Central Church of Christ in Huntsville Alabama

[Ronnie]

The Church of Christ denomination claims that they "have no creed but the Bible," but in reality many in the Church of Christ denomination have a book that they use as a "guideline" for church doctrine. It is called, "Why I am a Member of the Church of Christ," by Leroy Brownlow. Chapter 14 is entitled, "Because It Gives Scriptural Answers To the Question- What Must I Do To Be Saved." This chapter would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad to see to what extent the Church of Christ denomination will go to promote their position on baptism. In this chapter Brother Brownlow dissects the question, "What must I do to be saved?" He examines the question word by word. When he gets to the word "do", he says, "It is not what I must get, think, feel or believe. The word "do" suggests activity on the part of the man being saved. Salvation is not a matter of passiveness, but of activity. God saves; still man saves himself by obeying the gospel, God's power to save (Rom. 1:16, Acts 2:40). Take the word "do" out of Christianity and you destroy it. You never read of an inspired man telling a sinner that there is nothing for him to do to be saved." Now I don't know about you, but I would consider the Apostle Paul to be an "inspired man", and oddly enough he is the only man recorded in scripture to have ever been asked this question verbatim, "What must I do to be saved?" It was asked of him by the Philippian jailer in Acts 16:30. Keep in mind that Brother Brownlow's answer was "It is not what I believe" that saves me. Paul's answer, on the other hand, is just the opposite. When asked by the jailer, "What must I do to be saved?," the Apostle Paul answers, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved!" Mr. Brownlow's answer is a classic example of not being able to see the forest because of the trees!

[Ronnie]

Paul says in Ephesians 2:8&9 that "We are saved by GRACE through FAITH and not of ourselves, it is a GIFT of God, NOT as a result of WORKS, that no one should boast." If you ever stand before Christ Jesus and He asks you why should He let you into Heaven... you had better say, "Because of what You did for me on the cross," not, "Because I was baptized"!

Truth is always true. If you believe a certain doctrine, but through the study of God's Word, you find that your belief is not upheld scripturally (even if only once), then you need to seriously re-examine that belief. Regarding baptismal regeneration, a good case in point can be found in Acts 10:1-48. Here we find an example of a man named Cornelius, receiving the Holy Spirit, evidenced by " speaking in tongues and exalting God." And being amazed by the whole ordeal, the Apostle Peter (who had been preaching the gospel to the Cornelius household when the Holy Spirit fell upon all of them) stated in verse 47, "Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did..." Clearly we have in this example, a case where a person was obviously saved before he was water baptized. The Apostle Peter declares their salvation by saying that they had "received the Holy Spirit, just like we did!" The only way around this scenario is to deny that a person that is filled with the Holy Spirit (evidenced by speaking in tongues and glorifying God) is actually saved. And believe it or not, that is exactly what the Church of Christ denomination says! It never ceases to amaze me what some people are willing to swallow in order to protect what they feel is biblical, even if it denies the very Bible they seek to uphold.

[Ronnie]

It is really the Apostle Paul that puts the icing on the cake on the issue of baptism, by stating in I Cor. 1:17, "Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel!" Now if baptism is the point of salvation, this statement would be utterly blasphemous. But in reality, it simply confirms what the rest of the Bible already teaches... that we are saved by grace, not works of any kind! As human beings, it is in our nature to want to earn our salvation. There is nothing wrong with wanting to please God! The problem comes in when the way we want to please God conflicts with the way He wants it. If we look at Romans 10:9-10, we see God giving us the plan of salvation in a very simple and straightforward way. The Apostle Paul says that we are saved by confessing that Jesus is (our) Lord! Now that can't be true, can it? We don't get saved by simply believing and confessing that Jesus is Lord, do we? That is just too easy. There must be more to it than that, isn't there? Don't we have to do something to earn it? According to human wisdom, we have to deserve such a great gift. But in issues of life and salvation, sometimes we have to set aside our earthly "wisdom" and simply accept God at His Word. It's like the bumper sticker that says, "God said it; I believe it; and that settles it." Whether we understand God's Mercy and Grace or not, doesn't change His terms. He has made it simple so that anyone can be saved. But man comes along and tries to make it "better." But you cannot improve on perfection! God's ways are higher than our ways, and He says that salvation is a gift, that no one can earn. So my advice is to take God at his word and receive the greatest gift ever offered; Salvation by Grace through Faith in Jesus Christ!

[Ronnie]

Many members of the Church of Christ denomination will then ask the question, "If you get saved by believing, then are the demons saved, because James 2:19 says,'You believe that there is one God; you do well: the devils also believe, and tremble."

Answer? The demons are a different species than humans. We don't know if there is a plan of salvation for demons (fallen Angels) any more than we do for dogs or cats. It's a typical Church of Christ denomination straw man argument. The question to ask them back is: "I don't know if the demons can get saved by grace through faith or not, but do you think baptism will save a demon?" They usually look at you like you just insulted their mother. Why? Because they realize what a foolish argument they just proposed. That's what happens though, when you are constantly grasping at straws...eventually one will break your camel's back.

[Ronnie]

Key verse to remember:
Hebrews 6:1-3, "Therefore let us leave the elementary teachings about Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death, and of faith in God, 2instruction about baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. 3And God permitting, we will do so."

[Ronnie]

These last few messages were borrowed from my friend Brian with his permission. He is also ex_coc.

[Ronnie]

You guys might con the others out there but we who have spent half of our lives trying to reconcile your doctrine know where the rubber meets the road.

[Saban fan]

Ronnie wrote:

You are a dancer, slicer, deicer, and denier. let us start from scratch.
You deny HS indwelling.
You deny the sufficiency of Christ.
You speak from both sides of your forked tongue.
You have yet to explain which church of Christ is the only true church.
So hang on!

Lets see:
#1 - Lie.
#2 - Lie
#3 - explain...? You will have to show me how I have contradicted myself.
#4 - Christ established *A* Church. we can find this church by rightly dividing the Bible. Christ's church still exists. Many divisions also exist that do not resemble Christ's church.

[Saban fan]

Ronnie wrote:

9We also know that law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious;
Have you figured this part out yet? These people were probably gnostics, not true believers in Christ. Do your research instead of accepting everything your creedmasters tell you.

Paul was talking about the law of the OT (Rom. 7:12-14) It was given by god for a purpose. In the Christian age, men are no longer under the Law of Moses Gal.3:23-26). The law was given to bring men to a knowledge and sense of sin...toexpose sin. The lawless are those who live as they want to live...as if there is no law.

[Saban fan]

Ronnie wrote:

You guys continue to see with physical eyes as you see the sin and and see the water baptism, you are only seeing the shadow. Sin was destroyed (annihilated)for those in Christ.
We are two people in one body, In spirit baptism the old man died with Christ in his death and the new man was separated unto Christ. The new nature was created but god allowed the old physical body to live so that we might have a house to live in until we receive our new bodies. I hope you are reading this because it is powerful.

So when you knowingly lie about me it is not sin because you are "in Christ"???

[Saban fan]

Ronnie wrote:

Most (not all) congregations of the Church of Christ denomination claim that they can trace their roots back to the original New Testament church, in the same way that the Catholic Church claims that they can trace the papacy back to the Apostle Peter. Both claims are equally spurious. The reality is: in 1906 the Church of Christ denomination broke away from the Christian Church which was established in the mid 1800s by Alexander Campbell during the so-called Restoration Movement.

Wrong. There is a church in the bible. It still exists and can be recognized. It is not a denomination.

[Saban fan]

Ronnie wrote:

But right off the bat, this is where we get into one of their greatest controversies. They claim that they are not a denomination, but rather they are the TRUE Body of Christ! To justify this outlandish claim, they rest very heavily on the notion that they have the only biblically correct name of any church. They look down on other denominations for naming themselves after a man (Lutherans) or a doctrine (Baptists) or forms of church government (Presbyterian) and claim that the only scriptural name given to the church is the name that they bear. Since the word Christ simply means "messiah", that translates into The Church of the Messiah. But which Messiah? A better name would be The Church of Jesus Christ, which would also be a scriptural name.

The church of Jesus Christ would be a fine name as long as it follows the doctorine taught in the scriptures. No problems with that simply because it is not a denomination. Doesn't have to have a *certain* name.

[Saban fan]

Ronnie wrote:

As would: "The Church of God" (I Cor. 1:2) "The Church of the Faithful in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 1:1) "The Church of the Saints in Christ Jesus" (Phil. 1:1) "The Church of the Holy and Faithful Brothers in Christ" (Col. 1:2) "The Church In God Our Father and the Lord Jesus" (II Thess 1:1) "The Church of God's Elect" (I Peter 1:1) "The Children of God" (I John 3:1) Etc...Etc...Etc...

Those are all fine names. All of these could describe Christ's church or the church of which I am a member. When it is not a denomination the name does not matter as long as it properly describes the congregation. THANK YOU FOR MAKING MY POINT!

I DO believe naming a chruch after a man would be an un-scriptural division.

[Saban fan]

Ronnie wrote:

Baptismal regeneration is simply a 50 cent term used to describe the belief that you are born again and receive your salvation at the moment of water baptism. There are certain verses that they use, out of context, that they feel substantiate their belief. But if you examine each of their verses in context, you will see that the verses clearly do not substantiate their claims. Not to mention the myriad of verses to which they must turn a blind eye, in order to continue believing their works oriented doctrine.
They use three main verses to try to establish their position:
1. Mark 16:16
2. Acts 2:38
3. I Peter 3:21

You are wrong to continue to describe my baptism as baptismal regeneration when I have told you over and over there is no power in the water. We do not believe there is. This is an improper term you continue to adhere to when I've told you it is incorrect. This will soon be considered a lie if you continue to apply it to my beliefs. Understand how *lies* work yet?

[Saban fan]

Ronnie wrote:

Mark 16:16 says, "He who believes and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned." You notice that this verse does not say, "and he who has not been baptized shall be condemned," which is exactly what the Church of Christ denomination would like for you to believe. Jesus is simply making a natural assumption that all believers will be baptized. I would concur with that assumption. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that a believer should not get baptized, unless there is positively no water available, or in the case of a death bed conversion. In such cases the Church of Christ denomination shows absolutely no mercy. They will say that it was the individual's fault for waiting to the last minute. "Sorry, Bud, your prayers of repentance are falling on deaf ears 'cause you waited too long, there ain't no pool, river or baptistery for miles." Tell that to the thief on the cross! He didn't have the opportunity to be water baptized and yet because he cried out to Jesus for mercy, Jesus promised him that he would be in Paradise that very day with Him! Now the standard answer that the Church of Christ denomination member will pop out of his or her preprogrammed gray matter is that you can't use the thief on the cross as an example because Jesus made that promise to the thief while they were both still under the Old Covenant (which as we all know wasn't fulfilled until Jesus died). But you see, the key issue is not when Jesus made the promise to the thief. The key issue is, under which covenant did the thief die? We know for a fact that the thief died under the New Covenant. How do we know? Because the gospels tell us that when the soldiers came to break the three crucified victim's legs, they marveled that Jesus was already dead. They didn't marvel at the two thieves, because they were still alive. So if the New Covenant was ushered in at the death of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, then anyone who died from that point on, died under the New Covenant. And that would include the thief on the cross!

Because baptism is belief in action it IS faith. If you disbelieve you will not submit your life to Christ through baptism. AFTER Cornelieus' family were baptized they rejoiced because they HAD BELIEVED.

As far as the thief on the cross was concerned, Jesus was still alive when He told the theif he would see him in paradise. Old Covenant was STILL in place during Christ's life before death.

[Saban fan]

Ronnie wrote:

Next we take a look at Acts 2:38 in which the apostle Peter says to the remorseful crowd, "Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins." Now here is a verse they feel is stating that your sins are remitted at baptism. As we all know, if your sins are not forgiven, then you are not saved. But the question that needs to be asked here is: "Is it the baptism or the repentance that brings about the forgiveness?" Now we could get into the structuring of the sentence and try to argue our point from that perspective (the word "for" can be translated "because"), but usually a member of the Church of Christ denomination is not willing to accept that form of reasoning, so we go with a much more powerful position. If the forgiveness was brought through the baptism rather than the repentance, how do you explain the presentation that Peter gives in his very next sermon in Acts 3:19? He is speaking to a very similar group and says almost the same thing, but when he gives the plan of salvation, the topic of baptism is left out altogether! He said, "Repent therefore and return, that your sins may be wiped away." So we see from this second sermon, that it wasn't the baptism that brought the forgiveness, it was the repentance. Then in Acts 10:43 Peter once again states, "To Him all the Prophets witness that, through His Name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sin." Most people reading these Scriptures see the pattern that is developing... it is faith in Jesus that wipes away our sin!

Acts 3:19? This context means to start obeying Christ's commands. The act of obedience that follows repentance is baptism. When you turn again your sins are "blotted out". This corresponds with remission of sins in Acts 2:38.

Acts 10:43? One is saved when he receives the remission of sins. In order for this to happen he must believe on Jesus as the son of God. Believe means to believe AND obey (Matt. 7:21),(Mark 16: 15-16) and Peter will command this of Cornelieus and his household.

If "faith" (without obedience) in Jesus wipes away sin, please explain Jesus' words in Matthew 7:21.?????????

Ronnie....this is a request for you. Please do not continue to ignore my questions and requests.

[Saban fan]

Ronnie wrote:

Unfortunately, at this stage of the discussion some Church of Christ denomination members will take their pet doctrine of baptism from the extreme to the absurd. They actually will void the efficacy of someone's baptism, if the person didn't realize that their sins were remitted, at the moment of their baptism! I once asked a Church of Christ denomination preacher if he thought Billy Graham was saved, and his reply was, "Absolutely not!" When pressed for a reason for his conclusion he said, "Even though Billy Graham has been baptized, he doesn't preach baptism for the remission of sin, so he is not only not a true Christian, but he is also a false teacher!" So much for common sense.

My answer would be that I don't know.

[Saban fan]

Ronnie wrote:

We get e-mails daily from Church of Christ denomination members saying that unless you were "baptized for the remission of sins then your baptism won't save you." I asked a young Church of Christ denomination pastor (oops, I mean "preacher") once, "What if you didn't realize that the baptism remitted your sin...should you get rebaptized?" He said, "Yes!" I then asked him, "What if you did believe that the baptism remitted your sins, but you were thinking about something else while you were being baptized, like how cold the water was...etc. Should you get rebaptized?" He again said yes. He stated, "You must realize that at the moment of baptism, your sins are being remitted, or the baptism will be of no effect." So in other words, if your mind was not wrapped around the "remission of sin" issue like a steal trap the moment you went down into the water... you are lost and going to Hell. Now, THAT, my friend is LEGALISM!

Is there a problem with the word "pastor"?? You seem to act as if there is an issue.....?

Was his name Peter or Paul or Timothy? Were his words inspired Ronnie?

Call my submission legalism if you like. What do you call the people say they believe yet who REFUSE to submit to Christ's doctorine?

[Saban fan]

Ronnie wrote:

First of all, we see that Paul says that the "circumcision of Christ" is a removal of the flesh that is symbolized in baptism. In the Old Testament, the Jews would circumcise their boys as a part of fulfilling their covenant with God. It was a literal cutting away of the flesh. Baptism was a symbol of dying to the flesh, and rising to new life in Christ. You notice that Paul says "by the circumcision of Christ having been buried with Him in baptism." Paul is saying that baptism is the circumcision of Christ, "through faith." Now why would this distinction be important to understand? Because in Romans 4:10 Paul states emphatically that Abraham was considered righteous by faith, BEFORE he was circumcised! He then goes on to say in verse 11, "...and he (Abraham) received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had before he was circumcised ..." In other words, Abraham was counted as righteous before he was circumcised, and the circumcision was simply a "seal", or an outward sign, of the righteousness that he already had! Which is exactly the case with the "circumcision of Christ" (water baptism). It is an outward sign, or seal, of the righteousness you already possess through faith in Christ Jesus.

We've already discussed this. Why do you always start over at zero with someone else's writings. Why can't you go back to this discussion we had before and pick up with where we left off rather than starting at ground zero everytime. this is getting really old and tiring. Becomes a broken record when you don't advance the though but rather back up and start all over.

[Saban fan]

Ronnie wrote:

The Church of Christ denomination claims that they "have no creed but the Bible," but in reality many in the Church of Christ denomination have a book that they use as a "guideline" for church doctrine. It is called, "Why I am a Member of the Church of Christ," by Leroy Brownlow. Chapter 14 is entitled, "Because It Gives Scriptural Answers To the Question- What Must I Do To Be Saved." This chapter would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad to see to what extent the Church of Christ denomination will go to promote their position on baptism. In this chapter Brother Brownlow dissects the question, "What must I do to be saved?" He examines the question word by word. When he gets to the word "do", he says, "It is not what I must get, think, feel or believe. The word "do" suggests activity on the part of the man being saved. Salvation is not a matter of passiveness, but of activity. God saves; still man saves himself by obeying the gospel, God's power to save (Rom. 1:16, Acts 2:40). Take the word "do" out of Christianity and you destroy it. You never read of an inspired man telling a sinner that there is nothing for him to do to be saved." Now I don't know about you, but I would consider the Apostle Paul to be an "inspired man", and oddly enough he is the only man recorded in scripture to have ever been asked this question verbatim, "What must I do to be saved?" It was asked of him by the Philippian jailer in Acts 16:30. Keep in mind that Brother Brownlow's answer was "It is not what I believe" that saves me. Paul's answer, on the other hand, is just the opposite. When asked by the jailer, "What must I do to be saved?," the Apostle Paul answers, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved!" Mr. Brownlow's answer is a classic example of not being able to see the forest because of the trees!

I don't own this book. I do own some books that are studies of the Bible that faithful christians have written. My faith boils down to The Word everytime and you cannot prove otherwise so please do not act like I have some type of "denominational" handbook. I don't.