The True Foundation of the Church
Table of Contents
The True Foundation of the Church
"The Preacher sought to find out acceptable words: and that which was written was upright, even words of truth." Eccl. 12:10. The foregoing verse expresses my sincere desire in writing an introduction for the two letters that will follow. My purpose is to bring to your attention the basic teaching of God's Word on the subject of the church. Since the church is seen in the Scriptures in several different ways such as, "the body of Christ," "the house of God," "the bride, the Lamb's wife," etc., at first it will be necessary to limit myself somewhat to Peter's ministry that presents the church as a "spiritual house."
In Matt. 16:16, Peter (taught of the Father) confesses, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." The Lord replied, "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church." Matt. 16:18. In his first Epistle, he teaches that the church is a "spiritual house" built up with lively (living) stones (1 Peter 2:5) with the purpose of offering up "spiritual sacrifices" as a "holy priesthood."
It is commonly understood that a solid foundation is necessary for the erection of a durable building. The wrong teaching that Christ is building His church upon Peter is one of the worst fabrications in the Christian profession. The claim simply cannot be true, although thousands accept it. However, numbers do not prove anything to be right. If they did, we would be found in some false religious belief vastly outnumbering our Christian faith.
The Greek words used in the historic passage of Matt. 16:18 are, "Thou art Peter (petros, masculine gender meaning a stone) and upon this rock (petra, feminine gender correctly rendered here as a rock) I will build My church." To force these two Greek words ("petros," "petra") of different genders into the same identical connotation is to ignore all the standard Greek lexicons. (From C.H. Brown's research) Liddell and Scott define "petros" as a stone and "petra" as a rock. Robinson (in his works) gives the same practical definition—"petra" being a rock or mass of live rock, whereas "petros" is a piece of rock, a stone. Edersheim says, "petros" is used in Greek for "stone" and "petra" always means "rock." Thus, you may well conclude that the foundation of the church is the truth as to the Person of Christ as the Son of the living God. The early church fathers Augustine and Chrysostrom rejected the teaching that Peter was the foundation. Paul's statements should settle the question forever. "Other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ" (1 Cor. 3:11), and "that Rock was Christ." (1 Cor. 10:4).
According to the above positive evidence, Christ did not build His church upon Peter. He as mortal man would have been a defective foundation. He was only a stone.
There is no occupation of "St. Peter's chair," as he had none. His commission or assignment was to the circumcision or the Jews. Gal. 2:7 Et 8.
There is also another claim to originality by those who insist that the church was "organized" during the Lord's personal ministry from materials that John the Baptist prepared. This cannot be true for obvious reasons.
1. If the church had been established at that time, it would have released the nation of Israel from the responsibility of accepting Jesus as their Messias or the Christ.
2. The foundation of the church was not yet laid. Christ's death, burial, resurrection in triumph over "the gates of hell," and entry into heaven as the glorified man must precede (as the foundation) the beginning of the church. The Holy Spirit could not be sent until Christ was received up into heaven. John 7:39.
3. In the seven feasts of Lev. 23 we have an outline of God's ways of blessing from the cross to the Millennium. The Feast of Pentecost (or Feast of Weeks) when two wave loaves were offered finds its antitype in the descent of the Holy Spirit to endue the disciples with power in testimony and form believers into oneness of fellowship. Luke 24:49; Acts 2:1; Acts 2:42.
We read that the Lord added to the church in Acts 2:47, which He did and does, but the true word for church is withheld until later in chapter 5:11 after the offer of the Lord's return and presence among His people (Israel) was made in Acts 3:19 Er 20. Neither did the gospel go out to the Gentiles (Acts 10) until Stephen had been stoned to death (Acts 7) and sent up as the messenger in fulfillment of Luke 19:14. "But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us."
The historical beginning of the church was effected by the promised baptism of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, however the doctrine of the mystery (secret) of the church was necessarily delayed until the opportune time in Paul's ministry from which the following verses are taken.
"Now to Him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, but now is made manifest." Rom. 16:25-26.
"Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for His body's sake, which is the church."
"Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to His saints." Col. 1:24-26.
Now the mystery had been hidden in all former times; and in fact it needed to be; for to have put the Gentiles on the same footing as the Jews would have been to demolish Judaism such as God had Himself established it. In it He had carefully raised a wall of middle partition. The duty of the Jew was to respect this separation; he sinned if he did not strictly observe it. The mystery set it aside. The Old Testament prophets and Moses himself had indeed shown that the Gentiles should one day rejoice with the people: but the people remained a separate people. THAT THEY SHOULD NOW BE CO-HEIRS AND OF THE SAME BODY, ALL DISTINCTION BEING LOST, HAD INDEED BEEN ENTIRELY HID IN GOD. (From J.N.D. with one word and capitals added).
Paul delights to magnify his office of apostleship to the Gentiles and exults, "0 the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are His judgments, and His ways past finding out!" Rom. 11:33.
Please read Ephesians chapter 3 on the subject of the fellowship or administration of the mystery.
In F.C. Blount's letter, you will find two classic statements of serious import.
1. "WHEN OUR CHURCH RELATION IS SUCH THAT EVERY OTHER CHILD OF GOD DOES NOT SUSTAIN THAT SAME RELATION, WE ARE A SECT." (Capitals mine).
Anything less than this is man-made.
2. "IT IS ONLY WHEN WE CAN SAY THAT EVERY OTHER CHILD OF GOD BELONGS TO THE SAME CHURCH THAT WE DO, THAT WE ARE ON THE GROUND (foundation) OF THE CHURCH OF GOD." (The word, "foundation" and capitals mine).
"FOR BY (in the power of or with) ONE SPIRIT ARE WE ALL BAPTIZED INTO ONE BODY." 1 Cor. 12:13. Some strongly insist that this verse
refers to water baptism as the "door" to the church, but this cannot be. The baptizer would inadvertently in the case of one not real (not saved) introduce a lifeless member into the fellowship of the "body of Christ." He would add dead stones to the "spiritual house" composed only of living stones. This is unthinkable! Baptism is on the side of man's responsibility (in which he fails) but the baptizer introduces the subject into the "house of God" or the Christian profession. Of course immersion is the proper mode. To claim this passage as being water baptism is to ignore the total context of the frequent reference to "the Spirit of God," "the Holy Ghost," and "same Spirit," etc., in the previous verses. Paul's use of water baptism is found in chapter one of 1 Corinthians. This verse which comes much later in his discourse corresponds with "the Holy Ghost shed on us abundantly" in the beginning, (Titus 3:6) and reaching out to others afar off later. Acts 2:39. The subject of water baptism and the baptism of the Holy Spirit are uniformly and distinctly separated in all the Holy Scriptures.
During the preparation of this "introduction," an article by Dr. S.E. Anderson began in the May 15, 1980 issue of The Baptist Herald, Mayfield, Kentucky, on the subject of BAPTIZED INTO ONE BODY. Not knowing Greek, I have purposely waited to obtain the judgment of a capable Greek scholar. This adds impetus to "earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints." Jude 3. The next three paragraphs are submitted, with my appreciation, from the research and pen of brother Paul L. Johnson of Denton, Texas.
Without going into detail as to the many errors found in this series of articles, I would make a few comments on his references to the Greek, which the author obviously understands very little.
His statements on the force of the Greek preposition EN is unfounded as he asserts that it means "in" in the sense of "place" or "location," calling it "locative" and not "instrumental." That the ordinary meaning of the preposition EN is "in" in our language, no one would deny, but this by no means allows that it always has that meaning, as anyone aquainted with Greek would admit. I give one obvious example where EN could not mean "in." In 1 Cor. 4:21 Paul says, "shall I come to you with a rod?" The word translated "with" is the Greek preposition, EN. What sense would, "shall I come to you in a rod" make? If EN is always "in" we would be forced to such an absurd translation, but if the preposition EN sometimes has the force of what accompanies and characterizes, as it surely does, then we can translate the verse with sense as it is found in the King James with the preposition EN translated "with." Again this instrumental character of the preposition is obvious in Luke 14:31 where we read of one king going to war against another that he would first sit down and consult whether he be able "with ten thousand" to meet one coming with twenty thousand. The word translated "with" is the Greek preposition EN. Would "in" make any sense if so used instead of "with"? When Paul speaks of coming EN a rod, is he speaking of a location? When it speaks of a king coming EN ten thousand, does this mean a place or location? The answer is obvious that in both cases the instrumental thought is the only correct one, hence the translation of EN must be "with" in some cases. Now apply this to 1 Cor. 12:13 and we read, "For with one Spirit were we all baptized into one body." A perfectly legitimate translation in accord with Greek grammar and usage as found in the Scriptures themselves.
There are many other errors too numerous to take up so I confine myself to this example of the misunderstanding of the Greek. In fact his whole thesis is so blatantly wrong that one would have difficulty in knowing just where to begin in a rebuttal. He completely ignores such Scriptures as "Christ loved the church," which indicates to any unbiased mind that there is one church. He constantly projects many bodies and many churches in complete disregard to the plain teaching of Scripture that there is one church. The Lord said, "I will build My church." It is plain that this is singular, not plural. It would be monstrous to predicate of the local assembly in Ephesus that it was "the fullness of Him that filleth all in all," and yet the author does this very thing by saying the body in Ephesians is the local assembly. How could the assembly in Ephesus be this fullness and also the assembly in Colosse, then the assembly at Philippi and so throughout all the places where Christ is followed. Simply preposterous that such a distortion of the truth could have ever been conceived!
The only time the church is referred to as "a" church is yet future when Christ will "present it to Himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle or any such thing." Eph. 5:27. This will be the aggregate of all believers taken out of the world for the name of Christ during this long special day of grace.
There were local churches in the beginning, each one being representative of the whole church. The seven churches of Asia give us a prophetical and historical outline of the church in testimony from start to finish. Seven denotes completeness. Discipline is a local responsibility. The believer can still keep His word and not deny His name (Rev. 3:8) and follow according to 2 Tim. 2:22.
"The obedient heart will discern our Lord's instruction as set forth in Matt. 18:20:
1. "Where"—the divine place
2. "two or three"—the divine testimony
3. "are gathered"—the divine power
4. "together" —the divine oneness
5. "in My name" —the divine authority
6. "there am I"—the divine presence
7. "in the midst of them"—the divine center."
With due respect to Dr. Anderson, it is necessary to declare that his effort to force 1 Cor. 12:13 into local application only is unwarranted. His criticism that this one verse (or one word "By") has done major damage to Christians is unfounded. His reference to the very good time-honored King James Bible as being biased on immersion cannot be proven. His promotion of "Baptist Church doctrine" is very plain. That denomination originated during the Reformation about the year of 1792. Any claim to originality before that time is unauthentic. In the beginnings of our Christian faith mankind was classified as Jew, Gentile, and church of God. 1 Cor. 10:32. There were no church divisions then. The Christian people were the church of God. Dr. Anderson's frequent reference to the church as a "vaporized, foggy, invisible universal phantom" is an absurdity!
I have been operating under the call of responsibility to God over fifty years, and as a member of the body of Christ no one has had any difficulty seeing me, nor I in seeing them. This is according to Acts 2:42. Verse 28 of 1 Cor. 12 shows that the apostle did not limit his thoughts to the Corinthian church because he was inspired to write, "God hath set some in the church, first apostles," etc., and none were there in Corinth.
We cannot say that we are the church in this locality, (Columbus, Kentucky) because so many of the members of the body of Christ are otherwise affiliated in man's organizations. We can say that we are only a remnant or part of the church in much weakness gathered to the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. No one piece of a jug dropped and broken on the sidewalk can say, "I am the jug."
We have no name outside our building because we do not believe in division among the Lord's people. In the broken condition of the church, we find it necessary to use expressions such as "going to meeting," "Bible meetings," "meeting room," and "gathering." These are terms associated with going forth "unto Him without the camp, bearing His reproach." Heb. 13:13.
Peter advises, "And be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you." 1 Peter 3:15.
Criticisms have been made:
1. "If you people have something so good why are you so small in numbers?" Two things keep us small (a.) the exercise of discipline (b.) the reproach linked with a remnant testimony. Man naturally desires a prominent, popular, prestigious position for present advantage which is not available.
2. "You people think you are better than others." This cannot be. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh." John 3:6.
3. "You are a man-made church." We are not a sect, so we are not man-made.
4. "What you belong to is invisible." How can this be since you see me, and I see you? Is God's family invisible, too?
We have seen that Peter is not the foundation. Neither is John the Baptist and his work. He was the Baptist because of his baptismal work with the Jews. Mark wrote, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." No modern Baptist would say that. He would say, "He that believeth and is saved shall be baptized." So, Mark was not one. Paul informed, "Christ sent me not to baptize." John wrote, "The blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from all sin." 1 John 1:7.
The first and basic need of the sinner is "repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ." Acts 20:21. "Except ye repent, ye shall... perish." Luke 13:3 Er 5. "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ" (Acts 16:31) that you might receive as the end of your faith the salvation of your souls. (1 Peter 1:9). Remarkable John 5:24 is given below in two main translations with sincere prayer for your blessing.
"VERILY, VERILY, I SAY UNTO YOU, HE THAT HEARETH MY WORD, AND BELIEVETH ON HIM THAT SENT ME, HATH EVERLASTING LIFE, AND SHALL NOT COME INTO CONDEMNATION; BUT IS PASSED FROM DEATH UNTO LIFE." John 5:24. King James Translation.
"AMEN, AMEN, I SAY UNTO YOU THAT HE WHO HEARETH MY WORD AND BELIEVETH HIM THAT SENT ME HATH LIFE EVERLASTING AND COMETH NOT INTO JUDGMENT, BUT IS PASSED FROM DEATH TO LIFE." John 5:24. Douay Translation.
I have written this preface for friends, our children and grandchildren, and a brother in the Lord who feels keenly what it means to walk in separation from other good-intentioned souls. See Luke 12:50-53.
There is no expectation that this paper will change the religious pattern of the community. The normal course will be a gradual drift toward ecumenism which will come under God's sorest judgment after the real are called home to heaven and the false left behind. 1 Thess. 4:16 Et 17. Matt. 25:10 Et 11. There is the prayerful concern that this may fall into the hands of exercised souls who will respond to the moral call, "Come out of her, my people." Rev. 18:4.
It will help as you read the letters to know that Mrs. Geveden was my mother. Mr. Wright was the Baptist pastor at Burkley, Kentucky. Mr. Blount was the evangelist from Bloomington, Illinois, who labored intensively in this area in 1914 and other years.
May the Lord bless you in spirit and soul and body for "the foundation of God standeth sure." 2 Tim. 2:19.
Paul B. Geveden
Letter of Eli Wright to Mrs. Geveden: Thoughts on the Church
Feb. 2nd., 1916
Mrs. T.G. Geveden
Burkley, Ky.
Kind Friend:
Your esteemed letter of a few days ago to hand, and with much pleasure I have noted its contents. I realize that you are an earnest seeker of truth, from the Fountain of all truth, God's word, imbued, or filled with the Spirit. I always and at all times take great pleasure in studying, honestly and earnestly with anyone seeking the truth.
You have asked me many questions in your letter, which I will endeavor to answer, and as you suggest, in the light of His word, too.
The first question I deduce from your letter is in regard to the birth of the Church. You say you find from Acts 2:47, the birth of the church, because it says the Lord added to the church, "such as were being saved," or those that "were saved."
I want to ask you one simple question just here. How can you add anything to another thing that is not in existence? If the Church had not been in existence, it would have been an impossibility to have added to it. You can see that, can't you? So it must have been in existence before this time, but when was it begun or organized?
1 Cor. 12:28. "And God hath set some in the Church, first Apostles." So we now have the charter members of the church. God's word tells us so, and we must accept it. Then they at least must have been in the church when these others were added, for they were the FIRST.
Luke 6:13. "And when it was day, He called unto Him His disciples; and of them He chose twelve, whom He also named Apostles."
Now taking the above scripture, 1 Cor. 12:28, and then Luke 6:13, any unbiased mind would say the Lord has just organized His church, just put in the charter members. Would he not, sister Geveden? Let us be unbiased, and seek the truth in the light of His blessed word. Then if we do, we have a church organized by Christ Himself, and He said He would do it Himself. "I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH," and the first members are the Apostles, and then on Pentecost, many were added unto them, Acts 2:47.
Now, you question John's Baptism, and you know that Baptists only accept John's Baptism, and you are aware of the fact that all the Baptism Christ ever had on earth was John's. So the Baptists and Christ agree in this, don't they? If you will notice right close, the twelve that Paul baptized were not John's disciples, but were baptized "unto John," and John was dead, and Paul baptized them "in the name of the Lord Jesus." Acts 19:5. The one who First baptized these twelve must have been some one who had not been properly taught himself, like Apollos, Acts 18:24-26, he seems to have only known John and not Christ, but when taught the "way of God more perfectly," I am sure did a great work. We have many today who are like Apollos, need instruction along many of the lines of the doctrines of Christ, and taught to heed the scripture where we are admonished not to be "tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, BY THE SLEIGHT OF MEN, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to DECEIVE." Eph. 4:14.
You also ask on the envelope as to who baptized the Apostles, I would say that John the Baptist baptized them, being a man sent from God to "make ready a people prepared for the Lord." Luke 1:17.
The reason I say that John baptized the Apostles, we find, Acts 1:22, Peter says, "Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that He was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us, (with the Apostles) of His resurrection."
If the successor of Judas with the Apostles must be baptized of John, as the above scripture shows, ("Beginning from the baptism of John") then we must conclude that the other Apostles must have had the same qualifications that this one was required to have. Don't you think so?
Now, sister Geveden, you say when you joined the Baptist Church, it was not of faith. And you also agree with the scripture in your letter when you say, "without faith it is impossible to please God." We all admit that because God says so, and one without faith has no business in the Church, for "whatsoever is not of faith, is sin," so of course you did not please God going into the church without faith.
You say the Lord condemns all division, and that is true. He says, 1 Cor. 14:33, "For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all the CHURCHES of the Saints."
Division comes about by those who go about with various kinds of doctrines, which the Lord admonishes not to follow. We should earnestly heed His word on this as well as all points.
You say, too, that you like organization, but want the Lord to be the organizer. Well, I agree with you on that. And He said He would set up His Church, and I believe He did it, and then divisions came about by men going out and organizing, against His own Body, His own Church, which brought about division, and they are still at it. We don't have to go back very far in history until we can see where some new organization has come, claiming to be the Church of God. But we hear Christ say, Matt. 16:18, "I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
It seems though, that some think the gates of hell have prevailed, and they have proceeded to organize another in its stead.
We find that 590 A. D. the Catholic Church was organized by Gregory, I. The Lutheran church by Luther, 1517. The Episcopal church, by King Henry VIII. The Presbyterian church by John Calvin, 1536. The Congregational church by Robt. Brown, 1580. The Methodist church by John Wesley, in 1733. The Campbellite church by A. Campbell, 1827. Morman church by Joseph Smith, 1830. The Christian Science church by Mrs. Eddie in 1879, and many other small organizations at various times, and by various persons, but the Church of Christ was set up by Christ Himself, and the first members were the Apostles, 1 Cor. 12:28, and the Apostles were called out and kept with Christ, as an organization, or kept together as shown by Luke 6:18, being the charter members.
Now, the Baptists claim this organization that Christ set up, claim that it is the identical church of Christ. It is the only organization that claims to have been in existence since the days of Christ, except the Catholics, and history is against them. Baptists claim that Christ's word is and was true where He says, "The gates of hell shall not prevail against it." Matt. 16:18. We believe it, and claim it.
It is true that it shall suffer violence, and violence shall take it by "force," Matt. 11:12, but shall not prevail. Matt. 16:18.
Now let me give you some reasons briefly and by the scripture too, as to why the Baptists are right.
1. God called out a man as shown by the scriptures as a beginning of His national people, the Jews. This was Abraham, Gen. 12:1-3. I give you this reference to show the beginning of National Israel.
Now, I want to show you by His word, the beginning of His church, preparing of the material, and let you see how particular the Lord was about this.
1. "There was a man sent from God, whose name was John." John 1:6.
2. What was his mission? "To make ready a people prepared for the Lord." Luke 1:17.
3. How did Christ put His seal upon the work of John? By coming and being baptized by him. Matt. 3:13-17.
4. What did Christ do with the material John prepared? He took it and organized His Church. 1 Cor. 12:28.
5. When did He do this? Luke 6:13. "He called unto Him His disciples: and of them He chose twelve, whom also He named Apostles."
Placed first in the Church, Apostles, 1 Cor. 12:28.
6. But how do you know John baptized them? Because the one that was to fill the place made vacant by Judas, was required to have John's Baptism, "Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that He was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness of His resurrection." Acts 1:22. This being the qualification of one to journey with the twelve, it must of necessity have been required of the Apostles, and we believe it.
Now, we have Christ, calling a man whom He gives the name of a Baptist; and this man has to prepare a people for Christ's use, which must be Baptist material as a Baptist prepares it, and Christ takes this material and organizes a Church, which must naturally be a Baptist Church, the material being such, and has all the marks of the present church, stands for perpetuity. "Gates of hell shall not prevail," Matt. 16:18. Baptists believe it, and claim their Church has stood all the storms of all ages, and is the only one who claims it.
The Jerusalem church had its church troubles, Acts 15. So do we. It took John's Baptism, Acts 1:22. So do we, and had you ever thought of the fact, sister Geveden, that the Baptist Church was the only Church that Christ could get in on His baptism, if He should come to earth and seek an admission to a church?
May God bless His truth and bless all His earnest seekers for the truth. It will give me great pleasure to visit your home.
Your friend in His service,
Eli Wright
Letter of F.C. Blount to Mrs. Geveden: Church Truth
1214 Wall St.
17 Feby. 1916
Mrs. Geveden
Burkley, Ky.
Dear Sister in Christ:
I have received the letter you sent to me from the Baptist clergyman, Mr. Wright.
The first thing that strikes one in Mr. Wright's letter is, he is handling a subject too large for him, one in which he is not at home, indeed, he is not at ease in Scripture, but this is not unusual with the clergy, I regret to say. To understand the truth of the Church of God, one must be on the ground of the Church of God, which is "the oilier and ground of the truth." 1 Tim. 3:15.
The Church as the "mystery," as a thing of God's purpose, reaching from eternity to eternity, Mr. Wright has not the faintest conception of Eph. 3. Nor does he see it at all as "the house of God," and still less if possible, as "the body of Christ." 1 Tim. 3:15. Eph. 1:22, 23. Col. 1:24-26.
Mr. Wright makes an effort to show that the Church must have existed before the day of Pentecost, by quoting Acts 2:47—"And the Lord added to the church daily such as were being saved." His question is—"How can you add anything to another thing that is not in existence?" The Church, as such, came into being, in virtue of the baptism of the Spirit, and this is recorded in the beginning of the chapter, so that those added, at the end of the chapter, were added to what already existed. Anyone at all familiar with his Bible knows that the Baptism of the Spirit was consequent upon Christ's death and resurrection. Christ must be up there, before the Spirit could be down here, in this way, John 7:39. John 16:7. In Eph. 1 and Col. 1, we have seen the Church defined as "His body"; while in 1 Cor. 12:12, 13, we find that body is ONE, and formed by the BAPTISM OF THE SPIRIT.
In his desperate effort to prove that the Church began with the Apostles, before the cross, and Pentecost, he quotes 1 Cor. 12:28-"And God hath set some in the Church, first Apostles," etc. Here is an instance in which our brother meets himself coming back. To ask his own question—"How could these Apostles be set in to what did not exist?" According to his exposition the Church must have existed before the Apostles, since how could they be set in something which did not exist? If this principle of exposition holds good for Acts 2:47, it holds good for 1 Cor. 12:28. Our brother misses his way here, in failing to see that "first" does not express priority of date, but priority of rank, or place, as we might say in speaking of the President-"The 'first' man of the Nation." By reading Chapters 12, 13 Et 14, you will see that these Corinthians were being carried away by the "gift of tongues." The Apostle proceeds to show them that in the order of importance the Apostle comes first, and the gift of tongues last. To look at the question otherwise is to ignore the whole context. He refers then to Luke 6:13, and calls the Apostles, as mentioned here, "charter members of the Baptist Church." Nothing Could be more stupid, since a year or more later, Jesus says-"Upon this Rock I will build My Church." He had not built it, He was not building it. This was still future. He then, a little later in the same chapter tells them how this was to be done, presenting His death and resurrection as underlying all. Acts 2 is the historical confirmation of all this, where you get His death, His resurrection, the baptism of the Spirit, and the Church, for the first time an existing thing in this world. Compare Matt. 16, and Acts 2.
Our brother Wright has filled a paragraph with dates as to the origin of various religious bodies, beginning with Rome, 590 A.D. and ending with Christian Science, 1879. Without any date, he then makes a graceful slide, reaching the antiquity of the Baptist Church with a stroke or two of his pen. However all that we get is-"The Baptists claim." He does not designate which Baptists, as there are no less than FOURTEEN Baptist bodies, that can press the same claim. The trouble with all of them is, they are too old, according to their claim, as they began before Christ said, "Upon this Rock I WILL build My Church." As has been pointed out, "I will" is future, not past, nor present, so it was future when He spoke in Matt. 16:18. Thus, the Baptist Church is not what He calls "My Church," as according to their claim. Its date is previous to Matt. 16:18. As a matter of fact, the Baptists, as a distinct denomination, date from the Reformation—16th century. Anything before this is obscure and unauthentic. What "the Baptists claim" may satisfy a Baptist conscience, but not the conscience of one "that trembles at His word."
All that Mr. Wright says about John the Baptist, in connection with the Church, is fanciful, and visionary, and is nowhere found in Scripture. John the Baptist did not belong to the Church, nor is he in any way associated with it in Scripture. He belonged to another dispensation. His ministry had the Jewish remnant in view, and was connected with the Messiah. His ministry did not pertain to the Church, and its Head. For a confirmation of this, read the early chapters of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. John could say—"He must increase, but I must decrease." Quite in contrast to this are the Baptists; they are determined John shall not go through the diminishing process, thus John the Baptist is more in evidence than Jesus the Lord, in Mr. Wright's letter. Furthermore, Mr. W. says, "Christ gives John the name of A Baptist." This is crafty, the most contemptible juggling with the Word of God. Where does Scripture speak of him as "a Baptist?" It is "John THE Baptist." This does not refer to his church relation, since the Church did not exist in John's day, as we have proved. He was "the Baptist" because of the character of his service, he was a baptizer. Paul, who develops the truth of the Church, had a very different line of things, so could say-"Christ sent me not to baptize." 1 Cor. 1:17.
The Baptist Church never was, is not now, and never will be, on the ground of the "Church of God." When a Baptist gets on to the ground of the "Church of God," he is no longer a Baptist. There is no such thing in the Word of God as a Baptist church. It is a serious indictment, but I have never seen a piece of Baptist literature yet that could be trusted when it was a question of the Church. Any kind of a makeshift is used to reach the desired end—"We the Baptist church is His church." And each of the FOURTEEN Baptist churches can say the same thing.
When our church relation is such that every other child of God does not sustain that same relation, we are a sect. It is only when we can say that every other child of God belongs to the same church that we do, that we are on the ground of the church of God. When we are gathered as Baptists, Methodists, or Presbyterians, we are not on the ground of the "Church of God," since any of these embrace but a very small fraction of the redeemed. What Scripture says of church membership is-"We are MEMBERS OF HIS BODY." How was this membership formed? "By one Spirit ARE WE ALL baptized into ONE body." And I call your attention to the fact that "we all" embraces "ALL THAT IN EVERY PLACE call upon the Name of Jesus Christ our Lord." Compare 1 Cor. 1:2 and 1 Cor. 12:12, 13. Compare also Eph. 1:22, 23 and Eph. 5:30. Are "all that in every place call upon the Name of Jesus Christ our Lord" Baptists? Nothing less than "we all... in every place" constitute the BODY OF CHRIST, which is the Church.
As "Gathered together in His Name," we do not claim to be "the Church of God." We are but a remnant, flecked with many defacings, but through grace, "ON THE GROUND OF THE CHURCH OF GOD," since we do not sustain a church relationship that every other child of God does not sustain. The difference between ourselves and others is, those sustaining a sectarian relationship are denying their place in the "body of Christ," whilst we are owning it! When a Presbyterian joins the Baptist body he denies his relation to the Presbyterian body. When we join any body that man has made, we deny the place the Spirit of God has given us in the "body of Christ." Such a thought as joining the church, is not found in Scripture. "And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples." Acts 9:26. "GOD SET the members, EVERY ONE of them in the body, as it hath pleased Him. 1 Cor. 12:18. And this "body" is His system of things in this world, called "THE CHURCH." Believers by this divine arrangement are, by the Spirit, vitally linked with Christ, their Head in glory. Col. 2:18,19.
Where, in Scripture, are the brethren called "Baptists?" Think of taking the name of John, who belonged to a former dispensation, as our designation, instead of the Name of Christ. This should shock the spiritual sense of all dear to God. This too has its danger, since the Name of Christ may be used of a sect or party, as in 1 Cor. 1:12. To say "we are of Christ," or "we are the Christian Church," or "we are the Church of Christ," is equivalent to saying others are not, and so His Name, through misuse becomes the insignia of a sect, or party. Whatever is more than that Name is too much, whatever is less than that Name is not enough. That Name is as exclusive for gathering, as for salvation. Matt. 18:20, Acts 4:12.
Our brother Wright, in his zeal for his sect does not far miss irreverence when he speaks of the Baptist church "as the only church Christ could get in on His baptism," if He should come to earth, and "seek admission to a church." Scripture knows nothing of "A church," as it is everywhere "THE church," since there is only ONE, however, there are local churches or assemblies. Rev. 2 and 3. The thought of Christ becoming a member of a Baptist church is profane. Baptism is their "shibboleth," and not CHRIST. See Judg. 12:4-6.
There is no Scripture to show that John's baptism is Christian baptism; on the contrary, Scripture plainly shows that Christian baptism was instituted after the cross, and had the new order of things in view, that order to which John did not belong, has a place of favor and privilege for each, that John knew nothing of: "He that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he" (John). Matt. 11:11. "John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on Him, which should come after him," etc. This was the character of John's baptism: it contemplated a Jewish remnant, and had in view a coming Christ. Christian baptism has in view "all nations" (Matt. 28:19, 20), nor does it contemplate a coming Christ, but a Christ who came, and died, and rose, in whose death we died, and in whose resurrection we rose. Indeed in baptism we accept the death and grave of Jesus, and responsibility to "walk in newness of life." Rom. 6, Col. 2. No such thought attaches to John's baptism, and Acts 19 is conclusive as to Christian baptism. It is taught that Christ being our example, we should be baptized as He was. Why not be circumcised, too?
Mr. Wright fumbles with Acts 19 and says—"The one who first baptized these twelve must have been someone who had not been properly taught himself," etc. This being true, he would be in one class with the present Baptists. These twelve had not got beyond John's baptism, nor have the modern Baptists. None say as much and know as little about baptism, in its spiritual import, as the Baptists.
After all it is not. John nor baptism, but CHRIST. And that teaching that does not come bearing Jesus in BOTH hands, refuse.
I have barely touched on the church, not having gone into any detail, touching little the question of division, and saying nothing as to the Church's destiny, ministry, and discipline. This would require more time than I can now command, but the testimony of Scripture is ample, and full, on every phase of the Church's state and need.
May He guide and keep you, and make CHRIST increasingly precious to your heart-"CHRIST IS ALL." Col. 3:11.
Soon He'll come, O, glad day, O, joy eternal. Till we see His face, may we walk with Him in white. Rev. 3:3.
Yours and His, F.C. Blount
Courtesy of BibleTruthPublishers.com. Most likely this text has not been proofread. Any suggestions for spelling or punctuation corrections would be warmly received. Please email them to: BTPmail@bibletruthpublishers.com.