• "For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law." (Romans 3:28 emphasis added)
  
• "Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." (Romans 5:1 emphasis added)
  
• "So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith." (Galatians 3:24 emphasis added)

We could say, as some skeptics and antagonists do, that the Bible frequently contradicts itself and is not the inerrant word of God; or we could dismiss the seeming debate between Paul and James as mere semantics or perhaps errors in translation. Howewver, as we've all been admonished at one time or another to not use verses "out of context" in building doctrine, we would do well to consider each Apostle's words in their context rather than simply disregard them.

Let's read the entire passage in James chapter 2 verses 15-26:

¹⁵"If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food,
¹⁶and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, be warmed and filled," without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that?
¹⁷So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.
¹⁸But someone will say, 'You have faith and I have works.' Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.
¹⁹You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe — and shudder!
²⁰Do you want to be shown, you foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless?
²¹Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar?
²²You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works;
²³and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, 'Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness' — and he was called a friend of God.
²⁴You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.
²⁵And in the same way was not also Rahab the prostitute justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way?
²⁶For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead." (emphasis added)

In this passage, James is refuting the teaching that a person can have faith and not produce any good works (vv. 17-18). James emphasizes that genuine faith in Christ results in a changed life out of which pour forth good works (vv. 20-26). He is not saying that justification is by faith plus works. Rather, he is arguing that a person who is truly justified by faith will produce good works as a result of the unmerited grace of God granted to him/her. If a person claims to be a believer, but is without "good works", then s/he most likely does not have genuine saving faith in Christ.

On closer examination of Paul's letters, too, we see that there is no conflict between his and James' teachings, as even Paul mentions works in some of his letters. "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them." (Ephesians 2:10 emphasis added)

In other words, Paul exhorts that our salvation should manifest itself in a changed life which would then pour itself out by good works. "Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new." (2 Corinthians 5:17 KJV)

James and Paul do not disagree in their teachings regarding salvation. Rather, as two unique individuals — each having his own style of preaching, teaching, and writing and each to different audiences — they simply have different approaches, or perspectives, in their writing on this subject. Paul emphasizes that justification is by faith alone — but not to the exclusion of resultant works — while James emphasizes that genuine faith in Christ produces good works.

[Back to Top...]

A Closer Look at the Difficult Passages
It bears repeating that we daren't make the mistake of basing our doctrine on a few select verses, but must consider the whole of Scripture. Thus, in deducing the correct answer to the question of "faith alone" vs. "faith plus works (baptism)", we need to review some other hard-to-reconcile Bible passages. For example:

Mark 16:16
Another verse that, at first glance, seems to say baptism is necessary for salvation is in Mark 16:16 when Jesus says, "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned."

In order to state conclusively what this verse teaches about water baptism as a requirement for salvation, we need to break it down grammatically to be sure about what it does say and does not say. One thing this verse clearly teaches is that belief is necessary for salvation, which of course, is consistent with what Jesus said in other passages, for example:

• "Whoever believes in him [God's Son] is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God." (John 3:18)


• "Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life." (John 5:24)


• "And Jesus cried out and said, 'Whoever believes in me, believes not in me but in him who sent me.'" (John 12:44)

The Grammatic Structure of Mark 16:16
This passage is known as a compound sentence, meaning it consists of two complete sentences joined by the conjunction "but". So, let's dismiss all of our presumptions and assumptions and simply look at each statement on its own.

• The first statement, "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved," tells us about believers who have been baptized. Clearly, they are saved. However, that's all it says. It does not say anything about believers who have not been baptized.


• The second statement, "whoever does not believe will be condemned," asserts that if one does not believe, then that one is not saved. It does not say the person is not saved if he has not been baptized.


• In order for this compound sentence to teach baptism as a prerequisite to saving faith, it needs a third modifying statement, such as: "He who believes and is not baptized will not..." or "He who is not baptized will not..." However, no such statement is found in the passage.

The "Negative Inference" Fallacy
Those who try to use Mark 16:16 to teach that baptism is necessary for salvation commit a fairly common grammatical mistake that is known as the "negative inference" fallacy [false conclusion or incorrect reasoning]. The "negative inference" principle declares that if a statement is true, then we can assume that all opposites of that statement are also true, whether expressed or not.

Examples:
Here are two simple illustrations I borrowed from GotQuestions?org to help us understand the principle of negative inference.

• Statement: "A dog with brown spots is an animal." This sentence is completely correct. The negative inference, however, is, "A dog that does not have brown spots is not an animal," which we know is not true.


• Statement: "Whoever believes and lives in the U.S. will be saved." This statement is 100% true. All Americans who believe in Jesus will be saved. However, can we logically conclude from that statement that if a person does not live in the U.S., then s/he cannot be saved? Of course not! That would be an example of the "negative inference" fallacy.

In the same way, "he who believes and is baptized will be saved" is 100% true. The negative inference, "he who does not believe and is not baptized" is an assumption not born out or supported by other Bible teachings or Jesus' own words about salvation. Read the above verses from John 3:18, 5:24, and 12:44 again. Jesus says, "Whoever believes..." while saying nothing about baptism.

Although the second half of the passage in Mark 16:16 affirms the negative "he who does not believe," it does not affirm the negative supposition for baptism. It does not say, "he who is not baptized will not be saved." For us to infer such is an unwarranted assumption with no other Scriptural support.

The passage states a fact that baptized believers will be saved. It says nothing, however, about believers who have not been baptized.

[Back to Top...]

Acts 2:38
This is yet another verse that proponents of baptism as a salvific issue put forth to prove their ideology. "And Peter said to them, 'Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.'"

At the heart of the matter is the question: What does the preposition "for" mean? Does it mean "in order to receive" or does it mean "because of"? I take aspirin for a headache or cough medicine for a cold and cough. Am I taking these in order to get a headache or cold? Or, am I taking them because I already have a headache or cold?

As we have already discussed in this lesson, we can only discern what an isolated verse of Scripture teaches by filtering it through other passages on the same subject and looking at other usages of certain key words (in this case, "for"). We already know, too, that the Bible teaches salvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, not by works of any kind — which would include the work of baptism (cf. Ephesians 2:8-9).

This verse in Acts deserves a closer look and a breaking down of all segments to be sure we have a full understanding of what Peter said and what God intended. It definitely seems to say "be baptized . . . for the forgiveness [in order to be forgiven] of your sins."

This passage uses the Greek word eis which is translated "for" here and is also translated "at" in other passages. Those who hold to the belief that baptism is required for salvation assume the word translated "for" in this verse means "in order to receive or get". However, in both English and in Greek, there are three possible meanings of the word "for":

1. "in order to be", "become", "get", "have", "keep", etc.;
2. "because of", "as the result of"; or
3. "with regard to".

Since any one of the three meanings listed above could fit the context of Acts 2:38, we need to study further to determine which one is correct.

Let's look at how the preposition "eis" is used in another unrelated Scripture. Jesus said in Matthew 12:41, "The men of Nineveh will rise up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is here." Here, "eis" is translated "at", which means "as a result of". (emphasis added)

So, clearly, the interpretation of this passage is that they repented "because of" or "as a result of" Jonah's preaching, not "in order for Jonah to preach" (ludicrous, I know, but I felt I needed to say it in order to make my point crystal clear). In the same way, Acts 2:38 may well communicate that the people would be baptized "as a result of" or "because" they had believed.

Furthermore, this interpretation is consistent with Peter's next two messages in Acts where he associated forgiveness of sins with only the act of repentance and faith in Christ. In both of those instances, Peter never mentioned baptism (cf. Acts 3:17-26; 4:8-12). Question: If water baptism were indeed a requirement for salvation, can we presume that Peter would carelessly neglect that instruction on other occasions and put people's eternal souls at risk? Of course not!

Three Other Verses that Use "Eis"
Three other verses where the Greek word "eis" is used in conjunction with the word "baptize" or "baptism" are:

• Matthew 3:11 where John the Baptist says: "I baptize you with water for repentance." (emphasis added) Clearly the Greek word "eis" cannot mean "in order to get" in this passage because they had already repented and now were being baptized as a public demonstration of their repentance.


• Romans 6:3 in which the Apostle Paul asks: "Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into [eis] Christ Jesus were baptized into [eis] his death?" Again, this fits with the meaning "because of" or in "regard to", but certainly not "in order to have".


• 1 Corinthians 10:2 where Paul says, concerning Israel's exodus from Egypt: "and all were baptized into [eis] Moses in the cloud and in the sea." Again, "eis" cannot mean "in order to get" in this passage because the Israelites were not baptized in order to get Moses to be their leader. Rather, they were "baptized into" him because he already was their leader who was leading them out of Egypt.

If one is consistent with the way the preposition "eis" is used in the rest of Scripture, we must conclude that Acts 2:38 is indeed referring to their being baptized "because" they had repented and received forgiveness of their sins. Some other verses where the Greek preposition "eis" does not mean "in order to obtain" are Matthew 28:19; 1 Peter 3:21; Acts 19:3; 1 Corinthians 1:15; and 12:13.

[Back to Top...]

Acts 22:16
This is another passage of Scripture that seems, on the surface, to promote the doctrine of faith plus works. When Saul (later Paul) was blinded and went to Ananias for healing, Ananias said to him: "And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on his name." (emphasis added)

Concerning Ananias' words, "...be baptized and wash away your sins", we need to examine them in the context of the whole preceding narrative in Acts 22:10-15 where Paul recounts the experience.

¹⁰"And I said, 'What shall I do, Lord?' And the Lord said to me, 'Rise, and go into Damascus, and there you will be told all that is appointed for you to do.'
¹¹And since I could not see because of the brightness of that light, I was led by the hand by those who were with me, and came into Damascus.
¹²And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, well spoken of by all the Jews who lived there,
¹³came to me, and standing by me said to me, 'Brother Saul, receive your sight.' And at that very hour I received my sight and saw him.
¹⁴And he said, 'The God of our fathers appointed you to know his will, to see the Righteous One and to hear a voice from his mouth; ¹⁵for you will be a witness for him to everyone of what you have seen and heard.'"

In the above passage, we see that Paul had already come to faith in Christ before coming to Ananias to receive his sight. How can we know this? Because God called (appointed) him for ministry prior to his coming to Ananias and prior to his baptism. Is it reasonable to think that Christ would commission Paul if he were not yet saved? Although some churches today might reject the notion that Paul was saved before baptism, it seems obvious that God certainly was not conflicted concerning Paul's salvation and eligibility for ministry.

Thus, we can logically conclude that Ananias was either referring to the symbolism of baptism in the name of Christ or that he was quite possibly referring to the baptism of the Holy Spirit, not water baptism. As Paul wrote to the Corinthian believers, he understood that baptism is a picture of God's inner work of washing away sin.

As Paul wrote later: "But now the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and the power of God's Spirit have washed you and made you holy and acceptable to God." (1 Corinthians 6:11 CEV emphasis added) Where is water baptism mentioned in this verse?

Galatians 3:27
Many who believe in baptismal regeneration also look to Galatians 3:27 as proof that baptism is necessary for salvation. "For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ."

However, in using this verse to support baptismal regeneration, we ignore the context of the passage. Let's examine it in its immediate context.

²³"Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed.
²⁴So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith.
²⁵But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian,
²⁶for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith.
²⁷For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ." (emphasis added)

Here, Paul is scolding some in Galatia who were turning from the true Gospel to a false gospel that cannot save, as he had written at the beginning of his letter in Galatians 1:6-10—

⁶"I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—
⁷not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ.
⁸But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.
⁹As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.
¹⁰For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ."

The false gospel — or "distorted" gospel, as Paul called it — mixed works of the Law, including circumcision, as a requirement for being saved. Really, this is no different than those who add baptism as a requirement for salvation.

Paul's message in the entire letter to the Galatians is clear: We are not justified by works. "...yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified." (Galatians 2:16 emphasis added)

You can see the entire context of justification by faith alone in Christ alone throughout the first three chapters of Galatians. Paul reinforces that message in Galatians 3:26— "...for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith." We see that Paul does not waver in any of his writings wherein he asserts that salvation is "through faith in Christ Jesus". In order for baptism to have any meaning at all, it must be preceded by faith. While baptism is important as a way of identifying us with Christ, it only has meaning if it comes from saving faith, which always comes first.

What Type of "Baptism"?
Galatians 3:27 says, "For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ." Upon closer examination, we find that there is no clear-cut evidence from the context of this passage to conclusively deduce that Paul is speaking of water baptism.

There is more than one type of baptism spoken of in the New Testament. Therefore, is it logical to assume that Paul is speaking of water baptism when there is no evidence to support that assumption? The question we should be asking here is: "How do we get 'baptized into Christ'?" We can find the answer to that question in the following verses:

"You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him." (Romans 8:9 emphasis added)

"For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body — Jews or Greeks, slaves or free — and all were made to drink of one Spirit." (1 Corinthians 12:12-13 emphasis added)

The determining factor for whether or not someone is a Christian is the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit. And the baptism that puts us "into Christ", or makes us a part of Christ's Body is the baptism "in one Spirit".

Clearly, the baptism Paul speaks of above in 1 Corinthians and in Galatians 3:27 is not water baptism. Rather, it is the baptism of the Holy Spirit whereby we are "sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise" (Ephesians 1:13-14). When the Holy Spirit indwells us, then we become part of Christ's Body.

John the Baptist said that he was sent to "baptize with water", and he prophesied that Jesus was the One who "baptizes with the Holy Spirit" (John 1:33). At the point at which we receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, we are then "baptized into Christ".

Water baptism is symbolic of what is accomplished in our spirit when we are baptized into one body by one Spirit. Therefore, we can conclude that the baptism Paul speaks of above in 1 Corinthians and in Galatians 3:27 is not water baptism. Rather, it is the baptism of the Holy Spirit whereby we are "sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise" (Ephesians 1:13-14). When the Holy Spirit indwells us, then we become part of Christ's Body.

[Back to Top...]

Condition vs. Requirement
In continuing to investigate whether baptism is required for salvation, we must be careful not to confuse a condition of salvation with a requirement for salvation.

• Condition — An assumption [statement assumed to be true] on which rests the validity or effect of something else; information that should be kept in mind when making a decision; a statement of what is expected as part of an agreement.


• Requirement — Required activity; anything that is indispensable; something that is required in advance.

The Bible clearly teaches, and we can say with absolute assurance, that belief or faith is both a condition and a requirement. However, can we say the same about the act of water baptism? Does Scripture — the whole of Scripture, without contradiction or controversy — give absolute assurance that a person who is not baptized is not saved?

While we can attach any number of conditions to the requirement of faith, Scripture asserts that the person is still saved whether they meet any one or more conditions relating to salvation (such as good works, for instance). As such, no one can state with absolute assurance and authority that water baptism is necessary for salvation.

Before we dismiss this all-important question/concern/controversy, let's examine other Scripture references that tell us plainly and conclusively the requirement(s) for salvation.

• "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life." (John 3:16 emphasis added)


• "Whoever believes in him [God's Son] is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God." (John 3:18 emphasis added)


• "Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him." (John 3:36 emphasis added)


• "To him[Christ] all the prophets bear witness that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name." (Acts 10:43 emphasis added)


• "as it is written, 'Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense; and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.'" (Romans 9:33 emphasis added) (cf. Isaiah 8:14 and 28:16)


• "I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life." (1 John 5:13 emphasis added)


• See also John 6:35,40,53-54; 7:38; 8:24; 11:25-26; 12:46; 14:12; 20:31; Acts 16:31; Romans 4:5; 10:11; 1 Peter 2:6.

The above Scripture references most assuredly affirm that faith is a requirement for salvation. However, there is no indication in any of those verses that anything else is required. Doesn't it stand to reason that, if baptism were a requirement for salvation, Jesus and the Apostles Paul, John, and Peter would have said so? Would they really neglect so great an issue when people's eternal souls were involved? I seriously doubt it.

Let Us Reason Together
Let's take a look at one more interesting phrase Paul used in 1 Corinthians 15:1 in which he talks about the object of a person's baptism. Knowing what we do about the Apostle Paul's fervency with which he preached the Gospel, what do we do with this sentence which says: "I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius"?

Of course, we know this passage is really about the divisions among the Corinthian believers. Nevertheless, how could Paul possibly say, "I thank God that I baptized none..." or "For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel..." in verse 17 if baptism were truly necessary for salvation? If that were the case, then reason dictates that Paul was really saying, "I thank God that you were not saved..." and "For Christ did not send me to save..." How absurd is that deduction!

Also, in 1 Corinthians 15:1-8, when Paul provides a detailed outline of the Gospel, why would he not mention baptism if it were indeed a requirement?

¹"Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand,
²and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you — unless you believed in vain.
³For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures,
⁴that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,
⁵and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.
⁶Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep.
⁷Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. ⁸Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me." (emphasis added)

If baptism were a requirement for salvation, how could Paul possibly present the Gospel and not mention baptism?

[Back to Top...]

A Few Practical/Historical Examples
As we have seen in this study, the Bible tells us very clearly that we are saved by faith alone in Christ alone. Are there any examples of people who've been saved without being baptized?

1. All believers in the Old Testament — for example, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, Solomon, Job, Rahab, and Ruth, to name a few — were saved by putting their faith in the Messiah who was to come, but they were not baptized.


2. One of the thieves on a cross next to Jesus was saved but not baptized. Luke tells us in chapter 23, verses 40-43:

   ⁴⁰"But the other rebuked him, saying, 'Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation?
   ⁴¹And we indeed justly, for we are receiving the due reward of our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong.'
   ⁴²And he said, 'Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.'
   ⁴³And he said to him, 'Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.'"



3. Cornelius was saved and baptized by the Holy Spirit before receiving water baptism (cf Acts 10:44). Peter had not even mentioned water baptism at this point. All he said was, "To him [Christ] all the prophets bear witness that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name." (Acts 10:43 emphasis added) And in the very next verse, we learn that the Holy Spirit fell on them — obviously, because they believed Peter's message — without having been baptized yet!

   The context is very clear: God, who knew their hearts, forgave Cornelius and his household and baptized them in the Holy Spirit before they were baptized in water. In fact, the reason Peter allowed them to be baptized with water was that they showed evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit "just as Peter and the Jewish believers" had.



4. And of course, as we learned earlier, Christ called and commissioned the Apostle Paul for ministry on the road to Damascus before he was baptized in water (cf Acts 22:10-15).

Evidentiary Summation
Scripture clearly teaches that we have eternal life at the very moment we believe.

Although some have attached the condition of water baptism to saving faith, there isn't a single verse in the Bible that says if a person is not baptized, then s/he is not saved.

If baptism were required for salvation, then no one could be saved without another person being present to baptize them. This, then, puts restrictions or limitations on God's grace based, not on His love, but on human will and ability.

If water baptism were truly a requirement for salvation, why wouldn't the Apostle Paul write: "In him we have redemption through his blood and baptism, the forgiveness of sins..." (Ephesians 1:7) He didn't write it because he and the other Apostles and early Christians knew that God's saving grace is purely His work, from start to finish — as Paul affirmed in Philippians 1:6 when he wrote: "being confident of this, that he who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus." (emphasis added)

Let's take Jesus at His word!
Jesus said, "Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life." (John 5:24 emphasis added)

At the very point of faith — what we call "saving faith" — a believer possesses all the promises and blessings of salvation (cf. John 1:12; 3:16; 5:24; 6:47; 20:31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; 16:31). Read John 5:24 above again.

Baptism is a testimony of our faith and a public declaration that we believe in — have placed all our faith in — Jesus Christ.

Requiring anything in addition to faith in Jesus Christ for salvation is a "works-based" salvation. To add anything to the Gospel is to say that Jesus' death on the cross was not sufficient to purchase our salvation. To say we must be baptized in order to be saved is to say we must add something — our own good works and obedience — to Christ's death in order to make it sufficient for salvation. This is a presumptuous contradiction of Scripture which diminishes, or weakens, Jesus' atoning death.

• "But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us." (Romans 5:8 emphasis added)


• "God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God." (2 Corinthians 5:21 emphasis added)


• "In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace." (Ephesians 1:7 emphasis added)

Jesus' payment for our sins is appropriated (applied) to our "account" by faith alone. Therefore, as we stated before, we now state again: baptism is an important step of obedience for every new believer after salvation, but it is not a requirement for salvation.

[Back to Top...]

Copyright © 2012 Rev. Linda Smallwood
for the AOCI Bible Training Institute

---