FAQ 2

9.4.21 

Acts 16:31 provides an example of Paul in evangelism.  Does it show he taught that salvation is by faith alone?  Some think so.  And, in a way, at first glance, it seems to.  But, before we jump to conclusions, let’s look at it.  

Context, context, context 

It’s widely known that nothing bears on the meaning of Scripture like context.  That’s true of any communication.  There are many kinds of contexts besides the chapter context where a Scripture is located.  Actually, each Scripture fits into quite a number of contexts.  Our post today concerning Acts 16 will reveal some important ones that usually get overlooked.  

Acts 16:30-31 has provoked much controversy as to its meaning.  One reason is because people limit their reading of the local context.  They stop reading at verse 31 in order to claim that salvation is by mere faith and do not consider what follows in the next two verses, which paints a fuller picture of the evangelism that took place.  

To properly understand Paul’s answer in Acts 16:31, a person must understand three significant contexts in which it resides.  All three govern the meaning of what can be assumed from verse 31.  

Acts 16:31 is in the context of:  

1/ A patently strategic missionary enterprise (vv. 25-34)  

Step one in evangelizing a pagan, which the jailer was, is leading him to faith in the Person of Christ.  That’s standard missionary strategy because salvation results from faith in Jesus.  And that is precisely what Paul was attempting to do in verse 31.  

But just believing in a man called Jesus apart from the Gospel is not saving faith.  The Good News includes the pertinent information about Christ’s atoning sacrifice and resurrection and what He taught in His post-resurrection Great Commission about receiving salvation.  That is the common sequence in all effective evangelism and it is implied in verse 32, where it is stated that Paul and Silas gave the jailer the word of the Lord.  We know that word included Christ’s teaching on baptism because it is the most noticeable thing about his conversion.  

So, the missionary context of Acts 16:31, which is evident in further reading, bears on the meaning of it.   

Acts 16:31 is in the context of:  

2/ Paul himself  

By that, I mean that Paul’s own spiritual state bears on the meaning of what he said.  Each person speaks from his own insight and experience.  Therefore, Acts 16:31 must be interpreted in the light of Paul’s conversion experience and ministry practice seen elsewhere in Acts.  The Bible is consistent and so are its commissioned Apostles about the plan of salvation.  The context of Paul himself is necessary to consider because he could not be teaching something here that contradicts what he personally experienced and taught elsewhere.  He himself taught that there is only one salvation experience (Ephesians 4:5; Galatians 1:8-9). In other words, what we see in Paul’s conversion is what he would have taught the jailer.  The biblical record makes it clear that Paul experienced Acts 2:38.  This is evident from Acts 9 and 22:16.  And what we see Paul insisting on in another evangelistic context in Ephesus, where much more detail is provided, is what he would have insisted on in every case of evangelism.  His missionary outreach to the Ephesians reveals that he insisted on the Acts 2:38 tenets (Acts 19:1-6).  Paul was consistent with himself.  He would have taught the jailer what he taught others and received himself. 

Acts 16:31 is in the context of:  

3/ The divine authorship of the book of Acts  

Christ had a purpose for everything that was recorded in Acts.  The entire record, with its many instances of evangelism and personalities presenting it, combines to show that the book has a singular and unified message of salvation.  There is no account of difference between Apostolic personalities and especially none within a single person.  Nothing in Acts even hints that there are two ways to be saved.  The purpose of the book of Acts is to provide a template for salvation and a model for evangelism since conversion and evangelism would come to be duplicated many millions of times throughout the Church age.  It provides the standard for evangelistic procedure and doctrine.  Its Gospel tenets were introduced by Peter on the Day of Pentecost and were supported by multiple ministers, involving thousands of people.  Acts 16:30-34 dovetails perfectly with all the other examples, including those involving Paul himself.  

Conclusion 

Scripture is clear upon diligent study (2Timothy 2:15).  But a superficial or light-hearted approach to it is not only reckless, it’s dangerous.  Incentive to save one’s soul and the souls of others should compel a person to spare no pain to know the truth (1Timothy 4:16).  Jesus said the truth is what sets a person free (John 8:31-32).  He told Pontius Pilate that He came to bear witness to the truth and He referred to those who receive it as of the truth (John 18:37-38).  The truth can be known and will be known by those who revere it and desire it.  It will evade the notice of someone who scorns it, as Pilate did.  Paul said we are saved through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth (2Thessalonians 3:13).   True believers then become the promoters and defenders of the truth, or, as Paul said, the pillar and ground of the truth (1Timothy 3:15).  Solomon said, “Buy the truth and sell it not” (Proverbs 23:23). 

Does Paul’s message in Romans collide with Acts 2:38? 

1.9.22 

Paul was a tremendous Christian and missionary, probably the best ever in both categories.  We are especially grateful for him because he brought this precious Gospel into Europe, which is how many of us in America were able to receive it.  He said he was indebted to those who didn’t have the Gospel (Romans 1:14-15).  We are certainly indebted to him for bringing it to us (Fact).  But, as great as he was in commitment to Christ and in missionary zeal, he did not set salvation doctrine.  That was all determined before he even got saved.  He accepted the doctrine that had been revealed by Peter on the Day of Pentecost, loved it, and promulgated it. 

What’s odd concerning this reality is that many people, who, for some reason or other, want to dismiss Acts 2:38 as the plan of salvation, cite Paul as their authority to do so.  That’s a huge theological blunder.  Let me explain. 

Some people, for example, will readily toss out any salvation requirement that has to do with baptism.  They feel free to negate the imperative of Acts 2:38 because, they say, Paul taught that salvation is by faith, which they interpret to mean faith alone, apart from the tenets of salvation.  Therefore, they insist salvation can be claimed solely on the basis of believing in Jesus.  However, this is not at all what Paul practiced or taught.   This same error can be seen on major Christian websites.  They hereby misunderstand Paul and wrest Scripture.  

I think Paul would be profoundly upset if he knew how people have misinterpreted his writings.  He worked harder than any other Apostle to bring the Gospel to the world.  He wrote more of the New Testament than any other person.  And his epistles, especially the Roman one, were intended by him to clarify the Gospel of Christ, not confuse it.  Paul never said anything in Romans that contradicts Acts 2:38.  In fact, the epistle to the Romans, along with all his other epistles, supports and corroborates it.  

How people get confused 

People err when they isolate general comments Paul made about faith in Christ and do not consider the larger context of biblical revelation in which they lie.  Paul, and every other biblical personality, for that matter, fits into this larger context.  Each person and verse of Scripture is in tight association with the Bible as a whole.  No contributor of revelation or verse of Scripture disagrees with any other.  That’s because God is not the author of confusion (1Corinthians 14:33).  His Word is very clear to those who find its knowledge (Proverbs 9:8-9). 

Larger contexts of biblical revelation   

Let’s consider some of the larger contexts in which verses in the book of Romans reside. 

1/ The larger context of Paul himself  

Paul, like every other person used of God, was consistent with himself.  He was consistent in what he received as salvation and what he preached and taught about it.  And, fortunately, for those who really want to be sure about what the Apostle believed, the New Testament provides a large picture of him to examine.  He is perhaps the greatest standout in the entire New Testament, save Jesus Christ.  Half of the book of Acts covers his dramatic conversion and ministry.  And we have numerous epistles written by him, which comprise roughly half of the New Testament.  That’s a huge amount of Pauline material to assess. 

Paul’s conversion experience  

Paul’s conversion experience is well documented in Scripture.  Luke chronicles it in Acts 9 and Paul himself recounts it twice (Acts 22, 26).  It plainly shows that Paul’s conversion was no different than anyone else’s since the Day of Pentecost.  He repented on the Damascus road, was baptized in Jesus’ name by Ananias, and received the Holy Ghost (Acts 9; 22:16).  Does anyone really think he would have preached or taught something other than what he received? 

Paul’s preaching practice 

According to the wisdom of God, we have an account of what Paul taught as the terms of the Christian Gospel.  We see it in Acts 19:1-6 with those who became charter members of the Ephesian Church.  A superficial reading of this passage shows that Paul believed wholeheartedly in baptism in Jesus’ name and the infilling of the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in other tongues.  He even insisted that these, who had previously received John’s baptism, be re-baptized in Jesus’ name.  Does anyone really think that he would have taught in his epistles something different from what he actually preached? 

2/ The context of the book of Romans as a whole 

The book of Romans supports Acts 2:38.  

(It must.  Acts 2:38 was Paul’s own salvation experience.  He wasn’t a backslider by the time he wrote Romans.)   

There are clear references to Acts 2:38 in the book of Romans.  In chapter 6, Paul cites baptism and links it with eternal life.  In chapter 8, he stresses the importance of receiving the Holy Ghost.  It is not assumed that every person who merely believes in Jesus Christ has the Spirit.  In the short context of verses 8-11, he uses the conditional word, if, four times, indicating that receiving the Holy Ghost is a separate experience from every other aspect of salvation.  And, as with water baptism, Paul links having the Spirit with eternal life (v. 11).  

3/ The context of redemptive history 

Everyone who comes to know God finds his unique place in the course of redemptive history and has a role to play in relation to it.  Redemptive history is a kind of evolving timeline in which God works to save mankind.  And each person can only operate truly and effectively in association with that point on the timeline of redemption in which he lives.

Paul, as great as he was in spreading the Gospel, was not the one to introduce the plan of salvation to the world.  That was not his calling and, furthermore, he was one born out of due time.  In other words, the occasion of making salvation doctrine preceded him.  The Apostle Peter, who had walked with Christ from the beginning, was given exclusive authority to reveal the plan of salvation to the world (Matthew 16:19).  He explicitly stated on the Day of Pentecost that it was for everyone and that it would endure throughout the Church age (Acts 2:38-39).  From that momentous point, the terms of Christian faith were settled and could never be edited (Ephesians 4:5; Galatians 1:8-9; Jude 3; 1Peter 1:25).  Acts 2:38 became the Apostles’ doctrine (Acts 2:42).  

It’s important to remember that Paul wasn’t among the believers at that time.  When he did come to conversion, he received the Acts 2:38 message like everyone else when it was presented to him (Acts 9).  And, from that point, God called him to preach the message and to theologize about it in his epistles.  His theology about the Christian experience is the point of confusion for some people.  

Theologically, Paul often referred to salvation in Christ (Acts 2:38) as, faith in Christ, which it is.  Often, when expressing it that way, he was contrasting it with the old system of works under the Law.  This general contrast between faith and works is what people often misunderstand.  They misinterpret Paul’s summary use of the word, faith, to mean mere faith apart from the tenets of salvation.  In this way, they wrongly conclude baptism is a work.  But Paul never spoke disparagingly about baptism or put the tenets of salvation in the category of condemned works.  To be sure, he is the one, rather, who emphasized the necessity of baptism by requiring re-baptism on the part of the charter members of the Ephesian Church, as we pointed out.  

In his Galatian epistle, Paul revealed his inability to create salvation doctrine.  He recorded how he actually went up to Jerusalem and checked with Peter and others to be sure he was preaching correctly (Galatians 2:1-9).  From this, it is evident that he had no authority to set salvation doctrine and respected what had been established by those who were in Christ before him.   Even at the council in Jerusalem, headed by James (Acts 15), which decided the freedom of the Gentiles from keeping the Jewish law, Paul gave testimony of God’s grace among the Gentiles but did not make the decision that established that doctrine.  Thus, while Paul advanced the Gospel, he was not one who could steer it doctrinally.   

4/ The preemptive word of Jesus (John 3:5). 

When speaking to Nicodemus, Jesus gave a preemptive word regarding the Christian plan of salvation.  Nothing coming after could oppose it.  He said that a new birth of water and Spirit was required to enter the Kingdom of God.  In His post-resurrection teaching in the Great Commission, He specified the elements of water and Spirit to be water baptism in Jesus’ name and the infilling of the Holy Ghost.  And, of course, the Great Commission was fulfilled, as it was destined to be, on the Day of Pentecost when three thousand souls came into the Church.  

5/ The context of the Great Commission 

All Christian preaching is in the context of the Great Commission because it governs all preaching.  Paul was a commissioned minister, as all ministers are.  He could not stray from what Christ had prescribed for salvation in the Great Commission.  And Jesus prescribed the tenets of salvation that were subsequently introduced by Peter on the Day of Pentecost.  It is unreasonable to think that the great Apostle to the Gentiles would not take heed to Christ’s commission.  We see him being told by Christ on the Damascus Road that it would be told him what he must do to complete his own salvation (Acts 9:6).  Ananias, a man commissioned by Christ, delivered him the same tenets Peter preached (Acts 9:17-18; 22:16).  Can anyone truly conceive that Paul would not preach the same Christian message?  And, as we have pointed out earlier, he did! 

6/ The Day of Pentecost 

As mentioned earlier, some people use what Paul said about salvation being through faith in Christ to disregard what Peter preached on the Day of Pentecost.  By doing so, they fail to see the consistent flow of revelation in the New Testament.  The two personalities and concepts are not mutually exclusive but rather complementary.  What Paul said about salvation coming through faith in Christ (e.g., Romans 3:24) is exactly what occurred in the book of Acts, beginning on the Day of Pentecost.  Repenting of one’s sins, being baptized in Jesus’ name for the remission of sins, and receiving the Holy Ghost is faith in Jesus Christ.  Any summary reference Paul made to salvation in his epistles was a reference to Acts 2:38, which he himself received and preached to others.    

7/ The context of the New Covenant 

The point made under this heading is a simple but powerful fact.  All biblical preachers in the Christian era operated under the New Covenant.  We call it the dispensation of grace but it is a covenant nonetheless with terms and conditions just like any other covenant God made with mankind.  The New Covenant was inaugurated on the Day of Pentecost and the terms for entry were announced by Peter (Acts 2:38-39).  No one is authorized to preach anything differently.  To do so is to breach God’s covenant.  Paul did not violate the New Covenant.  In his Galatian epistle, he even illustrated a point by referring to the lasting nature of a covenant between men (Galatians 3:15).  Once it is agreed upon, neither party can disregard the established terms.  Of even greater import and immutability is the covenant between God and man.  

Conclusion 

To say that Paul taught something differently in his epistles than what Peter and others preached in Acts, or to say that Paul, in his letters, taught something different from what he received for salvation and taught others in Acts is irresponsible, given all the evidence to the contrary.  And, as we have endeavored to point out with these seven larger contexts by which to interpret Paul in any passage, he certainly preached the same salvation message as every other Apostolic minister recorded in the New Testament.  Had he not, he would have done violence to Christ, to biblical revelation, and to the very course of redemptive history.  And that is an untenable position to hold.