Friday, February 27, 2015

Ron Daly's attack on the KJV (Satyr, Dragon, Unicorn)

Below is an article sent to me by a "Church of Christ" evangelist on why no Bible is the preserved/inspired word of God. The COC said in one of his videos that "the word of God is perfect" but apparently he was just trying to sound like a preacher--he did not literally mine that the Bible sitting on his pulpit was "perfect". 

Mr. Daly's article has been pasted below in red font. 


King James VersionRon Daly

This article will consist of a relatively brief critique of one version of the English Bible – the King James Version (KJV). It is not our intent to cover the technical detail of the more comprehensive books already available on the subject. We will just point out its strengths and weaknesses, using the original text as the basis of what we hope will be judiciousness and objectivity. 

King James came to the throne of England in 1603. He invited fifty-four scholars to participate in the revision process that would come to be known as the King James Version. The King James Version of the Bible was issued in 1611. 
 
The King James Version was not the first English translation. It was preceded by Tyndale’s Version (1526, 1534), the Coverdale Bible (1535), Matthews Bible (1537), the Great Bible (1539), the Geneva Bible (1560), and the Bishop’s Bible (1568). The Old Testament committees used the Masoretic Hebrew text and the New Testament was translated from the Textus Receptus or Received Text. It is estimated that ninety percent of the King James New Testament is basically the vocabulary and style of William Tyndale. 

Perhaps the greatest weaknesses of the King James Version are its archaic Elizabethan English, the textual base from which the New Testament was translated (that is, the use of the Textus Receptus), and many of the exegetical choices its translators made. 

In the Old Testament text of the King James Version we read, “But there went up a mist from the earth” (Genesis 2:6). The word they render “mist” means stream or flow. It refers to underground streams that came to the surface or a substantial river. Genesis 12:19 says, “I might have taken her to me to wife.” The Hebrew simply says, “I took her.” In Deuteronomy 33:17 we read of the “unicorn.” The text says “wild ox.” In Isaiah 13:21 we read of “satyrs” instead of “wild goats.” In Psalm 44:19 we see “dragons” when the text says “jackals.” In Jeremiah 8:17 the King James Version has “cockatrices” but the text says “vipers.” 

In the New Testament text of the King James Version we read, “Behold, a virgin shall be with child” (Matthew 1:23) but the Greek text from which it was translated says “the virgin.” The article “the” is used in the Textus Receptus but it does not appear before “virgin” in the King James Version in the text cited. We read that “the Lord added to the church such as should be saved” (Acts 2:47). “Such as should be saved” is not in the Textus Receptus from which the King James Version is translated. It says “those who were being saved.” In Hebrews 6:6 we read, “If they shall fall away.” The Textus Receptus reads “having fallen away.” F. W. Farrar says the King James Version’s “rendering ‘if they shall fall away,’ is one of the most erroneous translations in the A. V.” (Cambridge Greek Testament For Schools And Colleges, The Epistle To The Hebrews, p. 83).

In 1 Timothy 3:1 the King James Version speaks of "...the office of a bishop." Two things are immediately apparent in the Greek text: (1) There is no corresponding word for "office." (2) The word episkopos doesn't mean "bishop," it means "overseer." Why does the King James Version have the word "bishop?" It reflects the religious views of those 17th century Church of England translators. This is one of the places where the NIV accurately reflects the sense of the original very nicely, "If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer." 

There are many archaic words in the King James Version. We read of thee, thy, thine, thou, ye, etc. Many of the verbs have the old endings “eth” and “est.” We do not speak with such forms in modern English. In Exodus 17:13 we read, “Joshua discomfited Amalek.” More recent versions say Joshua defeated Amalek. In 1 Thessalonians 4:15 we read, “…we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.” The word “prevent” should be “precede.” The cases of archaic language could be multiplied many times over.
Why make the Lord’s words more difficult to understand than God intends? Correcting mistranslations and updating the English does no injustice to the scriptures. The original languages of scripture were the vernacular of the day.

The King James Version contains translation inconsistencies. “Devil” is used for Satan, the prince of demons, and the demons themselves. “Hell” is used for both Hades, the place of the dead, and Gehenna, the place of punishment. It translates the same Greek word two different ways in the same text: “And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal” (Matthew 25:46). The words “everlasting” and “eternal” translate the same Greek word.

Is this intended to imply that the King James Version is a poor translation? No. It has strengths. In general it attempts to reflect a modified-literal approach to translation. It is generally faithful to the text available to the translators at that time. It was produced during the time of Shakespearean literature; it has excellent poetic beauty and cadence if you like old English.
Since the publication of the King James Version the English language has changed, thousands of biblical manuscripts have been discovered, and much has been learned about Hebrew and Greek grammar, lexicography, and linguistics in general in the last 400 years. Biblical scholarship has moved on. The King James Version is deficient in some areas. It is not the last word in Bible translations. 

A person would do well to use more than one translation of the scriptures. Study from and compare as many as you can. When you lock yourself in to using only one version, you also lock yourself in to the weaknesses of that one version. Learn to note the differences between the various versions and attempt to discover the reason for the variations.


HOSS'S CRITIQUE.

"We will just point out its strengths and weaknesses, using the original text as the basis of what we hope will be judiciousness and objectivity." There is no such animal as "the original text". You do not have any originals of anything. A good lie is always an excellent way to begin an article.

"The King James Version of the Bible was issued in 1611." Of course.


"The King James Version was not the first English translation." Pardon me, but "DUH".

"The King James Version was not the first English translation. It was preceded by Tyndale’s Version (1526, 1534), the Coverdale Bible (1535), Matthews Bible (1537), the Great Bible (1539), the Geneva Bible (1560), and the Bishop’s Bible (1568). The Old Testament committees used the Masoretic Hebrew text and the New Testament was translated from the Textus Receptus or Received Text. It is estimated that ninety percent of the King James New Testament is basically the vocabulary and style of William Tyndale." The Authorized Version [KJB] was not a direct translation. As stated on the first page, it was translated "out of the original tongues and with former translations diligently compared and revised". The translators already believed that the Bibles they had were good, they only professed to make good translations better. Therefore they started with versions such as Tyndale's, Bishop's, Coverdale, Geneva, and many others, including foreign Bibles such as Luther's. The KJB translators believed that most of the readings in these versions were perfect and they only did minor revision and few re-translations. If you compare the KJB to the Geneva [for example] you will find that they are practically identical.

"Perhaps the greatest weaknesses of the King James Version are its archaic Elizabethan English, the textual base from which the New Testament was translated (that is, the use of the Textus Receptus), and many of the exegetical choices its translators made." In other words, you believe that everything about the KJB is "weak". You named everything. Meanwhile the KJB agrees with most every manuscript from the old Koine Greek to the Old Latin and Syriac. Not to mention the readings of the KJB are the ones God used in the protestant reformation and they are the ones that do not continually attack the Deity of Christ and blood atonement--"by their fruits ye shall know them" [Matt. 7:20]. The modern perversions [RV, ASV, NASV, Amplified, RSV, NRSV, NIV, ESV, etc.] have produced very little fruit. The KJB [and agreeing translations such as Tyndale/Geneva/Luther] was and still is God's Book for starting revivals and protestant reformations. What has God used the RSV for? What truth do you get out of a NIV that I did not have in a KJB first? Answer: nothing. And just a note: the manuscripts that modern versions are translated from are Catholic Vatican manuscripts. Vaticanus and Sinaiticus were both old pieces of junk discovered hidden in the Vatican library and a monestary. While they were rotting in the dust, the Textus Receptus was being used throughout the world.  90% of manuscripts agree with the TR, so there is nothing "weak" about the textual basis of the KJB. 

"In the Old Testament text of the King James Version we read, “But there went up a mist from the earth” (Genesis 2:6). The word they render “mist” means stream or flow. It refers to underground streams that came to the surface or a substantial river." Says you. Meanwhile you must be smarter than Tyndale because he also translated it "mist". You must be smarter than Luther, because he translated it "ein Nebel ging auf" [mist]. You must be smarter than the Geneva translators because they also translated it "mist". Aren't you an arrogant little squirt? You do realize that Hebrew words can be translated different ways don't you? If would do your homework on Bible translators such as Luther and the AV translators, you may find that they were not as incompetent as you pretend.

"Genesis 12:19 says, “I might have taken her to me to wife.” The Hebrew simply says, “I took her.” In Deuteronomy 33:17 we read of the “unicorn.” The text says “wild ox.” In Isaiah 13:21 we read of “satyrs” instead of “wild goats.” In Psalm 44:19 we see “dragons” when the text says “jackals.” In Jeremiah 8:17 the King James Version has “cockatrices” but the text says “vipers.”

GENESIS 12:19 "TAKEN HER TO ME TO WIFE": Sir, "THE Hebrew" was not the source that the KJB translators got their information from. The reading is found in the Geneva Bible (1560's), Wycliffe (1382),  Tyndale (1534), Luther (1545), etc. as well as MODERN VERSIONS such as the NIV, ESV, and NASB. Apparently Mr. Daly thinks that he knows more about how to translate Hebrew than the translators of every English and German bible that has ever existed--I doubt that he does.

UNICORNS: The word unicorn is found in Wycliffs translation 1395, Tyndale 1525 (he translated part of the Old Testament before he was killed), Coverdale’s Bible 1535, Taverner’s Bible, the Great Bible, the Bishops Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, the so called Greek Septuagint version, the Italian Diodati 1649, Las Sagradas Escrituras of 1569, as well as the Spanish Reina Valera of 1602, all of which preceeded the King James Bible. Today, other more modern versions that contain the word unicorn are the Spanish Reina Valera of 1909, the Spanish Las Sagradas Escrituras 1999 edition "unicornio", the French Martin 1744 "licornes", Luther's German 1545 and the updated Luther German Bible of 1912 "einhornshomer", the Russian Synodal version 1876,  the Modern Greek translation of the Old Testament "monokeros"(not to be confused with the so called LXX), the Catholic Douay version of 1950, Darby’s translation of 1870, the 21st Century King James Version, the Third Millenium Bible, Daniel Webster’s translation of the Bible 1833, Lamsa’s 1933 Bible translation of the Syraic Peshitta, and in the 1936 edition of the Massoretic Scriptures put out by the Hebrew Publishing Company of New York. (according to Mr. Will Kinney's research and article on "unicorns")

The problem Mr. Daly is having is that he does not know what a "unicorn" is. He must think it is a mythological horse-creature with one horn. The KJB translators say in their footnote that they are referring to a rhinoceros (1611 edition KJV). The very first definition of "unicorn" in Webster's 1828 dictionary is "an animal with one horn; the monoceros. this name is often applied to the rhinoceros."

SATYR: The Hebrew word is "saiyr" and so "satyr" is not a wrong transliteration. Meanwhile Smith's Bible Dictionary gives "he-goats" as a definition for the word. The word is used 59 times in the Old Testament and it is translated "kid"  28 times, "goat" 24 times, "devil" 2 times, "satyr" 2 times, "hairy" 2 times, "rough" 1 time. The Hebrew word has different meanings such as "hairy", "rough", "goat", and "devils". Now what is a satyr? It is a ROUGH, HAIRY, half-goat, half-devil of mythology. 

"Satyr" is a perfect translation of the Hebrew "saiyr". 

COCKATRICE: There is no problem with the word "cockatrice". Webster's New World College Dictionary defines it as an unidentified deadly serpent.

DRAGON: Why is Mr. Daly objecting to the KJB's use of "dragon"? The other versions do it too: Bishop's, Geneva, RSV, ESV, Message, NASB, NLV, NRSV, etc. Mr. Daly continuously pretends to be smarter than every other translator in existence. There is no problem with the use of the word "dragon". Dictionaries define it in different ways such as "a very evil person", "a huge serpent", and "any of various lizards". 


"In the New Testament text of the King James Version we read, “Behold, a virgin shall be with child” (Matthew 1:23) but the Greek text from which it was translated says “the virgin.” The article “the” is used in the Textus Receptus but it does not appear before “virgin” in the King James Version in the text cited." This is a Roman Catholic translation that Mr. Daly is promoting. Catholics worship Mary and put emphasis on her as "THE virgin". That is an error, the quotation in Matthew 1:23 is from Isaiah 7:14 which says "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel." The KJB has it right. 

"We read that “the Lord added to the church such as should be saved” (Acts 2:47). “Such as should be saved” is not in the Textus Receptus from which the King James Version is translated. It says “those who were being saved.”" Mr. Daly's suggestion on translation would be an error, nobody is "being saved". You are either saved or not saved--salvation is not a process. (Eph. 1:13)

"In Hebrews 6:6 we read, “If they shall fall away.” The Textus Receptus reads “having fallen away.” F. W. Farrar says the King James Version’s “rendering ‘if they shall fall away,’ is one of the most erroneous translations in the A. V.” (Cambridge Greek Testament For Schools And Colleges, The Epistle To The Hebrews, p. 83)." What is the difference? Anyway, this is a matter of how translation methods change over the years. The (1560's) Geneva translates it "if they shall fall away" and so does Tyndale (1526). I do not really care what Mr. Farrar says, I just believe the BOOK.

"In 1 Timothy 3:1 the King James Version speaks of "...the office of a bishop." Two things are immediately apparent in the Greek text: (1) There is no corresponding word for "office." (2) The word episkopos doesn't mean "bishop," it means "overseer." Why does the King James Version have the word "bishop?"" The problem here is that Mr. Daly does not know what the word "bishop" means. Webster's 1828 Dictionary, "1. An overseer; a spiritual superintendent, ruler or director; applied to Christ. Ye were as sheep going astray, but are now returned to the shepherd and bishop of your souls. 1. Pet.2. 2. In the primitive church, a spiritual overseer; an elder or presbyter; one who had the pastoral care of a church."

"There are many archaic words in the King James Version. We read of thee, thy, thine, thou, ye, etc. Many of the verbs have the old endings “eth” and “est.” We do not speak with such forms in modern English." First of all, "thy", "thine", and "thou" are not difficult words in the slightest. Second of all, we do not speak Koine Greek--that is old and archaic. Yet you have been gassing about that through your whole article. Therefore you are inconsistent.

"The original languages of scripture were the vernacular of the day." Boy, you couldn't prove what the "original language" that the New Testament was written in WAS if your soul depended on it. Was it Greek? Latin? Aramaic? Or what about the book of Hebrews--it could have originally been written in Hebrew. YOU don't know!


"“Devil” is used for Satan, the prince of demons, and the demons themselves. “Hell” is used for both Hades, the place of the dead, and Gehenna, the place of punishment. It translates the same Greek word two different ways in the same text: “And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal” (Matthew 25:46). The words “everlasting” and “eternal” translate the same Greek word." The KJB makes it clear that Satan is the "prince of devils" and you can tell which is being referred to by the context (Matt. 9:34). As for "hell", that is perfectly accurate. Hell was the place of all dead folks (Luke 16:19-31) and the place of punishment. All translations translate a word different ways in different places. To say that a translator must always either use "everlasting" instead of "eternal" (or vice versa) is absurd. Both words mean the same thing.


"Is this intended to imply that the King James Version is a poor translation? No. It has strengths. In general it attempts to reflect a modified-literal approach to translation. It is generally faithful to the text available to the translators at that time. It was produced during the time of Shakespearean literature; it has excellent poetic beauty and cadence if you like old English." That means nothing. If the King  James Bible is the inspired word of God than you should not critique it. If it is NOT the inspired word of God than it is a corruption that should be destroyed (1 Cor. 5:6-7). I believe that the KJB is the inspired/preserved words of God in English.


"Since the publication of the King James Version the English language has changed, thousands of biblical manuscripts have been discovered, and much has been learned about Hebrew and Greek grammar, lexicography, and linguistics in general in the last 400 years." The claim that thousands of biblical manuscripts have been discovered since 1611 is nothing important and is a deceiving statement. There have been no new readings discovered. The KJB translators had the corrupt readings of Vaticanus and Siniaticus in the Catholic bibles that they could have used if they wanted to. How could you learn more about Hebrew and Greek grammar when the languages have only gotten MORE DEAD. They KJB translators were 400 years closer to when those languages were used and the KJB translators were much more intelligent than what we have today. (see the NEB from 1970--it says that people "broke wind" Judges 1:14)

"A person would do well to use more than one translation of the scriptures. Study from and compare as many as you can. When you lock yourself in to using only one version, you also lock yourself in to the weaknesses of that one version. Learn to note the differences between the various versions and attempt to discover the reason for the variations." That is polytheism. Mr. Daly is telling you that you do not have ONE book has your infallible authority. Meanwhile, no man can serve two masters (Matt. 6:24)! The different versions differ and are from entirely different Greek texts from different parts of the world. The manuscripts behind modern versions are Catholic manuscripts from Alexandria, Egypt while the manuscripts behind the KJB are pure manuscripts from Antioch. ANTIOCH is where the originals were written (Acts 11:26-27, 13:1).

Here are a few problems with modern versions (NASB, NIV, ESV, RSV, NRSV, etc.).

1.) Luke 2:33 says that Joseph was Christ's "father" while the KJB says "Joseph".

2.) 1 Tim. 3:16 says that "God was manifest in the flesh" in the KJB. Modern versions say "he appeared in a body".

3.) Modern versions omit many verses of scripture. Such as Matthew 17:21, 18:11, 23:14, Mark 7:14, 9:44, 9:46, 11:26, 15:28, Luke 17:36, John 5:4, Acts 8:37, 15:34, 24:7, 28:29, Rom. 16:24, 1 John 5:7.

4.) Modern versions have footnotes saying that many other verses do not belong (such as half of John 8 and Mark 16). Modern versions will omit single verses, but they will not omit half of a chapter because people would not buy a bible that was missing that much.

5.) In Micah 5:2 KJB says that Christ's "goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting". However, modern versions change this to say "origins from old, from ancient times".

6.) In John 3:13 Jesus claimed omnipresence (being everywhere at once) when He said "even the Son of man which is in heaven". Modern versions omit that phase.

7.) In Ephesians 3:9 the KJB says that God created all things by Jesus Christ, that phrase is omitted in modern versions.

Also see these posts

Three questions on authority.  
http://av1611studyblog.blogspot.com/2015/01/three-questions-on-authority.html

Archeology/history vs Bible preservation 
http://av1611studyblog.blogspot.com/2015/01/archeologyhistory-vs-bible-preservation.html

Perversions  
http://av1611studyblog.blogspot.com/2014/10/perversions.html

Perversions (Part 2) 
http://av1611studyblog.blogspot.com/2014/10/perversions-part-2.html 

Attributes of the living word of God. 
http://av1611studyblog.blogspot.com/2014/09/attributes-of-living-word-of-god.html 


--Eli Caldwell


Tuesday, February 24, 2015

What is the the "filth" of the flesh? (1 Pet. 3:21)

1 Peter 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

This verse has long been used by the "Church of Christ" and Roman Catholics to teach baptismal regeneration. They isolate "baptism doth also now save us" from the rest of the verse and then create a "private interpretation" (2 Pet. 1:20). The verse in context says that baptism saves you in a "like figure", figurative salvation is not real salvation. Do you know what a "figure" is? Nothing.

Then there is the portion of the verse in parenthesis. It says that water baptism is "not the putting away of the filth of the flesh". That is an obvious reference to your sins. Water baptism does not put away your sins, it is only a figure of it. This could not be any clearer.

However, the "Church of Christ" says that the filth of the flesh in 1 Peter 3:21 is a reference to physical dirt and not sins. They say that what Peter is saying is that water baptism does not save you by washing dirt of your body. --that makes no sense whatsoever. Who would possibly think that washing dirt off your body would save you? If that is what Peter meant, he certainly would be Captain Obvious.

How can you know what "the filth of the flesh is? Well let's look at every reference to "filth" in the Bible and see what it means.

2 Chronicles 29:5-6 And said unto them, Hear me, ye Levites, sanctify now yourselves, and sanctify the house of the LORD God of your fathers, and carry forth the filthiness out of the holy place. For our fathers have trespassed, and done that which was evil in the eyes of the LORD our God, and have forsaken him, and have turned away their faces from the habitation of the LORD, and turned their backs. (SINS)

Ezra 6:21 And the children of Israel, which were come again out of captivity, and all such as had separated themselves unto them from the filthiness of the heathen of the land, to seek the LORD God of Israel, did eat, (SINS)

Ezra 9:11 Which thou hast commanded by thy servants the prophets, saying, The land, unto which ye go to possess it, is an unclean land with the filthiness of the people of the lands, with their abominations, which have filled it from one end to another with their uncleanness. (SINS)

Job 15:16 How much more abominable and filthy is man, which drinketh iniquity like water? (SINS)

Psalms 14:3 They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one. (SINS)

Psalms 53:3 Every one of them is gone back: they are altogether become filthy; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. (SINS)

Proverbs 30:12 There is a generation that are pure in their own eyes, and yet is not washed from their filthiness. (SINS)

Isaiah 4:4 When the Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion, and shall have purged the blood of Jerusalem from the midst thereof by the spirit of judgment, and by the spirit of burning. (SINS)

Isaiah 28:7-8 But they also have erred through wine, and through strong drink are out of the way; the priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink, they are swallowed up of wine, they are out of the way through strong drink; they err in vision, they stumble in judgment. For all tables are full of vomit and filthiness, so that there is no place clean. (BOTH PHYSICAL FILTH AND SINS)

Isaiah 64:6 But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away. (SINS)

Lamentations 1:8-9 Jerusalem hath grievously sinned; therefore she is removed: all that honoured her despise her, because they have seen her nakedness: yea, she sigheth, and turneth backward. Her filthiness is in her skirts; she remembereth not her last end; therefore she came down wonderfully: she had no comforter. O LORD, behold my affliction: for the enemy hath magnified himself. (SINS)

Ezekiel 16:36 Thus saith the Lord GOD; Because thy filthiness was poured out, and thy nakedness discovered through thy whoredoms with thy lovers, and with all the idols of thy abominations, and by the blood of thy children, which thou didst give unto them; (SINS)

Ezekiel 22:15 And I will scatter thee among the heathen, and disperse thee in the countries, and will consume thy filthiness out of thee. (SINS)

Ezekiel 24:11-13 Then set it empty upon the coals thereof, that the brass of it may be hot, and may burn, and that the filthiness of it may be molten in it, that the scum of it may be consumed. She hath wearied herself with lies, and her great scum went not forth out of her: her scum shall be in the fire. In thy filthiness is lewdness: because I have purged thee, and thou wast not purged, thou shalt not be purged from thy filthiness any more, till I have caused my fury to rest upon thee. (SINS)

Ezekiel 36:25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. (SINS)

Nahum 3:6 And I will cast abominable filth upon thee, and make thee vile, and will set thee as a gazingstock. (GOD'S JUDGMENT ON SINS)

Zepheniah 3:1 Woe to her that is filthy and polluted, to the oppressing city! (SINS)

Zechariah 3:3-4 Now Joshua was clothed with filthy garments, and stood before the angel. And he answered and spake unto those that stood before him, saying, Take away the filthy garments from him. And unto him he said, Behold, I have caused thine iniquity to pass from thee, and I will clothe thee with change of raiment. (PHYSICAL DIRT)

Out of 21 references to filth in the Old Testament, only one or two meant physical dirt rather than sins.

Now let's look at the New Testament usage.

1 Corinthians 4:13 Being defamed, we intreat: we are made as the filth of the world, and are the offscouring of all things unto this day. (PHYSICAL DIRT)

2 Corinthians 7:1 Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God. (SINS)

Ephesians 5:4 Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks. (SINS)

Colossians 3:8 But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth. (SINS)

1 Timothy 3:3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; (SINS)

1 Timothy 3:8  Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre; (SINS)

Titus 1:7  For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre; (SINS)

Titus 1:11 Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake. (SINS)

James 1:21 Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls. (SINS)

1 Peter 5:2 Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; (SINS)

2 Peter 2:7 And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked: (SINS)

Jude 1:8 Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities. (SINS)

Revelation 17:4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication: (SINS)

Revelation 22:11 He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still. (SINS)

In the New Testament, only ONE reference out of SIXTEEN references to "filth" did it mean physical dirt. The "Church of Christ" is obviously giving you a "private interpretation" (2 Pet. 1:20) when they say that the filth of the flesh in 1 Peter 3:21 is a reference to physical dirt rather than sins. Their interpretation does not even made sense nor does it fit the context.

1 Peter 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

Peter's point is clearly that water baptism was only FIGURATIVE and NOT the putting away of the filth of the flesh. 

--Eli Caldwell

Sunday, February 22, 2015

Why did Paul baptize?

Please read these posts with the scriptures given in them before reading this post

The Gospel of the Kingdom
http://av1611studyblog.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-gospel-of-kingdom.html

Mid-Acts Dispensational water baptism debate.  
http://av1611studyblog.blogspot.com/2015/01/mid-acts-dispensational-water-baptism.html


Was water baptism "against us" (Col. 2:14)? 
http://av1611studyblog.blogspot.com/2015/02/was-water-baptism-against-us-col-214.html


Mid-Acts Dispensationalists, those of us who understand that water baptism is not part of God's revelation and command to Gentiles under grace often get asked, "Why did Paul baptize?"

This is a good and valid question that should be addressed. Since Paul was not told to baptize, why did he baptize? (1 Cor. 1:17) 

This question must be answered from the Bible. Why did Paul baptize since he did not receive it from Christ?

If Paul did not receive water baptism from Christ, who did he get it from?

The answer to that question is Aninias. The believer of the gospel of the kingdom, a devout man according to the Law.

Acts 9:
[17] And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.
[18] And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.
[19] And when he had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus
.

Acts 22:
[12] And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there,
[13] Came unto me, and stood, and said unto me, Brother Saul, receive thy sight. And the same hour I looked up upon him.
[14] And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth.
[15] For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard.
[16] And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord
.

Paul received the practice of water baptism from Aninias. He did not receive it from Christ according to 1 Corinthians 1:17, "For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect." If Christ had told Paul to baptize his converts, then he would have bee sent to baptize.

Paul was sent to teach the Gentiles works meet for repentance, but apparently water baptism was not one of those works.

Acts 26:
[17] Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee,
[18] To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.
[19] Whereupon, O king Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision:
[20] But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance
.

Works were not required for salvation (Titus 3:4-7, 2 Tim. 1:9-11, Eph. 1:13, 2:8-9, Rom. 3:24-27, 4:4-5, 10:1-4, Phil. 3:9, Gal. 2:16-3:28, etc.) but they were part of Paul's sending according to Acts 26:19-20.

"...I send thee....I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision....but shewed first unto them....that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance."

"Christ sent me not to baptize..."

Therefore water baptizing was not shewing people works meet for repentance--not after the dispensation of Grace. Christ sent Paul to instruct the Gentiles in works meet for repentance, but NOT to baptize. Water baptism is not a work meet for repentance, we are now under grace....

Ephesians 3:2-3 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to youward: How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery...

Romans 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

Romans 11:13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:

Romans 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

Romans 15:16 That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.

Romans 16:25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

"According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust......Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting." (1 Tim. 1:11+16)

Paul never told us to baptize. That is plain and simple. Water baptism was for the holy nation and royal priesthood under the gospel of the circumcision (1 Pet. 2:5-10, 3:21, Gal. 2:7-8). The Gentiles that would believe the gospel of the kingdom were told to get water baptized (Matt. 24:14, 28:19-20, Mark. 16:15-16) just as they would follow all the teaching Christ gave the apostles (Matt. 28:20) such as keeping the law, selling all, and enduring to the end of the Great Tribulation without denying the Lord:

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

Christ commanded to

#1). Believe on His name (John 1:12-13, 3, 5, 6, etc.)

#2). Get water baptized confessing your sins (John 1:33, Matt. 3:5-10, Mark 1:4-5, 16:15-16, Luke 3:3, 7:29-30, Acts 2:38)

#3.) Sell all (Matt. 6:19-34, 19:16-24, Mark 6:7-9, 10:17-23, Luke 9:1-4, 12:15-34, Acts 2:44-45, 3:1-6, 4:32-37, 5:1-11)

#4.) Endure to the end of the persecution in the Great Tribulation by your own faith without denying the Lord (Matt. 10:22-33, 24:1-51, Heb. 6:4-8, 10:38-39, 1 John 5:4, Rev. 2:11, 2:17, 2:26, 3:5, 3:8, 3:12, 3:21, 12:17, 14:12, 15:2, 18:3)

#5.) Maintain good works (Matt. 19:16-19, John 5:29).

Those are Christ's commandments under the "gospel of the circumcision" (Gal. 2:7-8). Those who would follow those requirements would enter into Christ's earthly kingdom. However, since Israel fell and was diminished and the revelation of the mystery was dispensed to Paul (Rom. 11:1-15, 11:25, Eph. 3:1-9) with the "mystery" "gospel of the uncircumcision" (Eph. 6:19, Acts 20:24, Gal. 1:11-12, 2:7-8, 1 Tim. 1:11-16, 1 Cor. 15:1-4). Christ revealed the mystery of the "one new man" "body of Christ" to Paul (Rom. 16:25, Col. 1:24-28) and Israel had been temporarily set aside until the fulness of the Gentiles comes and they are raptured out of the world (Rom. 11:25-28, Phil. 3:20-21).

In the dispensation of grace we are not under the ordinances of the gospel of the kingdom. Our salvation involves no works on our part whatsoever (Rom. 3:27, 4:4-5, 5:1, 10:1-4, 1 Cor. 1:17, Acts 13:38-39, 16:31, Eph. 1:13, 2:8-9, 2 Tim. 1:9, Titus 3:4-7). Christ's commandments changed in the new dispensation. Believers are now kept saved by the faith of Christ whether we are faithful to the end of our lives or not (Rom. 3:22, Gal. 2:16-20, 3:22-23, Eph. 3:12, Phil. 3:9, 2 Tim. 2:11-13). When we get saved we become known of God (Gal. 4:9), and then He predestinates us to be conformed to the image of Christ at the rapture and nothing can separate us from His love (Rom. 8:29-39, Phil. 3:20-21).

Another strong proof that water baptism was not a practice that Paul received from Christ is 1 Corinthians 1:14-15,

"I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name."


When it came to God's will and commandments, Paul never cared what people accused him of. He would not compromise the truth to please men, nothing would move him from what Christ gave him to do (Acts 20:24, Gal. 1:10). However, Paul would drop water baptism like a hot rock to avoid people falsely accusing him (1 Cor. 1:14-15). If water baptism was something that Christ wanted Paul to carry out, Paul would not be thankful for doing LESS of it just because he was afraid of what others might say about him (1 Cor. 1:14-15) "I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name." This proves that water baptizing is not God's will since the apostle to the Gentiles was willing to dump it based on the false accusations of others. This especially disproves that water baptism was not part of the gospel, because when it came to the gospel Paul did not care about pleasing anybody and would do exactly what Christ told him--it did not matter what people might say about him (Acts 15:2, Gal. 1:10). 

So why did Paul water baptize?

Answer: to avoid contention with the apostles and followers of the gospel of the circumcision/gospel of the kingdom (Acts 10:47-48, 22:16)

The devout man according to the Law, Aninias, immediately wanted Paul to be water baptized. As soon as Paul received his sight and was filled with the Holy Ghost, Aninias said, "now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized".

Acts 9:
[17] And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.
[18] And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized
.


Acts 22:
[12] And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there,
[13] Came unto me, and stood, and said unto me, Brother Saul, receive thy sight. And the same hour I looked up upon him.
[14] And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth.
[15] For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard.
[16] And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord
 


Aninias did not have the revelation of the mystery (it is questionable how much of it Paul even knew at this point) and he was still following the gospel of the kingdom and the Law. That is why Aninias wanted Paul baptized in a hurry. This is similar to what happened with Peter in Acts 10 when God made known to him that He no longer required him to keep the Law and that Gentile would be saved by grace through faith without works. 

Acts 10:
[9] On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour:
[10] And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,
[11] And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:
[12] Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
[13] And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.
[14] But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.
[15] And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.
[16] This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.
[17] Now while Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Cornelius had made inquiry for Simon's house, and stood before the gate
,


Acts 10:
[28] And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.
[29] Therefore came I unto you without gainsaying, as soon as I was sent for: I ask therefore for what intent ye have sent for me?
[30] And Cornelius said, Four days ago I was fasting until this hour; and at the ninth hour I prayed in my house, and, behold, a man stood before me in bright clothing,
[31] And said, Cornelius, thy prayer is heard, and thine alms are had in remembrance in the sight of God.
[32] Send therefore to Joppa, and call hither Simon, whose surname is Peter; he is lodged in the house of one Simon a tanner by the sea side: who, when he cometh, shall speak unto thee.
[33] Immediately therefore I sent to thee; and thou hast well done that thou art come. Now therefore are we all here present before God, to hear all things that are commanded thee of God.
[34] Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
[35] But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.
[36] The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all:)
[37] That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached;
[38] How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.
[39] And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree:
[40] Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly;
[41] Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before of God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead.
[42] And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead.
[43] To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
[44] While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
[45] And 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.
[46] For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
[47] Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
[48] And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days


Peter had just been made known that the "middle wall of partition" (Eph. 2:14) had been broken down. Peter realized from his vision from God that he should "not call any man common or unclean" and that "God is no respecter of persons". However, Peter did not receive the revelation that Gentiles would be saved upon the hearing of faith. Peter still thought that one had to "work righteousness" to be "accepted" of God. That is no longer true, not according to Paul's gospel (Titus 3:4-7). Which is why God poured out the Holy Ghost on the Gentiles BEFORE water baptism and laying on of hands. The 12 apostles believed that water baptism and laying on of hands was a requirement to receive the Holy Ghost (Acts 2:38, 8:14-17). However, Christ revealed to Paul that the "gospel of the grace of God" did not require works before the Holy Ghost is given:

Galatians 3:
[1] O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?
[2] This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
[3] Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh
?


Galatians 3:
[13] Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
[14] That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith
.


Ephesians 1:13-14  In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

Paul taught that the believer was sealed with the Holy Ghost when he trusts Christ believing the gospel. Peter did not have that revelation and that is why he and his friends were "astonished" that the Holy Ghost was given to the Gentiles before water baptism and laying on of hands.

Aninias, Peter, and the circumcision believed that nobody could be saved without water baptism (some also taught circumcision was a requirement--Acts 15:5).

That is clearly why Paul baptized. When it came to salvation Paul would not compromise on the gospel (Acts 15, Gal. 1) but when it came to smaller matter Paul would try and please people.

Acts 16:
[1] Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which was a Jewess, and believed; but his father was a Greek:
[2] Which was well reported of by the brethren that were at Lystra and Iconium.
[3] Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that his father was a Greek
.

Galatians 2:
[3] But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised:
[4] And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage:
[5] To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you
.  

Notice that Paul would practice an ordinance to avoid contention, but not if it was a matter of salvation and adding works to the gospel. After the meeting in Acts 15 Paul started practicing some ordinances that the believers of the gospel of the kingdom kept, not for salvation, but to help keep fellowship. Paul started circumcising (Acts 16:3), baptizing (Acts 16:15, 16:33, 18:8 ), vowing (Acts 18:18), keeping feasts (Acts 18:21), imparting the baptism with the Holy Ghost (Acts 19:6), and went along with the Law practices in the temple so that an offering could be made (Acts 21:18-26). Paul did not do these things for salvation, but to help the weaker brethren and those that did not understand his ministry (1 Cor. 8:1-13, 9:16-22, Rom. 14:1-23). Peter found the teaching given to Paul "hard to be understood" in 2 Peter 3:15-16.

That is clearly the Bible answer to why Paul baptized. Paul did not receive it from Christ (1 Cor. 1:14-17, Acts 22:16) and we are not to observe it in this dispensation of grace.

Paul said in Colossians 2,

"As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him: Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving. Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ."

Paul said in Colossians 2:20-22

"Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, after the commandments and doctrines of men?"

Water baptism is after the tradition of men and not after Christ. It is part of man's religion but is not a Bible commandment under grace. We are dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, we should not be subject to man's ordinances, commandments, and doctrines. These things are "dung" (Phil. 3:8) and it would be wrong to participate in them. In the same context of Colossians 2 it says in verses 10-12 that we have been circumcised spiritually by Christ taking away our sins and the Holy Ghost baptizing us into Him--an operation of God. These spiritual things make us "complete in Christ" and Paul's point is that we should not practice the physical ordinances since we have the REAL thing.

Colossians 2:
[10] And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:
[11] In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:
[12] 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.
[13] And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
[14] Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross
;

We have spiritual completion in Christ as members of His body. We do not need the ordinances of water baptism and circumcision and we should not practice them because we have been spiritually baptized and circumcised. That is the point of Colossians 2. We did not receive Christ through physical circumcision and baptism, traditions and doctrines of men, we received Him by faith without the ordinances (Col. 2:6-14).

--Eli Caldwell


Thursday, February 19, 2015

A divine "Church of Christ" mouse trap (1 Cor. 12:13)

I did a brief overview of what "baptism into Christ" is in this post http://av1611studyblog.blogspot.com/2015/02/what-is-baptism-into-christ.html

And in that post I throughly proved that baptism into Christ is simply being put into Christ by God (1 Cor. 12:12-18). That is why it says "by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body" in 1 Corinthians 12:13. That is why it says "God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him" in 1 Corinthians 12:18. That is why it says "Buried with him in baptism....through the faith of the operation of God" in Colossians 2:12.

Ignoring these infallible truths, the so called "Church of Christ" denomination puts a private interpretation on 1 Corinthians 12:13.

1 Corinthians 12:12-13  For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

Every Church of Christ elder in the world will tell you that "by one Spirit are we all baptized" means that the Holy Spirit led you to get water baptized into Christ. That is what all Campbellites believe and if they say they don't really believe that then they're lying, cause they DO. They believe that if you are not baptized into water then you have not been baptized into Christ. The official teaching of the Church of Christ is that baptism into water performed by a man is the SAME THING AS baptism into Christ performed by God (1 Cor. 12:13-18, Col. 2:12). They believe that their water baptistery mystically becomes Christ and that when an elder immerses you in that  baptistery that you have been put into Jesus Christ. ALL cambellites believe that and if they say they don't then they're lying to you. They do believe that. This is the same teaching that the Roman Catholic Church has been promoting about the Lord's Supper for years. The so called "Church of Christ" just adopted it for their water baptism.

No Church of Christ elder believes that you are a son of God, born again, a member of Christ, saved, etc. until you get put in their Jesus water. You have to confess your faith before a COC elder and then he'll put you in Christ by dipping you in a tank of water. That is Roman Catholicism to the core. No COC honestly believes that there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus (1 Tim. 2:4-6). They believe that if there is not a man around for you to confess to and baptize you, then you are condemned to hell. You cannot just pick up a Bible and believe the gospel to be saved. Every COC believes that you need MAN PLUS CHRIST in order to be saved.

But the Church of Christ elder breaks his religious neck here at 1 Corinthians 12:13. Our priestly elder cannot admit that you get into Christ "by one Spirit" rather than by his wicked man-made religion and therefore he has to put a wild private interpretation on the verse (2 Pet. 1:20).

1 Corinthians 12:12-13  For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

The COC priest will tell you that the meaning of the verse (he'll give the meaning while ignoring what it said) is that the Holy Spirit "influences" and "leads" a person to get water baptized. Did you get that? "The Holy Spirit "influences" and "leads" a person to get water baptized". That is some wild interpretation!

WHAT THE SCRIPTURES SAID: "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body.....But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him."

WHAT THE COC TELLS YOU IT "MEANS": "The Holy Spirit "influences" and "leads" a person to get water baptized"

But that's not even the funny part. The funny part is that with the COC private interpretation, they have completely blown themselves out of the water. Because if the Holy Spirit "led" you and "influenced" you to get water baptized by the COC elder/priest, then you were saved before water baptism!

Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

Did you get that? If the Holy Spirit led you to get water baptized then you were a son of God BEFORE water baptism! Did you get that? The priestly elders of the Church of Christ never got it. If you want to know why the COC never got it you can check out 1 Corinthians 2:12-16.

I told this to a COC elder one time and you know what that bird told me? He said, "Well in the English Standard Version, which is more accurate than King James, it says "For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body". We were baptized in one Spirit, not by one Spirit."

Uh oh! Somebody can't handle the Book! That's how these lying religious goofs will do. They're resemble snakes, worms, and wads of snot. If you grab them in one place, they slide off somewhere else! If a man can't find his false doctrine in the Book (KJB) he will always look for it in a different book. That is the philosophy of Bible "correctors". The ESV is not more accurate than the KJB, they aren't even translated from the same Greek and Hebrew manuscripts. The ESV New Testament is based mainly on the VATICAN manuscript of the VATICAN library, Vaticanus. (now you know what the COC priest likes it so much!)

The ESV is the same book that told you that Joseph was Christ's "father" in Luke 2:33. It told you that it was not God that was manifest in the flesh but only "he" in 1 Tim. 3:16. The ESV does not say that Christ is "from everlasting" in Micah 5:2. There are hundreds more errors which I have dealt with throughly under the "KJB Believer" page, but here is one more that the COC will love. The ESV says in James 5:16 to "confess your sins" to MAN. The KJB simply says to confess your "faults". The Church of Christ, the Vatican manuscript, and the ESV are Roman Catholic to the core.

But even if the ESV was the preserved word of God rather than the KJB (which it isn't), the COC priest has just sunk his own battleship AGAIN.

"Well in the English Standard Version, which is more accurate than King James, it says "For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body". We were baptized in one Spirit, not by one Spirit."

Question: if you are unsaved until you get water baptized, what in the world is a lost man doing "in one Spirit"? A lost man can't be "in the Spirit"!

Romans 8:
[5] For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
[6] For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
[7] Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
[8] So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
[9] But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his
.

If you are "in the Spirit" then you are "out of the flesh". A lost man cannot be "in the Spirit" when he gets water baptized! What is a lost man doing "in the Spirit", ain't he suppose to be "in the flesh"?

If you were "in one Spirit" when you were baptized then you were saved and out of the flesh BEFORE that water baptism.

So there you have the God appointed Campbellite mouse-trap. When a Campbellite hits 1 Corinthians 12:13 he is forced to submit to one of the following:

1.) Baptism into Christ is done by the Spirit and not by man.

2.) The Spirit led and influences you to get water baptized which means you are a son of God before water baptism (Rom. 8:14, John 1:12-13).

3.) You were "in one Spirit" when you got water baptized which means you were already saved before you got baptized (Romans 8:5-9).

The Campbellite is trapped like a rat no matter which option he takes. You do not get into Christ by water, it is by the Spirit.

This is the only gospel that saves in the present dispensation:


1 Corinthians 15:1-4
Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

Ephesians 1:7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;

Ephesians 1:13  In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

John 1:
[11] He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
[12] But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
[13] Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God
.

2 Corinthians 5:
[14] For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead:
[15] And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.
[16] Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more.
[17] Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
[18] And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
[19] To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
[20] Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.
[21] For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him


Titus 3:
[4] But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
[5] Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
[6] Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
[7] That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life
.

Acts 16:30-31 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

"...Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." (John 1:29)

John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

--Eli Caldwell