Why begin with the Lutheran Confessions?
Knuppel: "What do Lutherans believe about baptism in general?" He goes on to quote Article 9 of the Augsburg Confessions and the Small Catechism. Surely we should begin with the scriptures rather than Luther! The general consensus is that Luther and the other reformers did not go far enough with their reforms. Luther made some terrible blunders, not to mention his legendary antisemitism. Luther's first German translation of the scriptures omitted 25 books (i.e., Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Esther, Job, Ecclesiastes, Jonah, Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach (i.e., Ecclesiasticus), Baruch, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Matthew, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation. Luther referred to the Epistle of James as "straw not worthy to be burned in my oven as tinder". He referred to other books as "Judaizing nonsense". {1} It is obvious to me that Luther was a very arrogant man and that we should not hang onto his every word! What we find below is Luther's view of baptism which goes beyond what is written and is unsupported by the scriptures. (1 Corinthians 4:6).
The Small Catechism:
What is Baptism?
Baptism is not just plain water, but it is the water included in God’s command and combined with God’s word.
Which is that word of God?
Christ our Lord says in the last chapter of Matthew: “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” (Matt. 28:19)
Second
What benefits does Baptism give?
It works forgiveness of sins, rescues from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare.
Which are these words and promises of God?
Christ our Lord says in the last chapter of Mark: “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” (Mark 16:16)
Third
How can water do such great things?
Certainly not just water, but the word of God in and with the water does these things, along with the faith which trusts this word of God in the water. For without God’s word the water is plain water and no Baptism. But with the word of God it is a Baptism, that is, a life-giving water, rich in grace, and a washing of the new birth in the Holy Spirit, as St. Paul says in Titus, chapter three: “He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by His grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life. This is a trustworthy saying.” (Titus 3:5–8)
Certainly not just water, but the word of God in and with the water does these things, along with the faith which trusts this word of God in the water. For without God’s word the water is plain water and no Baptism. But with the word of God it is a Baptism, that is, a life-giving water, rich in grace, and a washing of the new birth in the Holy Spirit, as St. Paul says in Titus, chapter three: “He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by His grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life. This is a trustworthy saying.” (Titus 3:5–8)
Knuppel: "Baptism is a means of grace that works forgiveness of sins.. Water, all by itself, without any word of God is just plain water. You can drink it, you can use it to wash your car; but with the word of God, with God's word of promise, it is no longer just plain water, but it becomes a holy baptism.." The claim that the actual water (H2O) changes mystically in baptism has no biblical support whatsoever. This idea is similar to the Lutheran doctrine of the real presence in the Lord's supper (consubstantiation), which is an unfortunate throwback to the Roman Catholic Church.
Household Baptisms
Knuppel refused to spend time responding to arguments against the inclusion of infants into household baptisms in the book of Acts, although he thinks this is "strongly possible". I am not surprised that Knuppel is unwilling to substantiate his views on this subject. There are definite weaknesses with the view that entire households, including infants, were baptized. For instance, it is not feasible that infants belonging to the "entire household" of the jailer mentioned in Acts 16 heard the gospel, believed and rejoiced. Infants by definition would not have understood the gospel.
Among those listening was a woman named Lydia, a dealer in purple cloth from the city of Thyatira, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul’s message. And when she and her household had been baptized, she urged us, “If you consider me a believer in the Lord, come and stay at my house.” And she persuaded us. (Acts 16:14-15).
So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls. (Acts 2:41).
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. (Mark 16:16).
And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. (Acts 2:38).
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him. (John 3:3 cf. John 3:16. 5:24; Acts 8:12, 11:16).
Or aren’t you aware that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? We were therefore buried with Him through baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may walk in newness of life. (Romans 6:3-4).
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him. (John 3:3 cf. John 3:16. 5:24; Acts 8:12, 11:16).
Gill: "..because baptism is an ordinance of his; it is to submit to it with a view to his glory, to testify our affection for him, and subjection to him, without laying any stress or dependence on it for salvation; such who are thus baptized, are "baptized into his death"; they not only resemble Christ in his sufferings and death, by being immersed in water, but they declare their faith in the death of Christ, and also share in the benefits of his death; such as peace, pardon, righteousness, and atonement: now this proves, that such persons are dead to sin, who are so baptized; for by the death of Christ, into which they are baptized, they are justified from sin; by the death of Christ, their old man is crucified, and the body of sin destroyed; besides, believers in baptism profess themselves to be dead to sin and the world, and their baptism is an obligation upon them to live unto righteousness." {2}
Baptism and Circumcision
Baptism differs from circumcision in a number of ways. A key difference is that inclusion into the New Covenant is not something that parents can do for their children by proxy. Biblical faith is a personal saving relationship and a commitment to Jesus Christ. A definite command in the Old Testament was that only male children were to be circumcised at eight days old. (Leviticus 12:3). Infants were automatically included in the community of Israel when they were circumcised. Although children of believers have the advantage of being part of a Christian family, they are not considered to be Christian in their own right until they are old enough to make a personal commitment to Jesus Christ through faith. The sign of the new covenant is the Holy Spirit: For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God. (Romans 2:28-29).
Paul contrasts circumcision and baptism as follows:
In Him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of your sinful nature, with the circumcision performed by Christ and not by human hands. And having been buried with Him in baptism, you were raised with Him through your faith in the power of God, who raised Him from the dead.When you were dead in your trespasses and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our trespasses.. (Colossians 2:11-13).
Parallels between Genesis 17 and Acts 2
And God said to Abraham, “As for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your offspring after you throughout their generations. This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised. You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you. He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised. Every male throughout your generations, whether born in your house or bought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring, both he who is born in your house and he who is bought with your money, shall surely be circumcised. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant. Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.”
Acts 2:38-39
And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.”
Acts 2:38-39
And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.”
Cambridge Bible: "39. the promise is unto you, and to your children] Just as “to Abraham and his seed were the promises made” {3}
The Wartburg Castle has recently posted further revisions and updates, including a video by Hans Fiene: (48) "WhaddaBout the Thief on the Cross??" by Pastor Hans Fiene - YouTube This video is described as "satire" and it is supposed to be amusing. According to Fein, there are two ways to be saved: "Just because someone can be saved apart from baptism doesn't change the fact that baptism saves." This presents us with the confusing concept that baptism can save someone, but that it is not required for salvation. Perhaps I don't have the Lutheran "superior knowledge", but this does not make one jot of sense to me.
Kozar and his Lutheran associates should be very careful about mocking those who hold the biblical view of salvation by faith through grace. (Ephesians 6:8). In my view, their scripture twisting and mockery are likely to incur the wrath of God. (Galatians 6:7; Proverbs 18:7).
2. Romans 6 Gill's Exposition (biblehub.com)
3. (Galatians 3:16),
4. Acts 2:39 Commentaries: "For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself." (biblehub.com)
Further Links:
(44) FALSE TEACHER CHRIS ROSEBROUGH-LUTHERANISM-FIGHTING FOR THE FAITH
(44) #340 Chris Rosebrough's Defence of Idolatrous Statues of Christ | MEGIDDO RADIO - YouTube
(48) A Biblical Analysis of Infant Baptism - YouTube
(48) Controversies and Biblical Clarity on Baptism - YouTube
(48) Debate: "Is Water Baptism Required for Salvation?” Dean Meadows and Mike Winger - YouTube
(58) Water Baptism DOES NOT Save - Explaining 1 Peter 3:20-21 - YouTube
Excellent article Treena.
ReplyDeleteThis is a serious issue and I am glad that the erroneous beliefs of the Kozars and Longs are now public as I am sure others are leaving charismania for Lutheranism due to their videos. I was swayed towards Calvinism when I came out of Pentecostalism but witnessing infant baptisms and hearing the elitist perversions of the Reformed doctrines of salvation woke me up and I had to leave what I believe to be "another gosoel, not the one Paul preached".
I was unimpressed by Shawn of Revealing Truth who sounded very double-minded in condemning baptismal regeneration while insisting that people who believe in it - like the Kozars- are saved. Only God knows if they are saved but deceived OR unsaved and deceived. The example you cited of them mocking those who believe water baptism is not salvific is NOT a good indication of their relationship with Christ to my mind.
It is my understanding that the Greek word translated "baptise" literally means "placed into" and therefore the context should determine what is being stated. Thus the ( possibly non-Markan) scripture "He that believes and is baptised shall be saved" simply means "he that believes and is PLACED INTO (Christ, by their faith in Him) shall be saved".
If Paul taught that adding circumcision to faith in Christ nullified the gospel, then adding any ritual, such as water baptism, must also do this. I personally believe that anyone who believes in infant baptismal regeneration can have no true understanding of the gospel and the criteria for salvation according to scripture.
I agree that it is utterly disengenuous and double-minded to say that baptism is vital for salvation but not in all cases.
The sad fact is that the Protestant reformation did not go far enough and retained Catholic heresies such as baptismal regeneration which caused Anglicans like myself to be totally unaware of the true gospel and on the wide road to Hell, open to all kinds of error until I finally was told that Christ taught "ye must be born again to enter the Kingdom of Heaven". I never heard this growing up in the Church of England because in their funeral liturgy it states that a christened Anglican is "born again through baptism". This lie causes many to wind up in Hell and is thus NOT a light matter nor a minor disagreement over inessential doctrine. My best to you as always, Mike
Thank you for this Mike.
ReplyDeleteKozar, Long and Rosebrough are very good at calling out the NAR heretics, but it is very disturbing that they are promoting false Lutheran teaching. I did have quite a battle with a Lutheran on Facebook about this post. It seems that their minds are closed to the truth. I think ultimately Chris Rosebrough is responsible for this foolishness.. he is the mentor of Steve Kozar and has had a huge influence on him.
I don't know why, but Sean Christie of Revealing Truth has taken down his video or I would have included it in the links at the end of the post. It was a rather weak critique anyway in my view. We should not be making excuses for ANYONE promoting this dangerous teaching. Those who tamper with the doctrine of salvation are playing with fire in my view.
I recommend Mike Winger on this subject.
Chris at Gospel Commission Indonesia tells me that he will be doing a video on this subject in the future. He seems very sound so I look forward to that.
God bless.
Steve Kozar has launched a savage attack against Sean Christie (Revealing Truth) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1J48oIzlr4o Kozar and Long have managed to gain respect in some Christian circles due to their refutations against NAR heretics. However, I feel that they have thrown a spiritual hand grenade on the body of Christ with their Lutheran agenda. I am very unhappy.
ReplyDeleteI agree Treena.
ReplyDeleteI noticed that Kozar had created a response video to Christie. I chose not to view it and learned from Christie's two response videos that it had been slanderous and thus ungodly.
I can only put it down to the understanding that those held captive by false teaching are blinded and bound by a demonic spirit which retaliates through those persons when their lies are exposed. The tendency of the flesh to respond in anger when one is given unwanted correction is also at work here, in my opinion.
A sad day for those contending for the truth. Sean needs prayer re not falling into the trap of overly defending himself but rather letting the Lord vindicate him.
If all this delivers some from the serious soteriological error of baptismal regeneration then some good will come of it. No doubt some in the NAR who have been exposed by the Kozars will capitalise on this situation and label their previous videos as invalid. I feel sorry for Pauline, who I doubt is in complete sympathy with the strategies being employed against Sean by her husband.
My best to you, Mike
I believe that Sean was trying to be gracious to Kozar and Long Mike. Where doctrine is concerned we need to be very firm and leave no room for doubt. Kozar has shown his true colours.. his slanderous remarks must be very hurtful, but I believe that Sean has responded in the right way. I am praying for him.
ReplyDeleteGod bless
Thank you for the links Mike. I will listen later today. I have not left a comment on Long's video so far. I thought I would write something on my blog first. As you say, it really is shocking how many people support this heresy.
ReplyDeleteGod bless