Philip and the eunuch, Acts 8:26-40

Reaching out: Philip and the eunuch, 26-40

Direction through Spirit and Providence

Verse 26: “the angel of the Lord” speaks to Philip and directs him where to go (cf. v. 29). “south unto the way that goeth down” to Gaza. The Old Testament mentions Gaza several times, but only here is it mentioned in the New Testament. According to Bock, this was the last water stop before desert.[i]

 

Verse 27: “behold” – a remote pathway, a returning pilgrim, a roving preacher, all brought together in God’s providence. The eunuch was “of Ethiopia,” but not necessarily an Ethiopian.[ii] He was probably a Jew – or at least a Jewish proselyte – because he “had come to Jerusalem for to worship.”[iii] He was “an eunuch of great authority.” He held a high rank in the queen’s court. Jews often rose to high-ranking posts in foreign courts, such as Joseph in Egypt (Genesis 41:39-45), and Daniel in Babylon (Daniel 2:48-49). Some think this man was an eunuch positionally (under the authority of the queen) rather than physically.[iv] However, there seems little reason for Luke to mention that he was “an eunuch” if he simply meant he was an officer. The Bible teaches the apostle Peter first took the gospel to the Gentiles (later – in Acts 10, not Philip here in Acts 8). It is likely, nevertheless, that this eunuch did share his good news with Gentiles after he returned to Ethiopia.[v]

 

“Candace queen of the Ethiopians” – Candace was evidently a royal title of queens in Ethiopia, as Pharaoh was for the kings of Egypt (Genesis 12:15; 41:15; Exodus 1:11; I  Kings 3:1; Jeremiah 37:5), Abimelech for kings in Philistia (Genesis 20:2; 26:1), or Caesar for the emperors of Rome (Luke 2:1; 3:1; John 19:15; Acts 11:28; 28:18-19).[vi]

 

Verse 28: “sitting in his chariot” Considering the following circumstances, the chariot probably had stopped. “read Esaias the prophet” The eunuch of Ethiopia was reading a portion of text from the prophet Isaiah (cf. Isaiah 34:16). He read aloud (cf. v. 30). Providentially, this portion of text contains a prophecy of the suffering Messiah. The honest seeker is profitably employed when reading the word of God.

 

Verse 29: “the Spirit said unto Philip” Sent here by an angelic messenger, the Spirit guides Philip’s next move. “Go near.” This is why he is here, and this is the one whom he is to see. There should be no apprehension, and obedience is expected.

 

Verse 30: Philip obeys the Spirit’s command with haste – he “ran thither.” The eunuch read aloud from the Scriptures, and Philip heard him read. God’s providence places them in the right place at the right time. Philip traveling in his manner from the city of Samaria, and the eunuch traveling in his manner from the city of Jerusalem, converge on this one point on the same road at the same point in time.

 

Verses 30-31: Philip asks a question and the eunuch responds, “How can I, except some man should guide me?” He invites Philip to come up into the chariot and sit with him. God is at work on the evangelist and the evangelized. He has brought Philip here “for such as time as this,” and he had prepared the eunuch for his witness. The eunuch had been to Jerusalem to worship, and was reading Isaiah. Doubtless God combines these two elements in preparing him for the message of Jesus.

 

Verses 32-33: the eunuch reads, from Isaiah, what we recognize as Isaiah 53:7b-8a:

 

…he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth. He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living…

 

A common modern Jewish interpretation is that Isaiah 53 refers to the nation of Israel. Synagogue calendar readings leave it out. “Because of the christological interpretation given to the chapter [53rd of Isaiah, rlv] by Christians, it is omitted from the series of prophetical lessons (Haftarot) for the Deuteronomy Sabbaths. These seven lessons are called the ‘Seven (Chapters) of Comfort’, and are taken from the preceding and following parts of the book: the omission is deliberate and striking.”[vii] According to Rachmiel Frydland, “Our ancient commentators with one accord noted that the context clearly speaks of God’s Anointed One, the Messiah.”[viii]

 

Verses 34-35: The eunuch does not understand the reading, whether the prophet speaks this “of himself, or of some other man.” Philip launches from this question and preaches Jesus. He is the “other man” of whom the prophet speaks – the Messiah, the longing of Israel. He is the man who became obedient unto death. Now the worshipper at the Temple recognizes the one – the One whose temple was destroyed and raised again in three days.

 

Verse 36: the question of baptism comes up. The preaching of Jesus does not exclude the preaching of baptism, which is a testimony of his death, burial, and resurrection according to the scriptures. The believer does not delay to obey. Compare Psalm 119:60 “I made haste, and delayed not to keep thy commandments.”

 

Verse 37: ειπεν δε ο φιλιππος ει πιστευεις εξ ολης της καρδιας εξεστιν αποκριθεις δε ειπεν πιστευω τον υιον του θεου ειναι τον ιησουν χριστον “If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest [i.e., be baptized].” “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.” The great profession of belief before baptism, as found here in the King James Version of the Bible, is left out of many, if not most, modern Bible versions.[ix] This is based on claims that the “earliest and best” New Testament manuscripts (their words) do not contain it, and that the earliest with it dates from the sixth century (Codex Laudianus, or E). Nevertheless, Irenaeus quotes part of the Ethiopian eunuch’s confession of faith in Christ. The quotation is as early as the latter part of the second century, showing it was in the scriptures he used. See Adversus Haereses (Against Heresies), III.xii.8.

 

[Philip declared] that this was Jesus, and that the Scripture was fulfilled in Him; as did also the believing eunuch himself: and, immediately requesting to be baptized, he said, “I believe Jesus Christ to be the Son of God.”…[x]

 

Irenaeus references the great confession, and about 70 years later Cyprian (circa AD 250) mentions the first part of what we know as verse 37 (found in The Treatises of Cyprian, Treatise 12, Book 3.43).

 

That he who believes can immediately obtain (i.e., pardon and peace).  In the Acts of the Apostles: ‘Lo, here is water; what is there which hinders me from being baptized? Then said Philip, If you believe with all your heart, you may.’[xi]

 

Pontius, a deacon at Cyprian’s church, also mentions Philip’s words to the eunuch (If thou believest with all thine heart) when writing about the life of Cyprian of Carthage (Vita Cypriani, or Life of Cyprian, paragraph 3).

 

For although in the Acts of the Apostles the eunuch is described as at once baptized by Philip, because he believed with his whole heart, this is not a fair parallel. For he was a Jew, and as he came from the temple of the Lord he was reading the prophet Isaiah…[xii]

 

Pontius the deacon wrote Vita Cypriani after Cyprian’s death, which occurred circa AD 258. Cyprian of Carthage wrote circa AD 250. Irenaeus of Lyons wrote Adversus Haereses circa AD 175-185. It is clear, then, that the words recorded in Acts 8:37 were in the manuscript of Luke’s writing used by Pontius, Cyprian, and Irenaeus. Irenaeus (ca. AD 135-AD 202) was born within about 40 years of the writing of the last book of the New Testament. He was born in Smyrna, and grew up under the tutelage of Polycarp, who knew John the apostle. All three of these writings that mention the words of Philip and the eunuch (Acts 8:37) are older than the so-called “earliest and best” New Testament manuscripts that do not contain this verse.[xiii] J. A. Alexander stated, “This verse is excluded from the text by the latest critics, because wanting in several of the oldest manuscripts and versions.” He however suggested a reason for its early exclusion: “it may be argued that the verse, though genuine, was afterward omitted as unfriendly to the practice of delaying baptism, which had become common, if not prevalent, before the end of the third century.”[xiv]>

 

The eunuch of Ethiopia makes “The Great Confession” that must be made by all, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.” Romans 10:10 – “For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.” Ultimately, every tongue shall confess, Romans 14:11.

 

Verses 38-39a: Baptism by immersion – Philip and the eunuch “went down both into the water” and both “come up out of the water.” Paedobaptists would have them only go “to the water,” – or even if they went “into the water” that “they went perhaps up to the ankles or mid-leg into the water, and Philip sprinkled water upon him” (Matthew Henry). Yet, even the Protestant Reformer John Calvin (who did not hold to immersion only) sensibly includes this note on Acts 8:38: “Hence we see what was the manner of baptizing with the ancients, for they plunged the whole body into water.” Immersion was the universal practice of the New Testament and early churches.[xv]

 

The baptism of the eunuch indicates these elements:

 

• Proper authority 26-27
• Proper candidate 36-37
• Proper mode 38-39

 

Verses 39b-40: The Spirit of the Lord removed Philip to points beyond. Even though “the eunuch saw him no more,” he nevertheless “went on his way rejoicing.” Whatever manner God used to take Philip, he was next “found at Azotus.” Azotus is the same as the Old Testament Ashdod.[xvi] The history of the Maccabees locates Azotus “in the land of the Philistines” (I Maccabees 5:68). Philip initially traveled north from Jerusalem to Samaria. From Samaria, he traveled in a southwest direction where he met the eunuch of Ethiopia on a road going to Gaza. Afterward he is found north of there at Azotus. From there he probably traveled northward up the coast through an established route. As he traveled, Philip “preached in all the cities” through which he came, until he finally settles in Caesarea. Though mentioned in the telling of the story in Acts 8:40, it is nevertheless correct to understand he arrived there chronologically after Peter had gone to Caesarea (Acts 10). Acts 21:8 mentions Philip again; he had established residence in Caesarea (cf., “the house of Philip the evangelist”).

---

[i] Bock, Acts, p. 341.
[ii] The land of Ethiopia was to the south of and borders with Egypt (Ezekiel 29:10; see also Esther 1:1; Psalm 68:31; 87:4; Zephaniah 3:10).
[iii] Religious Jews came up to Jerusalem at least three times in the year – the feasts of Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles (Deuteronomy 16:16. Cf. Exodus 23:14-17). In this incident, we may see some fulfillment of Isaiah 56:4-5 and Zephaniah 3:10 (Cf. also Psalm 68:31). For eunuchs under the law, see Deuteronomy 23:1.
[iv] For example, see comments on Acts 8:27 in Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible.
[v] Irenaeus writes, “This man was also sent into the regions of Ethiopia, to preach what he had himself believed, that there was one God preached by the prophets, but that the Son of this [God] had already made [His] appearance in human nature (secundum hominem), and had been led as a sheep to the slaughter; and all the other statements which the prophets made regarding Him.” http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/irenaeus-book3.html Accessed 16 October 2020 9:45 am. According to John Gill, Damianus a Goes related in Fides, Religio, Moresque Aethiopum (Ethiopian Faith, Religion, and Mores, 1540) the following tradition, “we, almost before all other Christians, received baptism from the eunuch of Candace, queen of Ethiopia, whose name was Indich.” In Ecclesiastica Historia (2. 40), Nicephorus Callistus relayed the tradition that the apostle Matthias preached in Ethiopia and died there by stoning.
[vi] “As for the building within Meroë, there were but few houses in it: that the Isle was subject unto a ladie or queene named Candace, a name that for many yeeres alreadie went from one queene to another successively.” Holland, translator of Naturalis Historia by Pliny the Elder, p. 146.
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/holland/pliny6.html Accessed 18 November 2020 7:20 pm.
[vii] Claude G. Montefiore & H. Loewe, Rabbinic Anthology: Selected and Arranged With Comments and Introductions by C. G. Montefiore and H. M. J. Loewe, with a prolegomenon by Raphael Loewe. (London: MacMillan and Co., Ltd., 1938) p. 544.
[viii] Frydland, quoted in Issues: A Messianic Jewish Perspective, 13:6, p. 3. See also Jintae Kim, “Targum Isaiah 53 and the New Testament Concept of Atonement,” in Journal of Greco-Roman Christianity and Judaism, Volume 5, 2008, pp. 81-98.
[ix] For example, the Revised Standard Version leaves out verse 37, with this note, “Other ancient authorities add all or most of verse 37, ‘And Philip said, If you believe with all your heart, you may. And he replied, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.’”
[x] http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/irenaeus-book3.html Accessed 7 October 2020 12:02 pm.
[xi] https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/050712c.htm Accessed 7 October 2020 12:25 pm.
[xii] https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0505.htm Accessed 7 October 2020 12:15 pm. In the “parallel” Pontius is speaking of Cyprian “coming from the ignorant heathens” as opposed to the eunuch being a Jew or Jewish proselyte.
[xiii] Whatever value or lack thereof we find in the doctrine and interpretation of the writings by Ante-Nicene or Church Fathers, they are useful for historical discovery concerning the biblical manuscripts. Their writings help determine “whether a verse or verses existed or not in their day.” According to E. W. Bullinger, “There are nearly a hundred ecclesiastical writers older than the oldest of our Greek codices.” (Companion Bible, Appendix 168, page 190).
[xiv] Alexander, Joseph Addison. The Acts of the Apostles, pp. 349–350.
[xv] Even those who do not believe immersion is required for scriptural observance of this rite nevertheless should not foolishly deny that the ancient and universal practice of the rite of baptism was for believers by immersion in water.
[xvi] And the same as the modern village Esdud, located in the boundaries of Israel.

Acts 8:1-8

Chapter 8 divides into three parts – 1-4 Troubles without: the church scattered; 5-25 Reaching out: Philip and Samaria; 26-40 Reaching out: Philip and the eunuch.

Troubles without: the church scattered, 1-4

Verse 1: “And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judæa and Samaria, except the apostles.” Acts 11:19 calls this “the persecution that arose about Stephen.” “Judæa and Samaria,” two regions mentioned in Acts 1:8: “witnesses unto me…in all Judæa, and in Samaria…” “Acts 1:8 didn’t happen till Acts 8:1 happened.”[1]

Verse 2: the burial of Stephen by a kind act of devout persons in the church, even in the midst of persecution. Compare Acts 5:6, 10. The death of Stephen brings much lamentation. Lamentation (κοπετον) is passionate expression of grief or sorrow, sometimes accompanied with physical expressions such as beating of the breast (cf. Genesis 50:10; Jeremiah 6:26; Amos 5:16).

Verse 3: Saul, abruptly introduced in 7:58 and “consenting unto” the death of Stephen, emerges as the principal party in the persecution of the church. He entered houses and took Christians forcibly to prison. “Hale” means “drag or draw forcibly.”[2] Surprisingly, the person who emerges as the leading persecutor of Christians was a disciple of the leader who advised caution in dealing with them. Compare Acts 22:3 with Acts 5:34-39.

Verse 4: in consequence of the persecution, the church was scattered but not stopped. As the persecution intensified, they “went every where preaching the word.” The persecution changed their situation and location but not their message.

Reaching out: Philip and Samaria, 5-25

Direction through persecution and scattering

Verses 5-25: Luke provides an example of the scattered church preaching the gospel, first Philip and then the apostles in the city of Samaria.

“Although we might be tempted to see in the mission to Samaria the church’s first attempt to evangelize Gentiles, this would be a wrong interpretation. To the Jews the Samaritans were not Gentiles but schismatics, part of the ‘lost sheep of the house of Israel.’ For Luke they were people who kept the law and showed a greater piety than many Jews (Luke 10:33-37; 17:11-19)...” Nevertheless, ‘the overcoming of the hostility between the Jews and the Samaritans...may be seen as a step towards the greater problem of bringing Jews and Gentiles together.’”[3]

Verses 5-8: The success of Philip. Via the scattering, “Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them.” He preached the gospel, and performed miracles (v. 6). The miracles included casting out unclean spirits, and healing those “with palsies, and that were lame.”[4] As in the case of Stephen (Acts 6:8), not only the apostles, but also one of the seven performs miracles. The people of Samaria “gave heed unto those things which Philip spake” which brought great joy.

Notes:

---

[1] “Acts 1:8 didn’t happen till Acts 8:1 happened. Write that down, because it’s important in what it teaches us. Acts 1:8 didn’t happen, go into all the world, didn’t happen until Acts 8:1 happened.” From “The family knows the family’s secrets,” Steve Brown, Key Life radio, Monday, July 26, 2021. https://www.keylife.org/programs/key-life/the-family-knows-the-familys-secrets/ Accessed 29 July 2021 7:15 am
[2] Συρω/συρων (haling) is the word used of the disciples dragging their nets (John 21:8) and the dragon drawing a third of the stars of heaven (Revelation 12:4). See also Acts 14:19 and 17:6.
[3] Acts: an Introduction and Commentary, I. Howard Marshall, p. 162.
[4] Palsy seems to be a general debilitating condition of incapacity or helplessness. Cf. Luke 5:18-24; Acts 9:33; and Hebrews 12:12.

The Roman Road

The Roman Road to Salvation, also known as, the Romans Road to Salvation. A little over two years ago, I wrote concerning the history of The Roman Road to Salvation. Today I want to focus on its “faith and practice.”

First, what is the “Roman Road?” The Roman Road to salvation is a method of evangelizing that focuses on verses from the book of Romans about sin, death, and salvation. This “Printable” version of a Roman Road by Kathy Howard uses five locations in Romans.[i] She writes, “But how do we share that in a way that people will recognize their need and respond to Jesus? One very simple way is what Christians call the ‘Roman Road.’ It’s a short list of verses from the book of Romans that show our need for salvation and how Jesus fills that need. I have seen variations of this list that includes 4 to 8 verses. My list below includes 5, very easy to memorize verses.” Got Questions has an article titled “What is the Romans Road to salvation?” It also about uses about five stops along the road, while incorporating a few more Romans’ texts than Howard does.

Kathy Howard’s Roman Road:

• Romans 3:23 – Every person has sinned, has done things contrary to God’s holy perfection.
• Romans 6:23 – Our sin has a cost. That cost is spiritual death or eternal separation from God.
• Romans 5:8 – Because God loves us, He paid our sin debt Himself. Sinless, perfect Jesus died in our place.
• Romans 10:13 – Anyone and everyone who accepts Jesus’ gift, or “calls on His name,” will receive God’s salvation.
• Romans 10:9-10 – Anyone who believes and confesses that Jesus died for us and rose from the dead will be saved!

No Bible believer that I know of objects to the verses in Romans or rejects their usefulness in teaching truths about sin, death, and salvation. Every scripture in the “Roman Road” is inspired, sound, and biblical. Not every preacher or soul-winner who uses “the Road” is!

“Evangelism With The Romans Road” by Paul Fritz at Sermon Central uses six locations in the book of Romans and concludes with an exhortation to prayer. Fritz writes, “If you have never really accepted Jesus as your personal Savior, would you do it right now? Do not delay or put it off. If you would like to receive Christ by faith, pray this simple prayer in your heart:”

“Dear Lord, I acknowledge that I am a sinner. I believe Jesus died for my sins on the cross, and rose again the third day. I repent of my sins. By faith I receive the Lord Jesus as my Savior. You promised to save me, and I believe You, because You are God and cannot lie. I believe right now that the Lord Jesus is my personal Savior, and that all my sins are forgiven through His precious blood. I thank You, dear Lord, for saving me. In Jesus’ name, Amen.”

Paul Fritz concludes by pronouncing salvation on and giving assurance to any person who prays this prayer, “If you prayed that prayer, God heard you and saved you. I personally want to welcome you to the family of God.”

When someone objects to the “Roman Road” style of evangelism, there are always those “Roadies” who come along to raise the spectre of Calvinism. Calvinism is an easy foil charged with giving the Roman Road a bad rap. First, we need to realize that objections to the Roman Road are not just from the realm of Calvinism. The very first objections I heard were from Missionary Baptists who rejected the 5-points of Calvinism.[ii] Second, Roman Roadies need to realize – their own practices give the Roman Road a bad rap. Don’t look for someone else to blame!

One primary objection is the way these verses are used. This use reduces salvation to a method – if repeated, the proven steps will yield the right results every time. In principle the “repeat after me” prayer method subtly (or not so subtly) changes the biblical exhortations of repent and believe the gospel to “pray this prayer.”[iii] Some proponents of “the Road” are careful to say something like “if you sincerely prayed this pray.” However, note the quote from Paul Fritz above does not bother with this distinction. When the Philippian jailer asked Paul and Silas, “What must I do to be saved,” they responded with “believe on the Lord Jesus Christ” rather than “pray this prayer.”[iv]

The “Roman Road” method can be very superficial, manipulative, and results-driven. A number of believers have related online such things as “soul winning contests” in which they participated. Those who “got someone saved” received points for the feat, and the one who got the most points won the contest! Often these people are told that someone should be saved every time they go soul-winning, and if not they must be doing something wrong. Taking “no” for an answer is a sign of weakness and unconcern.[v]  The process usually ends with, “Bow your head and repeat this prayer.” There is good reason to question the sincerity of a profession of faith under “duress.”[vi]

Again, no Bible believer objects to any of the verses in Romans. These superficial, manipulative, results-driven practices give the verses a bad name. The Roman Road, as often practiced, reduces evangelism to a repetitive scheme more akin to the door-to-door salesmanship than sharing the gospel. Take your free fire insurance! The New Testament commands the presentation of the gospel and leaving the response to the conviction of the gospel and the Holy Spirit. May we be careful to neither add nor subtract.

---

[i] I write “locations” rather than “verses” because sometimes one “step” on the Road will include more than one verse.

[ii] As an example, see Friendship Missionary Baptist Church, Our Beliefs and Friendship Missionary Baptist Church, Salvation.

[iii] Some believers have dubbed this a “1-2-3-repeat-after-me” style of evangelism. Exhortations such as “make a decision for Christ,” “”accept Christ,” “ask Jesus into your heart,” and so on also substitute for “repent and believe.” I’m not sure what compels people to prefer these over biblical exhortations.

[iv] Perhaps I have missed it, but I have not noticed any New Testament reference that advises an unbeliever to do that.

[v] Curiously, some of the loudest advocates for extreme free will are the same ones guiltiest of badgering and bullying unbelievers into making a profession of faith. They say God can’t violate a person’s free will, yet they don’t mind doing it!

[vi] I have been present with “soul-winners” who bulldozed through the verses, forced the “right” answers out of the individual, and concluded the session by pronouncing the lost now saved and secure. Not being the presenter gives one the luxury of watching the body language, facial expressions, glances (when more than one is being witnessed to) and such like of the person or persons on the receiving end. Sometimes there was hilarity and mockery; maybe frustration and despair as the “soul-winnee” just wanted it all to be over with so he or she could get on with life; even the totally unresponsive. This would be coupled with lack of discernment on the part of the soul-winner. So busy putting another notch in his belt, the soul-winner can be oblivious to the real reception he and the gospel are receiving.

How St. Patrick evangelized

How St. Patrick evangelized a violent culture -- "It is hard to imagine a time or place more opposed to the gospel than fifth-century Ireland."

Remembering Billy Graham

On Wednesday, February 21, 2018 Evangelist Billy Graham passed from the walks of this life. He seemed to be almost idolized by many – vilified by others. The majority fell somewhere in between. From my point of view, he seemed like a likable person of integrity, but I diverged widely from his methodology and some of his theology. Graham’s message was kept simple, his methods (using decoys, repeat-after-me prayers, etc.) were misguided, and his alliances were ecumenical. Here are some of the favorable and unfavorable thoughts from the World Wide Web – most written after his recent death and a few from his prime.

• All living US presidents expected to attend funeral of Billy Graham -- "But it was unclear if a member of the Royal Family would attend the service in Charlotte, North Carolina, on Friday."
• Billy Graham and Your Local Church: A Thought Experiment -- "If Joe said what Billy said, would he still be qualified to be the pastor of Rowland Springs Baptist Church?"
• Billy Graham, Elmer Gantry, and the Performance of a New American Revivalism -- "Throughout Billy Graham’s career, the evangelist sought performative manners to ensure that he would not be perceived as another “Elmer Gantry”, or huckster preacher out to win money, fame, and favor."
• Billy Graham Led Millions Astray With False Hope, Altar Calls -- "His crusades, filling stadiums and drawing crowds in the hundreds of thousands, even over a million once in Seoul, Korea, are a legacy that will be remembered forever."
• Billy Graham’s Ministry of Error (from 1966) -- "The more we read of Graham the more apparent it becomes that he is not a Fundamentalist, but a liberal ecumenist."
• Biography from the Billy Graham Center at Wheaton College -- "Billy Frank, as he was called as a child, grew up in Charlotte, North Carolina, expecting to follow the lifestyle of his father and grandfathers. Frank and Morrow Graham owned a 300-acre dairy farm..."
• Examining Billy Graham's Theology of Evangelism -- "‘Examining Billy Graham’s Theology of Evangelism’ was written to advance an unbiased understanding of Billy Graham’s theology and practice."
• Franklin Graham remembers dad, Rev. Billy Graham -- "The younger Graham said his father was the same at home as he was on television."
• Remembering Billy Graham (1918-2018) -- "Billy Graham was perhaps the most significant religious figure of the 20th century, and the organizations and the movement he helped spawn continue to shape the 21st."
• There will never be another Billy Graham, because the world that made him possible is gone -- "...the fact that American Christianity hasn’t given rise to a leader like Graham over the last two or three decades isn’t just a result of the fracturing of evangelicalism into different factions..."
• When Did Graham’s Compromise Begin? -- "[In 1957] The Graham crusade committee in New York included 120 theological modernists who denied the infallibility of Scripture. The wife of modernist Norman Vincent Peale headed up the women’s prayer groups for the Crusade."

Great Commission preaching

Matthew 28:19-20 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Mark 16:15-16 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Our directive is to preach the gospel, to every creature. Our preaching should in harmony with the principles of this “Great Commission” command.

The ingredients or content of our preaching.

An ingredient is a constituent element of something, the component. The ingredients of our preaching are Jesus’ commands, the Word of God. Jesus says, “teaching them to observe all that I commanded you.”

The breadth or scope of our preaching.

Breadth is the extent or range of something. The extent of our preaching is “all” that He commanded. All 66 books of the Bible are inspired and authoritative. We should reach the entire Bible, the whole Bible.

The aim or purpose of our preaching.

An aim or purpose is the reason for which something is done. Preaching is to evangelize or make disciples – preach the gospel. When converts profess Christ, we baptize and then teach – instruct and exhort to obedience (to all the things Jesus commanded). If we do not evangelize and baptize, we have no one to disciple.

In fulfilling this command of our Lord Jesus Christ, we should preach the entire Bible, focusing on Christ and him crucified. Within the content, breadth, and purpose of our preaching, making “evangelistic” appeals is appropriate. Preaching through all of the books of the Bible is appropriate. Preaching what the Spirit moves to preach is appropriate. Preaching that exhorts believers to grow in Christ-likeness and knowledge of the Word is appropriate.

2 Timothy 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine.

The Roman Road to Salvation

What is the Roman Road (or Romans Road) to salvation? According to GotQuestions.org, “The Romans Road to salvation is a way of explaining the good news of salvation using verses from the Book of Romans.” This is a popular method used by Christian witnesses to “lead the lost down the Romans Road map to salvation.” The method is a basic presentation using, usually, six or seven texts from the book of Romans.

The “Roman Road” verses, as often presented:

• We are all sinners (Romans 3:10,23).
• The wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23).
• Jesus paid for sin on the cross (Rom. 5:8).
• Salvation comes by faith, confessing with our mouths and believing in our hearts (Romans 10:9,10).
• Call on the Lord/pray for salvation and get saved (Romans 10:13).

I recently noticed someone call attention to the fact that this “Roman Road” method was created and coined by Fundamental Baptist pastor Jack Hyles. In his June 1970 sermon There Remaineth Yet Very Much Land to Be Possessed Hyles recalls it this way:

“By the way, you folks who don’t come on Wednesday night don’t know this, but about twenty-two years ago, in a little East Texas Church, I came up with a little plan of presenting the plan of salvation called ‘The Roman Road’ whereby you take Verses contained in Romans and show people how to be saved using Romans 3:10, and Romans 3:23, and Romans 5:12, and Romans 5:8, and on and on. I termed it, ‘The Roman Road,’ and from the ‘Roman Road’ I wrote the little book, Let’s Go Soul Winning. Over one hundred and thirty-five thousand copies of that book have been printed. It has been translated into several foreign languages: Portuguese, Spanish, Japanese, French, and others, and has literally gone around the world.”

He further stated, “Just before he left Japan and retired, Douglas MacArthur got a copy of the ‘Roman Road to Salvation’ that we started in 1948 or 1949 in East Texas…”

I have searched and as yet have not found any reason to doubt Jack Hyles’s claim that he came up with the “Roman Road” plan of presenting the plan of salvation. As best I can determine, Hyles must have been attending East Texas Baptist University in Marshall and pastoring Grange Hall Baptist Church at the time this happened.* It also appears accurate that he based the plan in his book Let’s Go Soul Winning on “The Roman Road”. Here is part of what he writes:

I contend that you can be a soul winner if you don’t know a single verse of Scripture, if you can draw a map in your Bible to tell yourself where to go. All you need do is find Romans 3:10 and you won’t have to know a single verse of Scripture. Right beside Romans 3:10, write the next verse to tell you where to go in your Bible. Actually what you do is draw yourself a little road map in your Bible to explain where to go next.

First, turn to Romans 3:10. That is all you have to remember. Underline the verse. Beside it write 3:23. After you have read Romans 3:10, it tells you where to go next. Now turn to Romans 3:23. Underline that verse and beside that write 5:12. Turn to 5:12 and underline 5:12 and write beside it 6:23. Underline 6:23 and beside it write 5:8. Underline 5:8 and write beside it 10:9-13.  Now that is a map for you. You don’t have to know a single verse of Scripture to be a soul winner if you draw a map in your Bible. You follow the map until you learn the Scriptures. Of course, as you go along, you will learn many other Scriptures that will help, but these are the basic ones.
Let’s Go Soul Winning: Step-By-Step Lessons in How to Win a Soul to Christ by Jack Hyles (First Printing: April, 1962; First Electronic Printing: May, 1994)

All the verses used in the “Roman Road” are Bible truths. The tactics used by certain soul-winners when presenting the “Roman Road” are unethical at best and fiendish at worst. Nevertheless, I thought it interesting to find this tidbit of history concerning the beginning of “The Roman Road to Salvation.” If anyone knows of this method and name occurring before Jack Hyles, I would be glad to know of it.

* Note: Jack Hyles’s pastorates in East Texas were Marris Chapel Baptist Church (aka Morris Chapel) of Bogata, Texas, Grange Hall Baptist Church in Marshall, Texas, and Southside Baptist Church of Henderson, Texas. The latter two still exist as Southern Baptist churches. I am not sure about the first. From what I found online, 1949 seems to be about the time he was at Grange Hall.

With whom did Jesus eat?

Several weeks ago at church meeting we were talking about Jesus being the friend of sinners, and that He ate with “publicans and sinners”. I commented that He also ate with Pharisees, and I could see lights going on in some of the heads – they had not thought of that angle before. We must be careful, lest we be like radio teacher Steve Brown, who acknowledged, “One of my great sins in being Pharisaical about Pharisees!”

To remember only that Jesus ate with publicans and sinners is to miss an historical and theological truth of the Bible. With whom did Jesus eat? Jesus ate with publicans and sinners. He ate with Pharisees. He ate with His disciples. He even ate with (and fed) a mixed multitude of people who had gathered to see and hear Him. Jake Grogan says cutely that Jesus ate with sinners, snobs and saints. That’s a pretty good way to remember it – as long as we remember that both the snobs and saints are sinners also!

More has been written on the subject of Jesus's eating habits than one might suppose. Jeremy Sweets provides a nice brief chart of Meals in Luke’s Gospel. One author titled his book Eating Your Way Through Luke’s Gospel. Others have gone so far to say that "Jesus ate his way through [all four of] the gospels.

Let's notice a few with whom Jesus ate (and drank).

He ate with Pharisees.
Simon: Luke 7:37 And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster box of ointment
A chief (unnamed) Pharisee: Luke 14:1 And it came to pass, as he went into the house of one of the chief Pharisees to eat bread on the sabbath day, that they watched him. (check Luke 11:45 and 12:1).

He ate with “publicans and sinners”.
Levi (Matthew): Luke 5:29-30 And Levi made him a great feast in his own house: and there was a great company of publicans and of others that sat down with them. But their scribes and Pharisees murmured against his disciples, saying, Why do ye eat and drink with publicans and sinners?
Zaccheus: Luke 19:2,5,7 And, behold, there was a man named Zacchaeus, which was the chief among the publicans, and he was rich...And when Jesus came to the place, he looked up, and saw him, and said unto him, Zacchaeus, make haste, and come down; for to day I must abide at thy house...And when they saw it, they all murmured, saying, That he was gone to be guest with a man that is a sinner.

He ate with His disciples.
In the fields: Luke 6:1 And it came to pass on the second sabbath after the first, that he went through the corn fields; and his disciples plucked the ears of corn, and did eat, rubbing them in their hands.
The Passover supper: Luke 22:11 And ye shall say unto the goodman of the house, The Master saith unto thee, Where is the guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover with my disciples?
Cleopas and another disciple: Luke 24:30 And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them.

He ate with a (mixed) multitude.
Feeding over 5000: Luke 9:13-17 But he said unto them, Give ye them to eat. And they said, We have no more but five loaves and two fishes; except we should go and buy meat for all this people. For they were about five thousand men. And he said to his disciples, Make them sit down by fifties in a company. And they did so, and made them all sit down. Then he took the five loaves and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed them, and brake, and gave to the disciples to set before the multitude. And they did eat, and were all filled: and there was taken up of fragments that remained to them twelve baskets.

Some other Lucan references to eating:
Luke 11:37 And as he spake, a certain Pharisee besought him to dine with him: and he went in, and sat down to meat.
Luke 14:15 And when one of them that sat at meat with him heard these things, he said unto him, Blessed is he that shall eat bread in the kingdom of God.
Luke 15:2 And the Pharisees and scribes murmured, saying, This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them.

If Jesus’s eating habits were important enough for God to inspire them into the eternal record, they must be important enough that we are supposed from learn from them. Well, what should we learn?

Let’s notice a few possibilities.

Jesus didn’t eat “at the devil’s table.”
Luke 4:2-4 Being forty days tempted of the devil. And in those days he did eat nothing: and when they were ended, he afterward hungered. And the devil said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, command this stone that it be made bread. And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God. After Jesus had fasted forty days in the wilderness and was hungry, the devil appeared with an “offer of bread” – particularly that Jesus satisfy his hunger by turning stones into bread. Rather than eat according to the devil’s direction, we learn from Jesus the wonderful truth of the priority of God’s word and God’s will over the physical and circumstantial. Situations such as sitting down at supper with an unbelieving neighbor are not “eating at the devil’s table,” but we need to learn what is and when to avoid it (Cf. 1 Corinthians 10:21).

Jesus is a friend of sinners.
Luke 7:34 The Son of man is come eating and drinking; and ye say, Behold a gluttonous man, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners! Though Jesus didn’t eat “at the devil’s table,” he is “a friend of sinners.” Since Jesus is a friend of sinners, we ought to learn from that to be welcoming to those who “aren’t like us”. Jesus sat down with both some immoral sinners and intolerant scribes – those who likely aren’t our first choices for “communitas.” In Jesus ate his way through the gospels, Mark Glanville writes, “We learn from Jesus fellowship meals that our tables should be places of radical welcome, especially for those who feel lonely and on the outside. This is the shape of the Kingdom of God!” What shape does your table take?

Jesus used meals as occasions of instruction.
Throughout the gospels, Jesus’s meals (and examples of food and drink) serve as occasions for teaching. For examples: after his fasting, at his temptation of Jesus teaches about the true bread (Luke 4:1-4); when his disciples pluck grain on the Sabbath, Jesus teaches his Lordship over the Sabbath (Luke 6:1-5); when sending the seventy, he teaches the laborer is worthy of his hire, and to eat what is set before them (Luke 10:1-9); with a story of three loaves, he teaches the importance of importunate prayer (Luke 11:1-13); with the example of feasting in the parable of the prodigal son and his elder brother, he teaches the joy over one sinner that repents (Luke 15:11-32); in the story of the rich man and Lazarus, he shows that faring sumptuously and begging bread are not indicators of one’s spiritual condition (Luke 16:19-31). Some mistake Jesus’s actions as an example to use meals as a pretense to evangelism, while caring little or nothing for the person or persons with whom he ate. Such is far from our Lord’s actions. Jesus did not feign feasting to cover a bare evangelistic outreach. For example, in the Gospel of Luke chapter 11:37ff. Jesus accepted an invitation of a Pharisee and spent much of his time upbraiding the Pharisees and lawyers. Jesus’s overall sharing of meals was ostensibly incidental while yet exquisitely determinate.

Jesus used meals as occasions of fellowship.
Luke 10:38 Now it came to pass, as they went, that he entered into a certain village: and a certain woman named Martha received him into her house. All meals are a form of fellowship, but meals with his disciples were a family fellowship. There are times to withdraw from the world for the singular casual and peaceful fellowship of brothers and sisters in Christ – when we gather together around the word of God, around his praises, around his Spirit, and, yes, around his table.

Conclusion
Jesus did not overlook, whitewash, or excuse sin, but He did not kowtow to either the culture or the religion of the day. He conversed with the Samaritan woman at the well (John 4:27). Jesus forgave an immoral woman who washed His feet (Luke 7:47-50). He healed a Syrophenician woman’s daughter (Mark 7:26-30). He touched the untouchable (Luke 5:13). He entered the tax gatherer Zacchaeus’s house (Luke 19:5). But, in including these “outcasts,” Jesus did not cast out the “included.” He conversed with the Pharisee teacher Nicodemus who came to Him by night (John 3:1ff) and went to eat at Simon the Pharisee’s house (Luke 7:36). He pitied the importunate young rich ruler (Mark 10:17-22), healed the daughter of Jairus, a ruler of the synagogue (Mark 5:22-42) and wept over Jerusalem (Matthew 23:37). There was room in Jesus’s love for all who came to Him (There’s room in God’s eternal love to save thy precious soul; Room in the Spirit’s grace above, to heal and make thee whole. Anon.)

Jesus defied the social and religious establishment. This was not defiance for the sake of defiance, but the defiance of obedience – the obedience to God rather than men, the exaltation of truth above tradition, the being about his Father’s business rather than just being. He ate with saints and sinners, Pharisees and publicans, according to the purpose of his coming, as well as the purpose of eating. Jesus is better than any of us have imagined. He is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think (Ephesians 3:20). He feeds the hungry and sits down at the table of the undeserving. He invites himself and accepts invitations. Perhaps one day you may hear “...make haste, and come down; for to day I must abide at thy house.”