[google28b52e0868d1e307.html]

Search This Blog

Showing posts sorted by relevance for query steve kozar. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query steve kozar. Sort by date Show all posts

Wednesday, 2 April 2025

STEVE KOZAR: HOW TO LOSE FRIENDS AND ALIENATE PEOPLE

What Did Paula White (Actually) Promise for $1,000?

When pride comes, then comes disgrace, but with the humble is wisdom. (Proverbs 11:2).

Steve Kozar (The Messed Up Church) demonstrates how to lose friends and alienate people!

Kozar: "Paula White doesn't directly promise an angelic visitation (or "7 Supernatural Blessings") for a $1,000 donation. Please show where her commercial says 'If you don't send $1,000, you won't get 7 supernatural blessings,' before commenting. That's what this is about: being truthful. Truth matters. Words mean something. Please go to another more sensational channel if you don't like accurate and careful videos. This video does NOT "defend Paula White." (By the way, welcome to all of you 'Pastor Michael Grant''s viewers!)"

Once again, Steve Kozar has taken it upon himself to critique his fellow YouTube discerners and has offended many people. It appears that Kozar is actually looking for a fight with what he falsely terms as "sensational channels". Michael Grant, pastor of Moore's Corner Church, MA has come in for the brunt of Kozar's ire, which is shameful since Grant is head and shoulders above Kozar in the faith!

Kozar: "Paula White never actually said if you give her $1000 God will send you an angel."  

Paula White's actual words: "I believe that when you honour God on passover starting on April 12th at sundown to Good Friday on the 18th including on Easter Sunday, you can receive these seven supernatural blessings. For you and your house, according to Exodus 23, God will assign an angel to you; He will be an enemy to your enemies; He will give you prosperity; He will take sickness away from you; He will give you long life; He will bring increase in inheritance; and He will give a special year of blessing. You are not doing this to get something, but you are doing it in honour to God realising what you can receive." The video continues: "Don't miss your special moment to release seven supernatural blessings and provision into your life.." 

Paula White framed her scam in deceptive double talk.. "..you are not doing this to get something.. but you are doing this in honour to God realising what you will receive.."  Why is Kozar splitting hairs? I view Kozar's remarks as immature and divisive. His pettiness and sniping against his supposed "brethren" is absolutely disgusting (Matthew 7:18). Kozar promotes himself as an "expert" and the only one worthy of producing "accurate videos". Many see this as an agenda and an attempt to put himself first as the foremost discernment minister at the expense of maligning others. (3 John 1:9). This malicious and unfounded behaviour is unworthy of someone who claims to be a Christian.

As far as I am concerned, the more people calling out false teachers like Paula White, the better. Their voices add weight to the witness against her and other NAR wolves. 

This has happened before! In January 2023, Kozar took it upon himself to issue a stern rebuke to Sean Christie (Revealing Truth) when he dared criticise the Lutheran "holy grail", baptismal regeneration.

At that time, Kozar referred 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.'"1

My question to Steve Kozar is this: Who do you think you are, and who are you to judge who is qualified to produce videos exposing false teachers?

I have recommended Kozar's videos in the past but with reservations. These days, I look for different sources of information due to the elephant in the room i.e. baptismal regeneration. Baptismal regeneration is a very serious error supported by Lutherans Steve Kozar, Daniel Long, and Chris Rosebrough. This heresy alters the very core of soteriology. For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God.. (Ephesians 2:8). 

On this occasion, I left a message on Kozar's YouTube video, but as I expected, it was to no avail, and he has doubled down. Like many other proud people, Kozar has refused to accept correction. 

Bible believers should mark and avoid the Lutheran Mafia! 

1. WOLVES IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING: FALSE PROPHETS AND BIBLE TEACHERS IN THE LAST DAYS: January 2023

Thursday, 26 January 2023

MY QUESTION TO STEVE KOZAR: BAPTISMAL REGENERATION

 (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.


 


Tuesday, 8 August 2023

LUTHERAN STEVE KOZAR: THE EIGHT-HUNDRED-POUND GORILLA IN THE ROOM!

 (62) Steve Kozar and Jared Mindel Interview on "Scholastic Lutherans" YouTube Channel - YouTube

Above - Steve Kozar has posted a further video promoting Lutheranism on his channel The Wartburg Castle. While Kozar's stance against the NAR and their lunatic claims and teachings is valid, problematically, his solution is just as dangerous as Charismania. 

Kozar: "We (Lutherans) have multiple ways of being delivered from our sins; it's through baptism, it's through communion, it's through confession, it's any number of ways..  we don't have that one moment when you get saved and that's it.." (1:15:00 mark)

Kozar denies what he refers to as "a one-moment conversion experience", in other words, he denies a one-time conversion event or experience.

Kozar:  "We don't believe in a single conversion experience that Evangelicals are so familiar with .. we see that as one of the ways to express salvation but it is not the only way.. (1:21 mark) 

There are a number of instances in the scriptures when people believed the gospel and were saved at a particular point in time e.g. Acts 2:40-41; Acts 8:12, 35-39; Acts 14:14,30-34 etc. By contrast, I can find no instance where salvation is jettisoned into various sacraments following conversion. In all the above instances water baptism is performed subsequent to conversion! (Mark 16:16). I view Kozar's anti-conversion rhetoric as very dangerous and anti-biblical! There is only one way to be saved! (Acts 16:31). There is of course the sense that repentance and forgiveness continue throughout one's life, but continuing repentance, by necessity, follows initial salvation. 

Kozar puts the emphasis on Lutheran sacraments rather than an inner relationship with God through faith in Jesus Christ. The three Lutheran sacraments are the Sacrament of Holy Baptism, the Sacrament of Holy Absolution (Confession), and the Sacrament of the Eucharist. Lutheran sacraments involve the aberrant doctrines of baptismal regeneration, consubstantiation (a variant of transubstantiation), and absolution, all of which are deviant doctrines inherited from Roman Catholicism. It is critical to bear in mind that Satan's objective is to somehow displace believers from their pure devotion to Christ. (2 Corinthians 11:2). Not only does Satan employ obvious deception as demonstrated by the rotten fruit of the NAR; he also employs more subtle means, such as the sacraments, as demonstrated by Roman Catholicism and Lutheranism. 

Creeds: Lutheran churches use the three Christian creeds: the Apostles' Creed (second century). the Nicene Creed (fourth century), and the Athanasian Creed (sixth century). These ancient professions of faith summarize basic Lutheran doctrine. The above creeds agree with the scriptures and are useful in that they add structure and substance to a church service. However, liturgy does not have the authority of the scriptures and it can be problematic when it becomes an end in itself. The veneration of liturgy above the scriptures undermines the believer's personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

Chris Rosebrough (Fighting For The Faith)"We come to church and our sack is empty.. we hear that we are forgiven, and that is thrown into the sack, and then we have the absolution spoken over you, that's put into the sack, and then you are hearing the gospel that Christ forgave you through the Word, and that's put in the sack, and then you go and you partake of the sacrament and that's put into the sack, and then you hear the benediction spoken over you and that's put into the sack, and so you have got your sack full when you leave church.. that sack throughout the week starts to empty and you have to go back and do it again." 2

The difference between proclamation and absolution

Regarding the Lutheran throwback to the Roman Catholic deviant practice of absolution ~ Kozar: "Did you ever read what is says is John chapter 20.."  (1:21:00 mark)

Again Jesus said to them, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent Me, so also I am sending you.” When He had said this, He breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven (ἀφέωνται); if you withhold forgiveness from anyone, it is withheld.” (John 20:21-23).

The NASB reflects the passive voice of "forgiven" and "retained" in the Greek. The recipients' sins will have already been forgiven or retained by God before the apostles’ recognition of the fact. NASB Lexicon: ἀφέωνται (apheōntai) [their sins] have been forgiven.

The issue of forgiveness and retention of sins is related to binding and loosing in Matthew 16:18, 18:18. 

Bible Exposition Commentary: "The Roman Catholic church built its doctrine on the special priesthoods’ right of absolution of sin. This is done through the confessional. Although the church
acknowledges that God ultimately forgives sin, it nevertheless asserts that God does this through the action of the priest.
The Roman church then believes that the priest absolves but God forgives. God allows sins and judgment to remain. This is backward. God first forgives and then, on that foundation, people can proclaim forgiveness. There is a difference between absolution and proclamation. We have the right to preach forgiveness but do not have the right to absolve others of their sin.." 3

Chris Rosebrough's Influence

One of Steve Kozar's mentors is Chris Rosebrough. Rosebrough has some pretty good teaching in certain areas. However, he is compromised to a significant degree by Lutheran departures from the scriptures, not only the sacraments as mentioned above, but by flawed amillennial eschatology. 

Kozar's attitude regarding differences between Lutherans and Calvinists: "I don't get into the weeds about the differences very much.. I just don't want to be so mean about everybody.."  (20:00 mark)  We are not called to be people-pleasers! ..you put up with it readily enough. (2 Corinthians 11:4 cf. Acts 4:19-20; Galatians 1:10; 1 Thessalonians 2:4). Kozar's idea is to contrast early Protestant beliefs from the first hundred or so years of the Reformation with the world of pop evangelicalism. My personal conviction is to go back to the scriptures themselves rather than rely on the flawed ideas of men like Luther and Calvin.

Paul advised Timothy: Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. (1 Timothy 4:16). Paul refers to all doctrine, not just the low-hanging fruit of deviant groups like the NAR. It appears that Kozar has settled for Lutheranism as a remedy for his bad experiences within evangelicalism. Very sadly he has compromised and has settled for partial reform i.e. he has settled for a system that in his view has a more acceptable level of truth! A little leaven leavens the whole lump. (Galatians 5:9 cf. 1 Corinthians 5:6; Ephesians 5:27). 

On many occasions, the nation of Israel was guilty of the particular sin of partial reform. The charge to Israel to completely (not partially) destroy God's enemies transfers into the New Testament teaching regarding doctrinal compromise. (Ephesians 5:11).  

In the second year of Joash the son of Joahaz, king of Israel, Amaziah the son of Joash, king of Judah, began to reign. He was twenty-five years old when he began to reign, and he reigned twenty-nine years in Jerusalem. His mother’s name was Jehoaddin of Jerusalem. And he did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, yet not like David his father. He did in all things as Joash his father had done. But the high places were not removed; the people still sacrificed and made offerings on the high places. (2 Kings 14:1-4 cf. 2 Kings 12:3).  

In the seventeenth year of Pekah the son of Remaliah, Ahaz the son of Jotham, king of Judah, began to reign. Ahaz was twenty years old when he began to reign, and he reigned sixteen years in Jerusalem. And he did not do what was right in the eyes of the LORD his God, as his father David had done, but he walked in the way of the kings of Israel. He even burned his son as an offering, according to the despicable practices of the nations whom the LORD drove out before the people of Israel. And he sacrificed and made offerings on the high places and on the hills and under every green tree. (2 Kings 16:1-4).

All this stands in stark contrast to King Josiah's sweeping reforms in 2 Kings 23.

So keep my charge never to practice any of these abominable customs that were practiced before you, and never to make yourselves unclean by them: I am the LORD your God. (Leviticus 18:30).  

But if you do not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you, then those of them whom you let remain shall be as barbs in your eyes and thorns in your sides, and they shall trouble you in the land where you dwell. (Numbers 33:55).

If those who claim to be teachers are doctrinally unsound themselves, then how are they qualified to correct others and to be credible witnesses? Lutheranism is the eight-hundred-pound gorilla in the room which unfortunately blights the efforts of Chris Rosebrough, Steve Kozar and Daniel Long to expose error. (Matthew 7:5). Steve Kozar is neither qualified nor gifted to be a teacher! (John 3:1).

Thursday, 23 July 2026

PETERS-KOZAR PREMATURE VERDICT ON STEVE LAWSON

Now if anyone has caused pain, he has caused it not to me, but in some measure—not to put it too severely—to all of you. For such a one, this punishment by the majority is enough, so you should rather turn to forgive and comfort him, or he may be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. So I beg you to reaffirm your love for him. For this is why I wrote, that I might test you and know whether you are obedient in everything. Anyone whom you forgive, I also forgive. Indeed, what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, has been for your sake in the presence of Christ, so that we would not be outwitted by Satan; for we are not ignorant of his designs. (2 Corinthians 5-11).

The recent Peters–Kozar denunciation of Steve Lawson was issued long before the evidence justified anything resembling a verdict to the point of being irresponsible. They were not grieved as they should have been; rather they relished the chance to show their underlying hostility and hatred towards Lawson. This episode has revealed them for what they are, exposing them as nasty, unforgiving, and unrestrained. They have since moved quickly to erase all record of their vicious remarks.

The suspect post from Protestia: "Lawson briefly appeared as a Conference Speaker along with various women pastors and speakers at the Contending for the Faith Expository Preaching & Teaching Conference, which is presented by the Tennessee Baptist Missionary & Educational Convention (TBMEC), a regional body of the National Baptist Convention, USA, Inc. and was subsequently purged from website."1 Specifically, Lawson was listed as having several workshops on how to prepare a sermon, both on day one and on day three of the event. This generated a spate of protests stating that he is not qualified without anyone even factchecking the source and the information. 


Protestia subsequently published a correction: "We can confirm that the conference organizers advertised Lawson’s participation without his knowledge or consent. They invited him to be a speaker, but before hearing that he intended to decline, there was an internal misunderstanding that led them to assume he would agree. As soon as he found out, he informed them that he would decline the offer, and they promptly removed him from the line-up."

The furor began when Justin Peters and Steve Kozar could not wait to stick their knives into Lawson. Their zealous reaction to the suspect news erupted without factchecking the information or thinking about the repercussions of their stinging condemnation of Lawson. These two "discerners" have been left with egg on their faces.. but frankly they could do with a bit of humbling!

Peter's reaction on X: "I was just sent this. Hey, see this is proof Steve Lawson never repented. I wish I could say I was surprised but I'm not."  The post has been hastily deleted.3 

Kozar reposted Peters' post and added: "Steve Lawson, the narcissist, needs to have an audience."

Kozar subsequently posted an update: "I removed my earlier post about Steve Lawson from Justin Peters."4

Comments

Steve Lawson was formally and permanently removed from ministry about eighteen months ago after the elders of Trinity Bible Church of Dallas determined he had engaged in an “inappropriate relationship” with a woman for five years. Following their decision, Lawson resigned from all roles at OnePassion Ministries.5

Various leaders were quick to issue unanimous condemnation and shock reverberated throughout the Reformed camp. Justin Peters wasted no time offering his two pennyworth and weighed in with: "In our camp, you disqualify yourself sexually as a minister, you're done. You can be forgiven, you can be restored to church, but you'll never minister on the pulpit again, ever."

Lawson’s sin was grave indeed and met the biblical threshold for disqualification. Nevertheless, he has complied with every requirement placed on him and he has maintained a low public profile for eighteen months. No one had any reason to doubt his genuine repentance.

Although they have apologised to their readers, Peters and Kozar have failed to apologise to Lawson personally. Assuming that Lawson is a true believer, I wonder how this slander and concealed hatred has affected him personally? (James 4:11; Proverbs 10:18). 

Peters-Kozar pattern of conduct is entirely predictable:

Peters' skewed teaching on repentance and his various questionable teachings. 
Kozar's pronounced self‑importance, his dismissive posture toward other discernment efforts, and his commitment to baptismal regeneration and other Lutheran errors. 

* As a qualifier, I do not grant the legitimacy of Reformed or Lutheran theology.

1. Steve Lawson Briefly Appears As Conference Speaker, Then Is Purged From Website - Protestia
2. Steve Lawson Briefly Appears As Conference Speaker, Then Is Purged From Website - Protestia
3. Post Not Found - X | 404 Error
4. Steven Kozar on X: "I removed my earlier post about Steve Lawson from Justin Peters. Here is an update:" / X
5. Dr. Steven Lawson Resigns From All OnePassion Ministry Duties Following Moral Failure

Saturday, 14 March 2026

DANIEL LONG AND STEVE KOZAR: HERESY HUNTERS

(392) Are “HERESY HUNTERS” Hurting or Helping the Body of Christ? With Kozar and Long - YouTube

Daniel Long and Steve Kozar have undertaken substantial historical research on the early Pentecostal movement, particularly in their examinations of figures like John Alexander Dowie, Frank W Sanford, Charles Fox Parham and John G Lake. Their research is genuinely useful, and I hope their videos offer needed clarity to sincere believers who are unknowingly drawn into the NAR. Their work also functions as an early warning system for those who haven’t yet been pulled into charismania. 

Steve Kozar: "I want people to trust me, but more importantly, I want people to trust the content that I am giving them."

Kozar's content is accurate as far as it goes, BUT his theology is stunted, and it is incumbent that believers should test the spirits rather than blindly trust any teacher or influencer. (1 John 4:1; Acts 17:11).

While no one with a morsel of spiritual discernment would argue that the NAR is not corrupt at its foundations, Long and Kozar overlook several significant issues. They consistently elevate Mike Winger for exposing “cover‑up culture” and calling out obvious false prophets. Yes—Winger has exposed wolves like Benny Hinn, Shawn Bolz, Todd White, and Che Ahn. But at the same time it is troubling that he has publicly described Bill Johnson as “saved", “sincere” and “someone he would fellowship with.” He has also claimed that Todd White is “saved". Even after reviewing roughly sixty hours of White’s material, Winger claimed he did not see a false gospel. Winger’s underlying premise—that false prophets can be restored to ministry, and that institutions like Bethel can be reformed—is completely alien to my reading of Scripture. False prophets are predators (wolves), not candidates for restoration. Scripture instructs us to mark and avoid them, not rehabilitate them. (Romans 16:17–18).

Winger's exposure of cult leader Steven Koko, the so-called "predator of Panama", involved close collaboration with hypercharismatic false teacher Torben Sondergaard, founder of The Last Reformation.Sondergaard is a "thus saith the Lord" leg puller and demon slayer who hijacks people into false repentance. No bona fide Christian "influencer" should collaborate with false teachers like Sondergaard > the means do not justify the ends.

Mike Winger throws up one red flag after another!

Winger appears unable to recognise the ecumenical drift or the overtly worldly tone of the Bless God Summit and TPUSA. At the Summit, he shared a platform with Ruslan, Gavin Ortland, Wes Huff, Sean McDowell, and Roman Catholic activist Lila Rose, among other questionable teachers who are effectively reintroducing elements of the Galatian error. In addition, Ortland, Huff, McDowell, Ruslan and others have expressed sympathy toward Kirk Cameron’s heretical annihilationist position. Cameron recently convened Ortland, Dan Paterson, Chris Date and Paul Copan for ‘Hellgate’, a two‑and‑a‑half‑hour discussion centred on the nature and duration of hell.2 

Although he is praised for exposing false teachers, Winger aligns himself with individuals who are actively eroding the faith — and his own involvement contributes to that erosion.

Winger is part of a loose, self-reinforcing ecosystem of Christian YouTubers who:
  • appear on each other’s channels

  • endorse one another’s content

  • share platforms at conferences and livestreams

  • cross‑promote each other’s books, interviews, and debates

  • shape what becomes “acceptable” or “mainstream” in online Christian discourse

This creates a de facto establishment — not official, but influential.

Michael Grant refers to this as "one big swamp that needs to get drained".3  

The other person Kozar praised in this video is Justin Peters. Like Long and Kozar, Peters is very accurate in his exposure of NAR false prophets. However, my huge concern is that he is a Calvinist. Limited atonement (TULIP) is unsupported by scripture and poses a spiritual danger on par with the NAR. It undermines the heart of the gospel by redefining soteriology itself. Those who promote Calvinism will be held to account for how they excluded vast numbers of people by insisting that Christ’s saving work was never intended for all who believe, but only for an exclusive elect.

Lutheran theology also retains serious doctrinal errors with profound implications for soteriology. The absence of the full counsel of God is evident in three key areas: baptismal regeneration, consubstantiation, and eschatology. (Acts 20:27). These positions remain rooted in Roman Catholic tradition rather than biblical authority. Ultimately, no defence will stand for those promoting these deviations from scripture. (Romans 14:12; 2 Corinthians 5:10; James 3:1).

1. This Is Disgusting – Why I Expose My Friend Koko and Join Mike Winger to Uncover Church Coverup

Torben Sondergaard

Sunday, 18 September 2022

DANIEL LONG AND STEVE KOZAR: LUTHERAN HERETICS

(8) “Long and Kozar Talking about their New YouTube Channel: The Wartburg Castle - YouTube

In this video Daniel Long and Steve Kozar explain why they have created their new YouTube channel The Wartburg Castle. Long and Kozar are "Confessional Lutherans" or "Conservative Lutherans"  which they differentiate from liberal Lutheranism as practiced by the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA).    

I would describe Long and Kozar's agenda of discouraging criticism against Lutherism as Machiavellian. (Genesis 3:1). Kozar's dominant personality comes to the fore throughout this video and he frequently interrupts Long. He explains that they don't want to get into super detailed issues about doctrine or church history and the differences between denominations, but that they are setting doctrinal issues aside. Kozar and Long apparently want to "discuss Lutheranism" without discussing Lutheranism! Kozar suggests that those of us who differ should "respectfully disagree", and he asserts from the outset that severe censure against Lutheranism on their platform is unwanted and unacceptable. In effect their aim is to do what many false teachers do, they introduce heresy through the back door without clarifying their core doctrines. In order to "respectfully disagree", I would have to imply that there are only minor differences of opinion between bible believing Christians and Lutherans. In fact, Lutheranism undermines the very doctrine of salvation itself. (2 Corinthians 11:4). It is not possible to "respectfully disagree" when the bible gives such stark warnings against false teachers. (2 Corinthians 6:14). 

Long and Kozar follow the bad example of their mentor Chris Rosebrough. Kozar: "Everything we do has got a huge stamp of Chris Rosebrough's ideas on it". According to Kozar, Rosebrough's initial idea was to critique false NAR teachers without revealing his Lutheran beliefs because he knew it would be controversial. It doesn't seem to have occurred to either Long or Kozar that Rosebrough's tactic of obscuring his Lutheran beliefs is deceptive. Why would anyone with sound theology want to obscure their beliefs?  Rosebough has labelled false teacher Michael Brown "the apostle of obfuscation", but this label might just as easily be applied to himself. Rosebrough's deception was painfully encountered by Laura (End Time Apostasy) in 2017. Laura had listened to Rosebrough's teaching for nine years without realizing that he was a Lutheran! Her appeal to Rosebrough and his wife was subsequently ignored. Laura makes some very good points in the following video and is obviously very upset. *Proviso: I am not in agreement with Laura's view of OSAS (once saved always saved). 

Adiaphora

Adiaphora are matters not regarded as essential to faith, but nevertheless as permissible for Christians or allowed in the church. Kozar demonstrates his skewed mindset: "Don't park your car in the parking lot of the church because it doesn't say in the bible to have a parking lot at your church". Firstly, parking lots have nothing to do with the church service, and secondly, without an opportunity to park their cars, many people would not go to church. According to Kozar, vestments fall into the category of adiaphora because the bible doesn't say what a pastor should wear. In that case, any of us could turn up to church in vestments, but I don't think that would be seen as acceptable! Although Kozar claims that vestments are worn by the pastor in humility as a servant, the distinct impression given is that they elevate the pastor above the congregation. This impression is further compounded by the pastor speaking in the first person of God when he gives absolution. In fact, a biblical case can be made against vestments. Christians are instructed not to make distinctions amongst themselves or to make a show of outer appearance or adornment. (Matthew 23:5,8; 1 Peter 3:3-4; James 2:2). According to Protestant Reformer John Hooper, these requirements were vestiges of Judaism and Roman Catholicism, which had no biblical warrant for authentic Christians since they were not used in the early Christian church. {1}

Baptismal Regeneration?

Long's advice not to read our presuppositions into the text and to let the text speak for itself is sound advice, but sadly he does not apply it to himself. The scriptures confirm believers' baptism. A definite order of events is involved concerning salvation i.e. faith invariably precedes baptism.

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. (Ephesians 2:8-9).

Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (Matthew 28:19).

And they said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.” (Acts 16:31). 

..because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved . 
For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. (Romans 10:9-10).


Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning with this Scripture he told him the good news about Jesus. And as they were going along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, “See, here is water! What prevents me from being baptized?” And he commanded the chariot to stop, and they both went down into the water, Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him. (Acts 8:35-38).

And we indeed justly, for we are receiving the due reward of our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong.” And he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise.” (Luke 23:41-42).

And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him. (Hebrews 11:6).

The defects of Conservative Lutheranism

Absolution from a confessor as if from God himself; infant baptism; baptismal regeneration; the doctrine of the Real Presence in the Eucharist aka the sacramental union or consubstantiation (i.e. the Body and Blood of Christ are "truly and substantially present in, with and under the forms" of consecrated bread and wine (the elements); vestments; over-emphasized liturgy. statues, amillennial eschatology. {2} The very foundation of the Christian faith is misrepresented by Conservative Lutheranism. The fundamental principle of justification by faith alone is violated by baptismal regeneration and infant baptism. Lutheranism is a different gospel. (2 Corinthians 11:4).  Furthermore, vestments and granting absolution in the first person is unbiblical and puts a false distinction between the pastor and his congregation. I have heard the Lutheran spin on all these questions, but no matter how much they equivocate, it is impossible to justify these practices. For anyone to grant absolution in the first person is blasphemy. For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, (1 Timothy 2:5). 


Rosebrough defends the indefensible and condones idolatrous statues of Christ on the altar as "liturgical art".

The early church

When the church began in the first century Jesus' disciples met very simply in homes. And they devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. (Acts 2:42,46;16:40). 

When he realized this, he went to the house of Mary, the mother of John whose other name was Mark, where many were gathered together and were praying. (Acts 12:12).
So they went out of the prison and visited Lydia. And when they had seen the brothers, they encouraged them and departed. (Acts 16:40).
To Philemon our beloved fellow worker and Apphia our sister and Archippus our fellow soldier, and the church in your house: (Philemon 1:1-2)
Greet Prisca and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus, who risked their necks for my life, to whom not only I give thanks but all the churches of the Gentiles give thanks as well. Greet also the church in their house. (Romans 16:3-5).

Church buildings began to spring up in the middle of the third century during the reign of Constantine after Christianity was legalized. Prior to this time, the emphasis was never on buildings, the ecclesia were the people of God and believers met wherever they could. (Matthew 18:20). Roman Catholicism introduced adornments and embellishments.

Kozar: "If you’re burdened by not being a “good enough” Christian, even after many years of trying, Lutheranism might be the relief you’ve been looking for!"  {3} 

Kozar focuses on how charismatic teachers like Todd White put believers on a guilt trip and make them feel that they are "not good enough". As a former charismatic I agree with this assessment. My own experience in charismania was extremely debilitating. However, I cannot agree with Kozar that Lutheranism "might" bring relief. Lutherans and Calvinists have become quite good at mopping up Christians who have become disillusioned with charismania. However, neither of these options represents the true gospel of Jesus Christ. Christ is the answer! (John 8:31-36).

I watch Long's YouTube channel Long for Truth videos regularly. His videos are well presented and are a useful resource insofar as they expose the false teaching and the dubious history of the Word-Faith/Pentecostal/NAR movement. Kozar's channel The Messed Up Church follows a similar agenda but his videos are chaotic and difficult to follow. As with Rosebrough, it is indefensible that both Long and Kozar obscure their core heretical Lutheran beliefs. As Laura points out, these men are heretics exposing other heretics. 

1. Vestments controversy - Wikipedia
2. Eucharist in Lutheranism - Wikipedia
3. Lutheran Stuff — The Messed Up Church

Further Links

The Small Catechism · BookOfConcord.org
(12) #340 Chris Rosebrough's Defence of Idolatrous Statues of Christ | MEGIDDO RADIO - YouTube
Lutheran Heresies! - What's wrong with the Lutheran religion? (jesus-is-savior.com)

Sunday, 12 February 2023

STEVE KOZAR + DANIEL LONG: ILLEGITIMATE BAPTISM

 (7) My Response to Sean Christie of Revealing Truth on the Topic of Baptism - YouTube 

Daniel Long and Steve Kozar's exposés of the Azusa Street "revival", John G Lake, Charles Parham, William Branham etc. are well-researched and accurate. Ironically, it is very remiss of these men not to have dug up the dirt on their own cult leader Martin Luther, and there is plenty of dirt to be had! Arguably Martin Luther's wickedness exceeds that of all the false teachers Kozar and Long have exposed!

Daniel Long on the validity of infant baptism

Long: "If you are going to say that somebody who was baptized in the Catholic Church did not have a valid baptism, then you have to say that Martin Luther didn't have a valid baptism, Calvin, any/all of the reformers, and the early church fathers were all baptized as infants. Are you saying that their baptism was an illegitimate baptism and that they all should have been rebaptised?"  YES, that it precisely what I am saying.. although I do not acknowledge the claim that Luther and Calvin were true believers. (Matthew 7:16).

The argument that believers do not need to undergo believers baptism if they have undergone infant baptism is extremely weak and is not validated by the scriptures. Luther went to extreme lengths to validate the doctrine of infant baptism. However, his arguments depend upon tradition and his appeals to the scriptures regarding the faith of infants are dubious: “Since our baptizing has been thus from the beginning of Christianity and the custom has been to baptize children, and since no one can prove with good reasons that they do not have faith, we should not make changes and build on such weak arguments.” {1} 

Thousands of believers have been denied valid baptism as a result of this demonic teaching. (1 Timothy 4:1). Baptism is the very first commandment required of those who have repented and believed the gospel. To prohibit baptism to genuine converts is a very weighty matter indeed! These teachers will have to give an account to the Lord for this wicked teaching when the time comes. (Hebrews 4:13).   

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).

Luther - A drunkard and glutton

The widespread belief that Luther lived in poverty is easily debunked. Luther was massively obese and weighed a hefty 150kg (23st 8lb) at his death in 1546 at the age of 63. {2} Luther was a glutton and a drunkard, and by his own admission he indulged himself to excess. Apparently, he drank up to two litres of fortified wine with every meal in addition to large quantities of beer.

Luther: "What other cause do you think that I have for drinking so much strong drink, talking so freely and making merry so often, except that I wish to mock and harass the devil who is wont to mock and harass me." {3} 

"By his own admission, Luther put on a few extra pounds in his later years. During a business trip (of sorts) to Eisleben (his place of birth) several days before his death, he joked to friends that he would shortly return to Wittenberg and "give the worms a fat doctor to feast on." In actual fact he never made it back to Wittenberg. He passed away in Eisleben early in the morning on 18 February 1546." {4} 

Luther - As He Was
(Death Mask by Lucas Fortnagel - Leipzig, University Library)

Luther and the scriptures!

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". {5} 

Luther and the Peasants Revolt   

Beginning in 1524 and ending in its suppression in 1525, the Peasants' Revolt began as a result of abuses cited by the peasants by the government and the church. Luther is often credited with the role of encouraging the Peasants' Revolt. However, he maintained allegiance to the German Princes against the violence of the rebels. Luther openly condemned the peasants and called for their brutal suppression, arguably inciting the demise of more than 100,000 peasants and facilitating further oppression of the lower classes."(German: Wider die Mordischen und Reubischen Rotten der Bawren) Against the Murderous, Thieving Hordes of Peasants typifies Luther's reaction to the Peasants' War, and alludes to Luther's concern that he might be seen to be responsible for their rebellion." {6} 

Quotes from Luther:

Tract Against the Murderous and Thieving Hordes of Peasants, published in May 1525: "Therefore, let everyone who can, smite, slay, and stab, secretly or openly, remembering that nothing can be more poisonous, hurtful, or devilish than a rebel. It is just as when one must kill a mad dog; if you do not strike him, he will strike you, and a whole land with you".

“To kill a peasant is not murder; it is helping to extinguish the conflagration. Let there be no half measures! Crush them! Cut their throats! Transfix them. Leave no stone unturned! To kill a peasant is to destroy a mad dog! – If they say that I am very hard and merciless, mercy be damned. Let whoever can stab, strangle, and kill them like mad dogs”[Erlangen Vol 24"

"I have killed all the farmers in their rebellion; all their blood is on my neck.."

Luther's condemnation of the Anabaptists

The most distinctive belief of the Anabaptists was believer's baptism. The Anabaptists repudiated infant baptism as a blasphemous formality. They maintained that infants and young children are not accountable for sin until they become aware of good and evil and can exercise their own free will, repent, and accept baptism. The Anabaptists were mercilessly persecuted by the Reformers and most of the early Anabaptist leaders died in prison or were executed. Protestants were especially fond of “baptizing” Anabaptist heretics by drowning them in rivers.

Ken Rathbun: "Writing against the Anabaptists regarding the matter of faith and baptism, Luther strenuously denied that faith needed to be present in order to baptize. He even turned the argument around and stated that the 'rebaptizers' could never know for sure if anyone really had faith. Luther left open the question of whether infants could have faith in some mysterious way: 'There are Scripture passages that tell us that children may and can believe, though they do not speak or understand. . . . I grant that we do not understand how they do believe, or how faith is created. But that is not the point here.' {7}

"August 7th, 1536, a synod was convened at Hamburg to devise the best means of exterminating the Anabaptists. Not one voice among all the delegates was raised in favor of the Anabaptists. Even Melancthon voted to put all those to death who should remain, obstinate in their errors. The ministers of Ulm demanded that heresy should be extinguished by fire and sword. Those of Augsburg said: “If we have not yet sent any Anabaptists to the gibbet, we have at least branded their cheeks with red iron!?
{8} 

Luther and the Jews

Luther's hate-filled vitriol against the Jews is legendary. He wrote at least five treatises on the subject of the Jews, including The Jews and Their Lies in 1543. 

Luther's seven recommendations to church and state authorities for actions concerning the Jews: 
Their synagogues and schools should be burned to the ground, their houses should be “razed and destroyed”; their “prayer books and Talmudic writings” should be confiscated; their rabbis should be “forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb”; they should be denied safe-conduct on the highways; usury should be prohibited to them and their gold, silver, and cash should be taken from them; finally, they should be subjected to harsh labor.

Luther can also take responsibility for influencing Hitler and the Holocaust.


For Daniel Long to read aloud swathes of Luther's large catechism is scandalous. Luther was a gluttonous monster whose understanding of the scriptures was deeply flawed. We should mark and avoid those who promote the aberrant teachings of this imposter. (Romans 16:17).

The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church? He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover, he must be well thought of by outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, into a snare of the devil. (1 Timothy 3:1-7).

Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. (Galatians 5:19-21 cf. Proverbs 23:20).

Friday, 20 January 2023

STEVE KOZAR: INFANT BAPTISM AND BAPTISMAL REGENERATION

 (35) A Lutheran Response to Mike Winger on Infant Baptism (Repost from Pastor Matt Knuppel) - YouTube

Steve Kozar recently posted the above video which is Lutheran Pastor Matt Knuppel's (Grace Lutheran Church) response to Mike Winger's analysis of infant baptism. Kozar has come out of the wicked NAR/Charismania deception, but unfortunately he continues to have problems with basic theology. Very sadly he and Daniel Long are currently busy muddying the waters by foisting the aberrant teachings of Lutheranism onto the body of Christ. This topic is salvific i.e. it pertains to salvation and as such, it is a primary, not a secondary issue.

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: 

First
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)

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. 

Then he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” And they said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.” And they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their wounds; and he was baptized at once, he and all his family. Then he brought them up into his house and set food before them. And he rejoiced along with his entire household that he had believed in God. (Acts 16:30-34).

The scriptures show that faith precedes baptism. By necessity, baptism is a subsequent act that arises from faith and repentance. In other words, salvation occurs when believers receive the Holy Spirit prior to baptism. Otherwise, the thief on the cross would not be saved and there would be no deathbed conversions. (Luke 23:43).

Then Peter declared, “Can anyone withhold water for baptizing these people, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to remain for some days. (Acts 10:46-48).

The Lord opened Lydia's heart to respond to Paul's message and baptism followed:

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).

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} 

Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. (Mark 16:16). The early church appears to have performed baptism at a very early stage in the lives of believers (arguably on the same day). (Acts 8:36; 10:47 etc.). The emphasis in this verse is on whoever believes/does not believe. Given all the other scriptures confirming that faith precedes baptism, it is a reasonable deduction that the inclusion of baptism in this instance is based on the assumption that baptism will occur within a very short period following conversion. 

..when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water. Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, (1 Peter 3:20-21). A good conscience is pledged at the point of baptism. The scriptures indicate that baptism was performed on those capable of personally believing in Jesus Christ, pledging a good conscience, and calling on His name. (Acts 22:16).
 
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

Genesis 17:9-14
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.

In the above passages, descendants or posterity are denoted not infants.

Cambridge Bible: "39. the promise is unto you, and to your children] Just as “to Abraham and his seed were the promises made” {3}

Expositors Greek Testament: "Acts 2:39. ὑμῖν γὰρ: the promise was made to the very men who had invoked upon themselves and upon their children, St. Matthew 27:25, the blood of the Crucified." {4}
 
The sign of the old covenant was circumcision (Genesis 17:10-14), whereas the sign of the new covenant is the Holy Spirit:

For circumcision indeed is of value if you obey the law, but if you break the law, your circumcision becomes uncircumcision. So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? Then he who is physically uncircumcised but keeps the law will condemn you who have the written coded and circumcision but break the law. 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 2:25-28).

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). 

1. Luther's canon - Wikipedia
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

Saturday, 27 January 2024

DANIEL LONG THE WARTBURG CASTLE: WILLFULLY IGNORANT OR CATASTROPHICALLY CONFUSED?

 The Necessity of Grace (youtube.com)

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God.. (Ephesians 2:8).

How tragic that Confessional Lutheran Daniel Long has missed the very essence of the gospel. Long continues in the heresy that "other things" are salvific apart from grace through faith. This heresy is just as lethal as the false doctrines he exposes on LongforTruth1. In this video, Long continues to promote this diabolical doctrine by quoting parts of  Franz Pieper's Christian Dogmatics.

Franz Pieper's Christian Dogmatics.

Pieper: "When describing the way of salvation, Scripture indeed mentions other things besides the grace of God in Christ. It declares, for example, that the gospel and baptism save.."  

It is a grievous error to depend upon "other things" besides the grace of God in Christ for salvation. Any interpretation that adds water baptism, the Lord's Supper, or "Holy Absolution" as salvific has compromised the very gospel itself! 

For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, because they formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water. Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him. (1 Peter 3:18-21).. 

Baptism corresponds to i.e. it is an antitype of the flood waters which physically saved Noah and his family. Prior to the flood, Noah is described as - a righteous man, blameless in his generation. Noah walked with God. (Genesis 6:9). Baptism is -  an appeal to God for a good conscience.

Long: "We have to distinguish between how we receive God's grace, and how God delivers his grace to us, how He gets his grace to us. God delivers his grace to us through means. We always receive God's grace by faith.. God has multiple ways.. the main way is the preached word, but baptism is also a way that God delivers his grace to us the Lord's Supper is another way God delivers his grace to us and Holy Absolution is another way God delivers his grace to us..   16:30 mark..

The New Testament clearly and repeatedly states that salvation comes only through faith in Christ by God's grace. (Ephesians 2:8-9). The act of baptism is an expression of faith and obedience, it is not a means of salvation. There is no instance in the New Testament of an unbeliever receiving salvation through water baptism! Those who teach the lethal doctrine of baptismal regeneration violate the scriptures and are either woefully confused or willfully ignorant. (2 Timothy 2:15). The consequences for self-appointed teachers like Daniel Long and Steve Kozar, who mislead the body of Christ will be severe! ( 1 Timothy 4:1; James 3:1;).

Can anyone withhold water for baptizing these people, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. (Acts 10:47-48).

One who heard us was a woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul. And after she was baptized, and her household as well.. (Acts 16:14-15).

Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. (John 3:18).

To him all the prophets bear witness that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.” (Acts 10:43).

..he will declare to you a message by which you will be saved, you and all your household. (Acts 11:14).

..having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. (Colossians 2:12).

since you have been born again, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and abiding word of God; (1 Peter 1:23).

I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life. (1 John 5:13).

See also Matthew 28:19-20; 18:42,24:47; Galatians 3:23-27; Romans 6:3-5,10:17 etc.

Smith's Bible Commentary: But if it has not happened in my heart, it cannot happen by the ritual. The ritual itself cannot save me. Now you may be baptized by sprinkling, by dunking, by full immersion, and still not be saved. You know, they could hold you down until you drown and it still won't save you. The rite of baptism doesn't save. It symbolizes that which has already transpired in my heart. If it hasn't transpired in my heart, then baptism is meaningless. In fact, it's worse than that; it is --it's almost condemning to me.
Such as communion is condemning to the person who doesn't believe. The partaking of the bread and the cup, if you --if you don't believe in Jesus Christ, you're actually partaking your own damnation. You're witnessing against yourself. And "he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to his own soul, not discerning the Lord's body" ( 1 Corinthians 11:29 ).
So the same if you go through the rite or the ritual of water baptism and it hasn't happened in your heart; it's only a witness against you. It doesn't save you. So I do not believe in what is called baptismal regeneration. I do not believe that if a person is not baptized, then they are not saved. I can't believe that; you're saved by believing in Jesus Christ. Now because I believe in Jesus Christ, I want to obey Him and thus I am baptized as a sign of what has transpired already within my heart. But should I never get around to being baptized by some unfortunate accident or circumstances of some kind, I will still be saved. I have every confidence of that. "It isn't the putting away of the filth of the flesh," but it's that work of the Spirit within my heart, "the good conscience toward God, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:" 1 


..if the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do?” (Psalm 11:3).

1. 1 Peter 3:21 - Verse-by-Verse Bible Commentary - StudyLight.org