What are your thoughts?

-- Anonymous, April 25, 2001

Answers

My Friend “C”:

You have asked for our thoughts on the question are Catholics Christians. Would you please define your question better for us? For the word “Catholic” has the following meaning:

“Cath·o·lic Pronunciation: 'kath-lik, 'ka-th&- Function: noun Date: 15th century 1 : a person who belongs to the universal Christian church 2 : a member of a Catholic church; especially : ROMAN CATHOLIC”

Now according to this definition, you could be asking us if a person who belongs to the “universal church” is a Christian. Or you could be asking is a person a Christian by virtue of being a member of what is called the Roman Catholic Church. It would be difficult to answer your question until we understand for certain just which of these to distinct meanings you are referring to in your question.

For there is no doubt that those who have become Christians in obedience to the gospel of Christ are members of the church of Christ which is universal. And that there is only one Church in the Scriptures to which all Christians belong by virtue of being saved from their sins.

And it is also true that the Roman Catholic Church is not the church of Christ. Instead it is a perversion and a counterfeit of the genuine body of Christ which is the church of Christ. “ And hath put all [things] under his feet, and gave him [to be] the head over all [things] to the church, Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.” (Eph. 1:22,23). The church is the body of Christ and in it Christ, not the pope or anyone else, holds the “preeminent” place in all things. “And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all [things] he might have the preeminence.” (Col. 1:18). “If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and [be] not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, [and] which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister; Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church: Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God; Even] the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:” (Col. 1:23-26). Thus we see:

1. The church is the body of Christ. (Eph1:22,23; Col.1:18,24)

2. There is only ONE BODY “[There is] one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Eph. 4:4)

3. Therefore there is but one church.

WE can see that there is one Lord and the pope is not He. WE see that there is one “faith” and the Roman Catholic Faith is not “the faith” We see that there is “one baptism” of which the Roman Catholics have not submitted to. (Mark 16:16; Acts 2; 38; 1Peter 3:21; Romans 6:3-6; Acts 8:35-40; Acts 22:16; John 3:3-5; Gal. 3; 26,27)

Thus they are not the “body of Christ” at all.

And none are Christians simply by virtue of their membership in such an organization. In fact, no one can be a Christian by virtue of membership in any earthly organization. The Church is the “saved” and when one is saved from their sins in obedience to the gospel of Christ they are automatically, by virtue of their having become Christians, members of the body or church of Christ. “And the Lord added to the church daily such as were being saved” (Acts 2:47). And the church of Christ is “catholic” in the sense that it does indeed encompass all of the “saved” persons in heaven and on earth. (Matt. 16:13-18). But the Roman Catholic Church is composed of those who are converted to the “pope” as the “vicar” of Christ on earth and encompasses only those who follow his teaching instead of the teaching of Christ. Thy are not taught the true gospel of Christ and are not obedient to it. Those who haven not been obedient to the gospel of Christ are not “saved”. “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ for it is the power of God unto salvation to the Jew First and also to the Greek” (Romans 1:16). “And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;” (2 Thess. 1:8,9). Salvation is only found “in Christ Jesus” (Acts 4:12). The Roman Catholics are not obedient to Christ and thus he is not the “author” of their salvation. “Though he were a son yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; and being made perfect he became the author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him” (Heb. 5:8,9). Christ will not save anyone that does not obey him. (Matt. 7:21-23) and he is not the Lord over any who do not do what he says, (Luke 6:46). There are none that are saved outside of Christ and there are none that are saved who are outside of the body or church of Christ.

And al of the above scriptural truths apply not only to Roman Catholics but to any and all human denominations teaching the doctrines and commandments of men contrary to the doctrine of Christ our Lord. Only those who have been obedient to the gospel of Christ are saved and are therefore Christians according to the word of God. And there are no doubts that some, who have obeyed the gospel at some time in their life have later been lead by deception away from the truth and into sectarian errors and are thus to be found in the “Babylon” of denominationalism. But if they are to be faithful to Christ and thus genuine Christians saved from their sins they must “come out from among them” and submit to Christ in all things.

Now, I say all of this because you have, for whatever reason, isolated the “Catholics” by which I can only assume you mean the Roman Catholics, as if they are the only ones about which this question could be asked. But I must suggest to us all that they are not and if we are going to discuss this matter we should consider all sectarian, denominational organizations built by MEN and not God. “Except the Lord build the house they labor in vain that build it”. “But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. But ye say, Whosoever shall say to [his] father or [his] mother, [It is] a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; And honour not his father or his mother, [he shall be free]. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. Ye] hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with [their] lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching [for] doctrines the commandments of men. And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand: Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man. Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying? But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up. Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.”

Not only the Roman Catholics but every single Protestant denomination is a “Plant” our “heavenly father hath not planted” and they “shall be rooted up”. I warn all to be sure that they are not among those who are going to be “rooted up” by the mighty hand of God.

For Christ and the faithful in Him,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, April 25, 2001

E. Lee (who I love and admire) writes:

<<2. There is only ONE BODY “[There is] one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Eph. 4:4)

3. Therefore there is but one church.

WE can see that there is one Lord and the pope is not He. WE see that there is one “faith” and the Roman Catholic Faith is not “the faith” We see that there is “one baptism” of which the Roman Catholics have not submitted to.>>

But if there is but "one baptism"--it is not water baptism...

(1 Cor 12:13 NRSV) For in the one Spirit we were all baptized into one body--Jews or Greeks, slaves or free--and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.

It is the baptism of the Spirit--which places us in the body of Christ.

So the answer is...some Catholics are Christian (in spite of their doctrinal errors--the enumeration of which I agree wholeheartedly with Lee about--except this one point) just as there are saved Baptists, Quakers, Lutherans, etc., and also unsaved ones. There are wheat and tares all around. And while only the true church of Christ is saved--it does exist even amidst the sectarians.

BTW--I know Quakers who are quite sectarian, but I also know CoC folks who are as well. Thank God the church of Christ is a spiritual body and all who are baptized into it by the one Spirit are one in Christ.

-- Anonymous, April 25, 2001

I was asking about those you are calling the RCC.

“Roman” implies a connection to the ancient Romans. This is actually applied the Catholic Church incorrectly, just as the term “Protestants” is not an original ‘positive’ term that was used by the CC to define those against it. “Roman” was applied to degrgate the Catholic Church to give legitimacy to thos

Many Catholics accept the term “Roman” but many take offense to it (as they should if they really believe in their faith), as do Protestants. If one teaches errors, it must be false? Even pagans teach some things that are “Christian” morals and actions, yet those religions are considered ‘bad’.

I agree with you on many sides, however, If there is only “one congregation” and “one baptism” then which one is correct. If “I” am baptized in the CC yet they are not “Christian” but yet it’s said that some are, would my baptism be valid? Is got to be one or the other, there is no middle ground. Is there? There’s the side of The God and there’s the side of the devil?

-- Anonymous, April 26, 2001

My good friend and Brother White (whom I also love and respect) has said:

“But if there is but "one baptism"--it is not water baptism...”

It is difficult to question one with Brother White’s obvious talent, intelligence, and proven educational attainments. And it is certainly not pleasant to doubt one whom you hold in the highest esteem, as I do Brother White. Nevertheless, I do not hesitate in this case because Brother White has also shown himself to be honest, sincere and capable of objectively considering any evidence that might be contrary to the positions that he holds to be true. And I am convinced that if sufficient evidence should be presented to him, and he understands it to be true he would willingly accept the truth and reject error promptly upon obtaining such further evidence. It is sincerely in that spirit that I ask him to reconsider his above statement.

Though it seems from his words that he appears to doubt whether there is in fact only “one baptism” for he begins his statement with the words, “But if there is but “one baptism”. Yet the clear reading the Word of God leaves no doubt whatsoever that there is indeed only “one baptism” for the Holy Spirit inspired the apostle Paul to tell the Ephesians, “there is one Lord, one faith, and one baptism”. (Ephesians 4:4). Thus it is surely impossible that there might be two baptisms instead of just one. Therefore, there is no “if ands or buts” about the matter for there is no question that the Holy Spirit intended to convey in the clearest terms possible that there is only “one baptism”. In fact this same passage that says there is only “one Lord” and that there is only “one faith” in the very next breath says there is only “one baptism”. Thus, we would be as justified in doubting that we are subject to “one Lord” and that we all live by “one faith” in Him as we would be in doubting that there is “one baptism” that puts us into Him (Gal. 3:26,27). However, I do not think that my friend sought to actually doubt that there is one baptism by his statement only that he was not sure that he agreed with the conclusion that I had drawn concerning “one baptism” from that verse. I sincerely hope that he can see that it is the word of God that states unequivocally that there is but one baptism and that there is no “if” about the matter.

Nevertheless, even though he most likely will agree with what we have stated in the last paragraph, he would continue to maintain the latter portion of his comment wherein he contends that this “one baptism” spoken of by the Holy Spirit “is not water baptism”. It is with some disappointment that I find him making this assertion in that the passage to which he refers us for support of it says noting in the least about the subject of “which baptism” is the “one baptism” spoken of in Ephesians 4:4. Yet it is only fair that we consider his assertion first in the light of the passage which he would have us to believe supports it. And then to consider his assertion in the light of the teaching of the rest of the scriptures concerning baptism.

The passage to which he refers is:

“(1 Cor 12:13 NRSV) For in the one Spirit we were all baptized into one body--Jews or Greeks, slaves or free--and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.”

And from it he assumes that “It is the baptism of the Spirit--which places us in the body of Christ”.

But this passage says nothing concerning which baptism “places us in the body of Christ”. The verse only states that the Corinthians were “baptized into one body” without directly stating in that verse whether it was water baptism or Holy Spirit baptism. Though, as we shall see later, the context and the actual baptism of the Corinthians makes it abundantly clear that the reference is without question to the baptism of the Corinthians in water. For we have no record whatsoever of their having ever been baptized in the Holy Spirit. Neither do we have any inferences that they were so baptized. But we do, in fact, have the record of their conversion to Christ which is without doubt the time when they were “baptized into one body”, the body of Christ, wherein resides salvation. (Acts 4:12). And we will examine that context to determine just what baptism Paul is speaking of that placed the Corinthians into the one Body.

This passage, quoted by Brother White, is in the context of Paul showing the Corinthians, who had a very bad habit of making distinctions among themselves to the point of being downright divisive over them, (1 Cor. 1:10-12), that there are no distinctions between the saints. Whether they were Jews, or Greeks, bond or free. For they had all been made to “drink of the same spirit” by which phrase he no doubt referred to their reception of the Holy Spirit and the diverse miraculous gifts they had received as a result of having received the Holy Spirit. But he says nothing in this verse about how they had received the Holy Spirit at all and it is not the subject under consideration by Paul. For there was no need for him to explain to the Corinthians how they had received the Holy Spirit and the gifts that resulted from it. Because they knew full well exactly when, why, and how they had received the Holy Spirit. Paul merely uses the fact that they had all been baptized with the same baptism that placed them all into the same body. And that they had been made afterwards to “drink” or partake of the same spirit in the form of miraculous spiritual gifts as clear evidence to support his assertion that the Holy Spirit had not made any distinction between them on the basis of their having diverse gifts. This was the error that he was either trying to correct or prevent. An error that they had shown themselves to be easily susceptible. That of making sectarian distinctions among themselves at the slightest hint of a reason to do so. To sever this verse from its context and make it seem that Paul was teaching that all Christians become such by baptism in the Holy Spirit is a tragic mistake. Especially since it is a doctrine that is contrary to all that we read in the rest of the New Testament concerning this grave and important subject of the salvation of the souls of all men.

Now we shall examine this passage further in its context but first let us ask ourselves just where this passage states unequivocally anything about the “baptism of the spirit” at all. The passage most assuredly does not even mention one’s being baptized “in the spirit”. It does not say that the Corinthian brethren were baptized into the Holy Spirit but rather “into one body”. In fact, as we have before stated, the baptism of the Holy Spirit is not even the subject under discussion in this portion of God’s word. The subject of this passage is the spiritual gifts that the Corinthians received and their significance and the harmony of the body of Christ despite the fact that they had been given diverse gifts. For though they had diverse gifts from the spirit these gifts were given for the same purpose which was to “reveal and confirm” the word of God (Mark 16:17- 20; Heb. 2:3,4) and to edify the body of Christ until this purpose was complete (1 Cor. 13:8-11; Eph. 4:11).

Paul used the metaphor of a body to explain the unity of the saints, who possessed diverse gifts, to the Corinthians. For just as the body had eyes, hands, feet and other parts and each part, though diverse, worked in unison in obedience to the head and was therefore only “one body”. In like manner the Corinthians, who had been having troubles and were divisive and had actually taken pride in such simple things as who baptized them (1 Cor. 1:10-12), had been given diverse gifts and were as apt to be divisive over those differences as anything else. And because of the diversity of the gifts among them and their propensity to make distinctions among themselves it was necessary for Paul to show them that diverse gifts did not imply diverse faiths. And distinctions among them because of the possessing of what might be considered the “best gifts” and the simpler and less glorious ones was not an indication by the Holy Spirit that He had made distinctions among them that would justify their sectarian pride which they had demonstrated. (1 Cor. 1:10-12). They were indeed one body. And proof of it was the simple fact that they had all, by the same spirit, been immersed into one body. Meyer translates “For in one spirit we were all baptized into one body” thusly: "For by means of one spirit we were all baptized into one body" (Meyer). Rather, moved by one spirit acting through the apostles and evangelists, they were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Gentiles, bond or free. The idea is that, though diverse in race and condition, all of them had been made parts of one body by baptism, and that this had all been done under the direction of one spirit. All, too, receiving it as a gift, drank of the same spirit. Hence, if special and extraordinary spiritual gifts were imparted to the members of this body, these would be due to one spirit. And that is the true idea conveyed by the inspired apostle Paul in this verse. To mistakenly assume that this verse was intended to teach that our sins are remitted and we are saved by the baptism of the Holy Spirit, though I am convinced it was well intentioned by brother White and done sincerely, is just simply not correct. When the entire context of this verse is fairly and objectively considered. Anyone can see that the baptism “into one body” by means of the guidance of the Holy Spirit in the preaching of the apostles fits perfectly the purpose, intent, and force of Paul’s argument. And that a “baptism in the Holy Spirit” is not even remotely being considered by the apostle. And let us not forget that there is absolutely nothing said in this particular verse or any other verse in the entire word of God for that matter that even remotely indicates that “it is the baptism of the Holy Spirit that places us into the body of Christ”. This verse especially says no such thing.

Nevertheless it would be helpful just here to take also into consideration just what “baptism” Paul was reminding the Corinthian Brethren about when he told them they had been “baptized into one body”. This occasion of the Conversion of the Corinthians to Christ narrated in Acts 18: 8 which says, “"But Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord, with all his house; and many of the Corinthians, hearing, believed and were immersed." Now it does not take much for anyone to see that this immersion was not an immersion in the Holy Spirit. For Christ is the one, and the only one, with the authority to immerse anyone in the Holy Spirit. (Matt. 3:11; Acts 1:6-8) but the Corinthians were not immersed by Christ into the Holy Spirit. Instead Paul and those who were with him immersed them. Notice that Paul tells us that he did not baptize many of them but he did immerse some and he names Crispus, Gaius and the entire house of Stephanas as those whom he immersed. Read Paul’s words for yourself. “Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? 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. And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.” (1 Cor. 1:12-15). Now, we know that when the Corinthians were first converted to Christ that it was through the preaching of Paul and that one “cripus” was the first one to be baptized among them and that many others later followed him and were also baptized. And we know that Paul was the one who baptized Crispus. And that he also baptized one among the Corinthians named “Gaius” and he also baptized among them the entire household of “Stephanas”. Thus we know that when they were baptized into one body” they were baptized by Paul and those who worked with him. And just like all other baptisms in the New Testament administered by men it was a baptism IN WATER not the Holy Spirit. No men living then or now ever had the power to baptize another man in the Holy Spirit and never will have such a power. None can doubt that the Corinthians were baptized into one body when they were converted to Christ. And none can doubt that when they were so baptized Paul and those working with Him baptized them. Therefore their baptism, to which Paul referred which had “placed them into one body”, was without question a baptism administered by men. Lets read Acts 8:35-40 and see just how these MEN administered baptism. “Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on [their] way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, [here is] water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing. But Philip was found at Azotus: and passing through he preached in all the cities, till he came to Caesarea.” (Acts 8:35-40).

Phillip baptized people using the same physical action that John the Baptist, Paul, and all other apostles, Evangelist, and Christians used when they baptized anyone into Christ. (Gal.3;26,27). And therefore when Paul baptized the Corinthians it could only have been a baptism in water and not in the Holy Spirit. Thus when we read that Paul baptized Crispus we know that he did so in water. Which is in harmony with of the account of the Baptism of the Ethiopian Eunuch and all other accounts, which we have in the New Testament of baptisms administered by men in obedience to the command of Christ in the great commission (Matt. 28:19,20). Therefore, the baptism to which Paul refers in 1 Corinthians 12:13 is without doubt water baptism.

Thus we have shown that to determine just which baptism Paul was referring to one need only go to the place where the Corinthians were first baptized into Christ to see whether they were baptized in water or the Holy Spirit. We have done just that and we have learned that the Corinthians were brought into the body of Christ by water baptism instead of Holy Spirit Baptism. Thus Paul, since he was referring to their initial baptism into one body. And since Paul and those with him administered that baptism, it was a baptism in water for only Christ could administer the baptism of the Holy Spirit. (Matt. 3:11;Acts 1:5-8). We conclude then that the baptism to which Paul refers in this passage quoted by Brother White (1 Cor. 12:13) is the baptism of the Corinthians in water when they were initially converted by his preaching. And that it therefore was a baptism that was done by means of the guidance of the Holy Spirit in the preaching of the gospel by the apostles that placed them into the one body of Christ. Paul taught the exact same thing to Galatians to show that they too were one without any distinctions by virtue of their having been baptized INTO CHRIST. (Gal. 3; 26,27)

Now, since the passage quoted by Brother White does not say that this baptism was the baptism by Christ in the Holy Spirit. It is Brother White’s burden to show, as I have done concerning why I am convinced that it is water baptism, the reasons and justifications for his assertion. And I will consider all of his reasons for thinking that this baptism was the baptism in the Holy Spirit. And I most surely await his response and will attend to his answer with respect yet with a deep concern that we all follow the truth of God’s word.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, April 29, 2001

After wading thru this I’m still left with my original question and now another. Mr Saffold, do you believe there is “one” or “two” baptisms? You begin by stating “one” and you end by defending “two” – water and Holy Spirit? Which is it? Please do not write another essay, I can refer back to the original if needed. I am just curious to your answer, that’s all nothing more.

And the original (plus some) Is the CC Christian? And now since “all are plants” does that mean none are Christian, including yours? ???? Is it “men made organizations” or the people themselves? Or will “True” Christians just be pulled out, as it where, when Christ returns?

Maybe it’s just my simplistic way of questioning in the original that has summoned all this?

-- Anonymous, May 01, 2001

Mr. C:

You have said:

“After wading thru this I’m still left with my original question and now another.”

Your original question was answered in my last post. You originally asked if Catholics are Christians. And I gave some reasons that cause me to believe that Roman Catholics are not Christians. You may not like or agree with the answer that I gave but I gave you an answer to it. And after reading all answers that may be given here you may still be left with your question because you are not satisfied with the answers given but the implication that you were not given an answer is simply ridiculous. And the other question was not a question at all. Rather it was an assertion by Brother White to which I responded. I was not responding in my post to Brother White to your question at all.

Then you say:

“ Mr Saffold, do you believe there is “one” or “two” baptisms?”

I made it abundantly clear to anyone with the ability to read that I am fully convinced the scriptures teach that there is only one baptism. These are my words, which prove that such was my position:

“Though it seems from his words that he appears to doubt whether there is in fact only “one baptism” for he begins his statement with the words, “But if there is but “one baptism”. Yet the clear reading the Word of God leaves no doubt whatsoever that there is indeed only “one baptism” for the Holy Spirit inspired the apostle Paul to tell the Ephesians, “there is one Lord, one faith, and one baptism”. (Ephesians 4:4). Thus it is surely impossible that there might be two baptisms instead of just one. Therefore, there is no “if ands or buts” about the matter for there is no question that the Holy Spirit intended to convey in the clearest terms possible that there is only “one baptism”. In fact this same passage that says there is only “one Lord” and that there is only “one faith” in the very next breath says there is only “one baptism”. Thus, we would be as justified in doubting that we are subject to “one Lord” and that we all live by “one faith” in Him as we would be in doubting that there is “one baptism” that puts us into Him (Gal. 3:26,27). However, I do not think that my friend sought to actually doubt that there is one baptism by his statement only that he was not sure that he agreed with the conclusion that I had drawn concerning “one baptism” from that verse. I sincerely hope that he can see that it is the word of God that states unequivocally that there is but one baptism and that there is no “if” about the matter.”

Now, Mr. C, there is no way that anyone with even the slightest ability to read and think could draw the conclusion from my above statement that I affirmed anything other than the simple fact that the scriptures teach that there is ONE BAPTISM. Yet you come in and ask “do you believe there is one or two baptisms”. If you are able to read you can see from my previous post that I believe without any doubt whatsoever that there is only one baptism.

Then you say:

“ You begin by stating “one” and you end by defending “two” – water and Holy Spirit? Which is it?”

I made no defense of Holy Spirit baptism at all in any of my previous post. And I have made no statements whatsoever which would cause any honest person to draw the conclusion that I ended my previous post “defending” both Holy Spirit and water baptism. I have made it abundantly clear it is Christ who baptized in the Holy Spirit and that the baptism of the Corinthians was administered by Paul therefore there baptism was water baptism since it was the only kind that could be administered by men.

Notice that I was showing that Paul was not even discussing the Baptism of the Holy Spirit in 1 Corinthians 12:13 as follows:

“And that a “baptism in the Holy Spirit” is not even remotely being considered by the apostle. And let us not forget that there is absolutely nothing said in this particular verse or any other verse in the entire word of God for that matter that even remotely indicates that “it is the baptism of the Holy Spirit that places us into the body of Christ”. This verse especially says no such thing.”

And then near the end I again stated that it was WATER baptism and NOT A BAPTISM IN THE HOLY SPIRIT that Paul referred to in the Passage in Corinthians quoted by Brother White as follows:

“And we know that Paul was the one who baptized Crispus. And that he also baptized one among the Corinthians named “Gaius” and he also baptized among them the entire household of “Stephanas”. Thus we know that when they were baptized into one body” they were baptized by Paul and those who worked with him. And just like all other baptisms in the New Testament administered by men it was a baptism IN WATER not the Holy Spirit.”

And again I said near the end of my post:

“And therefore when Paul baptized the Corinthians it could only have been a baptism in water and not in the Holy Spirit. Thus when we read that Paul baptized Crispus we know that he did so in water. Which is in harmony with of the account of the Baptism of the Ethiopian Eunuch and all other accounts, which we have in the New Testament of baptisms administered by men in obedience to the command of Christ in the great commission (Matt. 28:19,20). Therefore, the baptism to which Paul refers in 1 Corinthians 12:13 is without doubt water baptism.”

And yet again I stated the baptism spoke of by Paul was water baptism and NOT HOLY SPIRIT BAPTISM as follows:

“Thus we have shown that to determine just which baptism Paul was referring to one need only go to the place where the Corinthians were first baptized into Christ to see whether they were baptized in water or the Holy Spirit. We have done just that and we have learned that the Corinthians were brought into the body of Christ by water baptism instead of Holy Spirit Baptism.”

Then in my very last paragraph I said that I would wait for Brother White to justify his assertion that the passage refers to Holy Spirit baptism as I had done to show that it was my believe that it refers to water baptism.

“Now, since the passage quoted by Brother White does not say that this baptism was the baptism by Christ in the Holy Spirit. It is Brother White’s burden to show, as I have done concerning why I am convinced that it is water baptism, the reasons and justifications for his assertion. And I will consider all of his reasons for thinking that this baptism was the baptism in the Holy Spirit.”

Thus it is clear to all that I do not believe in TWO baptisms and that I said nothing in any of my last post that indicates a defense of two baptisms. I quoted Eph. 4; 4 showing that there is only one baptism and my point was that that one baptism is a baptism in water in the name of Christ for the remission of sins. (Acts 2:38). I have been writing in this forum for over a year now. I believe that Brother White and others know that it has been my position all during that time. And I have made it clear to all that the only record that we have of Christ baptizing anyone in the Holy Spirit was on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2) and the house of Cornelius (Acts 10). And that those two events was for a specific purpose and no one other than the apostles and the House of Cornelius, in fulfillment of the prophecy of Joel (Joel 2:28) were ever baptized in the Holy Spirit. And that no one today has been baptized in the Holy Spirit and has no scriptural reason to expect to be baptized by Christ in the Holy Spirit. For that prophecy was fulfilled and is not being fulfilled today. Therefore the one baptism referred to by Paul in Ephesians 4:4 is water baptism and nothing else. And I have said nothing whatsoever to indicate that I believe that both of these baptisms are being done today. I have clearly said that it is water baptism in the name of Christ that is the “one baptism” spoken of by the apostle Paul. And that this is the ONE BAPTISM that we all share and there is no other available to us.

Now, I know that some disagree with this position but you have asked what my position is. I believe that I have made that clear in my first post and that after reading this post you no longer have any excuse for misrepresenting what I have said about it.

Then you say:

“ Please do not write another essay, I can refer back to the original if needed.”

Well, Mr. C, you can ask me any questions that you want and make any assertions that you chose and you can write in any way that you prefer. I can do the same. I will write an essay if I chose. You cannot ask a question and then direct the person to whom you put the question concerning just how they will answer. It is your business how you ask a question and mine concerning how I will respond. If I chose to do so with an essay then that is the way it will be and there is nothing anyone can do about that, now is there?

Then you say:

“I am just curious to your answer, that’s all nothing more.”

Well, you have your answer. Though I do doubt very seriously if you are here out of nothing more than mere curiosity. WE will have to wait and see about that, now will we not?

Then you say:

“And the original (plus some) Is the CC Christian? And now since “all are plants” does that mean none are Christian, including yours? ???? Is it “men made organizations” or the people themselves? Or will “True” Christians just be pulled out, as it where, when Christ returns?”

I believe you would have to ask that question of those who believe that there are faithful Christians among the sects. I am not one of them. I believe that the Lord built one church which is his body and that there is only one body (Eph. 1:22,23; Col1: 18; 24; Eph. 4:4) and that all Christians are in that body. And that there are some who are not faithful to Christ who have for whatever reason joined themselves to the sectarian denominations none of which are the body of Christ. And Christ will surely judge these at His coming. For we are told, “Yet if [any man suffer] as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf. For the time [is come] that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if [it] first [begin] at us, what shall the end [be] of them that obey not the gospel of God? And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?” (1 Peter 4:16-18). God will gather out of his kingdom, which is the church (Matt. 16:16-18; Col. 1:13) all things that offend. Those who followed the doctrines and commandments of men instead of the inspired word of God will face the Lord in judgment. The same thing that makes one a Christian also makes them automatically members of the church or body of Christ. (Acts 2:47). And no one is a Christian solely by virtue of belonging to a denomination, which teaches the doctrines and commandments of men over the doctrine of Christ. And any plant that our heavenly father hath not planted shall be rooted up. (Matt. 15:7-9). All are plants but only those, which our heavenly father hath not planted, will be rooted up. And our heavenly father has not planted the doctrines and commandments of men, which produces modern sectarian denominations. For we are told that the seed of the kingdom (which is the church) is the word of God. (Luke 8:11). The “scriptures only” makes “Christians only”. And the scriptures mixed with the doctrines of men make no Christians at all. I have no denomination or church. The Church belongs to Christ and I belong to Him. I belong to no denomination at all and neither does any other faithful Christian for denominationalism is sinful. (1 Cor. 1:10-12). Christ was Crucified for me and I was baptized in the name of Christ therefore I belong solely to Christ and the one and only true church of Christ is made up of those who belong to Christ by virtue of their complete surrender and obedience to his gospel. (Rom. 1:16; 1 Cor. 15:1-4; 1 Cor. 1;18-25; Mark 16:16; John 3:3-5; Titus 3:3-5). No one belongs to Christ by virtue of their joining some made denomination teaching the creeds of men over the very word of God and placing the will of man equal to the will of God.

“Maybe it’s just my simplistic way of questioning in the original that has summoned all this?’

No, Mr. C, your question regardless of how you may have asked it would have summoned all of this. That is the nature and purpose of this forum. It is our purpose to discuss these in the light of God’s word and with absolute freedom of speech to do so.

For Christ and those faithful to Him,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, May 01, 2001

Mr. C

To answer your question, anyone who believes on the Lord Jesus Christ is a Christian. The label they give themselves apart from Christian is due in most part to personal preference. For instance one may call themselves a "Roman Catholic" and be a Christian, one may call themselves a Baptist and be a Christian. Conversely, because one maintains a particular designation does not ensure they are Christian.

In Truth

-- Anonymous, May 07, 2001

Mr. Saffold,

For all your many, many verbose messages it amazes me how one can type so many words and say so little.

You are so intent on forcing your point you misappropriate many verses that speak of the Spirit Baptism into Christ's Body with mans Baptism into water.

Gal. 3:25-27

25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. 26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

Amongst the many misrepresented verses this is one of the most glaring. The text states we have been baptized into Christ. Now, unless you believe Christ IS water could you please explain why you continue to forward this misinterpretation of such a clear statement?

The text specifically states, "baptized into Christ", not, "baptized into water".

NOTE: The obvious exclusion of the term "water baptism"….in fact the word water is never mentioned a single time in the entire book of Galatians. Hmmmm…..

How are sinners baptized "into Christ"? Through faith. Faith in the operation of God, not faith in the operation of a man into water baptism.

Our body of sin is cut off by the operation of God when we believe by faith, as the text states.

We are risen just as we are buried, through the faith of the operation of God.

We are not risen just as we are buried, through water baptism.

The text in no way mentions water baptism and to state that it does is to add to the text In fact the word water is never mentioned in the entire book of Colossians.

Colossians 2:11,12

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.

In Truth,

-- Anonymous, May 07, 2001

Barry;

I disagree with you; your answer to C was too simplistic. Jesus Himself said that there would be many who would call Him "Lord" but would be departing for "the other place", and Paul wrote that people would preach "another Jesus" and "another gospel." Meaning that everything God makes, Satan counterfeits. And there are most certainly many counterfeits of Christianity in America today.

A person is a Christian if they believe on the Lord Jesus Christ ... as He is revealed in the Bible. The Jesus of the Bible is God made manifest, the Word of God (second Person of the triune Godnead), Creator of the universe and everything in it, wholly God and wholly man, born of a virgin, dying on a Roman cross for our sins, rising bodily from the dead and coming back visibly to judge the world.

Compare that with the "Jesus" of Mormonism, who is one of many gods, spirit brother of Lucifer, who was conceived on this earth when his father Elohim had physical relations with Mary, born at the wrong time (the Book of Mormon says he was born in AD 1 [margin note at 3 Nephi 1:19], when modern scholarship has shown that the original date set for the birth of Christ was in error and he was most likely born between 2 and 7 BC) and the wrong place (the Book of Mormon says he would be born in Jerusalem), who according to early Mormon apostles was married to Mary, Martha and Mary Magdalene and sired children by them (Joseph Smith being a descendant of Jesus), who's shedding of blood in Gethsemane - not on the cross - accomplished our "salvation" (just meaning we now have an opportunity to advance to godhood ourselves) and cannot completely save; this loving and compassionate Jesus destroyed a total of 16 major cities when he supposedly appeared in the New World. (What ever happened to, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing"?)

Or the Jesus of the Jehovah's Witnesses. This "Jesus" is a created being, the first being God created. In fact, before he was Jesus he was known as Michael the Archangel. God "uncreated" him, and then he was born to Mary as Jesus. He was only a man, and he was not the Christ until he was baptized by John. Even then he was merely a man with the holy spirit (to them, a force) giving him power. He tragically died on a "torture stake", not a cross, and was buried ... and that was the end of it. He was "resurrected" (actually recreated again) as a spirit being, who took on physical forms to trick his followers into believing he had physically arose. And he returned invisibly in 1914 and is directing the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society.

I could go on and contrast the "Jesus"'s of many other cults. Obviously, not all who claim to be Christians and follow Christ really are Christians. Any group that claims they are Christian, but follows "another Jesus", isn't. Which is why John told us to be on our guard, for many false prophets are gone out into the world. And even Satan himself can transform himself into an angel of light, so we are not to be surprised when his followers call themselves "Christians".

-- Anonymous, May 07, 2001

Brethren and Friends:

For my response to Mr. Hanson's post directed at me concerning baptism above please refer to the thread entitled "Revival of an old discussion concerning baptism" where I have collected his arguments to me from another thread along with the arguments that he has made in this thread which are identical to each other and I am answering them in one place so that I do not have to repeat myself over and over again. So if you are interested in my responses to those matters you will find them there. And Mr. Handson, if you would like to respond to what I have said concerning your arguments you will find them in that thread.

For Christ and the truth,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, May 08, 2001

John,

I can see your point - let me clarify.

At every possible opportunity I present a very simple message. The gospel does not need to be complicated, and in my opinion, is not as difficult as many have made it out to be.

The question is, "Are Catholics Christians?"

The answer in short is "Yes".

However, as I pointed out, not every Catholic is a Christian.

I further stated that it does not matter what title you give yourself as long as you believe on Jesus.

You go on to distinguish who we mean when we mention the person of Jesus. I have no issue with your clarification - I don't believe we disagree as I would affirm your clarifications.

If you have further objections please let me know and I will clarify further, essentially even though my post was too short for your particular taste was not incorrect.

Simply :)

-- Anonymous, May 08, 2001

Mr. Saffold,

I was not aware of any particular post dedicated to me….

I will immediately check this out - thank you for the information.

In Christ,

-- Anonymous, May 08, 2001

If the apostles had been as verbose as Mr. Saffold has been here, I daresay that the church would not have made it out of Jerusalem. When Christ established His Church (on Himself, THE "ROCK", not on Peter, the "stone"), there was no church of Rome, no Baptists, no Methodists or Episcopalians, no labels of any kind. What is a Christian? A little Christ. One whose life is fully yielded to God by accepting His gift of salvation through the finished work of Christ on the cross. The problem with labels is that if you're going down they will burn off and if you're going up they will drop off. Forget what the theologians and religious "leaders" say. What does the Scripture say? The book of Hebrews clearly teaches that each believer is a priest before God unto himself. "For there is but one mediator between God and man, the Man, Christ Jesus." As a true believer indwelt by the Holy Spirit you have all you need to fellowship with God and have Him teach you His truth as you read the Scripture. The problem with the Church of Rome is that they do not allow the work of Christ to be finished. They daily crucify Christ in their Mass. Christ died once for all and now sits at the right hand of God making intercession for us. We don't need a human priest, or a pope or Mary or any one else to intercede for us because we can "boldy approach the Throne of Grace" personally.

Are Catholics Christians? A few may be despite the teaching of the Church of Rome which perverts the gospel by adding so many conditions to it. There is absolutely no virtue to liturgy and institutional religion. It only distracts from true worship. The true church is the invisible Body of Christ made up of true believers who come together simply to worship and fellowship. That coming together needs no trappings, only the Word of God. Christ condemns the Church of Rome in Revelation when He condemned the Nicolaitans. The term literally means "against the people" and refered to a clergy class of church rulers who oppressed believers with their rules and regulations. Scripturally, pastors and elders are not rulers over the body, but servants of the body under Christ. The Church of Rome is one of the synagogues of Satan (Rev. 2), and is primarily in the business of paving the highway to Hell for millions of souls. Sorry to be so blunt, but a thorough study of their teachings and practices over the past 1700 years in light of the simple teaching of Scripture makes this clear. Martin Luther, a devout Catholic Priest who chose to study the Scriptures for himself, came to the same conclusion.

A good Catholic living in strict obedience to the teaching of the Catholic Church cannot be a true Christian according to the Scripture.

Faith alone. Scripture alone.

-- Anonymous, June 07, 2001

Mr. Hanson:

I did not post the above post date May, 08 2001. I did write the words and it was posted in another place. I do not know who copied and pasted it here but I just want you to know that I have not written anything in the forum today as of yet except this respose to you.

It may be that someone wants you to go back to those discussions and answer the matters that you have ignored. I do not know but I was not the one who posted the above comments stating that there was a thread designed to continue our discussion.

And you flatter yourself far too highly when you think falsely that the thread was in some way "dedicated" to you. It was just a thread that I started because the other one was getting too long to download easily.

For Christ and those who love the truth,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, June 08, 2001