us, is absolutely false. Not one thing He did in all His holy life under the law is credited to us. Remember that He "is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption" (1 Cor. 1:30). He Himself is our righteousness—not something He did. One other grievous mistake is that of quoting John 1:29 as "the Lamb of God which taketh away the sins of the world." This is not true, and Scripture does not says "sins," but "sin." It is the thing itself, not some acts. He "bear the sins of many," not of the world; but He will ultimately remove the thing—root, branch, and fruit—from God's creation. Then instead of God being dishonored by sin, He will be manifestly and eternally glorified by its removal. At present we who are saved have the forgiveness of sins, for which we bless His holy name, and gladly remember Him in death, in His own appointed way. During the Millennium there will be a further display of His work in taking away the sin of the world, for sin will be restrained, and Satan bound. Then in the eternal state every trace of sin shall have been removed, for it will be a scene "wherein dwelleth righteousness" (2 Pet. 3:13).
"Blest Lamb of God, Thy precious blood Shall never lose its power."