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.