(60) Responding to Sean Christie: Part One - YouTube
I can't go any further without responding to Steve Kozar's response to Sean Christie (Revealing Truth).
Sean Christie has posted a new video (below) which will hopefully silence these troublemakers, although I will not hold my breath. Kozar and Long have gained some credibility amongst Christians due to their refutations against NAR heretics. However, I now begin to wonder if their plan was to launch a spiritual hand grenade onto the body of Christ all along. (2 Peter 2:1). I have had reservations about Kozar in particular for some time, but I put this down to personality rather than anything I could pinpoint definitively. Kozar's various slanderous responses to Christie's original video now confirm that my previous uneasiness about him was based on something other than personality. (Proverbs 8:13).
Kozar refers to "..amateur discernment bloggers who seem to have the viewpoint of 'it's me and my bible against the world, I'm just going to do this all by myself.'"
My question to Steve Kozar: Who are you to say who can or cannot challenge various troubling developments and doctrines within the church?
Kozar's comment reminds me of my experience at Holy Trinity CofE Church in Leicester some years ago when I questioned the antics of the then vicar John McGinley and his promotion of various deviant teachings. I went to John McGinley's house one evening to discuss my concerns, and at one point he said to me "Who are you to question us?" My response was that what I was observing did not line up with the scriptures, and I asked him why I should not question him. John McGinley has now morphed into an NAR "apostle" and he is an associate of Emma Stark, Rebecca King and other false teachers. {1} If we do not test the spirits, and if we allow the "experts" to instruct us unchallenged, I think that we would be in real trouble! (1 John 4:1). Kozar appears to have taken a leaf out of the false NAR teachers' book by misapplying Matthew 7:1 "judge not"!
One accusation levelled against Christie was that he did not take the time to find out what Kozar and Long really believe. If you cannot put a good case for your so-called "doctrine" in a one-hour-plus video, then there is something wrong. According to Kozar, we need to spend several hours studying the subject of infant baptism and baptismal regeneration before we can question their view. I disagree. I heard enough in their original 1.23 hour video to set alarm bells ringing. {2}
Another accusation against Christie is, apparently, he does not have a PhD and he is not qualified to challenge those who "know what they are talking about". Christie does not mention whether he has any theological qualifications or not on his YouTube channel, but as far as I am concerned, provided his teaching is sound, this is not an issue. Whatever qualifications we have, they are not banners to be waved around to impress or intimidate others. We only have to look at Paul's boasts in the flesh to understand that on their own qualifications mean absolutely nothing. (Philippians 3:4-6).
My understanding from Kozar, without spending hours and hours reading the PhD's he recommends, is that according to Lutheran doctrine, baptism is and is not salvific.
A bewildering number of views exist amongst those who promote baptismal regeneration.
Jordan Cooper and Gavin Ortlund sum up the Lutheran view of baptism as "the ordinary means of regeneration.. baptism is not absolutely necessary for salvation, but it is ordinarily necessary for salvation.. there are exceptions to that." Chris Rosebrough calls out Michael Brown as "the apostle of obfuscation", but really, you would have to go a long way to make up anything more obscure, unclear or unintelligible as the Lutheran doctrine of baptismal regeneration. What Christie noticed was that Lutherans pay a lot of attention to the Roman Catholic doctrine of baptismal regeneration and I agree with him that this is a concern.
I have followed Steve Kozar and Daniel Long for a few years. Unfirtunately this latest video has left me confused about what they believe. They seem confused about whether baptism is necessary for salvation or not. i notice that the pairhave started a separate Youtube channel to promote co-called Lutheran teachings. Still concerned about the rantings of Emma Stark.
ReplyDeleteI am adding another video where you will see Steve Kozar's fruit!
ReplyDeleteLutherans do/do not believe in baptismal regeneration.. "yes and no" sums up this deviant view. We are saved by grace through faith NOT by baptism! Baptism is important, but it is not necessary for salvation.
My advice is to mark and avoid these people.
God bless.
Very well put. From what I can gsther, Lutheranism, like other Protestant denominations inc the Church of England, is "Catholic-lite". The reformers took a big step in the right direction but did not go far enough and failed to live up fully to the 5 solas. Both Luther and Calvin deny that fallen men have free will and that salvation is open to all, seeing God as a selective "respector of persons". This is Augustinian doctrine, to whom Calvin in particular looked to and quoted profusely. We are foolish to put anyone on a pedestal and fail to objectively test what they teach by the full counsel of God. Being 70-80% right is not good enough, particularly where teaching on the availability of and criteria for salvation is involved. Even Spurgeon, who many idolise, stated that all in Heaven would believe the gospel as interpreted by Augustine (the doctrinal father of the Catholic church) and John Calvin (!)
ReplyDeleteI have heard Mr Kozar say that going back to the Bible alone is not the answer as we must also benefit from the writings of great church leaders, presumably such as Martin Luther. This was a big red flag to me, for as much as I may benefit from a good commentary by say, Lightfoot or Swete, I must still test what they say as best I can. Elevatibg traditions and teachings of men who were not inspired to write scripture has brought error and disaster to God's people ever since scripture has been recorded! Christ himself warned that they had the potential to nullify the Word of God.
My prayer for the Kozars and Longs is that they apply the same approach to Lutheranism as they do towards the NAR doctrines they critique and discard those things which are false and causing them and others to stumble. Then, Mr Kozar needs to apologise to Mr Christie and others for bringing harm and division to God's people. .
My best to you Treena, Mike
I can't see Kozar apologizing any time soon Mike. Incredibly, he says that he is preparing a further rebuttal against Christie.
DeleteIf Kozar has stated that the bible alone is not the answer, then he is challenging the sufficiency of the scriptures. (2 Timothy 3:16). We can benefit from the teaching of others, but we should also be very careful to test everything because there are many false teachers around. (1 John 4:1).
I am really grieved and upset by the arrogance of Kozar's false assertions at the expense of damaging the reputation of others. I hope that he does repent and apologize before he does more damage.
God bless.
Mr Long has just released an hour-long response to Sean's video, so it appears to be a concerted effort to interminably drag out this debate /persecution. I will not be listening to it. Viewing all this as a high school teacher, it is beginning to resemble bullying tactics to me and my advice to Sean would be not to dignify these attacks with ongoing responses.
ReplyDeleteI was thinking today that the Jewish perspective on baptism (from Edersheim) was that it was primarily a ritual for Gentile proselytes, symbolising that they were being born again into a new life serving the living God of Israel. (I believe the only other similar practise was the ceremonial bathing of priests and Levites). This would explain the radical nature of John's baptism for Jews regarding their sinfulness and need for a completely new life in union with their Messiah. Thus the self-righteous Pharisees et al shunned the baptism of John and slandered him. The main thing is that it was seen as a symbolic act for both proselytes and repentant Jews NOT transformative. Likewise, the Passover meal was a MEMORIAL ritual looking back to the deliverance from Egypt which Christ clarified was also representative of His sacrifice for sin. From henceforth it would become an ordinance of remembrance for Christians just as it had been for the Jews, who still do not grasp that it was always pointing to the true Lamb of God.
Mystical tradition /error has added beliefs to these rituals which would have been utterly foreign to the mindset of the apostles and early church. These false beliefs are what people champion when they defend baptismal regeneration and transubstantiation.
I have discovered that those devoted to the errors which blind them are unteachable and that one is wise not to persist trying to correct them. "A heretic, after the second admonition, reject". I think that would be the best approach here. My best to you, Mike
I am just listening to it Mike. There are a number of basic errors just in the first fifteen minutes or so. Long directs his audience to the LCMS website which is horrific! If these guys cannot see the errors of Lutheranism then they have some very serious problems! I have no desire to argue, but I feel that I must respond for the sake of their listeners and also in support of Sean Christie.
ReplyDeleteGod bless.