If you are trying to understand where these folks are coming from, I would highly recommend spending some time on the ex-church of Christ website – especially in the “Church of Christ: Doctrine & Culture” board. There are some insight into this culture for those of us who weren’t raised in it.
It’s really interesting to me as a person who was raised in a different faith tradition, and you might find it to be so as well. At the least, it is informative to understanding any hyperconservative churches of Christ that might be in your community.
Answering the Church of Christ 
There is no such thing as church of Christ doctrine. We use bible doctrine.
still running from my question john-john?
hows those smoking pants coming?
drop and roll.
lee
faithful,
Right.
You should write the mods of that board and tell them that. Maybe they’ll consider changing that title.
“There is no such thing as church of Christ doctrine. We use bible doctrine.”
That is such a non-sensical comment. Very elementary. Guess what. ALL DENOMINATIONS CLAIM TO FOLLOW THE BIBLE ALONE!
On June 14, 2008 at 12:45 pm faithful Said:
There is no such thing as church of Christ doctrine. We use bible doctrine
Mitch, come on now, you should know better to make such a statement. What you should have said is “we use the bible like everyone else and we do our best to follow what it teaches, but we arent perfect and may be wrong on some things” instead you act as if you guys are the only ones who have it all fiqured out.
Hey before everyone goes back to stone throwing could someone answer me this? I believe I heard that CoC believe that if you do not attend a Church with Christ’s name on it, ie. Church of Christ you are not saved, is that correct or was it a false statement?
Secondly if it is correct, how does this scripture enter into the mix?
Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
Secondly, why does the above and the following scripture leave church and churches in lower case? Should you not capitalize a name? Church of Christ for example? Meaning if this is a direction to call the church something shouldn’t it be in caps?
Romans 16:16 Salute one another with an holy kiss. The churches of Christ salute you.
Thanks, I wasn’t really heading here but I saw the post and had wanted to ask this question!
Sorry my throwing stones comment was a poor choice of words, please accept my apology! I would edit it out but there is no feature for that.
Thanks and again my apologies!
“That is such a non-sensical comment. Very elementary. Guess what. ALL DENOMINATIONS CLAIM TO FOLLOW THE BIBLE ALONE!”
I’ll either consider you naive or dishonest , I don’t know which one yet. Have you ever heard of the westminster confession of faith , the baptist faith and message , the book of mormon , any of the ellen white books , etc…. Denominations all have extra books , manuals , creed books , catachisms …
Do you still want to stand by your statement?
Keep wishing, faithful-you know that is not a true statement…or else if you really think it is true, you are greatly fooling yourself.
I’ll stand by JP’s statement.
*Presbyterians don’t “follow” the Westminster Confession.
*Baptists don’t “follow” the BF&M
*Mormons aren’t a part of this discussion, because they DO follow something besides the Bible and they’ve attempted to change Jesus.
None of these “extra books, manuals, creed books, catachisms” are put in a place of superiority to Scripture. They are simply aids. Rather like songbooks, microphones, overhead projectors, pews, song leaders, pitch pipes, etc.
Besides, if you have a problem with Christians writing or reading books designed to help aid them grow in their faith, you better write the people at the following URL and tell them that they are apostasizing and in danger of eternal torment for the services they are providing to the brethren.
http://church-of-christ.org/bookstores/
“There is no such thing as church of Christ doctrine. We use bible doctrine.”
– This statement fully encompasses the primary problem. This gentleman has become convinced that “his” church’s manner of scripture interpretation is the only correct one. Everyone else in the history of the world is either dishonest or misguided.
Exhibit A
“I’ll either consider you naive or dishonest” (To JP for disagreeing with him)
“Denominations all have extra books, manuals, creed books, catechisms”
Um…really? Kind of like the shelves full of Coc tracts and Bible study “aides” I have personally seen?
“walkinlove”-There are some in the churches of Christ that believe that-i.e. many of those who post on this blog. But, thankfully that false belief is passing away as we recognize the full body of Christ.
I have been born and raised in the “church of Christ”, and always heard people ask that-but thankfully was never taught that and will never believe it, because it is illogical and more than that unBiblical.
It is a problem when people do not understand what the CHURCH, the body of Christ really is. It is a bigger problem when they do not WANT to understand or choose not to because it would ruin their agenda. The entire premise of Johnny’s agenda hangs on the fact that they believe they really are the ONLY ones going to heaven and somehow he has been charged to bring everyone else down-and he has proven on here to even take that 10 steps farther by tearing down those who choose not to behave as he does yet they hold the same beliefs. That is what I find even more ridiculous. It completely proves that he only has an agenda from himself, not from God-that his purpose is to really tear down and destroy people-not for the sake of God, but to prove something and puff up his pride even more.
That is what makes me so mad, and I cannot EVEN begin to think what God thinks, but He cannot be pleased with this behavior.
Great points, DMH.
Thanks for the answers Katherine, can you or anyone else comment on the following?
And the following also why no capital letter for church or churches if its a name and is Church of God an acceptable name for a church?
1 Corinthians 10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:
1 Corinthians 11:16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.
1 Corinthians 11:22 What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? what shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not.
1 Corinthians 15:9 For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.
Galatians 1:13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews’ religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it:
Also technically how can he call this church by it’s location using the same capitalization that is used with churches of Christ and how can they be in Christ if they are not named Church of Christ?
Galatians 1:22 And was unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ:
And in this last passage since it is capitalized just like churches of Christ, why isn’t Paul admonishing those people for calling the churches there churches of Judaea? Or being pleased they accepted him?
If what I heard is true that you can’t enter heaven unless you are worshiping at a Church of Christ church, why isn’t Paul after the people attending to come out of those churches?
Thanks!
Faithful (faithful to what?)
“Do you still want to stand by your statement?”
Yes, now more then ever, the difference is, the denominations are smart enough to write them down. You have your own creeds as well, you just keep them in the noggin’ and are kept safe by the ultra-conservative watch dogs.
Happy Father’s Day to all fathers out there! 🙂
On June 15, 2008 at 1:24 pm JP Manzi Said:
You have your own creeds as well, you just keep them in the noggin’ and are kept safe by the ultra-conservative watch dogs.
– so true! They have their creeds. Just as DMH stated “Kind of like the shelves full of cofC tracts and Bible study “aides” I have personally seen?”
Randy, you are correct, how could I forget the tract rack?
faitful, I am sure you will have nothing to say.
I would just like to say that the above mentioned site is a vile one. It is little more than a place for people to gather and poke fun at the beliefs of those within the churches of Christ. I wouldn’t approve of such a site for Baptists or Methodists either.
While they do discuss doctrine, there is an abundance of threads that seem solely dedicated to belittling the beliefs of others. I thought that wasn’t what the purpose of this blog was, and so I don’t think it is proper to endorse another site that does just that.
I can understand why you would say that, Corey. There are some people on that website who were really hurt by the churches of Christ in which they were raised, and so you see that pain exhibited in some of the things they write. However, there are people there who still love the church of Christ, as well. If nothing else, you have to appreciate the candor that exists there.
The thing that seems be common for the people on that site is that they are all from a cofC background.
walkinginlove,
As far as cofC believing you have to go to a church named cofC…this is and is not accurate. There are some who believe you have to go to a church of Christ…not because of the name, but because of the doctrine. It is not the name of the church that they are interested in except that the name is associated with correct Biblical teaching (in their minds).
As for the reason that “church” is not captialized… “church of Christ” is not considered a name (although treated like one). It is intended to be a description, as it is used in Romans 16:16. Many older churches of Christ still have “The church of Christ meets here” on the side of their building or on their sign for this very reason…it is an attempt to clarify that it is not a name, but a description…the church that belongs to Christ…at least that’s the reasoning…whether it actually holds true is another matter.
Church of God, to a conservative church of Christer, would be acceptable in description (because, as you pointed out with many references, it is in the Bible)…but they would not agree to use this “name” because it is associated with false teachings from a denomination called Church of God.
The whole point is supposed to be to simply be the church that belongs to Christ. No names should be needed to distinguish because the division of denominations should not exist. But, at the same time, church of Christ has become something of a name in practice…refusing to accept churches without this title, again not because the “name” means anything special, but because of the doctrine associated with it.
I hope this clarifies…I know this is greatly misunderstood, and seems like it is hypocritical at times…but believe me when I say it all began with the best intentions…and in many cases persists with the best intentions.
Stating the the c of c has no creeds is really intellectually dishonest. “No creeds, nothing but the Bible, “Christians only”, “We speak where the Bible speaks and we are silent where the Bible is silent” are creeds themselves.
Regarding the ex- board, I have found a lot of comfort from time to time reading the site. To be honest sometimes a person may be expressing bitterness, but it is only due to the spiritual abuse that was inflicted upon them. Venting about it I believe is a healthy “phase” in leaving the grips of the mindset. Notice I said “phase” meaning it would not be healthy for this to be a permenant state.
I have been thinking a bit about baptism and justification. At what point does one become justified before God? It seems the scriptures teach “upon faith” which would mean prior to being baptized. Also, how could a dead unregenerate man have living obedient faith prior to baptism “if one is not alive until baptism per the church of Christ teaching”. We have dead unregenerate sinful men exercising a living faith that confesses, repents, and gets baptized….all while he is dead. How can a dead unregenerate man who is a natural man and doesn’t understand Spiritual things exercise obedient faith in his dead state ……seems to me he would have to be made alive to have living faith that confesses, repents, and get baptized, which would mean he was made alive in Christ/ justified upon faith in Christ… and then confesses, repents and is baptized all due to the fact he trusted and placed his faith in Christ to save him. We are always willing to call repentance a work as well as confessing and baptism. James says faith without works is dead, so does this mean that the faith prior to being baptized was living faith from a dead man, or does this mean Christ justified him upon his faith
Nathan,
I don’t have to appreciate the candor when in descends into name-calling. I once read a multi-page thread there where they made fun of everything from the manner of dress of Christian women to giving out free Bible study material. They even make fun of the way some people pronounce the word “Lord”. There may be some with good intentions there, but the majority seem to be there to grind their respective axes.
I come from a Baptist background, but I would never create a site to belittle the Baptists just because I feel their doctrines “hurt” me. It is one thing to discuss that doctrine openly. It is quite another to get together with others like me and have a slam-fest on the way Baptists dress or speak.
walkinlove – I think Clint has done a good job of explaining that “church of Christ” is a description, not a name. I wish that Clint wouldn’t use terms like “church of Christ preacher” or “church of Christer”. The latter being a derogatory term in my mind on the level of Campbellite.
I think the problem comes with all of the religious division in the world today among those who claim to be part of the church of Christ, yet proudly wear names like Baptist, Lutheran, Methodist, etc. The names put on signs and buildings, even among the church, is an effort to distinguish religious bodies with differing practices. I think we all know that the congregations of the New Testament didn’t have to hang signs to differentiate themselves because only one church existed.
Nathan,
Why don’t you click here:
http://www.setbb.com/exchurchofchris/viewtopic.php?t=8438&mforum=exchurchofchris
and look at the signature of the person who started the thread. Tell me if that is the kind of thing you want your stamp of approval on. Even a casual reading of that site will reveal that “Rainbow” is not alone in using the worst possible language while assuming the moral high-ground.
To associate this blog with that site ruins your credibility as one who is trying to be Christ-like. I strongly suggest that you remove them from your blogroll and cease to use them as a positive example of any kind.
Katherine have you ever done any Bible studies on the effects of bitter root judgments, inner vows, and God principle of sowing and reaping? It may answer your questions about:
“It is a bigger problem when they do not WANT to understand or choose not to because it would ruin their agenda.”
choward, what will you do then if we form a group of believers and use the Church of Christ as our name and we also claim to see the Lord’s truth but it is not what you see? We will then be a false church teaching under the Church of Christ name!
What name do you choose then? And I have had CoC people tell me that I had to go to a CoC named church or I would go to hell!
Thus at this point they teach a false doctrine that is not consistent with what Jesus said he would judge me on:
Matthew 25:34Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
35For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
36Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
37Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
38When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
39Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
40And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
I don’t see him focused on what church I attended, but on if I had mercy for others!
You know, I am almost persuaded that we spend way too much time trying to analyze the Bible in order to impress people with our intellect while missing the simple truths of God love, mercy and forgiveness.
choward, I reread your post about the name issue, and I see where you are coming from. However there is a smell of outward appearance to it much like the Scribes and Pharisees were accused of. I mean if your love of God, as the first commandment of Jesus, causes you to act like the devil to your neighbor’s are you really fulfilling the first commandment since they seem to have a relationship to them? I say that because forgiveness from God seems to be very much tied to how we forgive others. So shouldn’t we walk by how Jesus treated people and not focus on how he dealt with the hard hearted leaders who were out to kill him?
Thanks!
Also where is the line between judging your neighbor and holding accountable the things we were asked to do:
James 4:11Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of his brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge.
12There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou that judgest another?
Also Matthew 7:1Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
Choward the first and second passage of Matthew concern me greatly when a person comes to the point of judging someone salvation. Hypothetically, if they are wrong, are they not going to suffer the judgment they give to another.
Thus if I say to you, you are not saved, based on Matthew 7:1&2 where does that leave me?
I stand by my statement.
pernell,
god be merciful to me a sinner.
that man went away justified not the other.
now jesus said that not me.
i still cant collect my thousand from johnny they offer
for the sinners prayer.
great observation.
lee
“Stating the the c of c has no creeds is really intellectually dishonest. “No creeds, nothing but the Bible, “Christians only”, “We speak where the Bible speaks and we are silent where the Bible is silent” are creeds themselves.”
I’ll tell you what dishonest is . Turning a hermenutic principle into a creed because your postion is so weak
Matthew 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
Why does Jesus make this statement when Baptism is used in the remission of sins?
Acts 2:38Then Peter said unto them, 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.
Could it be that in the above passage it is the name of Jesus Christ that is performing the remission of sins and not the baptism itself? Or should we consider the power of the water equal to Christs Blood in Matthew 26:28? If so when did water hang on the cross for our sins?
Luke 24:47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
Above we find a reference to his name and the remission of sins, but not baptism? Since water baptism has the power to remove sin should it not have been listed in this statement?
Acts 10:43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
Again his name, and remission of sins and no baptism listed as part of the process!
Romans 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
Once again we are back to Christ’s blood doing the work of remission, again there is nothing about baptism in the process at all!
Hebrews 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
And again the blood has the power in it and again there is nothing about baptism stated in the passage. Why? Could it be that the blood and Christ are the power at work in Acts 2:38? It would seem so to a laymen like me! A pastor once told me, if God says it more then once it might be a good idea to pay attention.
Can someone please clarify the above posts since they appear to somewhat contradict the power of water baptism in the remission of sins and while I am at it. I believe I was told that the thief on the cross was covered under the old law. If so, why is it he died after Christ? And if by some chance it is the blood that has the power, could you be wrong and the thief actually be covered under the new covenant?
Personally I would have to wonder if Christ forgave his sins on the cross, once the solders started to break the thief’s legs that perhaps he would be tempted to a sinful thought. I know I have when I have hit my thumb with a hammer, I can’t imagine to be hanging on a cross, struggling for air and have my legs be broken, and most likely in a brutal fashion.
And finally and perhaps the most I will stretch this, since baptism has to happen for the remission of sins, is it not being raised to the level of a sin offering?:
Hebrews 10:18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.
“faithful”: Just because you stand by your statement-it does not make it true. There is “Church of Christ” doctrine and it does not come from the Bible. You can deny it all you want, but that will not make it any less true.
TRUTH will always be truth-because God never changes. We just have to find it and believe in it, not changing it to fit our agendas or pre-conceived notions.
On June 16, 2008 at 1:17 pm rick Said:
You know, I am almost persuaded that we spend way too much time trying to analyze the Bible in order to impress people with our intellect while missing the simple truths of God love, mercy and forgiveness.
– you just may be right.
walkinlove,
you are right on the money,
i have asked the same question here and to norm or johnny.
the same old line is that christ could save anyone anyway he chooses………..wrong.
if that were the case why did he die? i will tell you why,without the sheading of blood is no remission of sin.
jesus forgave sin but he never saved anyone in the time prior to his death. you must be born again and that included the old testament saints who died waiting and looking to the day that a final offering would be given. all of their obediance to the law only covered their sin it never removed it.
jesus had camp meeting in hell-paradise, thats where they were saved. god has the power to do what ever he wants but it is not in his character to act as a man,he keeps his word.
most of the topics on this site are not even on gods radar. some of you have trivalized the wonderful plan that he hid from the foundation of the world. that christ would die and rise from the dead for whosoever
believeth.some will not enter in themselves and hinder those who are going in.
lee
lee is Christ can save anyone anyway he chooses then he is being called a liar when he says:
Matthew 5:17Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill
My conclusion is that the pharisees were so focused on the letter of the law that they missed the spirit of the law, thus Christ’s example of mercy to the woman CAUGHT in adultery was to show mercy based on the situation.
Thus to me if I were in Iraq in the middle of a battle and was with a dieing soldier and he wanted to be saved I would use a canteen and have faith that Jesus would have seen the situation for what it was and allow grace like he gave the woman.
But a CoC person would argue that you already had your chance and because you are not near water you are going to go to hell, sorry have a nice death and trip to hell!?!?!?! Where is mercy or faith in this concept?!?!?!?!
Corey, I say your name but this is for all CoC believers if they agree with what happened with the woman, you see the situation of the woman and judge the situation does not warrant death, but in the above situation where a dieing man is begging for one last chance in his life to be with Christ are you going to follow Christ and do like him and show mercy and have faith or are you going go against the example of Christ and the woman and judge by the letter of the law you see as true?
And this is no creed or denominational teaching that I am coming from, this comes from working out my salvation and testing what I read against what I see others saying, in an attempt to balance law with justice/judgment, mercy and faith.
Do any of you see this at all, or are you going to follow your teaching like a denominational creed and put up strong holds to protect your power and position in the church?
lee is Christ should be lee if Christ
And let me clarify, I am not saying that a little old lady should be sprinkled because she does not want to get her hair wet, thus I do believe you should be fully under the water as that is what the greek word says! But I also know that the power comes from the blood and not the water because it was the blood that was shed on the cross and not the water!
Faithful,
I am glad that you stand by your claim and that you offered no response. There is none. The CoC denom. does have creeds, extra-biblical beliefs that are simply not written down. You can look all you want but their may not be a tract on the rack to refute that.
walkinlove,
Here’s the deal – almost everyone in the churches of Christ knows and acknowledges that it is the blood of Christ that provides the forgiveness of sins. We also don’t believe that there is anything magical about the waters of baptism. We do acknowledge that one must be IN Christ to have access to that blood. The scriptures teach that it is in baptism that we first contact that blood. This harmonizes with Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, and specifically Galatians 3:27, just to name a few. The problem with denominational teachings is that they never go to a verse to tell us what puts us INTO Christ. The reason is because Gal. 3:27 tells us what does that – baptism. Baptism plays a role in salvation, even if people don’t want to admit it.
As to your scenario about the dying soldier, you’re doing what so many here have done before you and countless more will do after you – you’re looking for an exception or loophole to excuse the disobedience of those that are perfectly healthy and able to be baptized. What will happen to that soldier? That is in the hands of God and His judgment will be righteous. I have no part in that man’s judgment on the last day. I can’t tell you what He will do, but I pray He will show mercy.
Why would someone expect mercy when they see baptism’s role in scriptures but deny it? They are then rejecting the counsel of God.
I’m not sure why you continue to ask Clint & I questions since you’ve stated elsewhere that speaking to those in churches of Christ is like speaking to a “wall”. Sounds to me like you’ve got it all figured out and have pronounced your own judgment.
Faithful, you claim to be following Gods word “perfectly” right? You think because someone fails to understand everything as you that they are either “false teachers” or “false brethren” or just flat out not saved because they lack your supposed understanding of scripture. Let me ask you, how much bible do new borns in Christ know when they are saved ? They haven’t yet reached your supposed understanding, so will you boot them aside due to their not understanding as you? And, I have ask this about a dozen times – allow me to ask any church of Christ assembly to read the entire book of Romans and then allow me to quiz them and guess what….I will not get the same answers on each question…..will you boot them out who answer incorrectly per your understanding? If one doesn’t understand the Lords Supper as you, will he be booted out, even if he partakes each Sunday. I ask Johnny this same question, he said YES !!
“you are right on the money,
i have asked the same question here and to norm or johnny.
the same old line is that christ could save anyone anyway he chooses………..wrong.”
Actually depending on how you look at this it is right and actually conforms to the woman caught in adultery. It is just a simple way of saying, God uses Judgment and Mercy to operate in the law. Thus we have free will but Saul’s free will was blocked because of the impact he was having on spreading the good news. I personally believe had God not acted to stop Saul Christianity might have been eliminated from the earth before it was able to grow.
So the appearance is that God can do what he wants when he wants, but he is actually operating under the law. Otherwise he would simply visit each in the world and blind them to place the fear of God back in them.
Do you see this?
1. A person is baptized in order to OBEY THE LORD. It is a command of God (Acts 10:48). It is not an optional part of the gospel. Jesus said, ‘And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say” (John 6:46)? When the apostles went into all the world, they did exactly as they were commanded (Acts 2:38; 22: 16).
2. A person is baptized to BE UNITED WITH CHRIST. Acts 4:12 says, “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” To enjoy the blessings that are found IN Christ (Ephesians 1:3), one must be united with him. The only way to be united with him is to be baptized into him (Romans 6:3-4).
3. A person is baptized in order to BECOME A CHILD OF GOD. Great privileges are provided to those who are “sons of God” (Ephesians 1:3). “For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ” (Galatians 3:26-27).
4. A person is baptized in order to BE BORN AGAIN. Jesus told Nicodemus one had to be “born again” to enter the kingdom of heaven. (John 3:3). This new birth is explained in verse 5 as being born “of water and the spirit.” The new birth is further explained in Romans 6:3-6 when one is baptized and raised to “walk a newness of life.” The “old” is buried and the “new” is raised.
5. A person is baptized in order to BECOME A NEW CREATURE. Baptism puts one into Christ (Romans 6:3, Galatians 3:27) and if “any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away, behold, all things are become new” (II Corinthians 5:17). In baptism, we are “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” (Colossians 2: 12).
6. A person is baptized in order to BE SAVED FROM THEIR SINS. “Repent and be baptized…for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38). ‘Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins” (Acts 22:16). “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved” (Mark 16:16, I Peter 3:21).
7. A person is baptized in order to BE CLEANSED BY CHRIST’S BLOOD. “Without shedding of blood is no remission” (Hebrews 9:22). HOW does Christ’s blood take away our sins? It washes them away. “Washed…from our sins in his own blood” (Revelation 1:5). “These …have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb” (Revelation 7:14). WHEN does it wash them away? When one is baptized! “Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins” (Acts 22: 16).
walkinlove,
It sounds like you have been hurt by some people from the church of Christ. I know it’s probably not my place to apologize for them, but I am sorry you were treated poorly. I hope I have been respectful and kind in my comments, and that your animosity doesn’t stem from anything I have done. If it does, then I am sincerely sorry. Let me know so I can fix it in future conversations with you and others.
However the term “church of Christ” is used today, my point was that the original purpose (and the continuing purpose for many) was to simply be the church that belongs to Christ. Anyone who tells you that you are going to hell just because the church you attend does not have “church of Christ” on it is wrong. They are departing from the original, pure intent of the description, and are using it as a name.
The church that belongs to Christ is defined by submission to Christ, not by the terminology ascribed to it.
About baptism……for all.
Let’s make one thing very clear so that discussion can proceed productively:
I am confident that no one who comments regularly here believes that the water saves. This is not taught in the church of Christ. No one is advocating, “just because you are baptized you are saved.”
Randy has done an excellent job of pointing out that we are only advocating simply what Scripture says: faith is more than belief, requires obedience, and includes baptism. [James 2:19; Romans 1:5; Galatians 3:26-27]
So Randy are you saying the same Jesus who forgave adultery of a woman through an act of mercy and was angry at the pharisees for following the letter of the law with their tithe but were missing judgment, mercy and faith, this same Jesus would condemn a soldier in the middle of the desert because there was not enough water to baptize him fully? And lets say there is enough water to place him 99.9999999% under water, is he saved or is he going to hell?
So that the God of salvation who chastised the pharisees for not using mercy through judgment, would because he became all mercy suddenly and completely turn and say uphold the letter it is the only way to be saved. Thus baptism becomes equal to the blood of Christ, and because we have lifted it to the level of Christ, it becomes a sin offering because the blood was not enough.
And if you think I am saying to stop baptism, I am not, actually I totally support full baptism under water. But the difference is that I see the Blood of Christ as the key factor in the remission of sins and not the water itself. I could quote the scriptures again but they are already listed above.
Following the law also has to be governed by judgment of the situation and applying mercy through the holly spirit. Otherwise you are in fact falling into the same trap of the pharisees who to protect themselves from accusation took the law to the full limits so they could always claim to be walking in the law.
That same mindset killed Jesus himself and I would argue that until judgment, mercy and faith are applied to the law you are in fact not following the law at all as Jesus states in Matthew 23:23. The requirement of the Law of baptism has to be filtered through the operation of mercy and judgment or you are simply following in the pharisees footsteps to protect against being accused of not following the law or breaking the law!
The scary thing is to do that the Holly Spirit has to be involved to give wisdom because things are no longer simple and black and white.
That is how I see this!
Walkinginlove, I didnt say anything, I gave you quite a few scriptures though – tell ya what, I will play devils advocate and provide you with some things I use to say: see below
“IN HIM you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; IN WHOM also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory” (Ephesians 1:13, 14). This verse clearly states one is sealed upon trusting/believing the gospel-good news.
Also, the Greek word ( eis ) could give us some problems if we are consistent with its meaning per our view “for the purpose of or towards”
“I indeed baptize you with water unto( eis ) repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire” (Matthew 3:11). It seems they were being baptized of John not towards or to gain repentance or for the purpose to repent, but on the basis of repentance.
“Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into ( eis ) Christ Jesus were baptized into ( eis ) His death?” (v. 3
Does this mean one is baptized for the purpose of death or toward His death?
Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all of our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, all were baptized into ( eis ) Moses in the cloud and in the sea” (vv. 1-2). Again, does this mean they passed thru the sea ( baptism ) for the purpose, towards Moses, or on the basis of ? Now with this in mind lets read Acts 2:38 again. Repent and be baptized for ( eis ) the remission of sins. Here, we always stick to our view “for the purpose of or towards” and we also neglect the subject, verb agreement here. Note, I am playing devils advocate.
I will say that I see a connection with baptism and forgiveness, but I am not so sure that each time the word baptism is used that it always means water. Even Romans 6, I still am not totally convinced that Paul was speaking of water but seemed to be focusing upon the Spiritual aspect and union with Christ. I know there is one baptism per the words of Paul, but the word baptism often is used other ways than that of water. I’m not so sure that baptized ( eis ) into Christ means water, seeing water alone could not place one in Christ. There is more to water baptism and I think its often missed. The baptism is Spiritual , its God placing one in Christ….does this occur when one is baptized in water – seems to be the case, but the water is not the true baptism, it’s the place one is united with Christ-baptized by the Spirit into one body. . Water baptism is just getting wet if the Spiritual reality isn’t there. I fear that many church of Christ folk have lost focus of the Spiritual aspect and made it all water or at least have made their focus water baptism…..the baptism is Spiritual….it’s God at work ( col. 2:11-12 ).
Randy,
That isn’t one baptism – it is two. As you correctly said, Paul stated there is ONE baptism. Can that ONE baptism, in water, have spiritual aspects? Of course! It is the spiritual aspects that matter most.
To say that today we have baptism into the Spirit and water baptism is to contradict Paul’s statement that there is only ONE baptism.
I agree Corey, but many people are so focused on the water, they overlook the spiritual aspects. I believe the one baptism to be both water and Spiritual, but one baptism. Im not saying the Spirit baptism that you hear from Benny Hinn and others….not at all
Corey, can you address these: IN HIM you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; IN WHOM also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory” (Ephesians 1:13, 14). This verse clearly states one is sealed upon trusting/believing the gospel-good news.
Also, the Greek word ( eis ) could give us some problems if we are consistent with its meaning per our view “for the purpose of or towards”
“I indeed baptize you with water unto( eis ) repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire” (Matthew 3:11). It seems they were being baptized of John not towards or to gain repentance or for the purpose to repent, but on the basis of repentance.
“Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into ( eis ) Christ Jesus were baptized into ( eis ) His death?” (v. 3
Does this mean one is baptized for the purpose of death or toward His death?
Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all of our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, all were baptized into ( eis ) Moses in the cloud and in the sea” (vv. 1-2). Again, does this mean they passed thru the sea ( baptism ) for the purpose, towards Moses, or on the basis of ? Now with this in mind lets read Acts 2:38 again. Repent and be baptized for ( eis ) the remission of sins. Here, we always stick to our view “for the purpose of or towards” and we also neglect the subject, verb agreement here. Note, I am playing devils advocate.
Randy,
I’m not sure where you’re going with those questions, or what exactly you mean by them. I’ll try to answer anyway.
The first point – you know the Bible never portrays belief as mere mental assent. Those who believe will do all the Lord has asked – including repentance, confession and baptism. If one doesn’t, their faith or belief is dead, per James.
The second point – John’s baptism was unto repentance. We know that the baptism wasn’t actual repentance, but an act to seal their repentance.
The third point – by being baptized into Christ, our old sinful self is put to death. We die spiritually as Christ died physically. We are put into Christ and into His death by our spiritual death and rebirth.
The fourth point – they were baptized into Moses, into unity with Moses, just as we are with Christ through baptism today.
I don’t know if I answered your questions, or if I fully understood them.
walkinlove,
But the difference is that I see the Blood of Christ as the key factor in the remission of sins and not the water itself.
That is what I see as well. The two do not have to be separated as scriptures link them together. As both Clint and I have said, the water does nothing but unite us with Christ and give us access to that blood.
Thanks Corey. I just wanted a reply so walkinginlove could read it…
99.99999% under the water is he saved and to be treated as was the woman in adultery who was acting in sin and still forgiven because of the situation that was brought on by the trap being set for Jesus? Or is he going to hell?
Is that your situation? Does that imaginary scenario have any bearing on 99.99999% of the world?
is this thing on?
no one in the old testament ie prior to the death of jesus was saved-born again. none……. jesus could forgive sin but he could not change their hearts and that includes the apostles. you must be born again, no exception. if there is even one exception to this statement then the death of christ was unnecessary and a waste. without the sheading of blood is no remission of sin. and since no one can talk about anything here without mentioning baptism , sure there is no way you can ignore the fact that you should be baptized.but that is one of many commands.since i and others here are considered by the “wheat” to be tares,let us grow and if we prove to be, then jesus will do the seperation. i dont believe he charged any of you with that task. he reserved it for himself.
lee
Walkinlove, go to the book of Acts and study the accounts where people were forgiven and tell what you find in common with each account? One common mistake is to read the epistles’ and use them solely to teach how one is saved, when the very people Paul addressed in the epistles can be found in the book of Acts….
walkinlove said:
“Thus to me if I were in Iraq in the middle of a battle and was with a dieing soldier and he wanted to be saved I would use a canteen and have faith that Jesus would have seen the situation for what it was and allow grace like he gave the woman.
But a CoC person would argue that you already had your chance and because you are not near water you are going to go to hell, sorry have a nice death and trip to hell!?!?!?! Where is mercy or faith in this concept?!?!?!?!”
Corey responded:
“As to your scenario about the dying soldier, you’re doing what so many here have done before you and countless more will do after you – you’re looking for an exception or loophole to excuse the disobedience of those that are perfectly healthy and able to be baptized. What will happen to that soldier? That is in the hands of God and His judgment will be righteous. I have no part in that man’s judgment on the last day. I can’t tell you what He will do, but I pray He will show mercy.”
Corey, and correct me if I am wrong walkinlove (and I hope I am not)-I don’t believe that anyone has used those scenarios as a loophole to excuse the disobedience. I think you are looking at it from a different angle than those who have brought these scenarios up are trying to portray. You actually believe in the grace and mercy of God and have shown that on here-leaving the judging up to Him, but guys like Johnny and his brood do not, and I think that is why the questions have been brought up-not to show, “Well if that guy can be saved at the last minute, then who cares what we do?” I have certainly never said or thought that, and I do not think anyone else here does. I believe the point of the “imaginary situations” is only to show that God does have grace and mercy, and that HE and HE ALONE is the one who saves and decides who will be with Him. This flies in the face of the guys we have talking about who sit on the throne of judgment and decide who makes it into heaven and who is out. God is not hung up on technicalities like if your little finger did not go in, or you did not have ALL of the knowledge prior to being baptized, or if just the exact “right” words were said. The most important thing in responding to Him is our hearts and that we realize our need for a Savior. If we love Him and desire to obey His commands, then everything else will fall into place. That is a completely different ideal than actually choosing not to do anything when we have the knowledge. If we choose to reject Him when we have heard and know what to do, then we are also rejected.
It would be wrong to use such an example to excuse any kind of disobedience or think that we can wait and make a confession on our death bed. That is not what God has called us to and certainly not why Jesus died on a cross. We are to live a sold out, radical life for Him once we have found Him-to pick up our crosses and carry it daily, to love others as He has loved us-sharing our Good News with the world…so no, while this type of example is not the norm-there are billions of people in this world, and I imagine there are instances such as these happening-I am not saying we should go around using them as an examples as I have shown, nor should they ever be used when talking to an unbeliever, but above all-God is in control. God is the one who delivers mercy and grace to those who love Him and seek Him-not so we can go running around in it and do whatever we please, but so we really can live freely in Him and not be in bondage to our sins or to the world. Mercy and grace is what I see in the story of the woman caught in adultery-it is not a story about the law, but about that we are ALL sinners in need of Jesus and His mercy and grace. Not one of us would be able to cast a stone because we all need Him-and THAT is the Good News of that story and of the Gospel…which literally means “Good News” 🙂
Lee,
I completely agree with you that no one was “born again” until Jesus sacrificed Himself so that we could be born again. I don’t know who is arguing against that.
I do have a problem with this statement:
sure there is no way you can ignore the fact that you should be baptized
“Should” be baptized is a teaching of men. “Must” be baptized is a teaching of the Lord. I don’t want to start an argument about semantics, but there is a big difference between “should” and “must”.
You are correct that only Jesus will separate the wheat from the tares. I care about your soul and I want to make sure you’re counted among the wheat. I think that we must cling to God’s word to ensure that we are on the right side on Judgment Day. I don’t say what I say here to tear you down or to “win” arguments. I say it because I want you to be saved. I hope you can see my motives are pure.
Corey
Katherine,
What you see in that example is not what I see. What I see in walkinlove’s example (like those given by Rick and Chris) is that they want me to say “sure, those people are saved without being baptized”. If I say that they’re going to say, “a-ha! See, you just admitted that people can be saved without baptism!”.
I can’t tell them that because the Bible doesn’t address these outlandish scenarios. The word deals with what the overwhelming majority are going to face. God will handle the exceptions – they shouldn’t be our concern until we’re faced with such a situation personally.
The problem I see is that none of the people who dream up these examples are in those situations, nor have they been in them, and rarely do they know anyone who has. Look at Chris’ big example of Diane O’Dell – she defied her own doctor to obey the Lord’s commandment. She might have clung to such examples as an excuse, but she chose obedience over “what if” or “what about”.
I know the thief on the cross arguments and don’t wish to go over them, but can we honestly say that Gods mercy and grace changed after the cross? I am not excusing obedience, but many people have died without the “knowledge” of baptism as a means of forgiveness via the blood of Christ. My friend just last year went to the doctor and died with liver failure, he was in the hospital bed swollen up to the point he could barely move, he prayed to God on his death bed ( his family told me ) and I just can’t say for sure that God would send him to hell. And this same man I told Johnny about…three weeks prior to him dying…
I will say Johnny apologized for not getting to the hospital to see my friend. I know he is busy and might have been setting up his tent around that time.
Randy,
My grandfather had a similar experience. What will become of people like that? It isn’t revealed to us. I look at this verse as a sort of answer:
Deuteronomy 29:29
” The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our sons forever, that we may observe all the words of this law.
My problem is with people who are perfectly healthy and able, yet reject baptism. They want to base their salvation on someone else’s unique situation. We can’t let our hope for God’s mercy on those people influence what we do.
The question is worth asking – why wait until we’re at death’s door to try and make a commitment to God? Where was our love for Him in our good days?
“Must” be baptized is a teaching of the Lord.”
Of course we must all respect each other but the above is right on. Taught in the history of the Faith as well as in Scripture. Denying the effects of baptism is ripping a seam out of the Churches “fabric”……so to speak.
I take the same position as you Corey and this is why Johnny would say youre liberal.
I hold these views too, but this is what makes Johnny call you, Clint, and others liberals. Johnny is straight forward and will say a person who waited till the last moment will be in hell. Its one thing to know and understand something and flatly reject it, but quite another when one never was told, or never understood. I will not play God and separate the wheat from the tares, that’s his job…..have you ever seen wheat and tares growing up together…..they look pretty dang the same….until “harvest time”
“Johnny is straight forward and will say a person who waited till the last moment will be in hell. ”
…and that is why he is wrong. Do a google search on “baptism by desire”
Randy wrote:
I take the same position as you Corey and this is why Johnny would say youre liberal.
Ask me again how much I care about what Johnny says.
In his defense, Johnny is only operating within that which is revealed in the word. There is nothing to lead us to believe that God will save the unimmersed, other than our hopes and those examples where God showed people mercy they didn’t deserve.
My concern is based upon this verse:
Matthew 7:2
“For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you.
Those who demand “perfection” (as it exists to them) will find God demanding the same perfection of them on the last day. I hope for mercy and try to show it to others in hopes that the same may be extended to me for my own imperfection. This is not to say that we shouldn’t strive for perfection (Heb 6:1), but an acknowledgment that we won’t ever reach it, at least not like Jesus did.
Well, “walkinlove”, Rick, and Chris will have to answer that-but that is what I was trying to say-I don’t think you are seeing that the way they are portraying it. I could be wrong, but I hope I am not. I also think those examples are more for Johnny and his brood-since they think they have the ability to decide who will make it to heaven or not.
You said:
“My problem is with people who are perfectly healthy and able, yet reject baptism. They want to base their salvation on someone else’s unique situation. We can’t let our hope for God’s mercy on those people influence what we do.
The question is worth asking – why wait until we’re at death’s door to try and make a commitment to God? Where was our love for Him in our good days?”
I completely agree with this-always have. It is most definitely one thing to completely reject what you have been taught than for someone else who is in a unique situation or those who have never heard. God’s grace and mercy does not cover those who reject Him or His commands because they are not following Him. But, we as humans cannot limit it either by deciding who is in or who is out-I know you are not doing that, but Johnny and his folks do, and that is not right.
We are given the choice to follow God and His commands, and we can say yes or no. Like I said before, we are called to live a sold out, radical life for Him-picking up our cross daily and following Him. It is not an easy journey, but God never said it would be-but we will have a reward in heaven when we choose His way.
randy,
im not making light of your friends death but john is not one i would have sent anyway. god is quite capable of saving your friend without any help and i use that term loosely from johnny.
corey,
if i have to say must to make it clearer, than must it is. it wasnt my point anyway. it is one of many things we are told to do. if a man knows to do good and does it not……………
remember i dont give one whit if anyone here believes im saved or not. if i bear fruit than i must be connected to vine. simple enough. your motives are fine im not questioning that. but what i will say is that you seem to want to connect yourself to the same vine that johnny is. i can tell you that i want no part of that.
lovest thou me? feed my sheep.
woe unto the pastors that scatter the flock.
corey, dont keep trying to pacify john you only embolden him.
ask yourself why would we do our best to live by the bible and yet avoid one important componant. i would be better off living this short life in what ever way pleased me. listen carefully ……..i know that no thing is hidden from god. that cant be made more clear. and i am not in the habit of trying to fool myself otherwise. i serve christ ,like it or not.
and for the record………i like it!
join me corey, the waters just fine.
lee
On June 17, 2008 at 2:28 pm lee Said:
randy,
im not making light of your friends death but john is not one i would have sent anyway. god is quite capable of saving your friend without any help and i use that term loosely from johnny
– I know that Lee, I was just pointing out that this man was lost and Johnny “could” have helped him towards the right way. I was unable to convince my friend about baptism, he just didnt understand it…I will leave that to God
talk about your worst case scenario.
jesus showed us that he had no problem accepting a man who waited to the last minuite,he was hanging next to him. also the thief wasnt saved just forgiven………
not at all the same. he got preached to by jesus in hell. i know sombody isnt going to like that. that is when the plan of god was revealed.
satan would never have crucified christ had he known the effect of his action. praise god!
lee
What concerns me most of all is how we have lifted up baptism to such a degree that we often neglect Christ and His work. We speak so much about baptism that you would think its our Lord and Savior. The reason being is we see so many “watering” down baptism to just a symbol or “an outward sign of an inner faith”.
Walkinlove, why do you not want to accept this? I just would like a good reason for not wanting to believe this…do you thinks its some work that we merit Gods grace….is that why you reject baptism as the place God chose to “heal the soul”. The leper when dipped was healed….right? Was this because he worked for it or earned it?? Or, was this because he trusted God to heal him and acted in faith?
“And this same man I told Johnny about…three weeks prior to him dying…”
Randy , can Johnny get to everyone. It’s not about Johnny. Why didn’t you talk to him. Maybe if you would have studied you wouldn’t needed Johnny to go. I see Johnny basically working himself to death trying to reach the folks around here. He goes without sleep , spends sooo much time away from his family, and basically lives eats and sleeps the work. It’s too late for your friend but there are others out there just as lost and you spend your time here fighting against the very people that are trying to get the gospel out and make a diffference. You say you understand about the importance of baptism and wanted this friend of yours to obey , But have you obeyed yourself? Not to my knowlege
Maybe Johnny should spend more time with his family than spending it ripping everyone else apart and trying to destroy them (his words, not mine). Even if he were actually preaching Good News, his family should come first.
Father forgive them for they do not know what they do!
I would assume that Satan is working to destroy the water supply on the planet because it will stop salvation!
1 Corinthians 15:29 is he asking a rhetorical question focused on resurrection, if not why is he not stopping this activity!?
I mean how is it that people were being baptized for the dead loved ones and there is nothing about correction for this that I find?
walkiinlove,
Your belittling of baptism is confusing. Your view is not compatible with Scripture or Church history. Do a study on baptism and put down the southern baptist books. Ok, I was being cute on the last part of the sentence there.
We will all break the laws, if you will, sometime or another. And we cannot pay the debt for it. So God provided a loophole for us and that was Jesus. He died on the Cross to pay our debt for us. When Jesus was on the Cross He said that it is done, our debt was paid by Him (paid in full). All we have to do is believe that and have faith in God. It’s hard for some people to have that much faith because man can never have that much grace. Gods grace is so awesome. Sometimes people have such a hard time seeing that, they think by doing things of our flesh will save them when God told us that all we have to do is have faith in Him and believe that Jesus died on the Cross and rose again for our sins and we are saved. That’s how great Gods grace is. Once we have faith the rest should follow and we should desire to do good works.
faithless,
have you asked for my money yet?
im still waiting.
lee
Lee you have to be the most dishonest person here. Supply the verses that meet the criteria you you will be paid. Since I can’t type slow enough for you to comprehend call Johnny 276-806-2150
“All we have to do is believe that and have faith in God.”
Jas 2:19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
(KJV
“On June 17, 2008 at 6:27 pm Katherine Said:
Maybe Johnny should spend more time with his family than spending it ripping everyone else apart and trying to destroy them (his words, not mine). Even if he were actually preaching Good News, his family should come first.”
Who is he ripping apart. Are you saying division started when he came?
For real, “faithful” were you trained to act this way? Is this what the school of Johnny teaches you to do?
“Truth” tries to speak TRUTH to you and you just shoot it down. Way to build the kingdom of God-should not that be our purpose instead of tearing everyone else done and attempting to “destroy” each other?
The greatest command is to love God and love each other. Why are we not focusing on that?!
All I know is that he is causing great division, and he is the one who has admitted that his purpose is to “defeat and destroy”-those came straight out of his mouth (well his fingertips). Now, tell me how that is not causing division?!
gee faithless do i have to be dishonest?
i know you wont pay but that wont stop me from reminding you how silly you are. btw are johns pants still on fire?
remember….. stop – drop – and roll.
lee
What I’m trying to say is that as mere people it’s hard for us to sometimes understand that there is someone who could love people that much no matter what we have done. He wants to save us. God created us, He loves us, Jesus paid the ultimate price for our sins. Just knowing this we should want to fall on our knees pray to God to forgive us for our sins. And we should want to follow Him. Thing is we have to believe that what Jesus did for us saved us.
corey,
i left you a post, talk to me
lee
Randy explain to me how the thief on the cross is covered under the old testament law when he died after Christ? His legs were broken because he was alive, Christ was not because he was dead.
Why is it covered under the old testament?
Matthew 12:7 But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.
8For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.
My commentary talks about how the pharisees were more concerned with the ritual of the temple that they missed it’s purpose, that of bringing people closer to God.
So we have a God who is more concerned with Mercy then the ritual, yet now that the Good News is here, the ritual is more important then mercy!
jp Church History is full of hard harts and pride, I could care less about it except to, avoid being offended by it, understand how we got to this mess and what sins my fathers gave that people can be dieing in a hospital and according to the rituals practiced here, go to hell without anyone even caring?!?!??!!
TO BAD YOU HAD YOUR CHANCE is now our Good News? God have mercy on us all!
The only Good News now I see is this rotten termite infested house is close to falling as Jesus said when accused of being in league with the devil in Matthew 12:25 Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand.
And while he was defending himself, he was also speaking a truth that only Satan listened to. The end of Church in America is coming closer and closer to an end and while our house is burning and we are arguing about what color the fire hose should be and how long our enemy, Satan is slowing moving things in place to end public meetings and worship here.
There will come a time when same sex marriage will be forced on churches, the law may protect now, but if the constitution can be manipulated by the enemy to murder the unborn then normal laws can be changed to protect gay couples who are being attacked by those evil church people, at least that is how the non-believers will see it, and we will finally reap all the bad seed we and our fathers and mothers before us have sown in this land.
And after reading the heartlessness of faithfuls post, I am not so sure I should not be in prayer for the scythe to fall that much faster. It would be better to see it end then to have another little one harmed because our accepted theology shows us that God needs help on his thrown to judge others and drive them from the cross instead of to it.
It would be better we all die now, then one fall into sin because of us and go to hell!
Randy, I for one, weep both for the harsh things said to you by faithful and for your loss and I believe that the God of mercy can and will grant grace in this matter, I have faith in his mercy!
jp the passage I found about people being baptized for their dead loved ones, I found today, I had not read it before now had I ever heard of it at all. I asked a question here because of that, hoping that one of those who know all things had an answer to why it was going on and not being stopped as false teaching.
“He goes without sleep , spends sooo much time away from his family, and basically lives eats and sleeps the work.”
Ahem…
1st Timothy 3:5,
If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God’s church?
If true, this speaks volumes.
Robertson sounds like a man obsessed with his work.
No wonder he can’t comprehend the grace of God.
On June 17, 2008 at 5:57 pm faithful Said:
“And this same man I told Johnny about…three weeks prior to him dying…”
Randy , can Johnny get to everyone. It’s not about Johnny. Why didn’t you talk to him.
– maybe you looked over the part where I said, I did talk to him and he didnt understand, and I said Johnny may have been busy.
Faithful says: you spend your time here fighting against the very people that are trying to get the gospel out and make a diffference. You say you understand about the importance of baptism and wanted this friend of yours to obey , But have you obeyed yourself? Not to my knowlege.
Faithful, you do not know anything about me, other that what Johnny has told you. The one here spending time fighting against everyone is you and your buddies. I just speak out against the ultr-hyper-cons and if the shoe fits wear it. I have met many church of Christ people/preachers since you guys and almost all dosagree with the way you guys act and treat people – are they lost becauase they show love for one another? btw, I told you already, I do attend a place where the church of Christ meets…like I said, you do not know anything about me…
On June 17, 2008 at 9:57 pm walkinlove Said:
Randy explain to me how the thief on the cross is covered under the old testament law when he died after Christ? His legs were broken because he was alive, Christ was not because he was dead.
– There are many ways to look at this. What testamant was the thief under “when” Jesus told him ” this day you will be with me…
Plus, he seems to have had some knowledge of Jesus, seeing he made the comment about the kingdom, so its possible he was baptized under Johns baptism. Even if he didnt, Jesus could still forgive him – I mean He was God in the flesh…
From walkinlove: My commentary talks about how the pharisees were more concerned with the ritual of the temple that they missed it’s purpose, that of bringing people closer to God.
So we have a God who is more concerned with Mercy then the ritual, yet now that the Good News is here, the ritual is more important then mercy!
– and this concerns me today with those who lift up baptism to such a degree that you rarely hear Christ preached.
24 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:
25 But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.
26 But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.
27 So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?
28 He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?
29 But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.
Randy , I’ve asked you repeatedly if you have obeyed the gospel and you continue to not answer. So the only conclusion we can come to is the you understand but refuse to obey.
Randy , maybe the man did understand but didn’t obey because he doesn’t want to hear do as I say not as I do. You have never said that you obeyed. Some people reject the truth , you should know that first hand
Chris I’ve met Johnny’s family , . Have you? They are wonderful , well ballanced people. You have been exposed as the village hypocrite and I think people even wonder about your mental state. I’ve never met a loving family that doesn’t want more time with a loving father. You twist my words just as you do the scriptures. I hope you come to your self and repent so you can live down the fool you’ve made of yourself in the public eye
But how can the thief be covered under a covenant that has died along with Christ? Christ is dead by the time the thief dies, he dies under the new covenant, unbaptized, and any sinful thoughts he might have had while having his bones broken to speed his death were uncovered except for the blood that was shed for him just a few feet away.
He had no relationship except to realize he was lost under the law and his only hope was the God of mercy who’s son was hanging beside him. Be believed who Christ was and he died covered under the perfect lamb that was already dead. The sacrifice had happened when he died.
But we must uphold the law as written any anything that is counter to our understanding of the law has to be explained away or denied or avoided. Thus each of us puts the complete truth into a small box so that we can feel better about ourselves because we have compete structure of who is and is not saved.
The Thief was the first under the blood!
In other words he was that small child the Jesus talks about, he had no idea how it would work only that he would trust that it would and his faith was rewarded by mercy from the Father, since Jesus only said what the Father told him to say.
Walking in love , are you confusing us with the mormons on the baptism for the dead?
What is an idol? Is it only an object that you would worship instead of God, or could it be a creed or doctrine that becomes so important that it can not be changed or our God who we defined in it, would possibly no longer exist?
Where did the rigid, legalistic, patternistic wing of the Churches of Christ come from? They got their start from a man named Daniel Sommer. Few question his zeal or love for the Lord. He spent his life devoted to promoting his vision of God’s will for the church. Unfortunately, for the bulk of his life he had failed to grasp God’s purpose! Ignorant of His grace, and the freedom one has in Christ Jesus, he proclaimed a religion of rigidity, and perhaps did more than any other individual to bring about deep divisions. Sadly, we have men like Johnny Robertson, and others, who follow the same road. Like the apostle Peter, who wept bitterly after denying Jesus Christ, Daniel Sommer spent the latter days of his life lamenting his years of misguided maliciousness. Sadly, he was unable to undo the harm he had inflicted upon the church, and the fruit of his labor is still evident in the rigid, legalistic, patternistic wing of the Churches of Christ. Sommer sowed his seed well, and the tares that have grown up all around us today are the tragic result of his decades of devotion to division.
Many men and women within our faith-heritage today, myself included, are seeking diligently, and daily, to counter the effects of this man’s teaching. It is difficult work, and the opposition at times is fierce, but somehow I think Sommer would applaud our efforts, as would brother Ketcherside, who also came to his senses later in life. My prayers are that Johnny also come to his senses. Although much damage was done by these few men, and being done by men like Mr. Robertson, yet our Movement is not beyond repair, and the vision of our fathers in the faith is still just as valid. May God help us all to abandon these foolish, feuding factions, and may He guide us to the point of recapturing the vision of One Body united in the Lord Jesus Christ. To the Sommerites and Johnny’s of today, I issue this plea: Let us reason together; let us dialogue; let us tear down the walls that divide us; let us all truly be One Family to the glory of our Father.
AND, YES…FAITHFUL, I AM SAVED/FORGIVEN !!!!!!!!
walkinlove wrote:
Randy explain to me how the thief on the cross is covered under the old testament law when he died after Christ? His legs were broken because he was alive, Christ was not because he was dead.
The old law did not pass away until Jesus had completely fulfilled it. It was not fulfilled upon Jesus’ death but upon his resurrection. Certainly you wouldn’t say that Christianity could exist prior to the resurrection of Christ. The thief died before all had been fulfilled.
“Church of Christ in Name Only” demands that one must “obey”. “Church of Christ in Name Only” believes that we can lose our salvation if we are not obedient. “Church of Christ in Name Only” demands that we be baptized in order to acquire salvation. But if this is the case then even if one is baptized and is saved according to the “Church of Christ in Name Only”, one can still sin anytime afterward and lose their salvation. Maintaining salvation is of utmost importance to the “Church of Christ in Name Only”.
Thus, the logical course of action would be to begin baptizing a person so that he/she can be saved, and continue to hold them underwater in order to drown them and make sure that no opportunities for sinning (and subsequent loss of salvation) takes place.
Of course this means that there will be no more “Church of Christ in Name Only” but according to these people they are the only true church, so they will no doubt have the faith in God that is demanded of them per obedience.
So Johnny, James, and Norm: which one of you will be the first to demonstrate on live television that you will follow Christ’s example and be “obedient unto death”?
Why are you being so obstinate? Why are you being so disobedient? Why do you call yourselves the only true Christians when even one sin will cause you to lose your salvation, according to your doctrines?
Speaking of which, at what point does one lose salvation in your cult? Is it after one sin? After ten? After seventy? Do you keep a running tally of your sins in order to know when you’re in the “danger zone” and need to be re-baptized? Don’t you want to go to Heaven? Then why don’t you die to yourself – literally – and prove it, per your own doctrines?
Yes, you’ll be dead on Earth but alive in the presence of Christ, which is what you want anyway… isn’t it?
What’s that? You don’t want to die to keep from sinning?
You’ve got no choice left then per your doctrines, do you? You’ll eventually sin and will lose your salvation. And will go to Hell.
It’s all logical.
One of these days, the “Church of Christ in Name Only” will realize how it’s doctrinally trapped and we’ll see them do a mass suicide in Lake Reidsville, sorta like the Heaven’s Gate cult over ten years ago. Either that, or Johnny and James and Norm will flee back to Texas for marching orders from their mysterious millionaire sponsor and then pop up somewhere else (probably Idaho) to pull their scam on another rural area.
On that note, someone on my blog made a very point the other day. For all their money, why aren’t Johnny and James and Norm and their “Church of Christ in Name Only” cultists able to get airtime on a much better television station?
They seem able to afford it if they wanted it. One local station has a reach that so far as I know goes from Stokes County all the way to perhaps west Raleigh. And it wouldn’t cost hardly any more either. So why aren’t these “good ole boys from Texas” giving God their best fruits and using their “talents” wisely?
Unless it is that the management of WGSR is the only one in the area that was willing/desperate to sell them the airtime, because all the other stations are too upright/respectable to cater to them?
It was such a good point that it’s made me reconsider how seriously we should take either the “Church of Christ in Name Only” and the station carrying them.
And that being: not seriously at all.
On June 18, 2008 at 7:22 am faithful Said:
Randy , maybe the man did understand but didn’t obey because he doesn’t want to hear do as I say not as I do. You have never said that you obeyed. Some people reject the truth , you should know that first hand
– let me go a bit slower with you, he did not understand baptism as you and I. And, as you can tell many people do not understand baptism as you and I. Its not that most are rejecting baptism – most honestly do not understand it as you and I. Cant you even “understand” this !!??
lee wrote:
corey,
i left you a post, talk to me
lee
I don’t know what you’d have me say to that.
“Walking in love , are you confusing us with the mormons on the baptism for the dead?”
No I simply saw the scripture that IS IN the bible that talks about people being baptized for the dead and so no “may your loins be burned by McDonald’s Coffee” coming from Paul, one who would uphold the law.
And I asked what a child would ask, why is that the case?
I realize that it is not part of mainstream Christian practice or is it even talked about because I have not heard it in any teaching at all.
The debate between AC and Johnny…do you think AC purposely with intent sought to deceive people, or did he sincerely believe what he was teaching about baptism. And to be honest, AC’s focus/faith was more upon Christ and His work and not upon baptism. As I keep saying – we are so focused upon baptism, we have made it our God and savior, and often faith seems to be directed at baptism, rather than Christ. We need to preach a Christ centered gospel and stop playing God as if we are the ones who separate the tares from the wheat. Why not preach Christ and His work and then allow God to work on their hearts and then direct them to how they can have peace and eternal life through Jesus Christ, and not make it some 5 step formula in to a club or something. Preach it like Peter in Acts 2…don’t just straight to Acts 2:38 and beat people over the head with it….show them through scripture the love of Christ and how that Christ died, shedding His blood for them and rose from the dead to save them by His life…. lets turn our focus upon Christ …
Randy, I did some quick research into Daniel Sommer.
If the teachings of the local “Church of Christ” cultists is a pathogenic disease, Sommer would be Patient Zero. It pretty much all seems to start with him.
I found this quote by Sommer particularly interesting…
“In closing up this address and declaration, we state that we are impelled form a sense of duty to say, that all such innovations and corruptions to which we have referred, that after being admonished, and having had sufficient time for reflection, if they do not turn away from such abominations, that we can not and will not regard them as brethren.“
And one biographer noted that “It was while a student at Bethany that Sommer began what others would call being a ‘watchdog’ for the brotherhood. If he saw, what he deemed a deviation from the apostolic order he felt compelled to attack it.”
Now, who does this sound like?
Hyper-legalist that he was, Sommer did come to regret what he had done in his later years. But by then it was too late and the damage was done. And now we’re having to deal with it.
Carl Ketcherside came right after him…but he too later changed.
Chris, maybe you should google Johnnys email name ( Joe Blue ) I find it almost funny that Johnny says not to follow after man, but then uses “Joe Blue” for his email name.
http://www.therestorationmovement.com/blue.htm
From walkinlove: My commentary talks about how the pharisees were more concerned with the ritual of the temple that they missed it’s purpose, that of bringing people closer to God.
So we have a God who is more concerned with Mercy then the ritual, yet now that the Good News is here, the ritual is more important then mercy!
Randy replied:
– and this concerns me today with those who lift up baptism to such a degree that you rarely hear Christ preached.
But that is the symptom of the disease, the disease actually has to do with our fear of being wrong and not knowing all. So we build our God based on the part of scripture our personality is drawn to, so that we build a black and white system of laws and do not allow God to do what God does best, administrate mercy into that black and white system. So we ignore mercy because it would mean that we no longer have a cut and dry system of handling God and we then have to rely on him to help give us wisdom in those laws. Black and White without mercy is actually a faithless religion in one aspect because we have all the answers and thus, we can dare to sit on God’s Throne and pass judgment on all who do not follow as we follow.
Under that system if Jesus were here today, he would be declared a false teacher simply because he would be breaking the law as we see it. Thus we become the modern day pharisees! Passing judgment, “you know the law” they should have followed the law and sorry they had their chance!
So the Christ you follow, you would kill, if you could get away with it, or at least attempt to drive out to save your version of God.
How far are we from:
2 Timothy 3:1 But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. 2People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, 4treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— 5having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them.
6They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over weak-willed women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, 7always learning but never able to acknowledge the truth. 8Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so also these men oppose the truth—men of depraved minds, who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected. 9But they will not get very far because, as in the case of those men, their folly will be clear to everyone.
In our boldness are we starting to show some of the signs above? Surely the name it and claim it teachings fall into the group that love money and their pleasure and call anything that stands in its way or against it, of the devil.
But at the same time we also are closing in on the above, through our single mindedness towards the law, the law, the law. The law is all that matters if they do not listen to the law then, to bad so sad they had their chance.
This is NOT the Jesus who wept over the city, who showed mercy when mercy was not deserved by the law!
2 Timothy 3:0You, however, know all about my teaching, my way of life, my purpose, faith, patience, love, endurance,11persecutions, sufferings—what kinds of things happened to me in Antioch, Iconium and Lystra, the persecutions I endured. Yet the Lord rescued me from all of them.
If we focus only on the law, then we miss what Paul was saying and the importance of love and mercy.
Balance is the key, but we have no ability to be balanced because we drive anyone away from OUR Church because they do not have the same focus as we do. Thus what was supposed to be the body is now only one part of the body and those who would focus on mercy are prone to slip into an anything goes teaching, and those prone to the law into a, its the law and only the law and mercy has no place in the law. The problem with allowing people with different focus to be together is that we no longer are going to be right all the time and we are going to have to use mercy and love along with patience with each other as we put forward the case for law or mercy. Thus the black and white we all want to be under to feel safe has to become gray and thus we are less sure.
I submit there are no Churches who are an actual body, but only part of that body because we have no ability to put up with a part that is not like us.
Is that how it is supposed to be?
If I may ask, what denomination to you belong to walkinlove?
Chris wrote:
Thus, the logical course of action would be to begin baptizing a person so that he/she can be saved, and continue to hold them underwater in order to drown them and make sure that no opportunities for sinning (and subsequent loss of salvation) takes place.
How logical! In one post you suggest murder and suicide for those you oppose.
Speaking of which, at what point does one lose salvation in your cult? Is it after one sin? After ten? After seventy? Do you keep a running tally of your sins in order to know when you’re in the “danger zone” and need to be re-baptized?
I doubt you care if anyone gives a scriptural answer, but I’m going to give it to you:
Galatians 5:4:
You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace
Those who seek to be justified by something other than Christ (the old law, their own opinions) CAN fall from grace. It can’t be any clearer.
Romans 6:1-2:
1What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin so that grace may increase? 2May it never be! How shall we who died to sin still live in it?
There is no magic number of sins that causes us to fall from grace. As you can see it is when we willfully live in that sin, when we’re purposely disobedient that grace ceases to cover those sins.
Hebrews 6:4-6:
4For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.
Those who obey, but then reject Christ and go back into the world not only have they fallen away but they are clearly worse off than they were before they first obeyed.
Revelation 2:10
Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.
So, are we to follow Christ and be faithful unto death to receive the crown of life, or can we just follow Him for a while, then do what we want and expect the crown?
Those who remain faithful, who remain the Lord’s sheep will not be snatched from His hand (John 10:28-29). Those who chose the world over the Lord are not His sheep and become the goats that belong to Satan.
I agree with what you say Corey although I think the writer of Hebrews was addressing those who desired to go back under law/sacrifices. That’s why the writer said there is no other sacrifice for sin and it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame. It’s either Christ or nothing and to go back to the old system which was only a figure would be willful sinning, meaning. I don’t think the writer was addressing sins/sinning, but the sin of rejecting Christ and his sacrifice.
Randy what does that matter, I call myself a Christian. And after seeing what CoC does to others I would protect those I fellowship with, by giving up my life before I allowed them to risk falling into sin though offense of CoC practices.
A question Corey, a woman has been hurt several times by previous Churches. Her husband is a pastor and serving the Lord in his Church. She is not in church because of her wounds and offense made by the church. Does he step down from serving since his house in not in order? By the law he should isn’t that correct?
Oh before we play the semantic games with my post, replace his with the in the line of his church before you consider me saying it was the pastor’s church.
That’s actually a good answer walkinlove
On June 18, 2008 at 10:37 am walkinlove Said:
Randy what does that matter, I call myself a Christian.
walkinlove,
#1: What other people have done to us shouldn’t stop us from assembling for worship and taking part in the work of the church. If she has a problem with someone then she ought to follow the Lord’s instructions for dealing with those situations.
#2: There is no commandment that an elder should have a faithful/believing wife. However, with those kinds of problems at home he should consider that he has important things to take care of there first. He can’t be held accountable for her soul, but I don’t see how he can feed the flock when he can’t reach his own wife. If I were in his situation I would step down as an elder, at least until I took care of my own household.
Corey,
“How logical! In one post you suggest murder and suicide for those you oppose.”
No. Just doing something that I often do…
Demonstrating absurdity by being absurd.
if salvation isnt by good works, then how can one become unsaved by bad works? Who can claim they do not sin? Im not saying one can live like the devil and be saved…heck, why would a true Christian even want to live in sin? As you can tell, I am somewhere in the middle on this issue…oh boy, I bet faithful will judge me to hell for having a diff. view and understanding.
I think its a lack of faith to believe Christ will lose a sheep he saves. We are kept by Gods power per tha bible and sealed forever by the Spirit…to believe I can undo what God done is a lack of faith in Christ.
The Lord will protect you from all evil; He will keep your soul. The Lord will guard your going out and your coming in from this time forth and forever(Psalm 121:7,8 NASB).
Holy Father, keep them in Thy name, the name which Thou hast given Me, that they may be one, even as We are(Romans 17:11 NASB).
And stand he will, for the Lord is able to make him stand (Romans 14:4 NASB).
Who shall also confirm you to the end, blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God is faithful, through whom you were called into fellowship with His Son (1 Corinthians 1:8,9 NASB).
For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus (Philippians 1:6 NASB).
The God who gives perserverance and encouragement (Romans 15:5 NASB).
Randy,
You’re trying to force a framework that doesn’t apply. You’re trying to make sin = bad works. Sin is bad actions, but it is also more than that. It is bad thoughts. It is knowing to do good but not doing it. Wherever sin is, God is not. If we’re wallowing in sin,living day in and day out in it, then God cannot be with us.
Don’t you believe that you play a part in salvation? Don’t you believe that there are acts of obedience required before God gives us salvation? When you understand that it shouldn’t be much of a leap from there to understanding that we have a part in maintaining that salvation. I’ll ask you what I asked Chris:
Revelation 2:10
Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.
So, are we to follow Christ and be faithful unto death to receive the crown of life, or can we just follow Him for a while, then do what we want and expect the crown?
However, 1 John 2:19 says in dealing with antichrists, “They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, in order that it might be shown that they all are not of us,” (NASB). I see this verse saying two things: First, that if it appears that false teachers leave because they are not regenerated to begin with. In other words, if someone had salvation and then lost it, it was because they never were saved in the first place. Second, it says that if someone is saved, they will remain in the faith.
Nevertheless, there are different positions on this issue. One position states that it is possible to lose your salvation, but only if you want to. In other words, having been set free from sin, the person is then able by an act of will to deny the Lord and desire not to be a part of Him any longer.
Another position states that it is possible to lose your salvation if you sin too much. Then you need to go and confess your sin and get saved again. This has obvious problems because it could lead to someone trusting in his works and God’s grace to be saved.
Another position states that it is not possible at all to lose your salvation, that because Jesus has redeemed you and you are a new creation (2 Cor. 5:17) you cannot, then, turn your back on God. Since attaining salvation did not depend on anything you did, keeping it does not depend on anything you do, then also, losing it can’t occur because of anything you do.
Unfortunately, this topic has caused far too much friction in the church today. My hope is that people who disagree, can learn to live harmoniously with their eyes on Jesus.
Corey: So, are we to follow Christ and be faithful unto death to receive the crown of life, or can we just follow Him for a while, then do what we want and expect the crown?
Randy: Im not saying that at all. I am just pointing out that we work because we are saved, not to be saved. We should live Holy and godly, but not of fear but compelled from love. I have looked at this from every angle and am somewhere in the middle…
So corey in your answer he has to step down. Thus he goes home and tells his wife, and she adds that to the list of offenses she has against the church driving her further from healing the wounds. Even though she was a pastors wife she, because of her wounds, was actually a babe in Christ.
Judgment, dictated that perhaps adding another church wound to an already wounded church person, who is blinded by the offenses of the past from another church, is not the best choice and that it might actually send them from the Cross totally! That mercy should apply to give God a change to work through those church wounds and because of that act of mercy she has an example of a Church actually following God’s FULL teaching of balance between law and mercy and Acting Christlike in its decision making.
The story I speak of is a true story and the woman is back in Church because of the judgment, of the leaders, through relying on the Holy Spirit who made the decision to allow mercy to filter the law in that case because they realized that to follow the law to the last letter might protect them from ridicule, but it would kill the woman to do so!
In another instance, they might have to step down if the Holy Spirit confirmed the law should fall without mercy because the strong medicine of the law was what the believer needed to experience to be healed of his/her sin.
Walking in Judgment, mercy and faith is a dangerous place, it allows those prone to law only to point fingers like the pharisees did at Jesus. It is much easier to just say “you should have obeyed the law”. Because you are protected with the defense of chapter and verse and most people with a mercy gift would grant mercy to you for making that choice instead asking what about Matthew 23:23!
How many people have to be killed by blind application of the law of Christ, before the Church wakes up to mercy?
Randy wrote:
First, that if it appears that false teachers leave because they are not regenerated to begin with. In other words, if someone had salvation and then lost it, it was because they never were saved in the first place.
Careful. That sounds like judging someone’s motives. So many here say you can’t judge the motives behind someone’s baptism and whether or not it was scriptural baptism. Then we get to this subject and the same people will judge the person’s motives and say, “well, they weren’t really saved in the first place if they went back into the world”. What a double standard. Hebrews 6:4-6 clearly mentions those that are partakers of God’s grace and go back into the world. As grace is only for Christians that means they were saved at one point!
Randy wrote:
Second, it says that if someone is saved, they will remain in the faith.
This is partially true in that those who remain faithful cannot be taken from the Lord who purchased them with His own blood. However, it is really the other way around – those who remain in the faith are saved, not those who are saved will remain in the faith.
Titus 1:6 An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient.
In my question the leader is not making his wife submit to the law of assembly, thus he is not upholding the law and this disobedient in forcing his wife to attend Church!
this disobedient should be thus disobedient.
So corey in your answer he has to step down. Thus he goes home and tells his wife, and she adds that to the list of offenses she has against the church driving her further from healing the wounds. Even though she was a pastors wife she, because of her wounds, was actually a babe in Christ.
How is this an offense of the church? If the man tells his wife that he feels he needs to tend to her spiritual needs before he feels worthy to shepard the church, is he not showing that he has a great concern for her?
Again I’ll ask – why didn’t the woman confront those who had hurt her in the manner the Lord gave in Matthew 18? Shouldn’t she care enough for those who hurt her to go to them that they might correct the problem and repent of any wrongdoing?
Concerning the thief on the cross, can we not just allow room for mystery? We know what Sacred Scripture teaches concerning baptism and we know what christians universal have taught since the beginning (that baptism removes the stain of original sin) however, a better answer to the question is “he was ” going to be with Jesus in paradise…because He was Jesus. While on earth, Jesus could do anything. The thief called out to Him and Jesus honored this soul. I am sure we can assume that if the thief was not nailed to the cross, he would have been baptized. He could not. Lets not try to find a systematic answer to every quetion concerning the faith. Jesus saved him because he could. This does not negate what scriptures teach and why we must all be baptized. Men, women and children.
Corey: Don’t you believe that you play a part in salvation?
Randy: Yes, but they do not merit salvation.
Corey: Don’t you believe that there are acts of obedience required before God gives us salvation?
Randy: Yes, but they do not merit salvation.
Corey: When you understand that it shouldn’t be much of a leap from there to understanding that we have a part in maintaining that salvation.
Randy: No way, no how. Do I help God keep me saved? Faithful is He who called me and He will do it. I am faithful to Him, not to earn or maintain my standing, but because he first loved me. Nothing I could do would be enough to maintain salvation, seeing God requires perfection and that’s why we trust Christ to keep us saved, seeing he is the only once ever to be perfect.
Corey: So, are we to follow Christ and be faithful unto death to receive the crown of life, or can we just follow Him for a while, then do what we want and expect the crown
Randy: Yes, we are to be faithful, but no matter how faithful one might be, he is never perfect nor sinless. We are faithful because He is faithful. Either we trust our faithfulness to earn and maintain our salvation, or we trust Christ and His faithfulness. Will we expect a crown of life by merit, by perfect law keeping, by being sinless, or by being faithful? If you are saying faithfulness is not sinning, all will be lost.
Maybe you should explain what being faithful is – Its not a live without sin, nor a life of perfection, not saying that shouldn’t be the goal, but that’s not what John meant by being faithful…is, not one person will get the crown of life.
I will not be able to reply today, but will be at home Thursday and Friday. One question though, would I be dis-fellowshipped for holding my views on this issue?
“First, that if it appears that false teachers leave because they are not regenerated to begin with. In other words, if someone had salvation and then lost it, it was because they never were saved in the first place.”
This sounds too much like calvinism. We know from scripture that one can walk away from the faith. Sin is an ugly disease.
Randy,
Just as our acts of obedience don’t merit salvation, our faithfulness to Christ will not merit eternal life. The things we’re to do pale in comparison to what God gives us when we do them. However, that doesn’t take away our responsibilities. Being faithful doesn’t mean sinless – you know that isn’t what I mean. But if I give up Christ, renounce Him or live in my sins without repentance then I am not faithful.
You asked:
would I be dis-fellowshipped for holding my views on this issue?
I guess that depends on where you are and who you’re dealing with. It seems that some would quickly put you out for such a view. I would not. However, if I were an elder where you attended I wouldn’t allow you to teach. I would try to bear with you and teach you the truth. I think the elders at my congregation would do the same.
I think we are on the same page Corey, just from diff angles. Anyways, got ti run for a while. TTYL
“But if I give up Christ, renounce Him or live in my sins without repentance then I am not faithful”.
– AGREED
JP said:”Jesus could do anything. ”
I would to say it appears he could not, offense and lack of faith in his home area kept him from doing many miracles:
Mark 6:4But Jesus, said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house.
5And he could there do no mighty work, save that he laid his hands upon a few sick folk, and healed them.
6And he marveled because of their unbelief. And he went round about the villages, teaching.
Also in the following it appears his people stopped him:
Matthew 23: 37O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
So I would say we limit him in some ways to doing everything he wanted to do based on the above passage. And thus to say he can do it because he is Jesus does not appear to be completely accurate teaching.
So JP I would argue that in the Thief’s case, Matthew 23:23 was again being used by Jesus to judge the mans situation and grant him mercy, that he was never in violation of his own law because mercy plays a part in that law and that there is no mystery in this case because the thief was covered under the blood but judged with mercy under the law!
Now that may uncross some T’s and un-dot some I’s for people who are seeking a black and white answer to salvation, but it is how it appears to me.
Otherwise the “he can do what he wants when he wants” violates his own laws. And how just would that make him. Do as I say not as I do!
Otherwise he would not have washed feet as an example of leadership, he would have just sat in the Pilot in Express in comfort and dictated to the disciples!
walkinlove, you know scripture like one that was in the church of Christ 🙂
I know what JP was getting at, but I think most people realize that Jesus works within the rules that He established for Himself, the same is true for the Father. God cannot lie scriptures tell us, so we can’t say that God can do anything, because He has put limits upon Himself.
Jesus always worked within His self-given limits. He never did anything against a person’s free will, which explains the above mentioned verses from Matthew and Mark. Jesus never forced anyone to accept Him.
Again, the thief on the cross as an example of salvation today simply can’t be applied as Jesus had not been resurrected at that point. Without the resurrection there is no Christianity. Unless you can find a time machine and go back to Calvary, climb up on a cross beside the Lord and have Him speak your sins forgiven this example will never apply to you.
corey because he was going to be asked by the elders to step down.
She did not go back to the other church under Matthew 18 because it was their leadership what had removed them and even if she was able to process it properly there would have been no second step simply because they were at the top of the Matthew 18 cycle and could hardly judge correctly a matter that concerned their own actions.
So the wound was caused by the church, it was their leadership.
Randy I am learning as this goes, thats why I stop and asked a question about a scripture that goes cross grain against what I have seen taught at times. I am very much still working out my own salvation.
Secondly Randy, the pharisees, if memory serves knew a large amount of scripture by memory, if not all of the old testament. Note I am relying on memory and do not have a verse to back it up.
Yet because they were blinded by a black and white system of handling their laws they saw these acts of mercy as violations if those laws.
Thus I contend that if the US allowed CoC to kill people for violating scripture, that Jesus would be put to death, if they did not know who he was that is, and that would be true of all Churches that do not allow Mathew 23:23 to adjudicate their application of the law!
From 1 Timothy 3:
5(If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God’s church?)
7He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil’s trap.
The other elders appear to be trying to follow the word of God by asking him to step down. We’ve already addressed verse five (which does have great bearing here), but I think verse seven is even more important in this matter. What will outsiders say about a man chosen to lead the flock who has a wife that will not assemble? Outsiders would say, “he can’t even get his own wife to go with him. Why should I?” This gives the outsiders an opportunity to attack the church, and if I was in that man’s shoes I wouldn’t want to give anyone such an opportunity.
As to the second point, you originally said that she had been hurt before the other elders wanted her husband to step down. Were those other wounds caused by the leadership? What were they and why were they not handled in the spirit of Matthew 18?
On June 18, 2008 at 1:17 pm walkinlove Said:
Randy I am learning as this goes
– me too dude.
Corey they were following his word by not having him step down! If they had just gone by the letter of the law, she would have had the last nail driven into the coffin. They made the call based on judgment, they also knew they he was not responsible for the anger his wife felt at the church.
Without judgment, mercy, and faith, Jesus is a law breaker!
They were within their rights to do so, but they could have gone the other way as well. This is why elders are to meet such important qualifications – so they can make the right decision in such delicate matters.
You didn’t answer my questions though:
As to the second point, you originally said that she had been hurt before the other elders wanted her husband to step down. Were those other wounds caused by the leadership? What were they and why were they not handled in the spirit of Matthew 18?
Corey said:
“He never did anything against a person’s free will”
Saul’s conversion, while technically his choice, was close to a do it or die situation. So I would say there is some question as to that depending in how you see free will. Why blind Saul?
And i have not studied it in detail.
Also I would clarify that, in the situation of the woman, her husband was not the senior pastor and was kicked out when the Senior Pastor was let go. The Church was growing very fast and was controlled by one family. And while only God can say for sure, it would appear that they were afraid of losing control of the church.
Corey just because something is in someones rights does not mean they should do it!
1 Corinthians 8:133Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.
Clearly there are times when we have to give up our rights to help our weaker brother!
On June 18, 2008 at 1:53 pm walkinlove Said:
Saul’s conversion, while technically his choice, was close to a do it or die situation. So I would say there is some question as to that depending in how you see free will. Why blind Saul?
– I must say you raise some good points. Why blind Paul?? I have no idea. Maybe Corey does.
In the end, it is a “do-it-or-die” situation for all of us. Saul could have chosen to continue as he was, but he made the choice to follow God. Why was he blinded? The scriptures do not tell us. We can conjecture that it was to show him that he was blind to the truth, but the Lord was going to give him spiritual sight as well as physical sight. Saul made the choice to follow Jesus when he asked Him what he (Saul) should do.
As to the situation you’re talking about, I now see much more clearly. You’re not talking about pastors as the Bible describes them, you’re talking about preachers. Perhaps if they had pastors in the way the Bible describes them one family couldn’t have gained “control” over the congregation in the first place.
Matthew 18:2He called a little child and had him stand among them. 3And he said: “I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. 4Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.
5″And whoever welcomes a little child like this in my name welcomes me. 6But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.
7″Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to sin! Such things must come, but woe to the man through whom they come!
We are asked to become little children, and we are warned that if we harm one of these children we are in big trouble!
If my rights cause another to sin, am I right? I would say no!
corey says:”You’re not talking about pastors as the Bible describes them, you’re talking about preachers. Perhaps if they had pastors in the way the Bible describes them one family couldn’t have gained “control” over the congregation in the first place.”
Aren’t you now using a loophole about how you see the roll and names of pastors and preachers to avoid the concept of mercy in application of the law?
The only loophole I see in the role of pastors and preachers are with those who try to make them one and the same when they are not.
Does mercy cover those that willingly distort the scriptures to their own liking?
Corey wrote: “In the end, it is a “do-it-or-die” situation for all of us. Saul could have chosen to continue as he was, but he made the choice to follow God. Why was he blinded? The scriptures do not tell us. We can conjecture that it was to show him that he was blind to the truth, but the Lord was going to give him spiritual sight as well as physical sight. Saul made the choice to follow Jesus when he asked Him what he (Saul) should do.”
But he WAS following God, in his mind and according to the law. Christians were against God and were to be put to death to stamp out their unbelief!
He was blinded both to make him realize he was blind and to make him teachable to the real truth.
He saw a truth that WAS true, and at the same time was very wrong! He was blind to how Jesus was doing what he was doing when he forgave sinners and he was blind to who Jesus really was. And my argument was that their pride in their knowledge and their inability to understand that mercy was part of the law, made them blind.
I have to believe that Saul was not going to be allowed to continue to kill Christians, that at best he may have been left blinded for life had he stood on his teachings and at worst would have been killed because of the damage he was doing to the body.
But he WAS following God, in his mind and according to the law.
But the law he was following had been done away with. Saul was sincere, but wrong! Just because he thought he was right didn’t make it so. The truth had to be taught to him and he had to make the choice to accept it. Just because someone has a Bible and an opinion on it doesn’t mean that they’re right.
If I’m to follow your logic, the Christians would have had to show Paul “mercy”, even though he was wrong.
Paul may have been left blind if he didn’t change. God may have taken his life if he didn’t accept the truth. We don’t know because he DID accept it. Either way, it was up to Saul to make the decision.
I really do not think that God meant for us to have so much joy and peace stolen from our blood bought salvation by such a legalistic view of all the “things we must do to receive and keep” the gift of God’s grace and forgiveness.
Randy is there there no end to your dishonesty or misquoting
“On June 18, 2008 at 8:38 am Randy Said:
Chris, maybe you should google Johnnys email name ( Joe Blue ) I find it almost funny that Johnny says not to follow after man, but then uses “Joe Blue” for his email name”
2Th 3:9 Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to follow us.
2Th 3:7 For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you;
1Co 11:1 ¶ Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.
On June 18, 2008 at 11:55 am Randy Said:
Corey: Don’t you believe that you play a part in salvation?
Randy: Yes, but they do not merit salvation.
Corey: Don’t you believe that there are acts of obedience required before God gives us salvation?
Randy: Yes, but they do not merit salvation.
Corey: When you understand that it shouldn’t be much of a leap from there to understanding that we have a part in maintaining that salvation.
Randy: No way, no how. Do I help God keep me saved? Faithful is He who called me and He will do it. I am faithful to Him, not to earn or maintain my standing, but because he first loved me. Nothing I could do would be enough to maintain salvation, seeing God requires perfection and that’s why we trust Christ to keep us saved, seeing he is the only once ever to be perfect.
On June 18, 2008 at 2:55 pm faithful Said:
Randy is there there no end to your dishonesty or misquoting
“On June 18, 2008 at 8:38 am Randy Said:
Chris, maybe you should google Johnnys email name ( Joe Blue ) I find it almost funny that Johnny says not to follow after man, but then uses “Joe Blue” for his email name”
– maybe you should ask Johnny. I think Joe Blue was in the church of Christ too…maybe Johnny just guessed at the name…if so….ok
Randy I’ve repeated ask you about your baptism or lack there of . Why don’t you answer?
Rick wrote:
I really do not think that God meant for us to have so much joy and peace stolen from our blood bought salvation by such a legalistic view of all the “things we must do to receive and keep” the gift of God’s grace and forgiveness.
Strange then that He inspired writers to address these issues. It seems to me that many of you view following the word of God as it is written as being “legalistic”.
Joe Blue was a gospel preacher yes.
1Co 11:1 ¶ Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.
Faithful, you guys think I am anti-Johnny or anti-church of Christ and that’s not the case at all. I happen to think Johnny does good when he calls out preachers to defend their position and practice, and that’s why he should take Clint up on the written debate, but he hasn’t and he most likely will not. At least that’s what I gather from Johnny’s emails. He see’s Clint and others as liberals and the funny thing is they have the same doctrine….its just that Johnny has his own method and that I think isnt biblical and that could be debated….but Johnny is a no-show on this debate
On June 18, 2008 at 3:00 pm faithful Said:
Randy I’ve repeated ask you about your baptism or lack there of . Why don’t you answer?
– maybe youre falling asleep or something – go back and read and you will find the answer. I said yes, I am forgiven/saved/bought with His blood. You guys are making baptism your God. My focus is upon Christ, but for the reacord, yes, I was baptized, washed in the blood of the lamb.
corey wrote:”But the law he was following had been done away with.”
I’m curious, when did that occur in CoC teachings? To Saul Christ had not come because they were blind to who he really was. Why were they blind yo who Jesus was?
If Saul’s effect was not impacting the cause of Christ he would not have dropped in to see him! Why did Jesus go and see Saul?
As for the rolls of pastor and preacher, I have not spent time studying them in detail so please feel free to tell me so at I can continue to grow!
Thanks!
yo should be to
Faithful, you are so concerned about my soul “seemingly”, but then I go back and read prior post and you talk about my dad and make other comments that don’t show love at all. Johnny also ran his mouth to Shawn in Texas about my dad and about my past drinking problems and Shawn made comments like “ go get you a beer” or “you need a drink” and many more statements to the point I banned him from my blog. I don’t attack Johnny about his past and throw it in his face and he shouldn’t be telling my past problems to others so they can throw then on my face.
On June 18, 2008 at 1:17 pm walkinlove Said:
Randy I am learning as this goes
On June 18, 2008 at 1:28 pm Randy Said:
– me too dude.
Good that means you are alive in Christ and not dead in doctrine, hold on to that and evaluate all that is written to sift the truth. And do not fear those around you who would stop that process no matter the name on the Church wall!
Saul was likely blind to who Jesus was because, like most Jews, he was expecting an earthly king who would restore the Jewish nation to power. Instead, the Messiah turned out to be a spiritual leader with a spiritual kingdom. Even the apostles didn’t fully understand this as one of the last things they said to Jesus was, “Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?”.
Jesus went to Saul because He chose him to be his minister to the Gentiles. I can’t tell you why He chose Saul specifically for this, since the Lord didn’t reveal His motives.
As to the roles of pastors and preachers, here is a very good article that is a good beginning study on the topic:
http://bibletruths.net/archives/btar143.htm
I want to clarify that some pastors are preachers, but not all preachers are pastors. The article explains this. Coming out of a denomination I had never looked at these scriptures, nor had I noticed that the leadership in most denominations contradicts the Biblical plan of congregational leadership.
Randy do you realize that Johnny runs 2 tv programs , preaches 3 times a week, and is in the middle of doing a tent meeting and launching a new congregation? Do you think he has time for a written debate , when if a debate the debate could be done out in front of the whole communty. You all say Johnny is arogant , but I think it arogant to think you can dictate his schedule when you all won’t come on any of the outletts we already have that would fit into his schedule.
Randy shouldn’t you repent for those sins and obey the gospel? You still have not said that you have. I know my past has never been brought to me , because I did something about it
Randy you say you have obeyed the gospel. Which one? In other words I can tell you what I did and when I did it. What church Randy? You know the baptist church doesn’t baptize for the remission sins and preaches a do nothing gospel.
When did the New Covenant begin Corey? I asked this a couple of times and didn’t see a reply.
Oh and thanks for the resource I will read it when I get a moment.
“when if a debate the debate could be done out in front of the whole community.”
Lets look at this objectively, Johnny is fast on his feet so to speak and has been on TV and in that mode of operation for awhile now, thus he holds an advantage over anyone who is not constantly doing the same. Anyone walking into to debate him is giving away a huge advantage of experience, thus Johnny holds all the advantages in that mode and frankly in that environment he will most likely win.
In a written format, something he is less practiced at, the playing field is level, both parties have time to pray and respond. And the last time I checked, most people have computers now and certainly he could advertise it on his broadcasts to generate interest! And even comment on it from time to time if his show.
So from a my prospective, why is he afraid of a level playing field where the truth could be the focus and not winning? It takes little time to respond to a post, he does it now does he not? It could last for 6 months if his schedule will not permit otherwise. 30 minutes or an hour television is much more limited in getting to the truth then to allow someone time to research and seek wisdom in a matter. Thus the quality of the debate would be higher also.
The time line could even be set for a year, that should be time enough to work around his schedule if needed, should it not?
I would be very interested in reading it and it would easier to learn from since I would not have to be writing notes while listening to the next thought.
So whats more important, making sure you have the advantage or getting to the real truth? I hope it would be the truth and a written debate would get to that! And yes I would like to learn from the debate so I am asking both sides to work it out!
Level the field and lets see the truth!
On June 18, 2008 at 3:45 pm faithful Said:
Randy do you realize that Johnny runs 2 tv programs , preaches 3 times a week, and is in the middle of doing a tent meeting and launching a new congregation? Do you think he has time for a written debate , when if a debate the debate could be done out in front of the whole communty. You all say Johnny is arogant , but I think it arogant to think you can dictate his schedule when you all won’t come on any of the outletts we already have that would fit into his schedule.
– faithful, again I have stated that Johnny is in the middle of setting up a tent. And the times he has spent on here, he could have already done a written debate.
In a written format, something he is less practiced at, the playing field is level, both parties have time to pray and respond. And the last time I checked, most people have computers now and certainly he could advertise it on his broadcasts to generate interest! And even comment on it from time to time if his show.
So from a my prospective, why is he afraid of a level playing field where the truth could be the focus and not winning?
-great points walkinginlove !!!!
“On June 18, 2008 at 3:47 pm faithful Said:
Randy shouldn’t you repent for those sins and obey the gospel?”
– faithful, I dont think I need to answer you, seeing you arent God. But, again YES !!!!!!!!!!
On June 18, 2008 at 3:50 pm faithful Said:
“Randy you say you have obeyed the gospel. Which one? In other words I can tell you what I did and when I did it. What church Randy? You know the baptist church doesn’t baptize for the remission sins and preaches a do nothing gospel.”
– Boy, you sure repeat yourslef a bunch. There is but one gospel – the good news of Christ dying upon the cross, paying for sins and rising the third day. There is one church – the one Christ died for – made up of imperfect people. I never have attnded a baptist church. Mitch, I know you came from the baptist church, but I didnt. Now you belong to a sect of ultra conservatives, who think themselves to be God and judge. If you wish to go over baptsim or whatever, email me at randycraiger@yahoo.com – because all youre doing here is repeating yourself or things we have already discussed.
Randy if you would get it and answer plainly I would not have to keep repeating. I can tell you exactly what I did and the verses that goes with it. The day and time. If you don’t mind go ahead and tell us. Did you say the sinners prayer for your salvation?
Randy you are are just doing the very thing you accuse us of . You’re trying to control others.
Rick said:
“I really do not think that God meant for us to have so much joy and peace stolen from our blood bought salvation by such a legalistic view of all the “things we must do to receive and keep” the gift of God’s grace and forgiveness.”
AMEN.
“faithful” WHAT in the WORLD is your deal??!! I don’t understand why you feel the need to continue to attack everyone-have you been hurt somehow? Is this Johnny’s training? Why can you not see what you are doing, or if you do-why do you continue to do it?
This is such an absurd game. I have to wonder to who are you REALLY “faithful” to?
Katherine , are you attacking me? Why do you get to do something I don’t get to do? Are you a hypocrite?
I am not trying to attack you-I am questioning why you act the way you do by attacking Randy, others on here, and questioning everyone else’s salvation like you are God?
I am not questioning your salvation or place with God because I don’t have that right-but when you think you can and do so, then someone needs to question you. There has to be a reason you are doing what you do-because genuine followers of Christ do not act in this manner-simply because it is not like Christ. You have been influenced by someone to act this way, and it certainly was not Jesus.
Why do you continue to avoid my questions? Who are you really faithful to, and did Johnny train you to be this way?
I am an active and proud memeber of the church of Christ. Just to let everyone know that the church of Christ is not a denomination. If anything we are against division.
There are a lot of people who run down the church, but a lot of those same people lack true knowledge about the church. I would invite all of you to have a Bible study so that each of you may have a clear understanding.
katherine,
since you wont question faithless about his salvation ill do it for you. you know what jesus said to the fig tree that had no fruit. well its a good thing he hasent seen our friend faithless or we would have to find him in the dried fruit isle at food lion.
but seriously folks quit trying to talk darth from the dark side. i mean, hes comfortable there.
and faithless , since you did just mention the sinners prayer,go get my money.
and remember in you next witty reply…………………type slowly for me.
lee
adams
denomination is defined as 4: a religious organization whose congregations are united in their adherence to its beliefs and practices.
Sorry in this case CoC fits that bill and more importantly because it has judged denominations it is reaping that judgment and taking on the form more and more it seems, since there are factions within the organization itself.
“On June 19, 2008 at 4:15 am Adams Said:
I am an active and proud memeber of the church of Christ. Just to let everyone know that the church of Christ is not a denomination. If anything we are against division.
There are a lot of people who run down the church, but a lot of those same people lack true knowledge about the church. I would invite all of you to have a Bible study so that each of you may have a clear understanding.”
Coming from a denomination like yourselves that have no concept of the application of mercy to the law, your true knowledge is faulty at best!
Christ shows us an example of leadership by washing feet but you ignore his examples of mercy in the law and focus only on the law.
I personally can’t wait for the new and improved version of your denomination that claims you are not doing this:
“Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?”
Or allowing a woman to be save in child birth, or for that matter advocating that they start stoning again or some other merciless thing they find in that God calls for, while ignoring Christ’s life example!
You are all that you have judged! But then again you violated God’s law on judgment and are reaping that result. It is why you are uncorrectable!
“Just to let everyone know that the church of Christ is not a denomination.”
Yes it is a denomination. And it’s no more special than any other denomination.
“If anything we are against division.”
Everyone from the people of Babel to the Nazis has said that at one time or another. “Unity” for sake of unity is not a virtue!
“There are a lot of people who run down the church,”
If it’s anything like to so-called “Church of Christ” in this area, then it not only deserves to be run down, it needs to be run out of town on a rail.
“but a lot of those same people lack true knowledge about the church.”
Ahhhh… the old-as-dirt notion that only those possessing “the right knowledge” are worthy of Heaven. It’s always occasion to shake one’s head in disbelief when one sees that Gnosticism is still alive and well. Besides, I would much rather have a knowledge of Christ than have a knowledge of some so-called “church”.
“I would invite all of you to have a Bible study so that each of you may have a clear understanding.”
There’s so much harping on these “Bible studies”. Makes me wonder if something more sinister is going on at those things…
But then, those aren’t really supposed to be mere small-group discussions where everyone shares what they are getting from scripture, is it? No: “Church of Christ Bible studies” are actually very carefully orchestrated and executed schemes to orient others toward the “Church of Christ”‘s doctrine, and not any sincere seeking after what God might be showing others for edification of the true church.
There’s no other way to put it: “Church of Christ Bible studies” as defined by Robertson, Oldfield, Fields etc. are brainwashing sessions.
Coupled with their eagerness to attack those who disagree with them, it makes Robertson, Oldfield and Fields no different in my mind than David Koresh, Jim Jones or any other cult leader.
Katherine said”I am not questioning your salvation or place with God because I don’t have that right”
So when someone tells us something we are supposed to just take them at there thier word? Have you ever asked for an id? From your insurance man , banker, a policeman? realestate person?Maybe you are so naive to think that people don’t tell things that are not so?
On June 18, 2008 at 8:55 pm faithful Said:
Randy if you would get it and answer plainly I would not have to keep repeating. I can tell you exactly what I did and the verses that goes with it. The day and time. If you don’t mind go ahead and tell us. Did you say the sinners prayer for your salvation?
– There isnt a sinners pray in the bible faithful. Maybe you havent read my comments/post here and other places. I believe baptism just as you – except the part that one must understand it fully/perfectly before God will act. Again faithful, and last time YES!!!!!!! Far as you needing the day, time, and whatever… youre not my God and Judge…I do not have to answer you over and over as if you have some right to play God. Your focus is upon baptism, mine is upon Christ…not down playing baptism, but my faith is in Christ, not baptsim, not repentance, not confession – these all were acts of faith that point to Christ.
Chris said “Coupled with their eagerness to attack those who disagree with them, it makes Robertson, Oldfield and Fields no different in my mind than David Koresh, Jim Jones or any other cult leader.”
Chrisr is this an example of your eagerness to attack them? I think Charles on star 39 showed the viewers you were the village hypocrite but that didn’t suit you. You must continue to prove it with an on going errort.
From Randy:Since the email below has much to say about Clint, I thought I would bring it here in the light
Froma Johnny: where is clint?
in some dark spot
where are we?
turn on tv and see the real thing
go to some blog that cannot even get recognized in over one year
you see what i think of web traffic
i dont even post on mine
what about yours
oh good place
keep me posted on you and clint
that way i dont have to go the site anymore
to see the 5 that seem to stay one there
the only reason clint has time to worry with my style is he has nothing going on
we have so much i am not about to spend time with
persons like clint
2Pe 2:20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.
He cannot appreciate someone who has false teachers on the run
he has nothing but his own frustration and strife
no thanks Randy you cant draw me in
tell the 5 i said hey
tent meeting coming up 1000s put into the lost of mayodan
what is clint doing
oh he want s to argue style
Remember me for good Neh 13:31c
Johnny
Blessèd assurance, Jesus is mine!
O what a foretaste of glory divine!
Heir of salvation, purchase of God,
Born of His Spirit, washed in His blood.
What can wash away my sin?
Nothing but the blood of Jesus;
What can make me whole again?
Nothing but the blood of Jesus.
Nothing can for sin atone,
Nothing but the blood of Jesus;
Naught of good that I have done,
Nothing but the blood of Jesus.
“So when someone tells us something we are supposed to just take them at there thier word? Have you ever asked for an id? From your insurance man , banker, a policeman? realestate person?Maybe you are so naive to think that people don’t tell things that are not so?”
This comment should be highlighted as it is of utter garbage. Silly me, I forgot that the CoC has a litmus test for others to pass. Someone says they are a Christian and its this denominations job to question them. First question, no doubt, have you been baptized for the forgiveness of your sins and at the same time KNOWING MENTALLY that yours sins were being washed away?
Absurd. Get off your high horse and reach those who do not know the Lord. You are wasting EVERYONE’S time.
Rick,
Lovely lyrics, I sure hope for your souls sake that while you were typing those words, you were not clapping or tapping your leg. That would be creating an instrument which we know according to a few is a sin. God loves us making music in worship to him but in the NT he had a change of heart.
Pun deeply intended.
Mathew 9:11 And when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners?
Matthew 15:2Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.
Matthew 17:24And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute?
Luke5:30 But their scribes and Pharisees murmured against his disciples, saying, Why do ye eat and drink with publicans and sinners?
Luke 7:39Now when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner.
Pharisees judgment is simple, how can you be a man of God, you are failing in an area that we don’t fail in!!!!!!!!
The above are some examples of the pharisees nitpicking their laws and their judgment because of what they believed against Jesus, and their mind set of laws and regulations that Christ was not following and thus was not a man of God! The modern version of this is the same except there are new laws and you are not saved in you don’t believe as we do, even though you profess Jesus as Lord and Savior. It is the same mind set with new rules.
Matthew 23:13But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.
So what were the pharisees doing that was shutting up the kingdom of heaven from others? Could it be that their zest for the law was causing a stumbling block to those who were seeking God because they were out of balance and without mercy? If they had mercy they would not have been offended but would have tested the prophecies about him. Instead, even though he was among them, they could not or would not see him as who he was!
Luke 6:7And the scribes and Pharisees watched him, whether he would heal on the sabbath day; that they might find an accusation against him.
When you are out to trap others through the laws of God you are a pharisee! Thus you are a pharisee of Christ and not a follower of Christ!
Matthew 23:15Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.
It seems that part of the benefits of law focusing is that the next generation of law keepers do the same things but at a higher level. I wonder could the CoC teachings be causing the above in modern times since mercy has no place in their house and only the law is important? Thus the next version is even most strict, adding new regulations that are found and shunning those who do not follow their enlightened teaching!!
Luke 11:46 And he said, Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers.
And those burdens, like the biggest, to bad you should have done as we have done and you wouldn’t be this way. I feel the love of Christ in that!
The difference in Saul and David was that Saul showed no mercy and reaped it, David had chances to kill Saul and did not take them and because of that and his love for God and respect for authority, even to a point of weeping for Saul he man who had tried to kill him, he did not lose his kingdom or more importantly his soul!
Mercy is the key to the kingdom, without it you will not enter it! David took the messengers life because of that respect for God’s authority and because it would seem he was not telling the truth to David about it since there isn’t anything about the man in the account of Saul’s death, and was trying to gain favor with David with the tale.
Oh and yes I am judging your actions and methods, that is true, but even with all this I do not judge you to be apart from the Lord, because I will not risk reaping the consequence of what I have sown. God is the only one who qualified to decide those things.
I would rather be following Christ’s example of mercy in the law, then focus only on those after him, who’s job it was to setup the structure of things.
If Christ would be unable to teach in your Church, how is your teaching sound? After all you reject the possibility of mercy playing a part of the new law of the thief on the cross, as it did under the old law with the various sinners Jesus came in contact with.
Actually I was going to suggest that they would be better enjoyed if sung with the use of a piano…
I have to wonder if God is not using the extreme version of the CoC to try and wake up all the CoC to mercies truth by holding a version of themselves up in the mirror that even they can not stand to see!
new law of the thief should be new law and the thief!
Please, I beg you, pray about this and see if the Holy Spirit will confirm any of this to you, please do not ignore it because of the legal system of your laws. I am not an enemy, but a brother who sees a missing part in your message!
I do not discount the law, by all means we should through love of the Lord but balanced with Christ’s Life example!
I am sorry for the harshness of the words, but I see this in your body! Your strength is being used by the enemy to be a weakness to drive people from the Cross that gave Mercy!
Please, pray before you reject this!
On June 19, 2008 at 9:11 am Rick Said:
Actually I was going to suggest that they would be better enjoyed if sung with the use of a piano…
– OH NO ! Not a piano, God might take your salvation for that Rick, seeing God clearly states that music with singing is a sin…wait a minute, seems like God never even come close to saying that…:)
walkinlove,
You keep referring to the Pharisees as if their following of the law of Moses was their problem. Look at what Jesus said about them:
Matthew 23: 1Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to His disciples, 2saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses; 3therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them.
So, as long as what they taught held true to the Law, they were to be followed. Jesus said to do what they say, but not what they do. What was it they were doing that was wrong?
5″But they do all their deeds to be noticed by men; for they broaden their phylacteries and lengthen the tassels of their garments.
They were all about show and the praise of men. Look at Mark 7:
1The Pharisees and some of the scribes gathered around Him when they had come from Jerusalem,2and had seen that some of His disciples were eating their bread with impure hands, that is, unwashed.3(For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they carefully wash their hands, thus observing the traditions of the elders;4and when they come from the market place, they do not eat unless they cleanse themselves; and there are many other things which they have received in order to observe, such as the washing of cups and pitchers and copper pots.)
5The Pharisees and the scribes asked Him, “Why do Your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat their bread with impure hands?”
6And He said to them, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:
‘THIS PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR LIPS,
BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM ME.
7’BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME,
TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.’
8“Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.” 9He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition.
You see, Jesus had no problem with the keeping of the Law, for that was right in the eyes of God. It was all of the extra traditions of men that He condemned. Nowhere in the Law of Moses can you find these traditions of washing cups and eating with certain people – the Pharisees and those of like-mind before them had invented these.
When those of us in the churches of Christ say that we need to cling only to the word of God and not go beyond it we’re just saying what Jesus said. That is being Christ-like, not Pharisaic. When the religious world clings to their man-made traditions they are the ones following in the steps of the Pharisees!
You keep saying “mercy, mercy, mercy”. Does the person that willingly transgresses our own laws deserve the mercy of the court? The mercy of God is reserved for those who fail Him, yet still seek to follow Him. It is never shown to be given to those who willfully transgress the commandments of Christ.
“Chrisr is this an example of your eagerness to attack them? I think Charles on star 39 showed the viewers you were the village hypocrite but that didn’t suit you. You must continue to prove it with an on going errort.”
Like I care about what anyone thinks about me…
Here’s the picture as I’ve come to see it, faithful:
The Reidsville/Martinsville/Danville “Church of Christ” is demonstrating every major symptom of classic cult behavior, including rigid control of its members, castigation of those who go “off the reservation” and constant attacks on those it deems to be its enemies. Not to mention persuasion and propaganda.
That they use titles like “What Does The Bible Say?” and “A Word From the Lord” for their television programs makes their work all the more reprehensible. There is nothing biblical about what they are doing. And “A Word From the Lord”? It’s a word from James Oldfield. He’s just hiding behind the name of the Lord while he does his schtick. “What Does the Bible Say?” Johnny Robertson doesn’t care a flying rat’s butt about what the Bible really says, only his sick twisted interpretation. If the Bible is showing you something, he doesn’t want to know about it.
These men are using the Bible to excuse the cult of their own personality.
They parade themselves in front of us as if they are men with authority. But the fact of the matter is they cannot persuade anyone with the love and mercy of Jesus Christ, because they don’t have that at all.
All they do have are cheap tricks and smooth-talking words that work on the weak minded… and that’s just where they want people to be. Robertson, Oldfield and Fields do not want people to think for themselves. Indeed, they don’t even believe that others can go into the Bible and find the answers for themselves. These men insist that we all somehow “need” them to “understand” the Bible, because we are “confused”.
I happen to have a much higher estimation of other people than Johnny Robertson does. I believe that anyone is capable of seeking God on his or her own, and that God will credit them with righteousness for their faith as He did with Abraham. We do not need two-bit shysters like Robertson, Oldfield and Fields to come and tell us any different.
And as some are noting, the only television station in the entire region that has sold them airtime, when there are much better stations with better studios and broadcast range, is WGSR. Did Robertson and his cronies approach any other television station? If not, why not? Because it seems that if they are going to do their work for God then they should be compelled to give Him only their best effort, if at all possible.
BTW faithful, your spelling is atrociously bad. Like Johnny Robertson’s. Hmmmm…
On June 19, 2008 at 9:39 am Randy Said:
On June 19, 2008 at 9:11 am Rick Said:
Actually I was going to suggest that they would be better enjoyed if sung with the use of a piano…
– OH NO ! Not a piano, God might take your salvation for that Rick, seeing God clearly states that music with singing is a sin…wait a minute, seems like God never even come close to saying that…
– I know I opened up a can of worms with this – I know Corey’s stance on music – what say ye Corey ?:)
I just stumbled upon your site here recently and wanted to thank you for being willing to question and go back to the Bible to verify the Truth from the opinion.
I married into the church of Christ conundrum. Before marrying my wife I had never heard of the denomination nor was I familiar with it’s teachings. I came to Christianity much later in life than she did and had attended mainly non-denominational, Bible churches during most of my walk with Christ. My wife’s family of origin are multi generational members of what many describe as a ‘hardline’, non-institutional, non-instrumental church of Christ. One of the more disturbing things I’ve heard from the pulpit here is that one ‘comes into contact with the blood of Christ only in baptism’. Frighteningly extra-biblical teaching that is turned into a ‘litmus test’ towards finding who is and who isn’t a fellow Christian. The baptism debate to often generates more heat than light it would seem. I do not deny the importance of obedience in a Christians faith. It shows the reality of ones faith, certainly, but it in no way garners us anythng with the Father. It is, as far as I can ascertain from the totality of Scripture (tota Scriptura), simply a disciples obedience and does not merit us Salvation. How could a Christian, bought and paid for by His Master, not do what is asked of His Saviour? I think that may be a ‘healthier’ way of viewing the baptism debate, Scripturally speaking.
I have likened their stance on and seeming misunderstanding of the Gospel as a sort of New Old Covenant. That is, Christ is the new Moses and the New Covenant is simply the old system with a new set of rules and rituals. It disturbs me at times to hear some of the things my wife says in regards to her own salvation. She and her mother, seem constantly confused and unsure of their salvation. My wife seems to think she has lost and regained her salvation time and time again. She has no assurance, nor do others in her family. It shows outwardly quite frequently. My prayer is that God opens her eyes and heart to the devastating reality of the Gospel message and that His Spirit grabs hold of her and never lets her go.
Thanks again for your blog and keep it up!
God Bless,
C
Corey said:
“When those of us in the churches of Christ say that we need to cling only to the word of God and not go beyond it we’re just saying what Jesus said. That is being Christ-like, not Pharisaic. When the religious world clings to their man-made traditions they are the ones following in the steps of the Pharisees!”
Herein lies the problem, Corey-there ARE traditions of men within the churches of Christ, but some of them are masked as Biblical when they just are not. It is hypocritical to point out every other denominations “flaws” or traditions when we have logs in our own eyes.
…and yes, Adams and anyone else who denies this-techinically, yes we are in a denomination.
“faithful” my entire point is this: YOU ARE NOT GOD. No one on earth is God-only God is God. Do you think it matters one iota if you believe someone is saved or not? It is not up to you!! Or Johnny, or me, or anyone!!! Praise God for that!!!!
I see that you have still not answered the question I have posed MANY times. Why is that-do you not have an answer? Who are you really faithful to? Did Johnny train you to treat people in this manner?
Like I said, you learned it from someone’s example or training-and it certainly was not Jesus.
Are you playing the devil’s advocate?
Y’all make sure to go back up and read the email Randy sent in that he received from Johnny. Sorry, Randy, that it got caught in the filter.
Meanwhile, faithful wrote:
“Chrisr is this an example of your eagerness to attack them? I think Charles on star 39 showed the viewers you were the village hypocrite but that didn’t suit you. You must continue to prove it with an on going errort.”
I was going to comment on this last time, but I didn’t. Now I will.
faithful, do you even know what the word “hypocrite” means? Let’s give you the standard dictionary definition:
“a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings.”
Would anyone disagree with that definition?
Okay, so given that we have agreement on the definition of “hypocrite”, just how did Chris come across as one? Did he act in contradiction to his stated beliefs of feelings? No, I think he did exactly what he said he was going to do, and now Roark is trying to milk it for more than its worth in his misbegotten attempt to gain ratings.
Try to work up the ol’ noggin real hard back to that time, a short few weeks ago… Johnny challenges Chris to a debate. To Johnny’s apparent utter surprise, Chris shows up to take him up on the debate. Did Johnny do what he said he was going to do, and debate Chris? No. He schluffed him off – muttering some lame excuse about Chris’s lack of Bible Knowledge (where does it say in Scripture that we aren’t to debate people for lack of Bible Knowledge, anyhow?).
So, look back up and re-read that definition of hypocrite. Then reread the story of What Happened. Then connect the dots to find out who your real hypocrite might be.
If you do so honestly, it might just rock your world.
And, let’s see what Jesus himself had to say about hypocrisy in Matthew chapter 15, verses 7-9:
Hmm…
Just from the emails with Johnny, I dont think he will debate Clint on the issues Clint put forth…wonder why not:) Sure, Johnny is a busy man, but like walkinlove said…we can wait on him…now his excuse is what…faithful, you seem to be Johnnys cheerleader, so come on and tell us why he is not wantng to debate Clint…let me tell you – because his words will be forever on the net and all will see, including those who support Johnny.
walkinlove I agree with you in that, I wish that those in the cofC would step back and look at themselves. We all need to do that sometimes. I believe there is hope for anyone. When God says we shouldn’t condemn other people it is because how can someone believe there is hope for sinners but no mercy, it is impossible to believe both.
My stance on music:
What truly has the force to determine divine prohibition and/or exclusion? Is it specificity or silence? I maintain it is the former, not the latter.
The Ephesian and Colossian passages specify singing. Thus, we are to sing. If we REPLACE singing with something else (like dancing), then we have transgressed the command to sing. Instead of singing, we are dancing. That would not be a fulfillment of the specified command. When the Lord specifies something, He expects that which is specified to be honored through our acceptance and compliance. When God says sing …. WE SING. Replacing it, deleting it, negating it, invalidating it are forbidden. Specificity excludes our substituting something else in the place of that which our God specified. It is not silence about dancing that excludes dancing in this case, rather it is specificity about singing.
God has previously expressed His approval of instruments of music in corporate worship. That is a fact. Nowhere has God ever stated He has changed His mind. That too is a fact. Yes, His covenant with mankind has changed with the sacrifice of His Son, but aspects of our heartfelt expressions of love and devotion are just as relevant today as they were under previous covenants. He still appreciates prayer. He still approves singing. Loving one another transcends the atoning elements of specific covenants. Although offering bulls and goats is no longer needed, since Christ (the substance) has replaced those daily sacrifices (the shadows), nevertheless worshipful expressions remain valid. God has specified singing. Thus, we sing. We don’t replace it with something else. However, musical accompaniment is not a replacement of singing. The use of musical instruments as either accompaniment or as an aid to SINGING in no way whatsoever invalidates or negates or replaces singing. Singing still occurs.
God has mercy for people. People don’t have mercy for people. Those that don’t believe how great Gods grace is have little faith. In our walk with God we should try to do good and be obedient, but we will all fail sometime or another, without Gods grace and mercy there would be no hope for any of us.
corey,
i have heard it presented by one of the southside three
that the coc dosent believe in all men being born in sin. as part of their evidence for this stance they use the scriptures that say the sins of the fathers arent held against the son. maybe you can tell me why then it is that all children at birth are not ushered into the garden of eden. it would seem to be the fair thing to do,since the first two had that advantage. and they are sinless. secondly, it seems that all women are still under the curse of painfull childbirth. and most men in this world still till the land or make a living by the sweat of the brow.
seems like we are all still paying for the sins of the father. rom 5:12
lee
walkinlove wrote:
“I personally can’t wait for the new and improved version of your denomination….”
Please make note that that Bible is the same yesterday, today, and forever and so why would the church of Christ change? We don’t! And second of all, as I stated before- the church of Christ is NOT a denomination. A denomination is a division and has man-made traditions…
We do not have man-made traditions.
maybe you can tell me why then it is that all children at birth are not ushered into the garden of eden. it would seem to be the fair thing to do,since the first two had that advantage. and they are sinless.
Sorry Lee, that doesn’t even make sense. They don’t have to be in the Garden of Eden to exist without sin. Adam & Eve only had one real law to follow as they were under a different covenant. We have many more things to follow today and are under the covenant of Christ.
secondly, it seems that all women are still under the curse of painfull childbirth. and most men in this world still till the land or make a living by the sweat of the brow.
God said he would INCREASE Eve’s pain in childbirth, not that He would introduce pain. There are plenty of women, who without any medication, have relatively pain-free child births. Also, I’m sitting here sweat-free in my office, in my comfy chair. I neither till the land nor sweat for my pay.
Just like so many try to say we inherit their sins they try to apply their punishments to us today when it is easily observable that it isn’t the case.
As to Romans 5:12 we see that the sin of Adam & Eve brought death into the world. The wages of sin is death, and all will eventually fall short and sin. Jesus said that His kingdom would be made up of those who would become like children. If children have no different nature than adults then why would He make such a distinction?
Adams said:
“Please make note that that Bible is the same yesterday, today, and forever and so why would the church of Christ change? We don’t! And second of all, as I stated before- the church of Christ is NOT a denomination. A denomination is a division and has man-made traditions…
We do not have man-made traditions.”
You must be in some serious denial, Adams, or you just don’t want to see it. We have to be honest here-the “church of Christ” institution is different than the larger CHURCH of Christ-which is made up of God’s people who HE has saved. The church of Christ is a denomination, it is part of a religious heritage with a history, and it has become even more of a division especially by these guys we are talking about here. We most definitely have man-made traditions, that people try and then back up with scripture-then bind them on others and condemn them for it, when God never did such. We are as guilty of this as those these guys condemn, and it is time we took a good, honest look at ourselves to see what the REAL purpose of the church is.
You are right on this-the Bible and God are the same always, but the “church” has changed into something I do not believe it was fully intended to be.
Randy, that’s a slippery slop to go down.
After all, if IM is now approved because it was approved under the Old Law and there’s been no specific statement that it’s no longer approved, a number of other things logically come in as well.
The Sabbath day is the first of these to come to mind. It was commanded under the Old Law, and there’s no explicit commandment to stop under the New; it’s just never commanded again. Better not take a trip or work on a Saturday, my friend.
What about burning of incense in worship? Commanded under the Old, not forbidden under the New.
What about the offerings that were not animals, such as the grain offering, the various wave offerings, etc.?
Tithing?
I could go on and on, but the point is this: What proves too much proves nothing. If the principle you stated above is true where IM is concerned and that where God has not stated He has changed his mind is still the same as with the Old, these things still apply to us as well.
Will He send someone to Hell for using IM in worship? I don’t know. I do know I don’t don’t think as He does and don’t want to presume to speak for Him where He has not spoken. I do know I can’t participate in it in good conscience. If IM really is as unimportant as most people say, best to just leave it alone and follow what God has actually said instead of presuming what I’d approve is the same as what He would.
Er, slippery *slope*. 🙂
Jonathan,
I just read your post and I am glad you found us. Much of what you say is true unfortunately. I know that is sometimes hard to come out of, but I also pray what you pray for your wife and for all of those in that spot:
“My prayer is that God opens her eyes and heart to the devatating reality of the Gospel message and that His Spirit grabs hold of her and never lets her go.”
Amen! Blessings~
Katherine,
Do you recognize Jefferson Davis as one of our country’s presidents?
Why do you ask? That’s kind of random.
“Do you recognize Jefferson Davis as one of our country’s presidents?”
Trying to flush out the Confederate sympathizers Corey?
You say that no one can claim to be the one church of the Bible. You obviously believe that the church is made up of people from many different groups, teaching many different things.
Jefferson Davis claimed to be the president, at least of the Confederate states. Abraham Lincoln claimed that there were no “Confederate states”, that there were only the United States and that he alone laid ownership to the title of president.
Was Davis correct or was Lincoln? They both had many supporters to back up their claims. Both had people who would say their claims were true. Do you accept both positions or do you believe one was correct? Was there some sort of standard to determine which man was actually right?
I see your point, Corey-but you have missed what I am saying. I am not saying that “the church is made up of many different groups, teaching many different things”. We are to be preaching Christ and Christ alone-if anything else gets in the way of that, then we have gone wrong somewhere. All of the churches with names on the signs outside are simply man-made institutions-INCLUDING what we know as the “church of Christ”. There is simply no way around that-saying that we are the ONLY church and not a denomination, that we are not divided and do not have man-made doctrines is not only illogical-it is also dishonest. I know that some people really believe that not knowing any better, but there are many who will simply not face the truth or they are in denial. I am saying what I understand from the Bible-not something I WANT to believe or have created. WE are the ones who insist on it being different, and we in America have certainly institutionalized and boiled Jesus down to a religion; when that is certainly not why He came to earth and died, and not what the church was intended to be. The church is more than just gathering a couple of times a week (I am not downplaying that-it is important and beneficial, so hear me say that).
There is not ONE institutional church on earth that is THE one and only church, because that is NOT what the CHURCH is supposed to be or what it is. Take away all of the titles, the creeds, the labels and you have PEOPLE-God’s people who make up THE CHURCH. That cannot be boiled down to a building or a sign. We are all wrong on something if we are honest, but we try and follow God the most faithful way we know how.
Am I saying that ALL churches, or ALL religions are ok? Certainly not. Do I approve or like all of the divisions we have created? No way, and I know that God does not either. But, unfortunately we have done that so we have to deal with it. Instead of pulling out the “I have the only right way and you all do not”-we need to realize our common bond in Christ, our love for others, and the need of hope and light in this world that we have to share.
Ultimately, there is a difference between the physical church and the spiritual church-which we cannot boil down into one place…and honestly, why would we want to? I don’t want to prove I am right and bring everyone into “my fold”. I want to bring people straight to Jesus and the rest will fall in place.
I hope that helps.
Corey I do not defend anyone who would look at the law and ignore it, I was baptized as scriptures asked, not because I was in fear of my master, but because of the love FOR my master! Simon Peter and jesus did not talk about fearing him and obaying him, it was a love relationship!
You are right the pharisees were double minded me, telling people to do one thing and then doing something different.
For instance CoC calls for unity, but to get it they attempt to disrupt other service by sitting in them doing nothing to prove their point while rebelling against authority and unlike David’s respect for authority, they attack it with abandon. Thus to reach unity they attempt to cause rebellion???? Can anyone say double minded here?
Matthew again you know where by now…
23Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
24Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
They were also doing the law and leaving out the more important things, judgment or justice, mercy and faith. Again the CoC blindly (verse 24) follow teachings without any justice to a situation. If someone were to actually die without having a chance to receive the Good News they are not only in hell but had NO chance to do anything but go to hell. That is NOT justice! Thus I see the Thief of the Cross a symbol of Christ’s Mercy under the New Covenent not the old because he dies after Christ.
The Coc claims unity but there are differences between Churches, they claim not to be a denomination but by the definition of the word they are. They seek unity but they use tactics to divide in the hopes of playing on fears and rebellion against authority while responding the Church is growing!
This more like appearing as this:
2 Corinthians 11:14And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.
There is a huge difference in entering into a dialog about the scriptures in order, as the original Church did, to correct and build up the body, that those involved might gain knowledge than doing so to destroy as much as you can, of those who oppose your beliefs!
David understood Authority, it saved his Kingdom! God does have the ability to kill someone if he needs to make a point, He could wipe out all the “false teachers” of his word today if it was his will to do so.
You say all others are false teachers, I say from what I see by your methods you are false teachers, you may be able to cross most of the T’s and dod most of the I’s but your walk says something other then good fruit!
So if people, and especially other believers see that, how are they going to receive any truth you might have to offer? The answer is they will not! You may pick up some of the weaker sheep using the wolf tactics and declaring yourselves the shepherd, but many will avoid you.
Thus your own methods are your biggest fault to advancing your views and I say that because there is no real unity!
But even if you do correct it, to have the complete understanding of the word and the will of the Father, you are making Paul to be a liar:
1 Corinthians 13:12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
How can you have full ability to see, when Paul says otherwise in the above passage?
“Was there some sort of standard to determine which man was actually right?”
Yes, a full blown war.
Corey,
I see what you are getting at; I am just not sure it is the best example.
I think a better example would be 50 governors of 50 states. All disagree from time to time, but work for the same cause and are all Americans. Some are good. Some bad. All make mistakes. Maybe this is off to.
I left out one other hypocrisy, to claim to be the Church of unity, you exclude all others no matter how many to reach a small enough number of believers so that you are one in Christ! The unity of exclusion is not the unity of the original Church who were willing to work through their faults and take correction. Instead we just ex-communicate you as it were so the elect will be pure. Is that the original Church at work??????????????
For instance CoC calls for unity, but to get it they attempt to disrupt other service by sitting in them doing nothing to prove their point while rebelling against authority and unlike David’s respect for authority, they attack it with abandon. Thus to reach unity they attempt to cause rebellion???? Can anyone say double minded here?
Do you have to approve of someone’s actions to show them respect? Do you have to participate in their actions, even if they are scripturally wrong, to show your respect?
They were also doing the law and leaving out the more important things, judgment or justice, mercy and faith. Again the CoC blindly (verse 24) follow teachings without any justice to a situation. If someone were to actually die without having a chance to receive the Good News they are not only in hell but had NO chance to do anything but go to hell. That is NOT justice! Thus I see the Thief of the Cross a symbol of Christ’s Mercy under the New Covenent not the old because he dies after Christ.
You would have people ignore the commandments under the guise of “mercy”. You apply mercy to the commandments, not disregard them in favor of supposed “mercy”.
You can ignore it all you want, but the thief did not die under the New Covenant. Jesus’ covenant could not exist until all had been fulfilled – this includes the resurrection which had not happened yet!. The new covenant began upon Pentecost when the apostles proclaimed that all had been fulfilled.
You say all others are false teachers, I say from what I see by your methods you are false teachers, you may be able to cross most of the T’s and dod most of the I’s but your walk says something other then good fruit!
Where is your mercy? Where is your justice? All you know about me is what you’ve read on a blog. You judge my fruit without seeing it. What a fruit inspector you would make!
But even if you do correct it, to have the complete understanding of the word and the will of the Father, you are making Paul to be a liar:
1 Corinthians 13:12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
How can you have full ability to see, when Paul says otherwise in the above passage?
You’re taking Paul talking about one day seeing the Lord face to face and knowing Him as He truly is and trying to apply it to doctrinal matters. That won’t fly.
DMH – my point is this; there is a common law that all of the states are to follow. While they have some individual freedoms, as do Christians, there is also a common standard that all must follow. Any claims can be examined by that standard, and I believe the same applies in religious matters.
Corey said:
“DMH – my point is this; there is a common law that all of the states are to follow. While they have some individual freedoms, as do Christians, there is also a common standard that all must follow. Any claims can be examined by that standard, and I believe the same applies in religious matters.”
The common standard should be Jesus.
Katherine wrote:
The common standard should be Jesus.
I won’t argue that. However, I take the words of the writers He inspired as well.
I just want to point out that preaching Jesus is not just preaching who He is and what He’s done for us. Acts 8:
34The eunuch asked Philip, “Tell me, please, who is the prophet talking about, himself or someone else?” 35Then Philip began with that very passage of Scripture and told him the good news about Jesus.
36As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, “Look, here is water. Why shouldn’t I be baptized?”
Philip preached Jesus and it lead to the eunuch asking why he shouldn’t be baptized. To say that preaching Jesus doesn’t include all of the things the Holy Spirit inspired Paul and others to write is leaving out a great deal.
Corey said:
“You can ignore it all you want, but the thief did not die under the New Covenant. Jesus’ covenant could not exist until all had been fulfilled – this includes the resurrection which had not happened yet!. The new covenant began upon Pentecost when the apostles proclaimed that all had been fulfilled.”
Along the subtlety of this:
Mark 12:36For David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The LORD said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.
If Jesus makes the following statement on the cross:
John 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.
Then I will assume that you are taking him to mean his dieing is done? If so why not say I am finished!
It is finished means it is done. The Sacrifice for sin has been given, he has yet to give them the Holy Spirit, that is true but the payment has been given at his death.
The Problem is nobody on the planet is willing to apply Mathew 23:23 to the situation. It is either a you gotta do it and the Thief is not covered under it cause he is not under the new, or because he is under the new you don’t have to follow all the law.
So I take a third stance, based on what I read that says, do all you can do to show your love of Christ, but allow the exception if there was no other choice. In the thief’s case there was no time to baptize him.
Thus I conclude that Matthew 23:23 applies and the Thief is under the New but not held accountable because of Mercy!
Otherwise, it wasn’t finished and Christ is speaking a false statement, or you are devaluing Christ’s sacrifice, the perfect lamb that takes away the sins of the world, and adding Pentecost before IT IS FINISHED!
Christ died for me he did not Pentecost for me! Thus I am follow Christs full teachings and allowing Mercy, something the Pharisees could not understand or would not do because of their own personal agenda!
If a person stands in judgment knowing the law and not following it, then he is in very real danger, but even then God is the one who judges him not me. I can warn him but he has to walk his own walk!
Katherine said, Instead of pulling out “I have the only right way and you all do not” we need to realize our common bond in Christ, our love for others, and the need of hope and light in this world we have to share. AMEN!!
“You’re taking Paul talking about one day seeing the Lord face to face and knowing Him as He truly is and trying to apply it to doctrinal matters. That won’t fly.”
he sees through a glass darkly, go do that and tell me how the world and for that matter the word looks to you! He is talking about not seeing all and that only God does see and know all!
I didn’t say that, Corey-I just said that He should be our common standard. It should begin and end with Him-always being focused on Him and never on us. Everything we do, say, or believe should be measured with what He has said or done.
And we should always keep in mind that His commands are not burdensome or grevious, that His yoke is easy and His burden is light. Whenever any of that changes, we need to examine what we are believing and/or preaching and see if it stands in the light of what the Bible has said.
There is no perfect church. Even the first church had their problems. We as christians are the church of Christ and strive to understand and follow Gods Word.
Matthew 5:18
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
ALL was not fulfilled at that time! This messianic prophecy:
Psalm 16:10
For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
had not been fulfilled upon Jesus’ death. God had to raise Jesus so that His body would not see corruption. This means that all could not be fulfilled until after the resurrection. Why didn’t Jesus say “I am finished”? Because He wasn’t! There was more to come. His dying was a part of His mission and that part was finished.
As to the thief, I can’t say he was baptized, but neither can you prove that he WASN’T. I know this about the thief:
*He knew Jesus had done no wrong
*He knew Jesus was going to have a kingdom
How did he know those things? Jesus didn’t teach him on the cross, so the man must have been taught before his execution.
Exactly, “Truth”!
telew,v {tel-eh’-o}
1) to bring to a close, to finish, to end 1a) passed, finished 2) to perform, execute, complete, fulfil, (so that the thing done corresponds to what has been said, the order, command etc.) 2a) with special reference to the subject matter, to carry out the contents of a command 2b) with reference also to the form, to do just as commanded, and generally involving the notion of time, to perform the last act which completes a process, to accomplish, fulfil 3) to pay 3a) of tribute
Tam ve’nishlam – “It is finished”, are the first two words of the Hebrew phrase, “Tam ve’nishlam Shevach La’el Boreh Olam”, which means, “It is completed and fulfilled, blessed be God, the Creator of the world.” The acronym for this phrase, is written at the end of sacred Jewish writings such as books of the Bible.
Now I don’t 100% trust the sources but I think they give a picture of completeness!
he sees through a glass darkly, go do that and tell me how the world and for that matter the word looks to you! He is talking about not seeing all and that only God does see and know all!
Look again:
1 Corinthians 13:12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
Face to face would imply two people looking at one another. We will see Jesus face to face on judgment day, and hopefully throughout eternity thereafter. This is not talking about doctrine. If it is doctrine then Paul is saying that the message he’s been given is cloudy and imperfect. That would imply that the Holy Spirit was unable to give him a true understanding. Is that what you’d have me to believe?
“Tam ve’nishlam Shevach La’el Boreh Olam”
That isn’t what Jesus said. He simply said “it is finished”. You’re ignoring the prophecy that had yet to be fulfilled and the fact that Jesus Himself said the law wouldn’t pass away until all had been fulfilled. You want your argument to be true so bad you’re ignoring the very words of Jesus.
“Matthew 5:18
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.”
Corey this contradicts Jesus breaking the law with his acts of Mercy, he breaks the law without Matthew 23:23’s application to the handling of the law!
You can’t have it both ways! Jesus is either upholding the law or he isn’t. It isn’t a Jesus can do what he wants because then he becomes a less than perfect Judge because by breaking his own law he is sinning against the law. And you quoted him telling people to do what the pharisees said, yet he has a double standard while trying to uphold the law????
So, are you still maintaining that the new covenant applied before all had been fulfilled?
You never answered this either:
1 Corinthians 13:12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
Face to face would imply two people looking at one another. We will see Jesus face to face on judgment day, and hopefully throughout eternity thereafter. This is not talking about doctrine. If it is doctrine then Paul is saying that the message he’s been given is cloudy and imperfect. That would imply that the Holy Spirit was unable to give him a true understanding. Is that what you’d have me to believe?
On June 19, 2008 at 3:37 pm coreydavis said,
“As to the thief, I can’t say he was baptized, but neither can you prove that he WASN’T.”
Corey, surely you are not suggesting that the Roman soldiers removed the thief from the cross before he died in order that he might be baptized?
According to the Scripture,,,”31.Now it was the day of Preparation, and the next day was to be a special Sabbath. Because the Jews did not want the bodies left on the crosses during the Sabbath, they asked Pilate to have the legs broken and the bodies taken down.
32.The soldiers therefore came and broke the legs of the first man who had been crucified with Jesus, and then those of the other.
33.But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs.”
The thief was on the cross when Jesus forgave him and the thief was still on the cross when he died. It is only logical that he died on the cross without baptism. Fairly dependable proof.
The words Jesus said on the cross which in english means it is finished, was the same words they used then when someone had paid a debt which meant paid in full.
“Corey, surely you are not suggesting that the Roman soldiers removed the thief from the cross before he died in order that he might be baptized”?
– I think Corey’s point is that the thief could have been baptized under Johns baptism, seeing the thief had some knowledge of the kingdom… we can conclude he knew something about Jesus…was he baptized of John-who knows, but we do know he was forgiven and I dont think none of us want to forgiven as the thief ( on a cross )
According to the “standard” expressed by some, if it is not mentioned in the New Testament we can’t claim it…so the thief was not baptized.
I agree Rich. I dont know if he was baptized or not and honestly dont think it matters, seeing Christ was/is God and could do as he pleased. I will not even say that he cant show that same mercy today for one on the death bed, but again…I just dont see a way around baptism being connected to forgiveness. I have looked at every argument there is – from the greek word eis, to the subject verb agreement in acts 2:38 and then I look at every time in Acts that one was forgiven, he was also baptized. You are welcome to try, but I just dont see a way around it…
The Thief on the Cross
Three scriptural reasons why this is an invalid argument
Some will ask, “Well, what about the thief on the cross? He wasn’t baptized and Jesus very clearly told him he would be in paradise. Doesn’t that prove baptism in not essential for salvation?”
This is a perfectly valid question and makes sense at first glance. However, the problem arises from not having a clear understanding of what baptism represents and what the scriptures tell us about it. According to Romans 6:3-6, baptism represents being unified with Christ in His death, burial and resurrection. The problem with the thief on the cross when Jesus told him he would be with Him in paradise, is that Jesus was still alive. Christ had not yet died or been buried, so He had certainly not risen yet either. Baptism into Christ was not put into practice until Pentecost in Acts chapter 2 after Christ had risen from the dead and ascended to heaven.
I) The thief on the cross was still under the Old Covenant and therefore not subject to this baptism. He was saved just like anyone else under the Old Covenant.
II) But besides that, when Christ was on this earth, He had the authority to forgive people of their sins. Look at Mark 2:9-12:
Which is easier, to tell the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven;’ or to say, ‘Arise, and take up your bed, and walk? ‘But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” — he said to the paralytic — “I tell you, arise, take up your mat, and go to your house.” He arose, and immediately took up the mat, and went out in front of them all; so that they were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, “We never saw anything like this!”
When Christ was on the cross, He was still on this earth. And He had the authority to forgive sins.
III) An additional point to consider: To even position the argument about the thief on the cross one must be able to prove he was never baptized. But consider the following verses:
Mark 1:4-5
John came baptizing in the wilderness and preaching a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. Then ALL the land of Judea, and those from Jerusalem, went out to him and were all baptized by him in the Jordan River, confessing their sins.
So who can really say the thief was never baptized before he was crucified? According to Mark 1:4-5 there is a plausible chance he was!
Randy expressed “So who can really say the thief was never baptized before he was crucified? According to Mark 1:4-5 there is a plausible chance he was!”
That’s interesting. I wonder if that same approach would work with the “plausible chance” that the early church sang with instruments seeing as the early church included converted Jews who would certainly have continued in the tradition of their Old Testament forefathers in the use of instruments in worship.
New Testament doesn’t state that the thief was baptized nor does it state that instruments were prohibted in church worship.
Actually, there seems to be some dispute in the modern day Jewish community over whether IM was ever used in synagogues before the destruction of the second temple in 70 AD. It rather ironically parallels the divide here and elsewhere over IM.
We don’t need to know whether the thief was baptized by John or not. Either way, he had sins at that point that needed forgiveness. Jesus forgave them. His sins already being forgiven, the thief would have no need of baptism for the forgiveness of sins. And, since the doctrine of baptism was a symbol of Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection AND had not yet been commanded for all, he would have no way to be baptized into Jesus anyway.
The question of the thief on the cross doesn’t trouble me in the least. Then again, Jesus forgiving one man’s sins because of the faith of his friends, not himself (Mark 2:3-5) doesn’t bother me either.
(continued; sorry!)
Oddly, though, I’ve never heard anyone argue that we’ll be forgiven for the faith of our friends, even though there’s greater Biblical precedent for such than a believer who is not baptized being saved!
I do not understand why people are such cowards to write things and want to discuss it on this board, but will not have a debate? If you really think the way you believe is correct, then why won’t you have a debate and back it up with scriptures?
Who are you referring to, Adams?
Adams is my last name
Nice to meet you. I meant you were you referring to in the above post (i.e. the cowards you won’t debate)?
That should read “I meant who” not “you”…
I am being the coward people who will not debate a member of the church of Christ.
What I meant to say is I am meaning the coward people who will not debate a member of the church of Christ
Adams,
Johnny (the head hyperconservative church of Christ person in our area) had the chance to debate Chris Knight, and he refused based on his perception of Chris’s lack of “Bible Knowledge” (his words). (By the way, can you find in Scripture where we are not to contend (Jude 1:3) based on a person’s lack of “Bible Knowledge”?)
I extended a similar challenge on this blog for a written debate, and it was also swiftly shot down. Why? I suppose it is because Johnny wants to “defeat destroy [me] and uplift truth”. Yes, he said that it was the goal of the church of Christ to destroy people who disagree with him. Real Christlike, eh?
Another church of Christ person on this blog has also challenged Johnny to a written debate, which he has refused. I would like to be able to explain why he refused Clint (who he considers a librul), but I can’t really explain because of the disjointed nature of his email to Randy.
So, it seems that the only one refusing debates is the head hyperconservative church of Christ person in our area.
Rick are telling us you preach from what is not in the bible? Is that how you justify preaching the baptist church? LOL
“I would like to be able to explain why he refused Clint (who he considers a librul), but I can’t really explain because of the disjointed nature of his email to Randy”
-come on Nathan, I was hoping someone could put that email puzzle together 🙂 Johnny just types what he thinks and doesnt think it thru before he sends the email and often I am left at trying to read between the lines and fiqure out just what he is trying to say. Dang dude I was hoping you could fiqure his email out:) btw, I think this may be why he doesnt want to have a wriiten debate, can you imagine trying to fiqure that out. Thats why I also told Johnny he could ask Norm to help him.
Corey the example of the scripture where Paul seems to be saying he will know God as well as God knows him when he is physically in the presents of God. And that he knows God only partially as well as he will then.
Or are you telling me you, unlike what Paul is saying, are in complete knowledge of God and know he like he knows you? I assume you asked that cause “I got cha” is coming.
I apply it to say that the Master is greater then the servant and Paul knows he is not God.
As for prophesy, last time I read, it was not being nailed to a cross.
Otherwise under your teachings, once Peter utters the answer to what you should do to be saved. If someone in a crowd of people believed the message and trusted Christ they would still go to hell if they died on the walk down to the river?!?!?!??!?!
And since God is locked into the NEW LAW, he has to say she is going to hell. Under your teaching you raise the prophesy about Christ, to the level of Christ, thus you make it a type of Idol of sorts because it has the same power as Christ.
I chose to allow the Master to over lay the servants and to trump the servants. Thus Mercy would apply to someone who heard and had believed the truth but died before being able to keep all that the new law demands.
Under your system there is no reason to visit someone dieing in a hospital because if they are not already saved going in, there is no point wasting time on them since they can not be baptized because the nurses and doctors would have you thrown in jail for attempting it.
To bad, so sad, they had their chance already.
That is not a picture of the Christ I read about when he was here on the earth!
I find it interesting the Psalms you quote about the Holy One. Are all the old passages about Christ buried in the middle of other thoughts going on, or is this the only passage that seems to suddenly switch gears and back again?
Corey the example of the scripture where Paul seems to be saying he will know God as well as God knows him when he is physically in the presents of God. And that he knows God only partially as well as he will then.
Or are you telling me you, unlike what Paul is saying, are in complete knowledge of God and know he like he knows you? I assume you asked that cause “I got cha” is coming.
There is no “I got ‘cha” coming. I am just saying that Paul is referring to seeing the Lord face to face. He’s talking about shedding our earthly bodies and being transformed that we can understand the true nature of God. That is different from understanding his doctrine or commandments. Again, if you think his talking about the latter, you’re saying that the Holy Spirit was unable to inspire him to accurately teach what God would have him to teach. That would contradict 1 Corinthians 14:37.
If someone in a crowd of people believed the message and trusted Christ they would still go to hell if they died on the walk down to the river?!?!?!??!?!
Here we go again looking for loopholes. I’ve said before that God will judge those people and that His judgment will be righteous. I can’t say what will happen in those cases because that isn’t what the Bible deals with. The scriptures deal with what is going to happen to the overwhelming majority of us. You, like so many others here, want to base the plan of salvation upon exceptions rather than the rule.
Under your system there is no reason to visit someone dieing in a hospital because if they are not already saved going in, there is no point wasting time on them since they can not be baptized because the nurses and doctors would have you thrown in jail for attempting it.
To bad, so sad, they had their chance already.
This is not what I have said, neither is it how I feel. Thanks for telling me what I believe.
I find it interesting the Psalms you quote about the Holy One. Are all the old passages about Christ buried in the middle of other thoughts going on, or is this the only passage that seems to suddenly switch gears and back again?
To be quite honest, yes, many of them do. I would encourage you to look at the prophecies that the NT writers refer to and then look at them in their context from the OT. Sometimes it does seem as if they are buried in other thoughts and suddenly switch back. A good example of this is Zechariah 11:12-13 which predicts the actions of Judas. While Psalm 22 seems much more clear-cut, others do not.
Nathan,
The televised stuff, in the end, it doesn’t matter.
It’s the written material, and what is being chronicled about this cult (I’ve not problem at all calling it a cult now, because that’s what it is) that will endure a long time, and will be here for anyone to find about Johnny Robertson and James Oldfield and Norm Fields and everything else about their self-styled “Church of Christ”.
Heck, the more “hay” they make about this (to use Robertson’s own term) the worse this is looking for them.
Not in the short term, however. In terms of television, they still have an upper hand. But how many people in this world really tune in to WGSR, in either Henry County or Rockingham County?
Now how many people in this world can use a web browser, and find out the real uncensored truth about Robertson, Oldfield and Fields?
People here might see three men with money enough to buy airtime. But people out there – the greater part of the world, of which this area is far less than 1% of – do see three cult leaders at work in this area. And they see a number of individuals who are daring to take a stand against them. Especially you, Nathan 🙂 You’ve got a lot more respect out there than you know.
Robertson is more like the “tough guy” convict who thinks he has the run of a prison. Okay, fine: he has power in a prison. But outside the prison walls, he is nothing. He holds no sway at all. The world laughs at him if he thinks he can control it like he controlled the prison.
So why should I or anyone else care about what a very small group of people here thinks about me? That Robertson and his followers are even gloating that they’ve “hurt” me and “turned the community against” me cries out about their lack of humility and their arrogant presumption.
It also indicates to me that they suffer from extreme delusions of grandeur.
And based on what I heard about what happened during last night’s show (which I didn’t see because I was busy with better things in the real world) more people here are starting to see Robertson for what he really is, too.
In the end, nobody will take Johnny Robertson, James Oldfield, Norm Fields, and their cult seriously.
I can wait to see that happen.
Below is a comment Jeff made on my blog about Daniel Sommer – man,this also reminds me of someone else, can anyone guess who??
From Jeff: Daniel Sommer’s problem was largely one of tactics. He saw those who he believed to be teaching error as his personal enemies. He saw himself as a brotherhood-wide watchdog. He ridiculed those whom he believed to be wrong, he engaged in name-calling, he invoked guilt by association, and the like.
On June 20, 2008 at 7:35 am faithful Said:
Rick are telling us you preach from what is not in the bible? Is that how you justify preaching the baptist church? LOL
Faithful, John the apostle tells us that there were more teachings of Christ than could ever be contained in written form. So when Jesus is silent on a particular subject or issue what do you do? You consider the whole of the Bible (The Old Testament is just as much God’s Word as the New Testament) to determine if actions would honor God or not. Hymns that speak of the truths of God’s Word sung to instrumental music does not dishonor God. It certainly honored God in the Old Testament era why wouldn’t it honor Him in the New Testament era?
“He’s talking about shedding our earthly bodies and being transformed that we can understand the true nature of God. That is different from understanding his doctrine or commandments.”
Yes it TOTALLY is, and I TOTALLY agree with you. As long as we follow the New Law and ignore the life example that Christ used to administer the law, it is different and THE LAW, then does not reflect God at all!!
Thus we follow The New Law in total fear of making a mistake and we miss the love relationship Jesus is calling Simon Peter to!
“Again, if you think his talking about the latter, you’re saying that the Holy Spirit was unable to inspire him to accurately teach what God would have him to teach. That would contradict 1 Corinthians 14:37.”
Corey I am NOT saying Paul was being inaccurate, I am saying that The Law alone is not an accurate picture of a Father who gave a perfect son to suffer and die. And it is not the picture that Jesus himself gives to us through his life!
That the Law alone is like the blind men looking at the elephant and each seeming right about their idea of who the elephant was. That maybe we should START listening to the Master more and balance that against what his pupils say about how things are going to work under the New Law.
Thus the picture I see allowing Mercy because of Jesus actions to filter the law.
Otherwise we are no better then a teacher failing a student for not bring his homework to school because his house burned down last night!
Judgment and Law, with out Mercy, and that requires faith in God through the Holy Spirit helping us to do them is not the full picture of God. It is only part of that picture and that needs to find its way back into our Churches so they WILL become HIS Church again!
Is there a danger that someone will attempt to abuse that system and take off on a “no rules matter” approach, yes, but if we love one another as we are asked to do and we submit to each other as the original Church did do, then we might be able to find that unity that every one wants to see so that we can give the Good News in balance!
I would rather keep the law because I love the one who died in my place, then hid behind The Law so I don’t risk him squashing me because of a mistake I made!
The results are the same, holding up the New Law, but the methods for calling people to follow it are radically different. Do it because you love and fear/respect him, like the message to Simon Peter.
Otherwise it should have been, Simon Peter do you fear me, yes Load I fear you, then feed my sheep or else!
Rick wrote:
The Old Testament is just as much God’s Word as the New Testament
True, but is not binding upon Christians unless restated in the NT. It was written “for our learning” and to point to the Christ, not to be used to determine how we worship.
It certainly honored God in the Old Testament era why wouldn’t it honor Him in the New Testament era?
Because He asked for it in the OT. He actually gave rules and regulations regarding them as well. He never did that in the NT. This is the fallacy – people think that all or any of the Jews played instruments in praising God, which isn’t true. Only the Levites played the instruments and only those instruments that were given to them by David through the commandments of the Lord.
You can go to plenty of historical references (not written by members of the church of Christ by the way) and see that the music of the Christian church was exclusively vocal for nearly a thousand years until the Catholic church introduced the organ.
So when CoC arrive in heaven will they sit down when they play music? Or is there something written about you can do it again once you are in heaven? 😉 And yes I am yanking your chain with that! So the less fun way to ask that would be, how do the rules change for you when you get to heaven or are there no musical instruments to be used?
I’m curious, would CoC ever broadcast a meeting, since there is no command to use TV and no example of it being used? And do you record anything to rebroadcast over the net or radio since there is no example of that either?
walkinlove,
All of that sounds really nice, but I’m not sure if you believe it. When I mentioned that most denominations do not follow the Lord’s instructions for congregational leadership you accused me of not showing mercy. To say that you can excuse direct, willful violations under the guise of mercy is not applying mercy to the law – it is trying to excuse error. Jesus also mentioned justice as one of the weightier matters of the law. There is no justice in ignoring commandments – there is only disobedience.
I would rather keep the law because I love the one who died in my place, then hid behind The Law so I don’t risk him squashing me because of a mistake I made!
I do keep the law because I love Jesus, not just out of fear. In fact, He said that keeping His commandment is HOW we show our love for Him (John 14:15). And before you try to go to Matthew 22 and try to make those as the only commandments of Jesus you need to reread 1 Corinthians 14:37.
There is a balance to be found. Some only care about the letter of the law so they can be “right” all the time. They show none of Jesus’ love and mercy. Some only care about feelings and care nothing for obedience. They think that being “kind” or “good” makes them above having to obey the commandments of God. The truth is found where it usually is – between the extremes.
“I do keep the law because I love Jesus, not just out of fear.”
It shouldn’t be out of fear at all.
Corey for maximum benefit, before we start into a detailed entry into an area that talks about spiritual gifting, something both baptists and CoC’s believe for different reasons. Shouldn’t we go ask some Pentecostal believers to enter into the dialog so that we might see things from their perspective also?
I’m sure some of you know someone who follows that teaching who could ask their leaders or others to enter the dialog.
I believe we all might learn something including them from our various points of view on the word. Just as I have learned a great deal about CoC from my dialog with you Corey, and for that I am glad!
But I will say I see that those in the service will be ignored for not being orderly, not that God will ignore them. That God wants order in the service, not Chaos!
But for the full effect lets open that dialog with Pentecostals, can we?
Are you ok with that? And are the baptists who are here also ok with that?
should be do not believe for different reasons, sorry!
Luke 23:40
But the other answered, and rebuking him said, “Do you not even fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation?
John 9:31
“We know that God does not hear sinners; but if anyone is God-fearing and does His will, He hears him.
Acts 9:31
So the church throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria enjoyed peace, being built up; and going on in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit, it continued to increase.
Acts 10:35
but in every nation the man who fears Him and does what is right is welcome to Him.
Romans 11:20
Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith Do not be conceited, but fear;
I could go on and on to show you how Godly fear is a part of the Christian life. And just so you know there is more to Godly fear than respect, I point you to:
Philippians 2:12
So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling;
Do you tremble before those you simply respect? Ignoring the severity of God is how we get to this “I’m okay, you’re okay” theology and the misconception of God being like a kind old uncle who never scolds or punishes us. We don’t fear God in that we’re afraid that every mistake will condemn us – we trust in His grace. However, when we overlook His severity we don’t get the whole picture of who God is.
And just so you know, I am someone who is neutral as far as being locked into a denominational belief, I have sat in services that were various backgrounds, including baptists, and pentecostal and those in between. Very different in nature and how they do things. I have listened to some CoC services I found on the web so I would have an idea of how they would be.
Thus I would be very interested in a dialog that includes the various beliefs. Especially since the only ones here do not allow those things in services.
Lets get to the truth or at least a better understanding of why each does as they do.
I’m gone for awhile, have a great day everyone!
walkinlove,
I’m not trying to start a conversation on spiritual gifts, I’m pointing you to the fact that the things Paul wrote are the commandments of God. Most of the time someone points out that loving Jesus entails following His commandments, someone else runs to Matthew 22 and acts like Jesus only gave 2 commandments. That simply isn’t true.
If someone wants to discuss that area I have no problem with it. This isn’t my blog and I don’t control who participates or determine the subject matter. I do try to answer the questions thrown my way and attempt to teach the truth in love when error is espoused.
I think you missed the point of me pointing you to 1 Corinthians 14:37.
“Fear” is not the fear as in being scared of something or in horror of it. It doesn’t mean being “afraid” at all!
“Fear” here means a healthy respect for something.
There are several activities that I enjoy, any of which are potentially dangerous and even life-threatening if one is not cautious. Swimming is one of them. One of the first things I learned before knowing how to swim was “fear the water”. Fear it, but don’t be afraid of it. Respect it for what it can do. But don’t let that stop you from approaching it and having fun with it. I’ve always respected the water but have never been in fear of it.
Just so, as a saved follower of Christ I can approach God boldly and respectfully, without being afraid of Him.
As can anyone.
Philippians 2:12
So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling;
Do you tremble before the water? I agree that Godly fear mostly entails great respect, but that isn’t all that it is.
Anything can cause trembling.
Paul could be telling his readers to stop doing drugs and face the withdrawal, for all we know.
Corey, do you literally tremble when you approach God?
Actually, Paul was saying that even in his absence the Philippians were to work out their salvation with fear and trembling. It is clearly following God and seeking to stay close to Him that was to cause the fear and trembling. To say that it could be from drug withdrawal is absurd to say the least.
Do I literally tremble? I know that my soul does when I think of the power and judgment of God, just as the respect and fear comes from my soul. Has this ever occurred physically? Yes. When contemplating the justice and severity of God my body has literally trembled, although that doesn’t appear to be the emphasis. You could fake or manufacture physical trembling.
28And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
Matthew 10:28
13 The LORD Almighty is the one you are to regard as holy,
He is the one you are to fear,
He is the one you are to dread,
Isaiah 8:13
I do not in any way see God as a bitter avenger striking people down who do not agree on certain scriptural interpretations and human inferences.
However, I cannot look at verses like these and not think the Lord’s wrath is very real against evil, and the power he possesses is beyond the mere respect or fear I have for anything found on Earth.
“Do I literally tremble? I know that my soul does when I think of the power and judgment of God, just as the respect and fear comes from my soul. Has this ever occurred physically? Yes. When contemplating the justice and severity of God my body has literally trembled, although that doesn’t appear to be the emphasis. You could fake or manufacture physical trembling.”
So you’re saying that though we can do it, we don’t have to PHYSICALLY tremble, even though Paul says to “work out” our salvation with “trembling”?
Interesting.
On the same basis it could be said that we don’t have to be PHYSICALLY BAPTIZED WITH WATER in order to be saved. That the inward baptism of the spirit is enough. Because the outward baptism can be “faked or manufactured” also in a sense.
Yes?
well at least one pentacostal chimes in from time to time, but corey uaually dismisses my questions. or faithless speaks some words of wisdom,which btw i look forward to. ok cocers i read on one of these posts that you believe if a man has been divorced and remarried if he gets saved he should leave his current wife and return to the first. is this correct? i want to learn more about what you really teach………………..
lee
DMH wrote:
I do not in any way see God as a bitter avenger striking people down who do not agree on certain scriptural interpretations and human inferences.
However, I cannot look at verses like these and not think the Lord’s wrath is very real against evil, and the power he possesses is beyond the mere respect or fear I have for anything found on Earth.
I think we agree on this, but I know we disagree on what can fall under the banner of interpretations and inferences. I appreciate that last paragraph. I think you really understand this concept as we all should.
Chris wrote:
So you’re saying that though we can do it, we don’t have to PHYSICALLY tremble, even though Paul says to “work out” our salvation with “trembling”?
Interesting.
On the same basis it could be said that we don’t have to be PHYSICALLY BAPTIZED WITH WATER in order to be saved. That the inward baptism of the spirit is enough. Because the outward baptism can be “faked or manufactured” also in a sense.
Yes?
I didn’t say we don’t have to. I was saying that the most important part was the spiritual part since the outer can be manufactured and insincere. If contemplating the awesomeness and severity of God can’t produce trembling (spiritual and physical) within us then we don’t appreciate who He is.
Yes, we DO have to be physically baptized with water to be saved. We MUST be born of the spirit and of water. Jesus tied water baptism to salvation…like it or not.
However, I would agree that baptism will not save alone. You could be immersed and have no faith (only doing it for show or to please someone else). You could be immersed and never repent. All of these things must work together to be obedient to God. Leaving out any of them is disobeying God and leave the individual without hope of salvation.
“Yes, we DO have to be physically baptized with water to be saved. We MUST be born of the spirit and of water. Jesus tied water baptism to salvation…like it or not.”
No, He did not.
He said that we must be born of both water (flesh) and the spirit to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.
And even Mark 16:16 can be disputed in that the verse does not show up in the earliest manuscripts or reflected in the external evidence left by the original Christians. It is now thought to have been added-on later.
well at least one pentacostal chimes in from time to time, but corey uaually dismisses my questions. or faithless speaks some words of wisdom,which btw i look forward to. ok cocers i read on one of these posts that you believe if a man has been divorced and remarried if he gets saved he should leave his current wife and return to the first. is this correct? i want to learn more about what you really teach………………..
lee
Lee, that isn’t fair. In this very topic you asked questions about “original sin” and I answered them. I’ve tried to answer all of your questions, not dismiss them. You only gave one scripture in your question and I addressed it. If you give more I will address them as well. Don’t lump me in with the hit-and-run style of “faithful”.
As to your question (see, I’m answering you):
Matthew 5: 31″It was said, ‘WHOEVER SENDS HIS WIFE AWAY, LET HIM GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE’;
32but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
Jesus plainly states that unless there has been fornication (unchastity) there is no grounds for remarriage. That new relationship will be a constant state of adultery. If your spouse commits fornication with another you can divorce them and marry another. If YOU commit fornication and your spouse divorces you, you cannot remarry as that relationship would be perpetual adultery. You could return to your original spouse, but you can’t marry another.
Have I explained this clearly enough? Let me know.
Chris wrote:
He said that we must be born of both water (flesh) and the spirit to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.
You put the word “flesh” in there, not the Lord. This second birth has nothing to do with the flesh.
John 3: 4Nicodemus said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born, can he?”
5Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
Jesus, based upon Nicodemus’ statement, said that the birth of the water and the spirit had nothing to do with the physical birth. Could anyone go back and be born of the flesh again? No. We have already been born of the flesh. The birth of the water and the spirit harmonizes perfectly with verses like Acts 2:38.
I guess you think Jesus must have thought very little of Nicodemus’s IQ level if Nicodemus had to be told he had to be born of his mother. That’s the craziest position there is. LOL
Chris it sounds like you’re preaching two baptisms?
Corey,
Just about every scholar out there agrees that the “water” being referenced is that from the mother’s womb.
Heck, I’ve known that since I was knee-high to a grasshopper.
If Jesus was talking about baptism as a ritual act, don’t you suppose that He would mention baptism specifically, with no question at all about its prescription?
Later on in the same chapter, Jesus tells Nicodemus that “Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.”
Jesus says “whoever BELIEVES in him is not condemned”. He does not say that “whoever believes and is baptized” is not condemned.
So… which is it? Which are we to believe?
A legalistic interpretation, or what is taught throughout the New Testament: that salvation comes by faith alone?
bold off?
Corey,
I have to take a pause in the discussion to commend you once again. You are the only person with your doctrinal POV that is willing to engage people consistently, exhibiting the qualities of the fruit of the spirit that we read about in the book of Galatians. Any time one of the Local Gang show up, you just see discord and things thrown into chaos and disorder. When you post, you do so respectfully, and in a manner consistent with the Scriptural qualities that a Christian is supposed to maintain.
In fact, you’ve been having so many discussions at once that I haven’t been pressing the debate you and I have talked about having. If at some point you want to put these other conversations on hold and have that discussion, just let me know.
And I appreciate that although we have a bit of residual negativity that rears it’s ugly head every now and again (thanks fully to the Local Gang), things have been very civil of late. Thanks to all.
Mr. Answer
well if you will please explain how the new wife and kids fit in. they are to be discarded?
and there have been plenty of times you have ignored me.
but i know im not a “christian” so you dont owe me anything. you say i grouped you with faithless,not so but you know the exstream views of the southside three are just magnifications of the cocs tenants. how great a mater a little fire kindleth. i tell you the greater sin would be destroying two famlies rather than one.
lets look at all of the things you teach. as johnny only wants to talk about baptism,like no rapture of the saints……. man i completely misread that one.
jesus loves me this i know{no music please}
lee
Just about every scholar out there agrees that the “water” being referenced is that from the mother’s womb.
That isn’t true. Just like faithful said, why would Jesus tell Nicodemus that he needed to be born of his mother? He clearly had already done that!
You point to Jesus teaching how important belief is. Well, the demons believe (and tremble by the way). Are they saved? Belief is never mere mental assent – it is belief backed up with actions.
Salvation does not come by faith alone. You can’t show me ONE verse that says we’re saved by faith ALONE. Will you say they we’re saved without repentance? If we must have repentance than we’re clearly not saved by faith ALONE. Faith, repentance, confession, baptism and grace all are part of our salvation.
Lee,
I apologize if I’ve ignored you. As you can see, sometimes it is basically me verses everyone else here. I do my best to answer all questions, and per 1 Peter 3:15, I do believe I owe you answers.
As to this:
i tell you the greater sin would be destroying two famlies rather than one.
I tell you that sin has consequences. Sometimes our sins hurt others and that is almost always the case in divorce and adultery. Clearly a person could choose to stay in their marriage, but Jesus said that marriage would be adultery. This seems like a very hard thing to me, but Jesus said it to be true. Perhaps if we taught more strongly how much God hates divorce and tried to keep marriages together more we wouldn’t have to deal with such issues.
yes nathan you also could speak more when im posting.
you sure used to. little help would be nice even if you dont agree with this pentacostal.
lee
i dont consider you an opponent. i have on several occasions tried to reach out to you. but as long as you see us as unsaved you will never understand a different position. still waiting on the rapture………..
lee
I’m always reading, lee, even if I’m not always posting! If nothing strikes me as needing to be said, I won’t say it, because I’ll have nothing to say!
Part of the thing is that I’m trying to focus more on finding links to post than actually participating in discussions at the moment, since they seem to be running well.
But I’m glad you continue to post, lee! I hope you know that.
Nathan
corey i asked you several days ago why do you think
that people would follow the bible and the teachings of christ only to ignore something “key” to the very life they have chosen. are we hard of hearing or do we hope god will forget something? no it would be better to live this short life in any way you chose than to waste you life in a self deluded persuit of god. amen?
lee
“You can’t show me ONE verse that says we’re saved by faith ALONE. Will you say they we’re saved without repentance? If we must have repentance than we’re clearly not saved by faith ALONE.”
Habakkuk 2:4
Matthew 9:2
Matthew 9:29
Mark 2:5
Mark 11:22
Luke 7
Acts 26
Romans 1:17
Romans 3
Romans 4
Romans 5:1
Romans 5:2
Romans 9:30
Galatians 2:16 (READ THIS ONE!!)
Galatians 3:8 (READ THIS ONE TOO!!)
Galatians 3:11 (AND THIS ONE TOO DUDE!!)
Galatians 3:25 (YUP!!)
Galatians 3:26 (HOW ARE WE *NOT* SAVED BY FAITH NOW?!?)
Ephesians 2:8 (says it all)
Ephesians 3:17 (says it here too)
Hebrews 11 (pretty much all of it)
I would say that scripture is clear that repentance and faith go hand in hand, also. But a physical work such as baptism is not part of either repentance or faith. An outward sign of that repentance and faith, yes… but it is not a required component of either process.
Re: my previous comment.
Let me clarify something here: I think that repentance and faith, in the context of salvation, are practically one and the same. In that to have repentance there must be something to believe in at first to seek repentance from.
Demons cannot do this. They certainly believe in God, but they are not repentant to God. Humans can be repentant to God, however.
Not one of those verses says faith ALONE saves us. Not one. Some say that faith saves us, but none say faith ONLY or ALONE.
You can’t just say “repentance and faith go hand in hand”. They are two different things. Look up faith and repentance and see if either definition mentions the other word (and not commentary that tries to link them as you have).
Also, I can show you where faith and repentance are both called WORKS (that mankind does) in the Bible. You can’t show me ONE verse that describes baptism as a human work. You can see where it is a work of God. Regardless, none of these things are meritorious works. None will earn the gift that God has given. I’d also like to see the verses where baptism (not John’s baptism) is described as an “outward sign of repentance and faith”.
Chris who’s work is baptism? Can do baptize yourself?
Lee said”still waiting on the rapture………..”
tell us about what this means Lee
hi faithless,
according to the southside three any sinner can baptize
you. you guys are unbelievable. have you asked john for my money yet? dont be scared he dosent look that tough.
i think you can take him.
[ thats a southern expression for fighting ]
still havent addresed johns lying yet either.
glad to have you join us
lee
1th 4:13-18
if you act now faithless we can change your name to faithfull. comfort one another with these words.
remember this offer is for a limited time only! so act now!
lee
I do not doubt when Jesus said dying on the Cross it is finished and God says if we have faith in Him and believe that Jesus died and rose again we are saved. It is obvious that baptism is a physical act. Works of our flesh do not save us. Baptism is something we do to outwardly to show we want to repent for our sins. Repenting and baptism means nothing though if you don’t have faith and are truly sorry for your sins. It is what is within our hearts as God says that saves us. It is our faith through His grace that saves us.
Lee wrote:
i have on several occasions tried to reach out to you.
You have said to me ambiguous things like “join me, the water is fine” and “lose a brother, gain another”. I don’t know how to take these things. Can I, seeing the doctrine of original sin as heresy yolk myself with one who teaches the same? How can I justify that before the Lord? I can have civil discussions with you. If we lived near one another I’m sure we could be friends. However, I can’t condone such teachings that I see in contradiction of the scriptures.
corey i asked you several days ago why do you think
that people would follow the bible and the teachings of christ only to ignore something “key” to the very life they have chosen. are we hard of hearing or do we hope god will forget something? no it would be better to live this short life in any way you chose than to waste you life in a self deluded persuit of god. amen?
I’m sorry Lee, I don’t recall that. To be honest, I’m not sure what you mean by that. What “key” thing am I ignoring? I’m afraid I need you to explain this to me further.
And as for those want to destroy those who don’t agree with them. We are suppose to try to follow the examples of Jesus. He brought unbelievers to God by teaching His Word, by showing compassion and mercy. When His own disciples were sending people away because they didn’t think they were good enough to come to see Jesus, Jesus told them they were wrong and to let those people come to him. Those who want to destroy and put stumbling blocks in front of people to come to Jesus are not doing as Jesus teaches us to do.
“Chris who’s work is baptism? Can do baptize yourself?”
I know of a man who had to amputate his own foot with a pocketknife in order to survive a very bad situation. He survived.
If doing extreme surgery on one’s self can save one’s life, then I don’t think God has any problem with anyone baptizing himself/herself either, if that’s what is required to enter into Heaven and no one else is around.
Don’t play the absurdity game with me, faithful. I learned from the finest teachers of the art.
what im saying is why would i choose to ignore a key part of the gospel,”baptism.” i am at the very least smart enough to understand that god knows my heart and i cant fool him. so why do you think we waste our lives trying to hopefully get past god. what would be the reason to try and pull that off? you would have to reasonably conclude that we are self deluded at least in your estimation.
i dont mean to be unclear about my invitations but i have become quick with the one liners for the people like faithless. you also need to at least consider that god deals with man in his heart not through his head.
at least thats been my experence.
lee
Luke 23:40 Fear – Pobeo – 1) to put to flight by terrifying (to scare away)
1a) to put to flight, to flee
1b) to fear, be afraid
1b1) to be struck with fear, to be seized with alarm
1b1a) of those startled by strange sights or occurrences
1b1b) of those struck with amazement
1b2) to fear, be afraid of one
1b3) to fear (i.e. hesitate) to do something (for fear of harm)
1c) to reverence, venerate, to treat with deference or
reverential obedience
I would believe this would be a don’t you realize we are going to meet God and you are yelling at the man who claims to be his son!
John 9:31 – theosebes – 1) worshipping God (This appears to be less fear and more worship relation)
Acts 9:31 – Fear – phobos – 1) fear, dread, terror
1a) that which strikes terror
2) reverence for one’s husband
So I am scared to death and at the same time encouraged? Revencial fear would be a better choice for understanding the passage!
Acts 10:35 – theosebes – worshipper of God
Romans 11:20 – Fear – phobeo (See above)
Philippians 2:12 – Fear – phobos
Trembling – tromos 1) a trembling or quaking with fear
2) with fear and trembling, used to describe the anxiety of one who distrusts his ability completely to meet all requirements, but religiously does his utmost to fulfill his duty
It’s about understanding how big God is and how little we are. Thus we know we need him and through that respectful fear that I do my my best to conform to his teachings, ALL of his teachings, including when he was here!
It’s a reverential respect not a quake in your boots fear!
Le me add corey, I also appreciate your attitude and answers sir. I didn’t realize the others were also asking you questions. I can table my posts and follow along with their questions till then.
Have a Blessed Day!
I wonder, how about the owner creating some new threads instead of breaking back and forth and getting confused here, it would help to have some focus on things.
How about some subjects:
Fear of God
Spiritual Gifts (I’d like to give lee equal time under the gun LOL)
Baptism
Jesus Life Example vs Acts etc.
Old Testament vs New Testament differences
Thats just a few suggestions, it would help keep things on a subject line a little better assuming we all comply to focus on a topic that is!
Lee wrote:
what would be the reason to try and pull that off? you would have to reasonably conclude that we are self deluded at least in your estimation.
Lee, the problem is that you are only looking to yourself and your motives. I don’t know your motives, but the motives of some others seems clear to me when they post what they do.
When I was first shown the biblical teachings on baptism I rejected them. Why? Because it didn’t fit into what I already believed to be true. It was more important to me that I justified my previously held beliefs than to obey the Lord. I see this attitude in many others. When the word says to be immersed for the forgiveness of sins, and we realize we haven’t done that, we have two choices – fight it or submit to it. There are also greater implications to it. What about Granny and Uncle Billy Bob who weren’t immersed for the remission of sins and have now passed on? We get hung up on the situation of someone we love that we must fight the word because we don’t like the implications of it. I’ve dealt with this first-hand.
I guess my question becomes this: why, when someone is shown that baptism is not an “outward showing of repentance” or something done after salvation do so many rail against it?
still havent answered the question?
and i know i live in the south but there is no billy bob
You asked why someone would try to pull off neglecting baptism and I explained it to you. I don’t know how I can be any clearer.
I live in the south as well, and I’m sure there are some Billy Bobs floating around out there. Have you seen Swing Blade? There’s a Billy Bob for you.
“Don’t play the absurdity game with me, faithful. I learned from the finest teachers of the art.”
You are absured that’s for sure. My point is that being baptized is passive.
If someone really wants to actually debate I can arrange that. My brother is a church of Christ preacher who has debated lots and lots of people.
Acts 10:47Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
48And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
How can you have the holly spirit and not already been baptized? Just curios as to how that worked?
sorry holy spirit
Also why does Paul not remember how many people he baptized when they were so few in number according to him. I would think that since it was a life and death spiritual matter he would have had a better memory on the subject.
And it is interesting to see that our struggle was the same back then based on accounts from the book Church History in plain language.
“You are absured that’s for sure.”
I take pride in it, and you can’t spell.
“My point is that being baptized is passive.”
But what if a person cannot be baptized at all? So much stock is being put in it by you that it is a MUST for salvation… but there ARE cases where it is not possible.
So are those people damned to Hell?
If not, WHY not, and still keep with your argument that it is required?
Don’t bring up Diane Odell, we already know what happened to her. I’m glad she was able to do it, if it meant so much to her.
But what of those who turn to Christ and die without baptism? I’ve already mentioned a case or two regarding this before.
If you say that “Oh, God will understand,” then where is THAT to be found in scripture?
By the way, God blessed us with a magnificent performance tonight of our musical.
Judging by the applause, I’d dare say that more people will get more life-affirming and positive message out of our lil’ show, than they will from a tent-full of carpetbagging hucksters from the Church of Christ In Name Only.
(And one person told me tonight that I was “a hero” for “taking on that nutcase Johnny Robertson”, parse that as you will 😛 )
“…And one person told me tonight that I was “a hero” for “taking on that nutcase Johnny Robertson”, parse that as you will”
But, Chris, how can that be? faithful has declared you to be the village hypocrite, which I can only assume came down from his boss JR. If they declare things to be, then they must be, because they are Without Error in their interpretations of Scripture. Your friend must have been mistaken with regard to their assessment of your recent activities.
By the way, is it me or does “village hypocrite” sound like a very strange designation? I’ve heard of “village idiot” before, but “village hypocrite”? That’s new.
“But, Chris, how can that be? faithful has declared you to be the village hypocrite, which I can only assume came down from his boss JR. If they declare things to be, then they must be,”
Johnny Robertson has also declared that he has turned the entire community against me.
After being greeted by so many well-wishers last night, and one who openly ridiculed Robertson and his cult, it has to be wondered what Robertson’s definition of “community” is. Because his community certainly doesn’t seem to be the kind to take in a good musical. Not that I expected them to, either.
I think Robertson’s notion of “community” is more like what winds up happening in Las Vegas in Stephen King’s novel The Stand. Which would mean that Johnny Robertson is Randall Flagg. Makes sense when you think about it.
Chris you list all those verses and none of then say Faith alone or faith only. The ONLY place in the bible it says faith only is right here in the negative
Jas 2:24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
(KJV)
faithful, let me ask you a question. prior to them being baptized in acts 2:38 they had faith in christ seeing they were pricked in their hearts. was this a living faith? or was this a dead faith? keep in mind you teach one is dead until baptized. Jas 2:24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. i do see that faithful. you also teach repentance is a work. is repentance prior to baptism? does repentance come from a dead faith or living faith? on no, i see a problem here faithful. if james is correct a dead man cant have living faith, so wonder what made their faith alive prior to baptism in acts 2:38? how could a dead stoney heart have living faith to repent? do you not see something here faithful? let me ask again, did the spiritual dead men prior to acts 2:38 have living faith ? seems they had a living faith how else could they obey. i guess paul knew what he was talking about when he said one is jusified upon faith in christ.”know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ”
Acts 10:47Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
48And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
How can you have the holly spirit and not already been baptized? Just curios as to how that worked?
I never saw an answer to this, anyone have any idea? I would have thought you needed to have belief and be baptized first before the Holy Spirit came.
Oh and while I am at it, what does the sin remission, the water or is it Christ?
Oh and since I am at it, I reread in John where Jesus was washing feet. Very interesting things being said there that almost make me think they did not need baptism because they had been with Jesus, when Jesus was asked to wash all of the disciple, he responds in an interesting way!
Anyone ever looked at that?
Oh I heard that one of the reasons CoC discounts Jesus’ blood from being able to remove sins is this passage in
John 20:17Jesus said to her, “Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.'”
Now its interesting to note that had I been there I would have wanted to hug him that was lost and dead and I would have had a hard time letting him go! How can it be that this passage is seen as anything but Jesus limiting his exposure to others in the current state of his body.
Also some other translations use the word hold instead of cling I believe.
I would say if this passage is being used to limit Jesus’ blood it seems to be taken out of context to me.
Also I will note that while Christ said things to Thomas about putting his finger in the holes, I get no indication Thomas actually did it, it would appear he was to blown away to do anything at all except call him who he was, my Lord my God.
Matthew 5:19Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
How can you still be in the Kingdom at all if you break and if you teach others to break one of the commandments? It would seem to run contrary to other verses quoted about not following what was taught.
walkinlove,
thanks for the equal time suggestion{i think}
heres my problem with some of the people who post here.
in their honest effort to get along with some of the moderate cocers they seem to acquiesce to the notion
that they are the ones who are not saved.
as i was riding today, singing along with larnell harris
i felt the presence of the lord in my truck. this isnt an unusual thing. this is my experience and no one here can convince me that i dont know the lord.
if i relate this story to one of them i might get any number of responses. for the largest part of my life i have read gods word with the goal of being a doer and not a hearer only.
never once in all that time did god see fit to reveal any of these doctrines that the cocers preach.
god is able to teach his word without their help.
i cant sit here and accept this polite drumming we are taking. its quite civil but a beating none the less.
is anyone on the same page?
lee
Mark 16:16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.
Why does this not say but whoever does not believe and is not baptized will be condemned? And why is this not talking about the spirit and not the flesh? The next sentence seems to focus on that.
And most important when do we get the version of CoC that believes they can handle snakes and poison and not be hurt?
And is the CoC laying hands on people to pray for healing? Speaking in new tongues? Or are we going to once again selectively be letter of the law?
talk to me w.i.l
im up.
lee
How can you have the holly spirit and not already been baptized? Just curios as to how that worked?
That happened to completely fulfill Joel’s prophecy that the Holy Spirit would be poured out onto “all flesh”. At that point the only 2 types of flesh – Gentile and Jew – had the H.S. poured out onto them. This showed the apostles that the time had come to take the gospel to the Gentiles as well.
Note that they still had to be baptized in water. In Numbers 22 God spoke through a donkey. Did that make the donkey sanctified or was God proving a point? This is a completely unique situation in the NT, so when we balance it with Joel’s prophecy, we can see why it was done that way.
Also why does Paul not remember how many people he baptized when they were so few in number according to him. I would think that since it was a life and death spiritual matter he would have had a better memory on the subject.
If you notice, Paul does recount several that he had immersed. The emphasis had become who had done the baptizing, which was a problem. They were claiming allegiance to the one who had performed the baptism, which is why Paul seemed to prefer to not do the baptisms personally. Of the many Paul baptized do you expect him to have to name each individual? Brother Marshall Keeble is reported to have immersed about 40,000 individuals. Should he have been able to recount each name?
Oh and while I am at it, what does the sin remission, the water or is it Christ?
You must understand that we teach it is Christ that provides the remission through His blood. The Bible teaches us that we are baptized INTO Him (Gal. 3:27), giving us access to that blood. The emphasis on the water is usually by those who reject the biblical teachings on baptism, not those who believe them.
How can you still be in the Kingdom at all if you break and if you teach others to break one of the commandments? It would seem to run contrary to other verses quoted about not following what was taught.
Look at verse 18. Jesus is talking about the Old Law, not His law.
Why does this not say but whoever does not believe and is not baptized will be condemned? And why is this not talking about the spirit and not the flesh? The next sentence seems to focus on that.
And most important when do we get the version of CoC that believes they can handle snakes and poison and not be hurt?
And is the CoC laying hands on people to pray for healing? Speaking in new tongues? Or are we going to once again selectively be letter of the law?
Jesus tied belief and baptism together. If you don’t believe, you’re not going to be baptized. If you’re baptized without belief it is meaningless.
The part about handling serpents and other signs is true. I know that those things occurred. I also know that Paul said such things would pass away when that which is “perfect” (complete) comes. We now have that which is complete – the complete word of God. That isn’t pick-and-choose, that is following the sum of the word.
I have no idea what you’re getting at with Mary M. and Thomas, so I can’t address those things.
Randy – those people did have a living faith because they backed it up with repentance, confession and baptism. If they stopped at belief they would have been like those in John 12:42 whose faith was dead.
“The part about handling serpents and other signs is true. I know that those things occurred. I also know that Paul said such things would pass away when that which is “perfect” (complete) comes. We now have that which is complete – the complete word of God. That isn’t pick-and-choose, that is following the sum of the word.”
The perfect is the Bible?????????????????? LOL thats to funny, the bible that can’t even be learned unless you have a concordance with the Greek in it?????
Thats the perfect he is speaking of? NO the perfect is Jesus himself when he will see him face to face!
The Bible, at least in its current translation does not give a perfect representation of the original Greek!
walkinlove
please explain the equal time LOL comment.
im a little slow. just ask faithless.
lee
How did Moses allow divorce when it was clearly God’s intension that he could not?
Why does Nicodemus appear to be confused about a rebirth, if Christ was speaking about water baptism and he knew that John was already baptizing he should have been able to put it together because he is a teacher of the law. He has somewhat of a mind because he was able to learn the law.
Yet he is not able to handle what water is used for??????
That makes no sense that he would be asking about rebirth of a woman if Jesus was talking about water baptism! Or he was a total idiot, but if that is so, why did he even spend time coming to see Jesus if he wasn’t evaluating the possibility of who he really was!
John 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
Suddenly Jesus is changing gears and talking about being born of flesh in response to his question, could it me that he was really saying.
You are first born of a woman, the water birth, and then you must be born again of the spirit.
How can God’s Spirit live in someone who is not of him? Since you claim that you have to be baptized to be born again? Then you are not of God, but you have God’s spirit, that seems to be off the mark to me.
If you are not saved you are not of God, you can not have the holy spirit!
And speaking of holy spirit, what does the holy spirit do in CoC teachings today?
could it me that = could it be that
lee since I am open to all of what God says, and I am not closed off to the possibility of what the spirit can do, according to his word, I would like to see those things talked about at some point.
A dialog has to happen if we are to regain unity in the faith, or we can be like our fathers and their fathers and rack people for their differences, or stone them, or have them excommunicated etc. This abortion of thought is what has given us the religion of “evolution” in our public schools because of how the church treated science when they started to question the earth being the center of the universe.
That brought about a bitter root judgment against the church by science and now it is they that will not allow other teachings except their faith of something from nothing that became us!
If the church had said, yeah maybe you are right about this, lets look and pray about it, maybe our public schools would still be teaching religion instead of a godless religion.
Being afraid to be wrong has brought some much sin down on the earth and it was done by the church.
Why would Jesus say that you must be born physically? Why would anyone need that instruction? You, like Nicodemus, are trying to make the birth of water and Spirit tied into the physical birth. He was thinking fleshly and that is why he couldn’t understand Jesus’ teaching.
The Spirit of God cannot live in one who isn’t born again. I never said anything to the contrary.
Today, we have the word, delivered by the Holy Spirit. As we follow that word we can bear the fruit thereof. What is the Holy Spirit doing today according to the group you are associated with? Leading us beyond that which He had already delivered through the inspired word?
im with you then.
When Peter preached to them in Acts 2, did they repent because of the message of Christ dying and raising from the dead ?
When Peter preached to them in Acts 2, were they baptized because of the message of Christ dying and raising from the dead ?
At what point did the men in Acts 2 have faith in Christ?
Did the men in Acts 2 have dead faith?
Without works faith is dead, is repentance a work?
Can a dead man exercise living faith?
Paul states one is Justified upon faith in Christ., should Paul have said upon baptism one is justified?
Again, I ask. At what point did the men in Acts 2 have faith in Christ?
Acts 10:44While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
45And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
46For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
48And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
In the above passage they have the holy spirit before they are BAPTIZED! Thus you are wrong about this, either the spirit of God can live in someone before they are his, not likely, or the baptized of the holy spirit is the SIGN of salvation! And Peter, being the good Jewish follower, in the tone of Jewish traditions gave them something to do to affirm their belief in Christ!
Holy Spirit has fallen on someone not Baptized people!!!!!!!!! Acts itself proves it can happen! You can be saved without water as the power!
“Holy Spirit has fallen on someone not Baptized people!!!!!!!!! Acts itself proves it can happen! You can be saved without water as the power!”
Yup.
It’s quite hard to disprove this.
“What Does the Bible Say?” That salvation happens without baptism.
faithful2 – I have already answered you:
those people did have a living faith because they backed it up with repentance, confession and baptism. If they stopped at belief they would have been like those in John 12:42 whose faith was dead.
walkinlove,
You are trying to take a unique incident that fulfilled a prophecy and showed the apostles that the gospel was to be taken to the gentiles and make it a sign of salvation. You can’t find a single other instance where this type of occurrence was linked to salvation or taught as part of salvation.
Peter and Paul were writing for baptism and against circumcision long after the conversion of Cornelius, so to say that their water baptism was just in line with Jewish traditions doesn’t “hold water” (pun intended). You say that the spirit fell on un-baptized people. True, but they weren’t un-baptized for long. Also, the Spirit fell before Peter even finished telling them about Jesus (verse 44). So were they saved without even knowing all about Jesus?
On June 23, 2008 at 10:24 am coreydavis Said:
Why would Jesus say that you must be born physically?
And why would Jesus tell him about baptism in water as means of forgiveness – did he also tell him baptism was a picture of His death and resurrection? No. Seeing Jesus had not died and risen at this point, there is no way this was understood as its taught today by cofC folk.
How does God’s Spirit live in an UNSAVED person? If there is an exception to a rule it is not a rule corey!
If you notice how Johnny says that others do not look at the whole Bible and seems to me that Johnny doesn’t. Johnny shows on TV what parts of the Bible he wants people to see. How come he doesn’t address these verses in the Bible. John3:16 “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.” Romans 10:13 “Whoever calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.” Luke 7:50 “Then He said to the women,”Your faith has saved you. Go in peace.” Acts 2:21 “And it shall come to pass that whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.” John6:47 “Most assuredly, I say to you he who believes in Me has everlasting life.” Johnny also seems to show that Johnny and crew are more like the Pharisees who who were seeking to argue with the disciples and were out to defeat and destroy those who spoke about Jesus and His Word.
On June 23, 2008 at 10:53 am coreydavis Said:
faithful2 – I have already answered you:
“those people did have a living faith because they backed it up with repentance, confession and baptism. If they stopped at belief they would have been like those in John 12:42 whose faith was dead.”
– Again, great point! Only dead men have dead faith. Living men have living faith. They were alive prior to baptism. As you pointed out, some men have dead faith prior to baptism and some have living faith. Thanks.
How does God’s Spirit live in an UNSAVED person? If there is an exception to a rule it is not a rule corey!
I never said that the Spirit was living in them, just that He gave them gifts as a sign to Peter. Again, I point you to the donkey in Numbers 22. Was Balaam’s donkey sanctified because God used it as a sign or was He proving a point?
If this is how we’re saved (like Cornelius’ household) I ask you – is this what happened to you? Were you hearing the gospel for the first time and before you even heard it all the Spirit fell on you, giving you the gift of speaking in a language you’d never studied? If that means they were saved it means you WEREN’T unless you had the same experience.
The clause and be baptized, every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ as a parenthetical…The verb makes a distinction between singular and plural verbs and nouns. The verb “repent” is plural and so is the pronoun “your” in the clause so that your sins may be forgiven (lit., “unto the remission of your sins,” eis apJesin twn Jarmartiwn Jymwn). Therefore, the verb “repent” must go with the purpose of forgiveness of sins. On the other hand the imperative “be baptized” is singular, setting it off from the rest of the sentence
Ephesians2:4-10 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ(by grace you have been saved), and raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus, that the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches Of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.
Acts 10:47Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
I’m sorry this is the Holy Ghost/Spirit, not a gift from the holy spirit! They are on equal to Peter because he says “as well as we”.
This same Holy Spirit that was given to them!
Titus 3:4But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared,
5 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit,
6 whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior,
7so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
The washing of regeneration and renewing was through the holy spirit! Not through water!
To attempt to claim that the events of Acts 10 are some special dispensation that God granted to extend the gospel to the Gentiles and that baptism is STILL required for salvation, is unscriptural to the extreme. It is an invention to justify a doctrine of man, rather than turn to what the spirit and meaning of scripture teaches.
Unsurprisingly you didn’t answer either of my questions:
Again, I point you to the donkey in Numbers 22. Was Balaam’s donkey sanctified because God used it as a sign or was He proving a point?
If this is how we’re saved (like Cornelius’ household) I ask you – is this what happened to you? Were you hearing the gospel for the first time and before you even heard it all the Spirit fell on you, giving you the gift of speaking in a language you’d never studied? If that means they were saved it means you WEREN’T unless you had the same experience.
I always try to give you answers to your questions. How about you answering mine?
You said:
This same Holy Spirit that was given to them!
No kidding. I never denied that. The Holy Spirit gave the same sign with Cornelius’ household that He gave with the apostles on Pentecost – the gift of tongues to signify that the gentiles were to be accepted.
The washing of regeneration and renewing was through the holy spirit! Not through water!
Again, I agree. The issue is when we receive that spiritual washing and regeneration. Peter, in Acts 2:38 says that it occurs after water baptism. Like so many others here you seem to think that we’re only acknowledging the physical (the water). The water gives us access to the spiritual (Jesus’ blood, the washing & regeneration of the Spirit) as we are being obedient. This is explained in 1 Peter 3.
Yes we should try to follow the laws, He did not give us the laws to condemn us by them. God knows we as people(sinners)will in times fail the laws. That is why He gives us His mercy and grace to save us. That is why in our faith we should turn to God, not on our own works to save us.
Corey just to make if clear, my reply to the donkey is simply this:
Acts 10:47Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
I’m sorry this is the Holy Ghost/Spirit, not a gift from the holy spirit! They are on equal to Peter because he says “as well as we”.
Or is Peter a Donkey? 😉
Corey,
I have shuffled through all these comments and one thing keeps coming to mind: “Baptism does not need to be defended”.
Atleast it should not be. Those who have added new doctrines to baptism have to explain themselves. Baptism, traditionally and historically taught and practiced, is the initiation rite into the Church and “washes” away the stain of original sin.
Acts 11: 15″As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came on them as he had come on us at the beginning. 16Then I remembered what the Lord had said: ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ 17So if God gave them the same gift as he gave us, who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to think that I could oppose God?”
18When they heard this, they had no further objections and praised God, saying, “So then, God has granted even the Gentiles repentance unto life.”
Again I ask, can you be saved without even hearing all of the gospel? Peter didn’t even get through his statement before they received the Holy Spirit!
Look at verse 18 from Acts 11 above (which is Peter recounting this experience). This was done so that the Jewish converts would accept the gentiles, not to save them!
Corey,
I have shuffled through all these comments and one thing keeps coming to mind: “Baptism does not need to be defended”.
Atleast it should not be. Those who have added new doctrines to baptism have to explain themselves. Baptism, traditionally and historically taught and practiced, is the initiation rite into the Church and “washes” away the stain of original sin.
corey as fat as spiritual gifts go, I see them as tools for the kingdom. The fact that they showed a spiritual gift does not mean the spirit was not there. On the contrary the spirit had to be with them to manifest the gift or it would not have been a SPIRITUAL gift!
You are wrong on this and you can’t bring yourself to see it, why?
They have the sign of God in them they are saved because they believed not because some preacher/teacher dunked them under the water.
Should you be baptized, yes because Peter, mister traditionalist said to do it. But also remember Paul was totally unfocused on this because it was not important to him! He had already gone down the works road when he was attempting to kill the Hellenistic Jews!
I still say show me where any of the disciples were Baptized! And I will say they were, but the last supper is not considered baptism but it sure uses the same terms, like washing!
John 13:6So He came to Simon Peter. He said to Him, “Lord, do You wash my feet?”
7Jesus answered and said to him, “What I do you do not realize now, but you will understand hereafter.”
8Peter said to Him, “Never shall You wash my feet!” Jesus answered him, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me.”
9Simon Peter said to Him, “Lord, then wash not only my feet, but also my hands and my head.”
10Jesus said to him, “He who has bathed needs only to wash his feet, but is completely clean; and you are clean, but not all of you.”
Jesus is clearly saying I only need to wash part of you, why use that term after he clearly said he had to wash them for them to be part of him?
It makes me think this was their baptism!
corey as fat = corey as far (lol sorry)
On June 23, 2008 at 1:50 pm JP Manzi Said:
Corey,
… is the initiation rite into the Church and “washes” away the stain of original sin.
– I think Corey will disagree party with you, seeing they do NOT teach original sin, nor refer baptism as an initiation, nor do they see Catholics practicing baptism per the right way. Please do comment Corey on original sin and the Catholic baptsim vs. the church of Christ
corey as fat as spiritual gifts go, I see them as tools for the kingdom. The fact that they showed a spiritual gift does not mean the spirit was not there. On the contrary the spirit had to be with them to manifest the gift or it would not have been a SPIRITUAL gift!
Of course the Spirit was there. This doesn’t mean that He was there as a sign of salvation. Acts 11:18 tells us why He was there in them.
They have the sign of God in them they are saved because they believed not because some preacher/teacher dunked them under the water.
They couldn’t believe because Peter didn’t even get to finish telling them about Christ! Who is saved without hearing the gospel? How many plans of salvation do you find in the NT? Peter tells us why the Holy Spirit fell upon them, and it wasn’t to save them. Will you hear Peter?
Should you be baptized, yes because Peter, mister traditionalist said to do it. But also remember Paul was totally unfocused on this because it was not important to him!
This is totally false. Peter didn’t teach baptism because he was a traditionalist, he taught it because he was inspired of the Holy Spirit to teach it. Paul also taught it and obeyed it. Just because he didn’t perform the baptisms himself doesn’t mean he wasn’t teaching it. Obviously he was, but he saw the way people were identifying with the one who performed the baptisms, rather than the one they were immersed into – Christ.
Jesus is clearly saying I only need to wash part of you, why use that term after he clearly said he had to wash them for them to be part of him?
It makes me think this was their baptism!
You think wrong. Several of the apostles were disciples of John the Baptizer first which means they would have been immersed in water, like the pure hearted who came to John.
Furthermore:
John 4:1 When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, 2(Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)
Would you have me believe that Jesus was having his disciples immerse people but He didn’t expect it of them? The washing of their feet was an example of humility in service, not to serve as their baptism.
Also, when you think of Paul’s reluctance to immerse look at verse 2 above. Why would Jesus have His disciples immerse, but not do it Himself? Wouldn’t a person immersed by the Lord Himself be even more arrogant than one who boasted that Paul had immersed him? Of course he would.
If Jesus wanted us to walk in Agape love, then setting up a system where you were going to hell for the slightest transgression is not a system where you can learn that kind of love! If I hold a gun to my kids head and say do something because you love me, then he will do it, but it will be out of fear and not love.
Jesus called his disciples his friends, do you force your friends to do something for you? No you don’t force a friend, you do something for a friend because you are a friend. I do things to keep the things Jesus said to do, when I am not racing Paul for the title of Chief of Sinners that is!
I would be interested to know if anyone has ever read the 5 love languages, and I would be curious of CoC people are primarily “acts of service” oriented in their love language! It would explain some things, like focus on doing things to be/feel holy.
“Also, when you think of Paul’s reluctance to immerse look at verse 2 above. Why would Jesus have His disciples immerse, but not do it Himself? Wouldn’t a person immersed by the Lord Himself be even more arrogant than one who boasted that Paul had immersed him? Of course he would.”
That’s because it is a WORKS faith! It causes that to happen, thus people boasted!
When was Peter a disciple of John the Baptist? He was a fishermen before Jesus called him to follow was he not?
“They couldn’t believe because Peter didn’t even get to finish telling them about Christ! Who is saved without hearing the gospel? How many plans of salvation do you find in the NT?”
Because they were little children open to God! Or God living in you through the Holy Spirit is not a sign of salvation.
You tell me what you want to call it?
Peter was certainly one of Jesus’ disciples:
John 4:1 When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, 2(Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)
Why was Jesus instructing his disciples to teach a “works faith”?
43To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
This happens before the Holy Spirit comes to them. They may not know the name but they believe, like a small child believes even if they don’t totally understand!
You tell me what you want to call it?
Why don’t you call it what Peter called it – a sign that the gentiles were to be accepted, Acts 11:15-18.
Because they were little children open to God!
So now we have two plans of salvation; hearing & obeying the gospel and “being little children open to God”.
Per the hyper-literalist opinion, baptism is commanded.
But per that same interpretation, so too is drinking poison and taking up serpents and scorpions, and greeting each other with a kiss.
If the “Church of Christ In Name Only” cult demands baptism for salvation and insists that musical instruments are not of God because they are not written about in the New Testament church, then why are they not also picking up snakes and kissing each other?
Would Johnny Robertson dare demonstrate the strength of his faith on live television by drinking strychnine, in accordance to the Word of God?
I mean, there it is, in Mark 16:18, just two verses after Mark 16:16 that he uses to demand baptism for salvation.
So if Mark 16:16 is valid then Mark 16:18 must be valid, too. If it is not then this is all a falsehood.
How about it Johnny: want to drink the poison and handle a live rattlesnake on your television show to show that your “church” is the right one?
There is a huge difference in those two things. Baptism is a commandment, with no “time limit” upon it – making it binding until the end of the Earth. The things Jesus mentioned in verse 18 are signs that were only given to confirm the word for a time (1 Cor. 13).
Why would Johnny perform signs that are not needed as we have the written word? Even most Baptists will agree that the miraculous signs have ceased. How about you invite some Pentacostals to come on tv and perform those signs since they’re the ones who believe they still exist?
“John 4:1 When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, 2(Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)
Why was Jesus instructing his disciples to teach a “works faith”?”
It was a symbol of their repentance from sin, it was making the way straight. It was not removing the penalty for that sin that Jesus Blood would do.
“Acts 10:43″Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.”
And the fun part about this is Peter has changed the rules, he did not say anything about Baptism here before the Holy Spirit fell on them, BUT he still says something about Jesus Name.
Through his Nam everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins!
“Acts 2:38Then Peter said unto them, 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.”
You repent through Baptism, your remission comes from Jesus Name because it represents the blood that was shed!
Matthew 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
If you repent you are sorry for what you do, you still are guilty of sin and death is the illness, the remission that comes from his name and the blood that was shed removes the illness’ effects. You no longer are going to die a spiritual death from it!
It is the blood that removes the illness, not the water that shows repentance!
explain to me the point of the arguement about the disciples being baptised by john the baptist.
this may have happened , so how did that save them?
it was prior to jesus death.it wasnt how cocers say for the remission of sin. it couldnt be. were they baptized after his death?
lee
It was not removing the penalty for that sin that Jesus Blood would do.
We agree on this. Are you abandoning your stance that the washing of feet was their baptism?
And the fun part about this is Peter has changed the rules, he did not say anything about Baptism here before the Holy Spirit fell on them, BUT he still says something about Jesus Name.
You’re right. You have to read a full four verses later to get to water baptism.
You repent through Baptism
Not true. In Acts 2:38 Peter says “repent and be baptized…” They are two different things. We’re not talking about John’s baptism here.
If you repent you are sorry for what you do, you still are guilty of sin and death is the illness, the remission that comes from his name and the blood that was shed removes the illness’ effects. You no longer are going to die a spiritual death from it!
It is the blood that removes the illness, not the water that shows repentance!
Other than the fact you’re still trying to make baptism a sign of repentance we completely agree. It is Jesus’ blood that provides remission of sins, not the water. The water simply gives us access to the blood (Galatians 3:27, Romans 6:3-4).
Doesn’t matter Lee, Peter was not John’s disciple he was a fishermen if I remember right, and thus he was partially dirty because he had been with Jesus!
Oh I forgot to ask, since you feel at times ignored Lee, how are you today, I hope it is a blessed day for you!
explain to me the point of the arguement about the disciples being baptised by john the baptist.
this may have happened , so how did that save them?
it was prior to jesus death.it wasnt how cocers say for the remission of sin. it couldnt be. were they baptized after his death?
John’s baptism and the baptisms performed by Jesus’ disciples while He lived on Earth seem to function like keeping the law of Moses. Those actions were “made good” by Jesus’ death. The only people who were immersed with John’s baptism who are shown to be re-baptized are those who did so after Jesus’ death.
Just as Jesus’ blood could roll back and save the faithful Jews who died before Him, it could seal or complete the baptism of those who were immersed by John or Jesus’ disciples after He gave His life. I see no record of them being baptized again after the death & resurrection.
“Not true. In Acts 2:38 Peter says “repent and be baptized…” They are two different things. We’re not talking about John’s baptism here”
Not according to John!
Mathew 3:11″I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me will come one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not fit to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.
The waters power does not gain anything, it is NOT the cure for remission of sins!
Matthew 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
Jesus Blood is for remission of sins! Or are you going to correct Christ when you get to heaven?
Now some call it forgiveness of sins, it appears to be the same!
It is the blood, not the water the takes away the sin and removes the penalty!
Oh and Corey I hope you had a blessed weekend and day also!
God wants us to follow the laws. But God knows people will sin and not always live up to the laws. None of the laws were given for God to condemn us. Gods mercy and grace saves us. If you cannot see that what little faith you have in God. You rely on your own works to save you not God. Being baptized does not save you, it is Gods grace that saves you. If a man who has done many wrongs in his life comes to Christ and is truly sorry for the wrongs he has done God tells him as long as he believes that Jesus died on the Cross for his sins and rose again and has faith that Gods mercy and grace will save him, that man is saved.
“Why would Johnny perform signs that are not needed as we have the written word? Even most Baptists will agree that the miraculous signs have ceased. How about you invite some Pentacostals to come on tv and perform those signs since they’re the ones who believe they still exist?”
If we are to insist that these are merely “signs” that have ceased, then by the same criteria we must be prepared to accept that baptism is a “sign” that has ceased also.
And nowhere have I found it written with absolute certitude that miracles have “ceased” after some length of time.
could you explain why god wanted baptism in the new but not the old testament? what changed? in the old i dont remember seeing it.
lee
Paul states the remission of sins was through faith and he never mentions anything about baptism. “Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God” (Romans 3:24-25) Paul says that the payment for sins (a propitiation) is set forth by God to be received by faith in Jesus’ blood and that his is the basis for the remission of sins.
Not according to John!
I had just written (which you quoted):
We’re not talking about John’s baptism here
John’s baptism was “unto repentance”, Jesus’ baptism is “for the remission of sins”. They aren’t the same baptism. Look at Acts 19.
Jesus Blood is for remission of sins! Or are you going to correct Christ when you get to heaven?
No, are you? His inspired apostles said that it is in water baptism that we are baptized INTO Christ. You can’t access Jesus’ blood if you aren’t IN Him.
It is the blood, not the water the takes away the sin and removes the penalty!
I’ve agreed with this countless times already. I’ve never disputed that fact.
………………………………………….
If we are to insist that these are merely “signs” that have ceased, then by the same criteria we must be prepared to accept that baptism is a “sign” that has ceased also.
Jesus never called baptism a “sign”. There is a difference between a commandment and a “sign”. In verse 17 Jesus calls the things of verse 18 “signs”:
And nowhere have I found it written with absolute certitude that miracles have “ceased” after some length of time.
1 Corinthians 13 says that the miraculous signs will cease. Was Paul wrong? Can you perform those signs?
Chris,
I am not in the Churches of Christ but I must come to their defense here. You have been defending Christianity against the legalists of this bunch which I commend you for but to paint the broad brush of “Church of Christ cult” is wrong. Also, they are not wrong for their belief on baptism (they are partly right) they are wrong for their condemning of others and believing the right doctrines is what saves you. If your offense of the term cult is geared towards the like of JR, I can understand but not the Churches of Christ universal. They are the most loving people I have ever encountered and in no way should be labeled anymore then labeling a group a cult who denies essential christian teaching on baptism.
“Jesus never called baptism a “sign”. There is a difference between a commandment and a “sign”. In verse 17 Jesus calls the things of verse 18 “signs”:”
Now we’re splitting hairs. And 1st Corinthians 13 merely teaches that in the presence of love, which supersedes all prophecy and signs, such things have no meaning. They are much like the law, which is also superseded by love. It says nothing about miracles and signs “passing away” as if they were only for one particular moment.
Besides, among the local “Church of Christ” cult, there’s no love anyway. If anyone must be believing in miracles and signs, it should be they.
“Can you perform those signs?”
No one can perform a “sign”, apart from what ability God has given them. And it’s very dangerous ground indeed to be able to boast that one can do such a thing as if it were a power. I certainly cannot say that I have or can perform such signs. But there are people who can and who have, in accordance to what measure God has given them.
JP I would have to concur with you that the majority of Christians who are part of the denominational Church of Christ are indeed loving and caring people. The people from the Church of Christ that I have met over the years in the Carolinas and Virginia have exemplified that truth. In all of my life I had never met such a group of condemning persons like Johnny and company from the Church of Christ until 2 or 3 years ago here in Danville Va.
And I might add that Baptists also have similar groups who pattern their philosophy of “we are the only right ones” after the Johnny’s of the world.
if i may,
im not speaking for chris but if i can add this.
i have said that we, that is pentacostals, baptists ect
are being bludgeoned here. even though its done by some quite politely.we would embrace them but they will not.
we will never get past the barrier they put up.
even the conservative ones wont say the real truth about the southside three. that is that they dont represent christ and in fact hinder christians.
if it dosent apply dont be offended.
lee
1 Corinthians 13: 8Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away.9For we know in part and we prophesy in part;10but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away.
I guess you missed some of that, so I put it in bold for you.
No one can perform a “sign”, apart from what ability God has given them. And it’s very dangerous ground indeed to be able to boast that one can do such a thing as if it were a power. I certainly cannot say that I have or can perform such signs. But there are people who can and who have, in accordance to what measure God has given them.
Yes, there were people who could perform such signs, but none exist now. You say that you cannot do them, but if you’re trying to make Mark 16:18 possibly apply today then you’d have to do them, since Jesus said, “These signs will accompany those who have believed” since you’re supposed to be “one who has believed”. Otherwise you must admit that Jesus’ statement applied only to specific people at a certain time.
i asked james several times on air about healing in the new testament. he cut me off once because i kept bringing up the scripture that say one should call for the elders of the church and the prayer of faith……
he said that time had passed.
who in the coc got to make that call?
lee
There is nothing in that passage from the book of James that indicates the elders who are to be called for did anything miraculous. In fact, it is God, through their prayers, that does the healing.
I have no idea why James O. would say that the time to follow that instruction has passed. I say that it has not. There is nothing supernatural or miraculous in that passage. I guess James made that call on his own.
“Yes, there were people who could perform such signs, but none exist now.”
Ehhh, you really sure about that, guv’nor?
“You say that you cannot do them, but if you’re trying to make Mark 16:18 possibly apply today then you’d have to do them, since Jesus said, “These signs will accompany those who have believed” since you’re supposed to be “one who has believed”. Otherwise you must admit that Jesus’ statement applied only to specific people at a certain time.”
According to what Robertson preaches I couldn’t do them anyway, because I’m not really saved, since I’m not part of the “Church of Christ” and haven’t been baptized according to what Mark 16:16 teaches, a few verses before.
According to what Robertson preaches I could not do these. But Johnny Robertson could do them! Because he has been baptized and saved according to “right doctrine”.
Can you imagine how many converts would be won over to the Church of Christ, if God let Johnny Robertson do such things before a live television audience? Why, everyone in the entire region would be down on their knees, weeping and crying, wearing ashes and sackcloth, declaring that the Church of Christ is the one true body of Christ on this Earth!
Seems a small enough thing to do, in order to so boldly proclaim the gospel. And if he dies from it wellll… he’ll be in Heaven anyway.
Would Johnny Robertson be willing to possibly lay down his life so that untold thousands could believe and repent and be baptized? Does Johnny Robertson have so much love in his heart for so many that he has not even met before?
According to what Robertson preaches I couldn’t do them anyway, because I’m not really saved, since I’m not part of the “Church of Christ” and haven’t been baptized according to what Mark 16:16 teaches, a few verses before.
Way to avoid the issue and turn it back around to your grudge match with Johnny. You say you’re saved, so why can’t you do the signs Jesus mentioned? Johnny has never claimed to do those signs because he understands that the time for such is passed. Why should he have to do something he doesn’t even believe in?
Would Johnny Robertson be willing to possibly lay down his life so that untold thousands could believe and repent and be baptized? Does Johnny Robertson have so much love in his heart for so many that he has not even met before?,
You know I have my own issues with Johnny, but let me say this; he was a wealthy man who sold all his possessions to go minister to the poor. Have you done that? I think he has made great personal sacrifices for the kingdom of God and for that, I must commend him.
i am not a linguist as you can tell. but if saying some words to an unseen entity and a follower of said entity has his physical body healed if that isnt supernatural
have faithless read me the defination.
lee
oh btw,
keep on commending john.
let me know how that works out for you.
lee
2 Timothy 3:1But realize this, that in the last days difficult times will come.
2For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, revilers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, unholy,
3unloving, irreconcilable, malicious gossips, without self-control, brutal, haters of good,
4treacherous, reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God,
5holding to a form of godliness, although they have denied its power; Avoid such men as these.
6For among them are those who enter into households and captivate weak women weighed down with sins, led on by various impulses,
7always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
Interesting that we seem to be on those times spoken about, what gets me is the 5th verse!
Anyone have any input on this verse?
“he was a wealthy man who sold all his possessions to go minister to the poor. Have you done that? I think he has made great personal sacrifices for the kingdom of God and for that, I must commend him.”
Someone could sooooo have some fun with this.
I promised that I wouldn’t go there though.
(But because I can’t completely resist…)
Since when is going to p—– as a c——– f—- a “personal sacrifice”?
Yes, JP-there is a massively HUGE difference between the “church of Christ” as Chris terms it “in name only” who does act like a cult, and the churches I have been a part of and continue to call my family. Unfortunately, Johnny and those like him tend to be the most vocal sometimes-running after people attacking and asking for debates-but only to “defeat and destroy” their opponent. None of that is what God has called us to do-we are here to share the love and awesome hope of God with others. Many of us in the churches of Christ understand and embrace the love and grace of God-and it is people like Johnny and his kind that want to drag that down. Thankfully, they are a minority-even though they do not want to believe that. Many people have come out of the sectarian, legalist mindset into the true grace of God and have been freed from their bondage-able to LIVE their life in Christ. I pray that even more can follow the same path.
I think most who have been posting on here understand this, but that does not hold true for much of the world or others who may be reading. It is confusing, I can imagine, and I would never ever want to be lumped into the group with the likes of Robertson and the gang. Honestly, until college I never knew that churches of Christ were so divided or that there were people who thought this way. It is only in the last couple of years that I knew there were people as twisted in their beliefs and justifications such as these guys. I truly believe that is satan trying to divide us more-and it makes me both sad and angry that anyone could be that intentional in wanting to destroy their own brothers and sisters.
Anyway, just wanted to throw in my thoughts again 🙂
I cannot say if certain people are given these supernatural gifts by God such as speaking in tongue and healing the sick. But I have learned to be careful not to believe that everyone who claims to have these gifts are telling the truth. And some such people that claim to have these gifts also will tell you if you do not speak in tongues you do not have the Holy Ghost and that their way is the right way and everyone else is going to hell. Johnny and crew are not the only group that have this mindset.
In knowing that Johnny and crew and others like them are out there who put up stumbling blocks for people to come to Christ, it tells me we need to reach out more to people who desperately need to come to Christ and let them know they are okay to come to Christ and how much God loves them and wants to save them.
I feel the same way as Katherine. It makes me sad and angry that the in world we live in there is so much division among us. As long as there are those who think that to defeat and destroy is the answer to unity there will be no unity. These people show nothing but hate and that is not what Jesus teaches us.
And to add, these people feed off trying to make others angry. You can hear it in their voices and see on their faces how righteous it makes them feel to make other people angry. They say they don’t do anything to hurt other people but what they do is no different than someone putting their finger up in someones face and saying they are not touching them knowing they are trying to make them angry.
still waitin corey
lee
Lee,
You’re going to have to forgive me if I can’t give you instant answers to your questions. I only have so much time each day I can be on this site.
As to your comment that the healing is supernatural I agree in the sense that God provides the healing. I am saying that the elders in that passage did nothing supernatural, as opposed to the healings that Jesus and the apostles did by touching someone or speaking them healed and they were instantly better.
John 3 seems to be misunderstood and is the grounds for being Baptized and Jesus is speaking of it, but lets look at this passage by passage and ask some questions.
John 3
The New Birth
1Now there was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews;
(We know he is a teacher and follower of the law of Moses, that means he is do dummy)
2this man came to Jesus by night and said to Him, “Rabbi, we know that You have come from God as a teacher; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him.”
(He is smart enough to know the signs he sees point to Jesus as a man of God at the very least)
3Jesus answered and said to him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.”
(Jesus tells him he must be born again, here is where the paths split, Jesus is talking about being born into the Spirit, receiving the Holy Spirit, Nicodemus is focused on the physical birthing process as we will see)
4Nicodemus said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born, can he?”
(A logical question to ask, if you are focusing on the physical birth of a woman, and not the spirit, and also a foolish question to ask of the conversation is about baptism in water)
5Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
(Here Jesus appears to be speaking of water, thus we assume he is talking about born by water submersion or baptism, but lets follow along and see what else he calls this water process, and he is also talking about being born of the spirit.)
6″That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
(Jesus is now talking about a fleshly birth and a Spirit birth, thus he us attempting to clarify things to Nicodemus who is still stuck on a physical birth.)
7″Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’
(Jesus is again talking about a Spirit Birth, the physical one has already happened since he exists, but the Spiritual one is still to come, other wise sense the first birth is a physical birth it would be you have to be born again twice, with water birth and spirit birth, but he does not, each is a single event, thus the physical birth has already taken place!)
8″The wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”
(And now we see Jesus totally focused on the Spiritual end of it, again attempting to be more clear. he has not said anything more about the physical/water part because that is not the focus of his teaching, Nicodemus is so tied up with the physical end of it that he appears confused and my guess is that he has so focused on the physical rebirth the thinks Jesus is telling him about that he can’t hear the Spiritual part of the rebirth message)
Jesus is talking about a man being born of a woman and of the Spirit, he is not talking about baptism by water or he would have called it such in verse 6, instead of moving to the term physical. Thus you are born by a woman and then you are born into the Spirit. That is the rebirth he is talking about!
Corey do you follow this? Or anyone who sees this as him talking about water baptism? If you can let go of assuming its water and really read the physical and finally the ending focus you can get to the true meaning of the interchange.
it was just a reminder.
a little tired huh?
lee
remember, its not you against me