An Interesting Take on the Baptism Issue

In my daily wanderings-around, I found the following comment regarding baptism which I had never heard before.  I’d be interested in other’s opinions on this comment:

“I grew up in the Church of Christ. It does not “remain silent where the Bible is silent”, it condemns where the Bible is silent. It creates doctrine where doctrine does not exist. This is Adding to the Word. You teach the washing away of sins from Peter and Ananias, which was in effect at the time, until Paul was specifically chosen by God to learn His Will, hear words from God’s mouth concerning the New Covenant, and pass on this info to others. (Acts 22:16) After Paul was taught by “revelation from Jesus Christ,” he never taught the washing away of sins. He taught they were taken away at the cross. Peter and Ananias taught what was in effect at the time, that “before the coming of Christ John taught baptism for the remission of sins.” Galations ch. 1 and 2 show it was 3 years Paul before Paul was introduced to Peter, and another 14 years before he first taught at Jerusalem. His teaching letters did not reach the churches for 40 or more years after the New Covenant began. The N.C. was in effect, but no one knew it until Paul was able to get teaching to them! Peter did not know the N.C. until he learned it from Paul. Ananias did not know it yet either. The Church of Christ gets it’s doctrine from Peter and Ananias, rather than from Paul’ teaching.”

Found here.
Advertisements

7 thoughts on “An Interesting Take on the Baptism Issue

  1. Wow, that article is so full of lies I hardly know where to begin.

    First off, the whole premise is that God had men like Peter and Ananias teach a different plan of salvation than what Paul would later preach. So are there multiple plans of salvation?

    The author says that Paul never preached the washing away of sins after revelation from Jesus. Then why did he write in Galatians 3: For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.

    Don’t we need to be in Christ to have our sins washed away? Isn’t that where salvation is found, in Christ? Did he not say the same thing to the Romans in chapter 6?

    Second, how can you say that Ananias didn’t know the correct plan of salvation? Who was it who sent Saul to Ananias? Wasn’t it Jesus Himself? Why would Jesus send Saul to a teacher who couldn’t explain God’s will? Jesus spoke to Ananias before Saul came to him, did Jesus forget to give him the correct plan of salvation? That not only foolish but blasphemous.

    Third, he says that Peter didn’t learn the truth until he was taught by Paul. Then why did Peter write much later in 1 Peter 3:21 “Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you– not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience–through the resurrection of Jesus Christ”?

    Did Peter still not get it? Was he still teaching an incomplete or incorrect plan of salvation? Of course not.

    The churches of Christ get their plan of salvation from God as recorded in His complete word. Peter and Ananias taught correctly as their instructions came directly from God. Paul’s teachings are in harmony with what those 2 men taught as well.

    What a disgustingly perverted teaching this person has presented. According to them, God just needed a few tries before he got the right teacher. Pathetic!

  2. I’ve seen versions of this garbage in Cecil Hook’s writings. My guess is that this person is just repeating Hook’s teachings.

  3. Shannon,

    You are right. Now that I think of it, I saw this theory put forth in an article called “The Bible vs. the Church of Christ” which I believe was by a man named Melton. I read it around the same time I was subscribed to Hook’s email list and confused the two.

    Sorry,
    Corey

  4. Hi,

    Hope you are well. I am a member of the Church of Christ. I have to say first of all most of what the man says is foolishness.

    But let me say this the some Churches of Christ teach things not found in the Bible.

    The ‘five steps’ of salvation is one. Not only does this seem to make it a works Gospel instead of grace Gospel there is one major problem. To reach our eternal reward we must also remain faithful and have Love in our lives. I would cite 1 Corinthians 13 for the Love part and Revelation 2:10 about being “faithful to the end”. I certainly agree that all ‘five steps’ are necessary but they are never taught or referred to as that in the Word of God.

    Another problem is the name Church of Christ itself. While this is a Biblicaly correct name Romans 16:16, a more correct name would be Church of God which I have just counted from my concordance as appearing eight times in the Bible. (I was told it appears a dozen times.) Also the “Way” is also a correct name of the movement Jesus started.

    On a side note many quote the second part of Romans 16:16 while they entirely forget the first part “Salute one another with a holy kiss”.

    I have heard preachers in the Church of Christ say that if the name of the Church isn’t the Church of Christ than that person is going to Hell. (See above comments on the two other Biblical names.) I think we’d be better off preaching the Gospel and leaving the judging to Jesus, I mean that is His role after all isn’t it.

    Love,

    John

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s