This is a letter sent with kindness and respect to the First Baptist Church of Jacksonville, FL concerning their inconsistent beliefs regarding salvation and the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This letter was sent and meant to be posted here and read by all. May God bless every reader. Your kind and respectful comments and questions are welcome.
January 24, 2013
To the members and leaders of the First Baptist Church,
Seeing your confession of the deity of Christ and confession of the virgin birth is an encouragement of faith in a world of skepticism. Because of these convictions and your confession of the “Inerrancy and Completeness of Scripture”, I urge you that though one’s labors and works are good Christ may still have something against a church (Rev. 2-3). Let us all be aware. Therefore, I must encourage you to reconsider and look again at some of the words of Jesus Christ and those of His Apostles and prophets. You openly profess your belief that salvation comes by faith, trust, and receiving Jesus as one’s personal Savior before a believer is conformed to the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. I plead with you to rethink this teaching, and may your ministers give themselves wholly to reading, exhortation, and doctrine (1 Tim. 4:13-16). I write this letter by the Apostle Paul’s example of speaking to those, who are seeking God and His Christ.
Here is my plea. With your open confession that 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 is true, you also confess that the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ is the Gospel by which believers are saved. I assume that you also confess the Gospel to be the power of God unto salvation (Rom. 1:16, 1 Cor. 1:18). Please, recognize that believers must conform to Christ’s death to be resurrected with Him (Phil. 3:10-11, Rom. 6:3-8). Why then do you not teach that one must die and be buried with Christ to be resurrected with Him? The Holy Spirit described the saved believer, who was, “Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead” (Col. 2:12). Without being resurrected with Christ, one cannot be brought to life with Christ and forgiven of all sins as Colossians 2:13 states, “And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;” (Col. 2:13). Why do you not openly recognize that being raised with Christ in baptism is when one is forgiven of all sins? The Scriptures show that Jesus died in order that each believer must die to one’s sins, and that by being buried with Christ, that believer can be raised with Him and be forgiven of all of one’s sins. Why then do you believe that one is saved before dying, being buried, and resurrected with Christ? Why place baptism after salvation when Jesus said, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned” (Mark 16:16)?
This is a misleading belief to overlook that one is saved when raised with Jesus Christ. Instead of teaching a believer to be saved when one is resurrected with Christ, your words are clear from your tract, “Life’s Greatest Question”, that you believe that you are saved when you trusted in Christ before you have died, been buried, and resurrected with Him. In teaching others how to become a Christian, your tract comes short stating, “only through trusting in Christ’s payment can our sins be forgiven. That means from the moment we trust in Christ, God sees us not as sinners but justified (just as if we had never sinned)” (emp. added. <fbcjax.com> 22 January 2013). You are not clear and do not indicate that this trust is when one conforms to Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection. Yet, you also provide a “Spiritual Birth Certificate”, which states for when one has “received Jesus as my personal Savior and Lord” rather than when one is raised with Christ from being buried with Him in baptism. When you confess that believer’s baptism is a conformation to the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ in your tract, why do you place baptism after salvation?
When are we truly saved by grace? Let us not misapply God’s grace. Being dead to sin, Christians are alive and their souls are hid in Jesus Christ (Col. 3:1-3). Those who have not died with Christ and have not yet been raised with Him are still dead and are not yet saved. Christ’s Spirit states, “Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:” (Eph. 2:5-6). God’s grace is when we are raised with Christ. Therefore, grace is “not of yourselves” (Eph. 2:8), but in the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. Therefore, we cannot boast (Eph. 2:9). Baptism is not a work invented by men, and no one baptizes oneself. If you so believed in grace through one’s conformation to Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection, would you not instruct immediate baptism upon confession of faith and repentance? Were not the converts of the Book of Acts all baptized immediately? Why baptize immediately if baptism can wait until another time? Should you not also instruct others, “And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16)? Should you not inform these believers saying, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost” (Acts 2:38)?
You are right to confess belief in “The Bodily Resurrection of Jesus from the Grave” (22 January 2013). Yet, you are not confessing the resurrection of Jesus Christ through your baptism when you believe that you have already been saved by His grace implying that you have already been resurrected with Him? Do you not see that the scriptures teach that one is raised with Jesus after being buried with Him in baptism (Rom. 6:3-8)? Does not Colossians 2:12-13 teach clearly that when one is raised from the burial of baptism “through faith” that this person then has the forgiveness of all sins (Col. 2:12-13, cf. 3:1-11)?
By placing salvation before the believer’s death, burial, and resurrection with Christ, I find that you are twisting Jesus’ words about being born of the water and the Spirit to exclude the baptism that Jesus commanded after His resurrection (John 3:5, cf. 1 Cor. 6:11, Titus 3:5). Yet, rising from the waters of baptism is the moment when the believer is reborn and regenerated. Peter affirmed, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,” (1 Pet. 1:3, cf. 1:22-23). How are believers begotten by God by the resurrection of Christ? Peter affirmed, “The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the request of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:” (1 Pet. 3:21). This is my plea to you in short.
For good measure so that my plea does not come short, note that this baptism is water baptism in Jesus’ name. As you recognize the Scriptures, Jesus established baptism in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit after His resurrection (Matt. 28:19). This baptism is the baptism in Jesus’ name taught on the Day of Pentecost after Jesus’ ascension (Acts 2:38). The baptism in Jesus’ name is baptism in water (Acts 11:47-48). This is the one baptism by which Jesus washes His Church by water (Eph. 4:5, 5:26). This is the baptism taught in 1 Corinthians 12:13 when one is baptized into one body, the Church, by the one Spirit (cf. “body” in Eph. 5:23, Col. 1:18, 24). First Corinthians 1:11-13 show that this is the one baptism in Jesus’ name and 1 Corinthians 6:11 shows this baptism to be the moment when the believer is washed, sanctified, and justified in Jesus’ name. We also see that the Lord adds believers to His Church rather than men consenting to add others to a church (Acts 2:41, 47).
Therefore, I must remind you. Jesus said, “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven” (Matt. 7:21, cf. Heb. 5:9, Jas. 2:24). After the resurrection, Jesus commanded in Matthew 28:19, “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:”.
Please, consider the claimed Baptist founder, Thomas Helwys, who wrote repeatedly about salvation and baptism. Helwys wrote in his book, “The Mystery of Iniquity” (1612),
“And therefore please not yourselves so much in those things, although we acknowledge they are worthy of great commendations in you, and our souls are much affected to you for them. But if you follow not Christ in the regeneration, that is, if you be not ‘born again of water and of the Spirit, and so enter into the kingdom of heaven,’ all is nothing, as you see by the example of this ruler. And Cornelius (Acts 10), if he had not been baptized with the Holy Ghost and with water, for all his prayers and alms he had not, nor could not have entered into the kingdom of heaven.
Thus entered all the people of God of whose entrance the scriptures give testimony, either by rule or by example, and thereof if there be any other entrance found out, it is not, nor cannot be of God. This only is the door which Jesus Christ has set open for all to enter in at, that enter into his kingdom. (John 3:5) And the Lord sanctify all your hearts with grace that you may enter therein. For no other way of salvation has Christ appointed but that men first believe and be baptized. (Mark 16:16).”
Therefore, listen also to the famous Baptist preacher, Charles Spurgeon, who noted in his lesson, “Baptism – A Burial” (October 30, 1881),
“Baptism sets forth the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, and our participation therein. Its teaching is twofold. First, think of our representative union with Christ, so that when he died and was buried it was on our behalf, and we were thus buried with him. This will give you the teaching of baptism so far as it sets forth a creed. We declare in baptism that we believe in the death of Jesus, and desire to partake in all the merit of it. But there is a second equally important matter and that is our realized union with Christ which is set forth in baptism, not so much as a doctrine of our creed as a matter of our experience. There is a manner of dying, of being buried, of rising, and of living in Christ which must be displayed in each one of us if we are indeed members of the body of Christ. […]
We are buried with him in baptism unto death to show that we accept him as being for us dead and buried. […]
His death is the hinge of our confidence: we are not baptized into his example, or his life, but into his death. We hereby confess that all our salvation lies in the death of Jesus, which death we accept as having been incurred on our account.”
In conclusion of my plea, I urge you by the name of Christ to reconsider your beliefs and teachings concerning salvation, baptism, and the Gospel of Christ in the light of the inerrant and complete Scriptures. Remember “He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me” (John 14:23). I welcome your response. I am willing to reconsider in all honesty. I plan to present this as an open letter. You can contact me at ScottJon82[at]yahoo.com or if you prefer by mail.
May God bless you all in the study of His Word,
Scott Shifferd, minister, Dean Road church of Christ in Jacksonville, FL
Seeing God's Breath 
Jesus’ words do not have the ability to automatically impart life. The essence of John 6:63 is about “spiritually” understanding His words. One cannot intellectually & literally process His words and expect to understand their meaning.
John 5:38-40
38 And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not.
39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.
LikeLike
Adam, I respect where you are coming from as I spent many years believing as you.
However I think that it’s real easy to get caught up in the letter of the NT text to the detriment of the Spirit. As I’ve said before, one can mechanically follow the text to the tee and still remain spiritually asleep. Adherence to the letter of the text is not the same as adherence to His Spirit. How many verses have I shown you that state that we are to live according to the Spirit and not just the text? I think you have made the mistake of thinking that the “Word” is the “text” of the Bible and it simply is not true. The NT also makes it clear that His Word is to dwell in our hearts. He never says that that His Words are to dwell in our intellect. You have made no such distinction. I would be interested to know your thoughts on this and the difference between the two.
Scott does not seem interested in a dialogue with me, which is fine. The Baptist church has not responded to Scott’s plea, so I guess it’s a double edged sword.
LikeLike
Adam, I do agree with some of what you say. However, the spiritual determines the physical and is an effect of the spiritual. The new covenant is based in “cause” and not “effect.” This does not mean that the effect is meaningless. It is a natural effect of the work of the Spirit. Read Romans 8. We should not have to use effort to do those physical things that reflect the faith that precedes it. And the NT makes it clear that human effort is not a factor in our salvation. Romans 9:16
It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy.
Ephesians 2:8
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—
Water baptism requires physical effort. Therefore it is disqualified as that which invokes salvation. However baptism from the Spirit is effortless and would be the natural gift that God bestows upon us by giving us His new presence within us as our new guide apart from text. This should be self evident.
At this point it is no longer we who do the work but it is God who does the work in us. This transformation of mind now gives us two methods of going through life, flesh and Spirit. We need the flesh (and the mind of flesh) to carry out our practical duties, such our jobs and other duties non-related to the Spirit. But we now have a New Source for our Spiritual lives, and this is the Spirit within us and not just the written text, as the coC seems to think.
You said, “We are physical beings, and we can really only understand spiritual things in the form of the physical.”
I totally disagree with this. In our flesh we can only understand fleshly ideas. (Read Romans 8, it explains this beautifully.) However, we have a Spiritual aspect to our inner being that has become dormant and overpowered by the flesh. This is what awakens as we become transformed of mind. Then we can live from His Spirit within us as a guide and master of our lives. this is not to say that the scriptures are meaningless, but we now have a new way to serve God.
Romans 7:6
But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.
LikeLike
“We should not have to use effort to do those physical things that reflect the faith that precedes it.”
I think this contradicts 1 John chapter 1 as well as James chapter 2. The faith must be made complete by physical action. Without it, faith is useless, dead.
“And the NT makes it clear that human effort is not a factor in our salvation.”
I think it’s more accurate to say that the NT makes it clear that we cannot earn or merit salvation through our own acts, but I think it’s very clear that we must act on our faith, and there are so many examples in the Bible to illustrate this concept.
As it concerns the rest of your post, I’m worried that you seem to think the scriptures are only a secondary source of information and that you rely primarily on this inner spiritual awakening you have experienced. I could rattle off several scriptures showing us how vital the word is, but I’m sure you already know where I’m going with that.
“Romans 7:6
But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.”
Context is extremely important as I’m sure you would agree with. What is the context here? Also, I don’t believe in the Word being inconsistent or contradicting itself so we have to come to terms with what the scriptures are saying, the one voice of God.
The whole book of Romans is indeed very interesting and filled with lots of “meaty” verses and concepts. Much of Romans deals with Jews who think they’re superior because of the Law, so Paul launches into a diatribe against those thought processes. Basically, Paul’s point is that there is no law, whether that of a code of man, or the Old Covenant law that could ever save a man’s soul. He’s obviously right, I agree with that. There is nothing anyone could ever physically do to be saved. Salvation ONLY comes from Jesus Christ. Paul is telling us that ALL of us, whether Jew or Gentile, were once bound to fleshy things (pointing the finger at Jews especially), but that Jesus Christ leveled the playing field, so to speak, and that we are all TO BE bound (as one, united) by the Spirit of Christ because all of the laws out there actually separate us, whereas Christ unites us.
Caps for emphasis only. Not yelling. :-)
Romans 7 is in no way relegating the Word of God to a letter, law, or code. No way, the Word is God revealed to us! The Word IS Christ! To live by the Word is to live by the Spirit, they are joined together, again one voice of God. It’s not “legalism” to practice the truth, it’s only legalism when you start injecting your own ideas of “law” apart from the Word, which is what the Pharisees were guilty of.
LikeLike
What concerns me is that the coC theology seems to be void of anything mystical and that everything is based upon logical and practical principles. The Spiritual world is based upon mystical principles and in which God works within our mind and heart independent from written instructions. This is validated through the Bible, yet seems to be ignored by those in the coC. The Bible has it’s place in the whole process of spiritual development but as we develop (spiritually) our dependence on the written text should diminish.
Romans 8 says nothing about the words of the Spirit as being the same as the Spirit. “The Word” is not the same as “The Spirit.” These two term are NOT interchangeable. If Paul wanted us to live solely by the words don’t you think he would have made this clear? Romans 8 and many other passages state that we are to live from God’s Spirit within us and not from a list of commands.
You said, “I think this contradicts 1 John chapter 1 as well as James chapter 2. The faith must be made complete by physical action. Without it, faith is useless, dead.”
This is true, but under NT principles our physical action is generated by God’s Spirit within us and not from human effort. Human effort is from the flesh and is unacceptable as a means by which we generate good works.
Paul strongly admonished the Galatians for turning back to law after they supposedly has transformed into the Spirit. He then make a statement that should give every scriptural Christian a wake-up call. He said, Galatians 4:19
“My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,” So Paul is stating that there is pre-formation of Christ in the believer and post-formation of Christ in the believer. It appears to me that your form of worship is that of the pre-formation of Christ as you still look for written commands to produce you Christian actions and use the biblical text as your only guide because either you don’t believe that God influences and guides you personally by His direct presence in your heart, or Christ has not been formed in you as of yet.
Anyone can follow the NT commands without one ounce of faith or Spiritual presence within them. It’s a matter of following instructions, which is based upon personal competence, self discipline and desire or fear, none of which are acceptable as tools toward obedience. They are virtuous in practice but are not the same as the work that is a result of God’s Spirit within the heart of the believer.
I hope some of these truths help you to see the difference between the Spirit and the scriptural text.
LikeLike
Jesus said, “The words that I speak to you are spirit and life” (John 6:63). “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom” (Col. 3:16).
LikeLike
It appears we will not find common ground on this topic, sir.
“The Bible has it’s place in the whole process of spiritual development but as we develop (spiritually) our dependence on the written text should diminish.”
On the contrary, I believe as we develop, we should become MORE dependent on His Word. You have no basis to make such a statement. Plus, it troubles me that you’re essentially accusing me of lack of faith or spirituality simply because I believe in adherence to His Word. You will find that the Word is the most important thing there is, everything is centered on it. The Word is the power of God, you will remember that He spoke us into existence. The Word is Christ, the Word came from men inspired by the Holy Spirit. The Word is truth, and the Father, the Son and Spirit are all in agreement. How could one go wrong with 100% reliance on that?
I pray for all of us, for more understanding…
LikeLike
“No assumption about baptism being in water. You know that Acts 10:43, 47-48 says. You are in denial and complete disregard for the Spirit’s revelation in Acts 10.”
You can pick apart and analyze every word in the text and still miss the message. The bottom line is that the NT is a Spiritual Covenant and putting a physical action as that which puts one into Spiritual Kingdom is inconsistent with new covenant principles.
The fact that the Spirit indwells and directly communicates and influences the heart and mind of the believer is something you deny and this fact alone contaminates everything you promote about NT Christianity. I have given you plenty of scriptural evidence that God works apart from the text and you continue to deny it. You depend on your own mind of flesh to reveal spiritual truth and it leads you astray and keeps you spiritually disconnected from God. And then you try to convince the Baptists of their folly.
LikeLike
Adam,
“Practicing truth is a physical thing, is it not?” Isn’t the physical thing to which you are referring a “work of righteousness?” If not then what is a “work of righteousness?”
Practicing truth can be a physical thing, but the physical performance does not justify. What does the NT say about this? Romans 9:32
Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;
Here’s where it gets tricky. We try to produce the “physical thing” as if proves the we have faith, yet anyone can produce the physical thing without any faith at all. It does not take faith to perform the physical thing. It can be achieved through the use of fear, self discipline, obligation, etc., which are not products of faith. Practical Christianity is not a bad thing, but it does not prove ones mind is in the right place.
LikeLike
I actually had a rather lengthy response to this but the computer decided to go wacky on me. Anyway… I’ll hit the main points I was trying to make…
I see you have a tendency to divorce the physical and spiritual as if they’re totally separate. Indeed they can be, but the Bible shows a third relationship, the physical and spiritual working together. This is where James chapter 2 comes in for me. It talks of faith not being complete without the physical. I think we can all agree that God would not be satisfied with something He considers incomplete faith.
We are physical beings, and we can really only understand spiritual things in the form of the physical. This is why 1 Peter 3:21 goes into details that baptism is not “about” the physical (not the removal of dirt from the flesh), but rather it is our way of making an appeal to God. In other words, baptism in and of itself is just getting wet, just a physical act. However, baptism combined with a person’s faith becomes an appeal to God, almost literally a prayer. The physical and spiritual working together and not against each other. I think this is the point God is making in the Word.
In no way can we work enough, or be good enough, to merit salvation. Anyone who would rely on their baptism as a work of righteousness that saved them is simply wrong and would contradict everything we stand for. Quite simply, the reliance is on Jesus, the baptism is our physical response of obedient faith, and the spiritual is being placed in Jesus (Galatians 3:27), for salvation.
I hope this helps.
LikeLike
Exactly. Excellent comment.
LikeLike
1 Peter 3:21
The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: If Baptism is the answer then it is a response. A response is always and effect of something preceding it. Faith is that which creates the need for baptism, yes or no?
Why would the scriptures need to validate the obvious? Water baptism is the effect of faith, don’t you agree? If not, then where am I wrong?
The New Testament is based upon principles of the Spirit (inner) and not of the letter (outer), right? Romans 2:29, “But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter;” This being the case would you suggest physical baptism more closely related to the the Spirit or the letter? Well the fact that it is physical would make it more closely related to the letter because things of the letter are physical in nature. The application of the letter of law always indicates a physical action which can be monitored to see if the letter was followed. You and I can see the physical baptism take place and know that it happened through a pro-active process. We are not saved by any physical action that is performed. Ephesians 2:8
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
LikeLike
Phil,
You need to check the Greek behind the word “answer”, because that is the only place that it is translated “answer” rather than “request”. The ESV shows this “an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Pet. 3:21). The NASB also states, ” an appeal to God for a good conscience–through the resurrection of Jesus Christ”. On top of that, it says that we are saved through the water and through the resurrection. You would have seen this if you carefully read the letter above.
Obedience of the spirit occurs also in the physical, but the spirit is not obedient when one rejects Jesus command to be raised with Him when one has buried the old man in the burial of baptism.
If you read the letter above, you would have noted Ephesians 2:5-6 comes before Ephesians 2:8 stating, “even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up with Him”.
LikeLike
I think this is where legalism becomes a problem. Your approach to the scriptures is no different than a lawyers approach to the Constitution. The wording becomes a stumbling block and the spirit of the message gets missed.
Don’t you think that those who were inspired to write the NT would have made it obvious that immersion is essential for salvation to occur? No one argues that faith is a prerequisite for salvation, but the rest has been argued over and over. I find it interesting that most protestant religions and denominations see the essence of new covenant as a message of inner faith as being that which puts a believer into the possession of a Spiritual Savior (Jesus). Yet it is the Catholics and the church of Christ who stand by the belief that is is a physical baptism that puts one there.
The bottom line is that the essence of the new covenant is that of the (inner) Spirit and not of the (outer) letter, and yet the coC puts emphasis on the outer action (immersion in water) as that which occurs before inner conversion. It just is not consistent with new covenant principles. You can dissect and analyze NT words all day long and still miss the spirit of the message. On the subject of baptism I think this is exactly what you have done.
If you dwell on the fact that the Spirit of the message trumps the letter of the text in the new covenant I don’t know how you can conclude that anything physical is required in order to enter into a Spiritual Kingdom. In essence you have taken an Old Covenant principle and applied it to the new covenant and it creates a stumbling block that you can seem to get beyond.
LikeLike
Eugene,
You said, “You have reverted to saying the same thing over and over; which lacks any scripture, but is overflowing with personal feelings, personal thoughts and personal judgment. You’ll get nowhere with God’s word if you keep doing that.” So your saying that you don’t have a perception of the words you read in scripture, and that your interpretation of those words are objective and that you have correct understanding of the Bible. Show me your certificate for truth and then I’ll listen to you.
If you want scripture I have plenty. However you will just invalidate my understanding of the script as erroneous, and continue with your practice of approaching a spiritual writing from and intellectual pov. Legalism then takes over and creates a barrier that blinds you from the Spirit. Happens all the time. The Pharisees were guilty of this, too.
Just remember that the new covenant is of the Spirit and not the letter and you might receive new understanding that evades you now. I pray that God will somehow change your heart and get you out of your brain. The brain is a great servant but a terrible master.
LikeLike
No one says that physical baptism puts you into the Church, but the Lord adds you to the Church when you are baptized (Acts 2:38, 41, 47).
You could at least know what we believe before asserting it.
We see the message of baptism embedded in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. We have not lost anything.
The Spirit is in reverence to the Spirit’s revelation in the New Testament, and the letter is that of the Old Testament. I casual reading of 2 Corinthians 3 teaches this basic point that is easy to understand.
LikeLike
Why do you make a law by your own assertions and expect legalistically that others comply? If we obey God, do we not know Him and love Him (1 John 2:4, 5:2-3)? If we have spiritual life by words of Christ, are we not His disciples (John 6:63, 8:31)?
Yet, you would have us give up the words of Christ for a spirit, and yet Christ’s words are spirit and life.
LikeLike
Scott, “Obedience of the spirit occurs also in the physical, but the spirit is not obedient when one rejects Jesus command to be raised with Him when one has buried the old man in the burial of baptism.”
Beautifully stated.
1 John 1:6-7 “If we say that we have fellowship with Him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth; but if we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin.”
Practicing truth is a physical thing, is it not?
LikeLike
Scott,
“No one says that physical baptism puts you into the Church, but the Lord adds you to the Church when you are baptized.” Again, you are assuming that this baptism is in water and not the Spirit.
“You could at least know what we believe before asserting it.” Seriously, I spent 35 years in the fundamental coC. I know what is taught there.
“The Spirit is in reverence to the Spirit’s revelation in the New Testament, and the letter is that of the Old Testament.” You don’t seem to realize that you approach to the NT as if it’s just another letter of law. You look for commands to obey and then do your best to obey them and hope you did it right so you can go to heaven. You’re main objective is to use personal will power and self discipline toward this goal. This is certainly virtuous in it’s practice but totally ignores the need for regeneration, which is a mystical act that God performs in you, and empowers you to live from. Refer to Romans 8 for further proof. Her are other passages that support what I am trying to convey:
Hebrews 10:16, This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;
Ezekiel 36:26
A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.
Romans 2:15
Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;
2 Corinthians 3:2
Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men: Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.
You are teaching that God’s word is written only in biblical text and can only be known through reading of that text, and this is totally contrary to what I just posted from the Bible. Why can’t you see this? You don’t want to believe that you can go within for instruction even though the scriptures state otherwise. Jesus admonished the Jews for the very same thing you are guilty of. John 5: 38 And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not.39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.
“Why do you make a law by your own assertions and expect legalistically that others comply?” I didn’t. Where did I make a new law?
“If we obey God, do we not know Him and love Him ” No, our obedience is NOT proof that we love God. Lots of people obey because they are afraid they will be condemned if they don’t. That’s not love! 1 John 4:18, There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love. Romans 8:15, For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
LikeLike
No assumption about baptism being in water. You know that Acts 10:43, 47-48 says. You are in denial and complete disregard for the Spirit’s revelation in Acts 10.
LikeLike
Eugene,
Why is it that Protestants are so often incapable of civil dialogue?
Your typical style of rattling off machine gun questions without taking a breath is sad. Instead of throwing out a laundry list (which is as old as dirt), how about asking a question?
You see, what you (and millions like you) do is simply try to win by exhausting your oponent–not because there is no answer to your laundry list. What takes you a minute to ask requires pages to answer.
Of course, you have the magic of Google at your fingertips, so you are most able to find answers to your questions, but you wanted to look like a know-it-all.
First, both you and Scott have avoided my points–foundational points that prove that any theological fantasy that Protestants conjure are outside the realm of Christian orthodoxy. In other words, your questions that you asked me are irrelevant. But I’ll indulge for a bit.
My opinion about baptism? My opinion means nothing. The Church is the pillar and foundation of truth. So what I do is try to submit my opinion to that of the Church–the rightful interpreter of the Bible. Therefore, I believe in baptismal regeneration. I’m pretty sure you don’t care about my opinions, though, or you would have asked in a civil manner. If you change your mind, I have a quick outline here: http://churchofchristinformation.com/2013/01/17/why-do-catholics-baptize-infants/
What is self-popery? Do you really not understand the term? You, Eugene, practice self-popery in that you believe you are the rightful interpreter of the Bible. “Truth” to you and Scott, is not the Word of God, but YOUR interpretation of the Word of God.
Orthodox: A topic that I believe Protestants purposefully try to distort, and then expect Catholics to use Protestant language to provide answers to distorted questions. So, to answer Scott’s question of which came first (Catholic or Orthodox), the answer is simple: the Orthodox is 10 centuries late.
Mariology: Seriously? Have you ever, EVER, read a book about Mary?
Authority of the pope? How “Bible-only” Christians ignore the Bible amazes me. Here’s about 50 verses that I put into an outline that support the hierarchy:http://churchofchristinformation.com/pope-in-the-bible/
So, if you decide to ask me a question like an adult, I’ll be happy to respond. But if you are demanding that I use “scripture” to answer your questions, you will need to allow me to use scripture as it is interpreted by it’s rightful interpreters–and not by pope Eugene. Until then, try to find that super secret verse in the Bible that suggests, in any way, that sola scriptura is rational or what Jesus intended. This is Scott’s thread, so if you decide to have a reasonable discussion, then direct me to a more proper place or ask your question on my blog.
LikeLike
Patrick,
Now, you want a civil dialogue? I think Patrick knows that he must lean upon the Roman church, because he does not have the faith to lean upon the words of Christ in the Apostolic scriptures. All he has to lean upon is some other authority to keep some belief in Jesus. He sees so many different interpretations that he cannot justify only following Christ without the Roman hierarchy to interpret. Although the Apostolic writings are written to congregations and all Christians for them to understand them (Eph. 3:1-5, 1 John 1:1-4), Patrick struggles with this more than the mixed history of explaining where the Eastern Orthodox churches came from. He is not yet bothered with bridging Christ’s words and arriving at following the Roman church. I have hope that these things linger in his mind until he realizes he needs to repent or he is able to give an answer to these these serious and relative questions.
LikeLike
I see you’ve avoided/evaded answering questions that must be first answered before your questions can make any sense.
I’ll wait to see why pope Scott and pope Eugene can tell me why you have the authority to interpret scripture and bind your decisions on me. And I’ll wait for that super magic Bible verse that teaches sola scriptura.
LikeLike
Let me quote Ephesians 3:1-4 for you, Pax.
“For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for you Gentiles— if indeed you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which was given to me for you, how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery (as I have briefly written already, by which, when you ask and rely upon Rome you will get your answer from the scriptures according to what the pope says),”
That’s not what the Bible says…although you think it does without giving ONE scripture to back it up. You have to rely upon the ole’ “oral” tradition don’t you – because it’s not written.
Ephesians 3:1-4 says, “For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for you Gentiles— if indeed you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which was given to me for you, how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery (>as I have briefly written already, by which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ),”
Who was Paul talking to, Pax? Was he talking to “clergy?” No! He was to Christians, everyday simple Christians following God according to what they were reading. And according to Paul (who was directed the Spirit of God) when a person reads the Bible they can understand God’s will. But the pope’s will cannot be understood when a person reads the Bible and that’s why the Catholic “Church” relies upon “oral” traditions that completely contradict the written traditions of God’s word.
“If anyone speaks, let him speak as the oracles of God…” (1 Peter 4:11)
Peter didn’t say let a person as the words of the pope declare.
“Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that you may learn in us not to think beyond what is written,…” (1 Corinthians 4:6)
Paul didn’t say don’t go beyond the oral traditions; he said don’t go beyond the written word.
“He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him—the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day.” (John 12:48)
Jesus didn’t say the catechism, the creed book, the council records will judge a person. He said His word – the word that you can read in the book created by the inspiration of God (2 Timothy 3:15-17).
Are three witnesses enough for you, Pax, or are you still so desperate that you need me to quote some “church father” before you take it seriously? You want to talk Bible without talking Bible because you’re too used to listening to Rome and not God’s word.
LikeLike
If you want to know what I think, then read what I wrote. I gave you links to what I wrote.
Your “proofs” are not proofs. Circular logic is not reasonable. The Bible does not say what the Bible is.
Why do I listen to Rome? Because it’s her book! The Bible is the product of the Church. Wouldn’t it be foolish to ignore the a song writers interpretation of his own song? That’s what’s so confusing about you self-popes–you think Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture are at odds with themselves, but they’re not. Jesus NEVER intended for people to be “bible-only” Christians. Instead, he built a visible Church with a hierarchy so that everyone on earth would know where it is. You would learn that if you read the link I a gave you of my outline.
So yes, I don’t mind witnesses, but not when self-popes put words in their mouths (which is exactly what you’re doing).
LikeLike
Circular? If you call me asking for scripture for what you say and you failing to give it, then, yes, I guess I am being circular.
You worship people, Pax. You worship people who teach others to worship Mary and to give her credit for being a co-redeemer of mankind’s salvation – that is blasphemy plain and simple, and you’ll answer for the support that you give it.
You say, “Jesus NEVER intended for people to be “bible-only” Christians.
But Jesus said, “I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word;” (John 17:20)
A church not built upon the pope’s word, but a church built upon the word of the apostles!
Enough has been said, and enough scriptures have been given to show you your grave error.
LikeLike
Wow.
I don’t believe you have the ability to discuss theology at an adult level. It’s not an insult, just a fair assessment.
Until you realize that your PREMISE of sola scriptura is false, and that you have no authority to interpret, your arguments are irrelevant.
GIANT ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM: If your premise of sola scriptura were correct, then you and Scott would agree on the topic at hand. And because the Protestant sects have bought it hook, line, and sinker without any thought, you are all fighting with each other and proving to the world that your fantasy of ecclesial chaos is anything but of God.
So, I’ll let you all continue to prove the Catholic Church correct by displaying to the world your disunity, but I’ll also invite you to the links I posted–you might learn something.
axpay
LikeLike
You’re arguing against yourself now. First you say the pope, then you say the apostles, now you say the pope again. But where again does Mary fit into this? Oh yeah, let me ask “papa” Benedict again:
“As she suffered and almost died together with her suffering and dying Son, so she surrendered her mother’s rights over her Son for the salvation of the human race. And to satisfy the justice of God she sacrificed her Son, as well as she could, so that it may justly be said that she together with Christ has redeemed the human race.” from Pope Benedict XV INTER SODALICIA”. “
LikeLike
…one more point! Your John 17 text is a proves that Christian unity is achieved by minding the apostles (which mandates that you mind today’s bishops). The verse does not imply in any way that Baptist or CofC self-popery is Jesus’ intent.
And, Catholics don’t worship people–that’s a stupid thing for you to say, and reveals your reliance on other stupid people. False witness is a no-no, Eugene.
LikeLike
Don’t worship people?
One more time…”As she suffered and almost died together with her suffering and dying Son, so she surrendered her mother’s rights over her Son for the salvation of the human race. And to satisfy the justice of God she sacrificed her Son, as well as she could, so that it may justly be said that she together with Christ has redeemed the human race.” from Pope Benedict XV INTER SODALICIA”. ”
The more you talk the more you reveal your “expertise” on the “oral” tradition instead the God’s scriptural tradition.
Bishops and apostles are not the same office in the church. Their qualifications are completely different. Try studying the Bible and looking for the church that started in Jerusalem instead of looking to the pope and the church that “started” in Rome.
The more you talk, the more you show yourself to be obtuse by ignoring what the original purpose of Scott’s post was.
And since you like John so much, remember this: “Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth.”
Not the word of an apostate head, but the word of God, Pax. That’s where truth is found. Try following it sometime.
LikeLike
You don’t acknowledge anything I write. Best of luck.
LikeLike
“As she suffered and almost died together with her suffering and dying Son, so she surrendered her mother’s rights over her Son for the salvation of the human race. And to satisfy the justice of God she sacrificed her Son, as well as she could, so that it may justly be said that she together with Christ has redeemed the human race.” from Pope Benedict XV INTER SODALICIA”.
Best of luck…you’re going to need a lot more than that, my friend, if you stay where you are.
LikeLike
Eugene has it in simplicity. The Spirit of Christ spoke through His Apostles and prophets to everyday Christians and congregations. If that is self-popery, then you must judge us guilty with the Apostles, prophets, and the Spirit of God.
LikeLike
Wrong. Jesus spoke to the twelve. You weren’t there. He said that the THOSE men would be guided into all thruth. He gave THOSE men authority. THOSE men passed on their authority by using the authority Jesus gave them. Your theory is just a theory, is alien to the history of the Church, but is a needed theory to support self-popery.
LikeLike
…it’s also self-popery to think you (Scott) are chosen by God to correctly interpret what “the apostles, prophets, and Spirit teaches. Can you honestly not understand that?
What Christians are meant to do (as Jesus intended) is seek the Church’s interpretation of her own library of books (the Bible).
Are you the proper interpreter of the book of mormon?
Are you the proper interpreter of the Koran?
Nor are you the proper interpreter of the Bible.
That is self-popery.
LikeLike
And in case someone missed it, let me make very clear what teaching Pax submits himself to: “As she suffered and almost died together with her suffering and dying Son, so she surrendered her mother’s rights over her Son for the salvation of the human race. And to satisfy the justice of God she sacrificed her Son, as well as she could, so that it may justly be said that she together with Christ has redeemed the human race.” from Pope Benedict XV INTER SODALICIA”.
You submit yourself to someone who has submitted to doctrines of demons. You submit yourself to a church who worships people. You’ll never be able to deny this because you belong to a church that isn’t afraid to admit it, although for some reason you’re being awfully afraid to own up to it in the conversation here.
LikeLike
The more you talk Patrick the worse I feel for you. You put on your blog that I’m a Baptist “pastor.” LOL! You might want to change at least that little bit of falsehood if you really want to learn the truth…so who hasn’t been paying attention around here?
You also said, “I tried to pull them from the muck. I used logic. I used scripture.”
I haven’t seen any logic from you and the only thing out of your mouth more rare than “logic” was scripture…let me go back and see if you quoted any…nope not one verse, but you can feel free to highlight where you did and reply back. I see where I gave scripture after scripture reference and even some direct quotes, but not single reference or quote from you, Patrick.
And by the way, Patrick, you never answered whether or not you agree with your “papa” when he said:
“As she suffered and almost died together with her suffering and dying Son, so she surrendered her mother’s rights over her Son for the salvation of the human race. And to satisfy the justice of God she sacrificed her Son, as well as she could, so that it may justly be said that she together with Christ has redeemed the human race.” from Pope Benedict XV INTER SODALICIA”.”
Feel free to provide scripture to show how this is true. I’ll be waiting. I guess your stance on scripture is soLONG scripture.
LikeLike
Patrick,
You’ve already confessed that the New Testament is the work of the Apostles and assembled by the Apostles just as the Roman Catholic church hides in the notes of their encyclopedia. You’ve read those exerts that are posted on this site.
Catholic Confession of the 1st Century Canon of the New Testament
They didn’t write these scriptures to themselves, only to the elders, or only to the hierarchy of Rome. They wrote them to individual congregations to understand them for themselves. You can’t handle that fact.
LikeLike
Both Eugene and I are Christians of the Church of Christ Jesus. We have known doctrinal differences between us.
LikeLike
“And I’ll wait for that super magic Bible verse that teaches sola scriptura.”
John 1:1-3 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.”
John 1:14 “And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.”
Matthew 28:18 ” And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.”
I believe that should suffice.
LikeLike
In regards to being complete and having every good work, then 2 Timothy 3:16-17 suffices. Add to this all things for life and godliness come by the divine knowledge of God found in the revelations of the Apostles (2 Pet. 1:2-3, 16-21, 3:2, 15-16). We could keep going. The truth is that Patrick will have to realize this for himself, but that is going to take honesty and maybe some self-sacrifice.
LikeLike
Adam,
that verse is about Jesus, not the Bible.
LikeLike
Sad? Your failure to answer anything is sad. My simple questions exhausted you? I wonder how you’d feel after more complicated ones. Google? I bet you have a shortcut to Rome’s website for your answers. My friend, I didn’t have to use Google to say what I said above, I used…the Bible.
In reality I asked you about 3 real questions. There were a couple more sentences with “?’s” at the end but I thought that you would see that those were rhetorical. Guess not.
Here, I’ll number the real questions for you:
1) Can you not join in the actual conversation about baptism? Or are you afraid that you’ll have to defend baptizing babies who don’t have the faith necessary to be baptized (not that they need faith any more than they need to be baptized since baptism is for sinners…uh oh, there’s another topic you’d have to defend isn’t it)?
2) “Call no man on Earth your Father (much less “holy” father) for there is only one Father who is in Heaven (Matthew 23:9)”‘ doesn’t apply when you get to choose what does and doesn’t apply to a man-made priesthood, huh?
3) Since you like quoting “papa” Benedict, tell me if you agree with something else that “papa” Benedict said: ““As she suffered and almost died together with her suffering and dying Son, so she surrendered her mother’s rights over her Son for the salvation of the human race. And to satisfy the justice of God she sacrificed her Son, as well as she could, so that it may justly be said that she together with Christ has redeemed the human race.” from Pope Benedict XV INTER SODALICIA”. Am I quoting a different “papa” Benedict by chance? Can you tell me where in the scriptures it is said that Mary is a “co-redeemer” of the human race???
Those don’t seem to exhaustive to me, especially considering the “thousands of years of traditions” that the Catholic “Church” has…which happen to be those “oral” tradition since you can’t call them scriptural traditions.
You said, “The Church is the pillar and foundation of truth.” You got that right, but you have the wrong church, Pax. The church that belongs to Jesus is built upon the prophets, the apostles and the Cornerstone of Christ (Ephesians 2:20). Your Roman church is built upon false prophets and false apostles who murdered people in the past to protect their own version of the truth, and a Christ who gives way and shares all glory and honor with His mother.
You go onto to say/ask, “Mariology: Seriously? Have you ever, EVER, read a book about Mary?”
Did you notice how can’t even answer a simple question that asked about your “papa” Benedict when it comes to Mary? Yes, I have read a book about Mary – it’s called the Bible. I’m not interested in reading a man-made book that tells people why and how they should worship and pray to Mary. Why can’t you see that? Answer the simple question raised by a direct quote, Pax – is Mary a co-redeemer of the souls of lost men and women???
And in a funny twist you said, “So, if you decide to ask me a question like an adult,” and then followed that up with, “pope Eugene”
That sounds so “adult” of you, Pax. I, unlike the man you fall down before, don’t want any title attached to my name other than Christian. You fail to answer my questions with scripture because your answers come from the mouth of corrupt men and not the mouth of Almighty God.
And as far as your sidestepping me goes, you’re right, this is Scott’s blog, but if you’ll go back to the beginning of my first reply to you (and back to the first question above) you’ll see that I asked you why can’t join what the conversation is about instead of rambling about stuff that had nothing to do with the topic…but you gave your answer to me (and an answer to Scott in your reply to me???) in your reply – you can’t respond with scripture on any topic because you only rely on Rome and not on the Spirit of Truth who came from Heaven.
LikeLike
Please, be sure to read the letter before commenting. Thank you.
LikeLike
Not sure what you mean. I’ve read the letter and my comments are pointed toward the death, burial and resurrection, which is what your point is in the letter. I see this baptism as representing that which happens in the heart, not in the water. Water baptism is the “effect” of this regeneration that happens in the heart. Water is not the “cause” of this regeneration. I think you have put the cart ahead of the horse.
LikeLike
Phil, where exactly are you finding all of these definitions of baptism’s causes and effects in scripture? I don’t see that anywhere.
LikeLike
1 Peter 3:21
The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: If Baptism is the answer then it is a response. A response is always and effect of something preceding it. Faith is that which creates the need for baptism, yes or no?
Why would the scriptures need to validate the obvious? Water baptism is the effect of faith, don’t you agree? If not, then where am I wrong?
The New Testament is based upon principles of the Spirit (inner) and not of the letter (outer), right? Romans 2:29, “But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter;” This being the case would you suggest physical baptism more closely related to the the Spirit or the letter? Well the fact that it is physical would make it more closely related to the letter because things of the letter are physical in nature. The application of the letter of law always indicates a physical action which can be monitored to see if the letter was followed. You and I can see the physical baptism take place and know that it happened through a pro-active process. We are not saved by any physical action that is performed. Ephesians 2:8
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
LikeLike