erroradamsthree

Is There A Contradiction
Between Acts 2:38 and Matthew 28:19,20?
Number 3

Bro. Robert Adams of 4196 Hwy. 805, Jenkins, Ky. 41357 sent me a reply to my second tract: "Is There A Contradiction Between Acts 2:38 and Mt. 28:19, 20"? I am thankful for the opportunity to reply to his material. My dear brother became sick and was in the hospital for a few days. I am thankful he is back home, and I pray God's continued blessings upon him.

Questions my dear brother has failed to answer

There are a number of questions I have asked, which my dear brother has failed to answer. Bro. Adams, the readers are going to begin to wonder why you have not answered all these questions. Eventually they will realize you did not answer them because you cannot answer them and hold on to your present position. The position that the person who baptizes someone must say: "I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins". A position that if the person baptizing someone says any thing else, other than this formula of words, the baptism is no good. The person is still in their sins, and not added to the true church of Christ. Bro. Adams, will you please answer the following questions? Show us you are not dodging, or evading these questions. Your readers will know you cannot answer these questions and hold on to your position. I believe I have answered every question you have asked me. If I have overlooked one, just call it to my attention and I assure you, I will answer it. Will you please answer the following questions?

1. Do you believe Mt. 28:19-20 is inspired of God?

2. Do you believe Mt. 28:19-20 should be in the Bible, or will you take the same position Martin Luther took about the book of James, when he thought Paul and James contradicted one another on works; and thus the book of James should not be in the Bible? Do you believe Matthew 28:19-20 should be removed from the Bible?

3. Is there anything else, other than Mt. 28:19, 20, in the book of Matthew that Jesus did not give us access to?

4. By what authority do you have to tell us Jesus did not give us access to Mt. 28:19?

5. Do you mean Jesus told the Apostles to "go ye therefore , and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world" and then deny them access to what He told them to do? Did Jesus tell the Apostles to do something and then not allow them to do what He told them to do?

6. Did Peter do what Jesus told him to do in Mt. 28:19?

7. If he did not, was Jesus with him always even to the end of the world (Mt. 28:20)?

8. If Jesus did not authorize the baptism of (Mt. 28:19) in the church, where did He authorize it? When was His teaching followed?

9. When did Peter and the rest of the Apostles go teach all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost?

10. Who was it in Galilee that told the Apostles to baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost?

11. Bro. Adams, are you saying Matthew does not belong in the Bible, when you say, "within the Bible itself, there is no contradiction"?

12. Please show me where Jesus gave a formula of words to be said at baptism, during His personal ministry, that was brought to the remembrance of Peter in Acts 2:38?

13. Which one of the following passages: Acts 2:38; Acts 10:48; Acts 8:16; or Acts 19:5) contain a formula of words that must be said when baptizing someone i.e. "A group of words that are fixed, that cannot be changed by God or by man" as per your definition of formula?

14. What is the formula of words that are fixed, that cannot be changed by God or by man, that must be said when baptizing someone?

15. Does one have to say, "I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins", in order to baptize someone in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of their sins?

16. Does one have to say, "I am preaching in the name of Jesus Christ", in order to preach in the name of Jesus Christ (Col. 3:17)?

17. Does a husband have to say to his wife, "I love you in the name of Jesus Christ", in order to love his wife in the name of Jesus Christ (Col. 3:17)?

Examination Of His February 19th Article

On Page 1 he says, "Mr. Shame, Shame, Shame believes he has the right to tell those he baptizes that he is baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost for remission of sins, and this my friends is not written in all of the inspiration of God". Bro. Adams, we are not told what to say while baptizing someone, in all the inspiration of God. Acts 2:38 says nothing about what the preacher is to say while baptizing someone. Mt. 28:19 says nothing about what the preacher is to say while baptizing someone. Both passages tell us what to do. Those who baptize are to baptize people in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (Mt. 28:19). Those who are being baptized are to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ (Acts 2:38). The name of Jesus Christ is the word of Christ (Rev. 19:13; Acts 4:12; Rom. 1:16). The word of Christ is the word of God (Heb. 1:1; Jno. 12:48, 49; Jno. 7:16). The word of Christ is the word the Holy Spirit revealed (Jno. 14:26; Jno. 16:13). The name of Christ, God, and the Holy Spirit is the same name, or word, or doctrine. There is no contradiction between Mt. 28:19; Acts 2:38; Acts 19:5; Acts 8:16; and Acts 10:48. If I do not have the right to say, "I baptize you in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost" then I do not have the right to say what I am doing. I certainly have the right to do this, i.e. baptize people in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost; because Jesus gave me that right (Mt. 28:19, 20). This right, Jesus gave me, will last till the end of the world (Mt. 28:20). Further-more Jesus told me He would be with me all the way till the end of the world, when I baptize people in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (Mt. 28:20). Also, when I baptize someone, I can say, "I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ" (Acts 2:38). I have a right to say, "I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ", because that is what I am doing; and I have a right to say what I am doing. My dear brother then asked, "Why does this man tell those he baptizes, he is baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost for remission of sins"? I would like to inform Bro. Adams that I do not always tell those I baptize, "I am baptizing you in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost for remission of sins". My dear friend you don't know what I say when I baptize someone.You never have been present. I have no fixed formula of words that neither man, nor God can change, which I use when I baptize someone. I have a right to say what I am doing. I do baptize people in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost for the remission of their sins. Jesus gave me the right to do that. I also baptize people in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of their sins. Jesus gave me the right to do that (Acts 2:38). I have a right to say what I am doing. I have said different things when baptizing people. There is no formula of words to be said that makes it magic. I have no objection to anyone saying, "I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins", because that is what we are doing, and we have a right to say what we are doing. What I object to is making a law, which God has not made. This is what you, my dear brother, are doing. God does not have a law that requires us to say anything when we baptize someone. This is your law, and the law of "Jesus only" people. It is certainly not the law of God.

On page 1, he says, "By the law of Jesus Christ and God our Father, he cannot preach baptism in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost for remission of sins, so I wonder why he chooses this passage of Scripture when baptizing"? Let me say again, Bro. Adams you don't know what I say when I baptize someone. You were never present. You are accusing me of choosing Mt. 28:19 as a formula of words which I say while baptizing. You are falsely accusing me. I beg to differ with you. I can and do preach baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost for remission of sins. Jesus, the Son of God preached baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost for remission of sins (Mt. 28:19). Jesus told the Apostles to go teach all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. If it was not for the remission of sins, then what was it for? Was it because they were already saved? Was it an outward sign of an inward grace? Was it to show the world what had taken place on the inside? No, it was for remission of sins. Jesus preached it, therefore I have a right to preach it. My brother says, if I do what Jesus said do in Mt. 28:19 that I "have destroyed every passage that God inspired to give you the Church because you have gone away from Him that told you His house would be built by the word of the Lord that would go forth from Jerusalem". He then said that when we leave Jerusalem to go to Galilee that we will die in our sin and spend eternity in a burning hell. Bro. Adams, do you realize what you are saying? It is very serious when a man tells you that if you do what Jesus taught, you will destroy every passage that God inspired to give us the church. It is very serious when a man tells you that if you do what Jesus taught, you go away from God. It is very serious when a man tells us that Jesus taught something contrary to the will of God. It is very serious when someone tells you that if you do what Jesus taught, you will die in your sin and spend eternity in hell. It does not matter whether Jesus taught it in Galilee, or in Jerusalem; because Jesus is the truth (Jno. 14:6). It does not matter whether Jesus taught it in Galilee, or in Jerusalem; because Jesus is the word (Jno. 1:1, 14). There is no difference between what Jesus told us to do in Galilee (Mt. 28:19), and what Jesus taught us to do in Jerusalem (Acts 2:38). A man is in bad shape, when he has to stoop to telling people that if we do what Jesus taught (Mt. 28:19) we will die in our sins and spend eternity in hell. Bro. Adams, shame, shame on you.

Then on page two he said, "Every time baptism is performed in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost believing that sins are being forgiven and souls are being added to the Lord's Church, they have given themselves to the doctrine of the Catholic religion, the Pope becoming their Father". What a shame, when a man teaches that following the instruction of Jesus, the savior of the world, we end up with the Pope as our father. Every time someone does what Jesus taught they have given themselves to the doctrine of the Catholic religion. This is accusing Jesus of teaching the Catholic religion. You notice, bro. Adams said "every time baptism is performed in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost", he did not say every time the preacher says I baptize you in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. The Catholics may insist you say a formula of words. If so, they are just as wrong as our dear brother. Jesus did not tell us what to say. What Jesus taught will not make Catholics. Bro. Adams brings a very serious charge against our Lord Jesus Christ.

We are making progress. On Page 2 in Paragraph two he says, "in the name of means by the authority of". This is what I have taught all along. But on Page 2 of his July 10, 2000 paper he said, "In the name of means by the authority of, not any more, that joke is being played out, it's a real tragedy that so many souls had to die under such nonsense". Thank God, our dear brother is learning. When we began, he thought teaching in the name of means by the authority of, was nonsense. It was a joke being played out, and a real tragedy. Now he believes the truth. In the name of means, by the authority of. All authority has been given unto Christ (Mt. 28:18 ASV). Jesus had all authority in heaven and on earth to teach what he taught us to do in (Mt. 28:19). He has been given a name which is above every name (Eph. 1:21). Salvation is in His name (Acts 4:12). His name is the word of God (Rev. 19:13). The gospel of Christ is the power of God unto salvation (Rom. 1:16).

At the bottom of Page 2, and the top of page three, he accuses me of tempting God and making my own law of supposition. I said I know the Apostle Peter followed the teaching of Christ in Mt. 28:19, on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2:38. He contends that since Peter did not quote Mt. 28:19 on the day of Pentecost, that Peter did not follow the teaching of Christ in Mt. 28:19, on the day of Pentecost. Of course Peter could not quote anything Matthew wrote, on the day of Pentecost, because the book of Matthew had not been written at that time. I said, I know Peter followed the teaching of Christ, on the day of Pentecost, and thus he accused me of tempting God and making my own law of supposition. Bro. Adams, this is a false accusation again. Bro. Adams, all I did was follow the law of hermeneutics, the art or science of interpretation of Scripture. We all follow that law, when we establish Bible authority for whatever we do in religion. When we decide whether we can use mechanical music in worship, we follow the law of hermeneutics to show whether the Bible authorizes mechanical music in worship today. Whatever the question is, we establish Bible authority by the law of hermeneutics. The Bible teaches by command (Acts 10:48), approved apostolic example (Acts 20:7), and by necessary implication, or inference (Acts 8:38). In Acts 8:38, the Bible says, "he baptized him". By necessary implication we know Philip baptized the eunuch. We know this, because the eunuch is the one who requested baptism, and the one who needed baptism. Therefore, I can say I know Philip baptized the eunuch by the law of hermeneutics, by implication. This is the reason I know Peter followed the instructions of Jesus in (Mt. 28:19) on the day of Pentecost. It is not my law of supposition, but it is the law of hermeneutics. Jesus told his disciples to "go teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" (Mt. 28:19). This teaching began on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2), in the city of Jerusalem. It then spread to Judea, Samaria; and then to the uttermost parts of the earth (Acts 1:6-8). It had spread to the entire world by the time Paul wrote to the Colossians (Col. 1:23). Jesus promised to be with the Apostles, on the condition they follow His instructions in (Mt. 28:19) according to (Mt. 28:20). Jesus was with them, therefore, it is necessarily inferred that they baptized people in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. I know that Philip baptized the eunuch by necessary inference. I also know that Peter baptized people in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost by necessary inference. This is not the law of supposition. It is the law of hermeneutics. This is the law we all use to establish Bible authority for what we do. He then, in the next paragraph, attempted to answer one of my questions. The question was, "When did they do what He told them to do in Mt. 28:19)"? He answered, "For the setting up of the Church, never". He thinks, adding the phrase for the setting up of the church, makes his answer sound better. But it doesn't. His answer is, the Apostles never did do what Jesus told them to do. How could Jesus be with the Apostles when they never did what He told them to do??? Let's look at the consequences of his answer! Peter said if we add to our faith the graces of 2 Pet. 1:5-7, we will never fall (2 Pet. 1:10). According to the reasoning of bro. Adams, we will never fall, even though we do not add the graces to our faith. If Jesus was with the Apostles who never did what He told them to do in Mt. 28:19-20, why should we expect to fall, if we never do what He told us to do in 2 Pet. 1:5-7? He said if we were guilty of the works of the flesh, we could not inherit the kingdom of God (Gal. 5:19-21). If Jesus was with the Apostles when they never did what He told them, then why can't we inherit the kingdom of God, guilty of the works of the flesh? If Jesus doesn't mean what He says in Mt. 28:19, 20; then why should we expect Him to mean what He says in Gal. 5:19-21. Bro. Adams, please repent and come back to the truth. Call me a hypocrite; Call me shame, shame, shame; tell me I have no mind; say I am disoriented, etc. etc. etc. I still love you and want you to return to the truth, and have a home in heaven in eternity.

On page 3, next to the last paragraph, he says, "From Jeremiah 31:31-33 when God revealed through Jeremiah; Behold, the days come saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah'. Where and when would this new covenant be made"? He proceeded to tell us it was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost. Then he said, "Matthew 28:19 can only be applied to your baptism as long as it is brought into your baptism in the name of Jesus Christ". Bro. Adams, please tell us how Mt.28:19 can be brought into our baptism in the name of Jesus Christ. Please explain what you mean. You teach that Mt. 28:19 contains a formula of words said at baptism. You teach that Acts 2:38 contains a formula of words said at baptism. If the formula of words of Mt. 28:19 are said, according to you, you are still in your sins and not a member of the true church of Christ, and you are bound for hell. Now please explain to us how that formula of words in Mt. 28 can be brought into the name of Christ, a formula of words to be said at baptism in Acts 2? I am truly interested in your explanation. I am sure all of your readers are anxious to hear your explanation. Please explain it to us. Please don't ignore . Please don't try to get around it by calling me a hypocrite, saying I have no mind, or that my mind is disoriented, or by calling me Mr. Blank, etc. Bro. Adams, your readers are not dumb. They are going to see your evasions. They will see your dodges. Come on now and explain how this can be.

In the last paragraph of page 3 he says, "What I see in this man and his friends makes me fear for every soul that they come in contact with, and it makes me sick to know that those people not knowing the scriptures will allow this baptism to continue destroying soul after soul. Honesty will prevail no more in spiritual matters, therefore, a FORM of the Church of Christ will always remain". My dear brother, all I and my friends are doing is insisting that we follow the teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ. If we need to fear for any souls, it's the souls of those who are taught that the baptism Jesus taught is destroying soul after soul. We need to fear the teaching of Robert Adams which condemns those who follow the teaching of Jesus Christ our Lord. We need to fear the teaching of one who makes the Bible contradict itself. We need to fear, and be sick of a doctrine that would accuse the Apostle Peter of rebellion against the very thing His Lord and Master told him to do (Mt. 28:19, 20). Bro. Adams, your readers are going to see what you are saying. Most of them are not going to appreciate such attacks upon our Lord, who died for us.

In the first paragraph on Page 4 he says, "And then Mr. (S.S.S.) Because I hold to the name that I preach for remission of sins says, Shame, Shame, Shame. This is not to shame me, but his Shame points to the name of the one that gave His life and shed His blood to save him. Yes, what a Shame, Shame, Shame His name has become to this man". No, my dear brother. My saying shame on you pointed to you, and not our savior who died for us. The name (title) Jesus means savior. This is the definition of the word. However, saying "Jesus" over a person you baptize is not what saves him. Saying a formula of words over a person does not save him. Saying, "I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ", does not save a person. Saying, "I baptize you in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost", does not save a person. If that is what it takes to save a person, then all Jesus Only people are saved, because that formula of words are said over them, when they are baptized. The name of Jesus is what saves people. The name of Jesus saves people when this name is preached (Acts 4:12), and when this name is obeyed (Rom. 1:16). The name of Jesus is the word of Jesus (Rev. 19:13). The name of Jesus is the authority of Jesus. When this authority is preached and obeyed, people are saved. You could get in the pulpit and say Jesus, Jesus, Jesus from beginning to end, and never preach Jesus Christ. You can say, "I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ", and still not baptize someone in the name of Jesus Christ. According to you, all it takes is just say, "I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ",and the person is saved. If that is true, Jesus Only people are saved. You say you "hold to the name that you preach for salvation". Explain to us how you hold to the name. Do you hold to the name, meaning the doctrine or word of Christ (Rev. 19:13)? Or do you hold to the name, meaning Jesus? If you hold to the name Jesus, and think there is something magic about saying Jesus over the person you baptize; then this is exactly the position of the Jesus Only people. Please explain to us how you differ from the Jesus Only people on Acts 2:38.

In the second paragraph, on Page 4 he said, "Shall we review the pattern again, I mean the only pattern that will give you the True Church of Christ". What he means by this is, that the only pattern that will give us the "True Church of Christ" is this formula of words, "I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins. If this is the only pattern that gives us the true church of Christ, then the Jesus Only people are in the true church of Christ, because they use the same pattern he uses. He is in the same church they are in, because they both use the same pattern. Those who heard the preacher say, "I baptize you in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost for the remission of your sins" are not in the true church of Christ, according to him. But those (including all the Jesus Only people) who heard the preacher say, "I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins" are in the true church of Christ. Bro. Adams, you and the Jesus Only people are in the True church of Christ. I notice the church of Christ at Ermine is listed among non-institutional churches of Christ in the 2000 Guardian of Truth Directory. I would like for you to name just one of those churches, listed in that directory, that agree with you on a baptismal formula that must be said when baptizing people in order for them to enter into the true church of Christ. Why is the church at Ermine listed in that Directory? You do not agree with any of those churches about Acts 2:38. According to you, not one of those churches are a true church of Christ. According to you, only those who hear the preacher say, "I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins" are in the true church of Christ. Again, why is the church at Ermine listed with all those churches, which according to you are not true churches of Christ? You should be listed in a "Jesus Only" Directory.

Bro. Adams, if you are going to tell your readers what I say, please be sure and tell them exactly what I say. I did not say, this discussion will continue until you repent and become ignorant as I am or until you throw in the towel. I did say this discussion would continue until you repented or threw in the towel. The towel I was talking about, is not the towel you talked about. I am sure you understood perfectly what I was talking about.

On page 4, you went on to say, "we have located True Churches of Christ in Arkansas, Alabama, Missouri, faithful men and women who believe in Memphis, Tennessee, and in London, Ky." Bro. Adams, I asked you to name one church in Alabama which agrees with your teaching. Just one church that teaches the preacher must say, "I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins" in order for them to be members of the true church of Christ. You did not name one. Now, I am asking you to come up with the proof of what you said. Give your readers proof of churches of Christ in Alabama, Arkansas, and Missouri who preach what you preach about being baptized. Give us the names so we can investigate to see. We would like to hear it from their mouth. I would also like to have the names of people in Memphis, Tennessee, and London, Kentucky who teach what you are teaching. I have done a lot of preaching in London, Kentucky through the last 45 years. I am interested in the proof of your claim. I am sure others who read your material are also interested in the proof. Now, either give us the proof, or else stop making the claim.

At the bottom of page 4 you say, "We are not opposed to Matthew 28:19, we believe it to be contained in the name of Jesus Christ by all of the truth. But we are opposed to what men are doing by their ability to Matthew 28:19, this is abuse in the worst way". Now, Bro. Adams since I have no mind, am ignorant, and disoriented, I have no idea what you are trying to say here. It may be some more of your readers are weak minded, too. Will you please explain it to us? We would like for you to explain to us how you can not be opposed to Matthew 28:19 after telling us that when we follow and do what that passages says do, we will be lost? Please explain it to us! If we will be lost and go to hell for baptizing people in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, then we should all be opposed to this passage. If the teaching of Jesus will result in our going to hell, then it is dangerous teaching and we should be opposed to it. Also, I am weak minded, according to you, so please explain to me how Mt. 28:19 can be contained in the name of Jesus Christ by all of the truth. Please explain it to us. Please explain to me how I abuse Mt. 28:19, "abuse of the worst kind", by practicing what the passage says?

On page 5 he says, "I'm not going to get involved with what this man has written about this being the Jesus Only doctrine, for a man to even think of baptizing in the name of Jesus Christ could somehow reflect upon the Pentecostal Oneness doctrine is pathetic. Do these men believe that Peter preached Jesus Only on the day of Pentecost?" No, we do not believe Peter preached Jesus Only. He neither taught one person in the godhead, nor a baptismal formula. Peter taught what people are to do, not what the preacher is to say when baptizing folks. You do not agree with the Jesus Only people on their teaching about the godhead, but you do believe and teach their doctrine about a baptismal formula. In fact, you teach that only those who have this formula of words said over them at baptism are members of the true church of Christ. This would make Jesus Only people members of the true church of Christ, because they hear the same formula of words said when they are baptized, that you say when you baptize people. No wonder you don't want to get involved with me on this.

On Page 5, of his answer to my second tract, he said, "Only one other point that I will discuss in this writing and that is the oral discussion, (debate) that Mr. (S.S.S.) Has offered". Then, in the next paragraph he mentioned the church at McRoberts and Clintwood offering to debate with him. He says they "fell into the same pit that Shame, Shame is falling into". Then he said, "I knew only two places in the New Covenant that debates were mentioned, and both those places condemned debating. (Read Romans 1:21-32 and 2 Corinthians 12:20-21)". Then he said, "I could only associate debating with the works of the flesh that are in the world". When I challenged Leon Lambert, a Jesus Only preacher, for a religious discussion a few years ago, he gave me the same answer. Debating was condemned in the Scripture. He cited these same two passages. He turned right around and had an oral religious discussion with me. A short time later he had another oral discussion with another gospel preacher. I, along with others, tried to get him to have another discussion with me. He refused. He even came to hear me preach one time. He knew that I did not conduct my self in such a way as to violate those two passages that use the word debate. Certainly, it is wrong to debate in the way the word is used in those two passages. "The servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; and that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will" (2 Tim. 2:24-26). Check other translations, of those two passages, and you will find the Greek word eris translated strife instead of debate. The Greek word eris is found in Gal. 5:20 as a work of the flesh. The word is defined by Mr. Vine: "Strife, contention, is the expression of enmity" (W E Vine New Testament Word Studies Vol. IV, P. 82). The same word is found in the following Scriptures: (Rom. 13:13; I Cor. 1:11;3:3; Gal. 5:20; Phil. 1:15; I Tim. 6:4; and Tit. 3:9). Mr. Thayer in his Greek English Lexicon defines the Greek word eris as: "Contention, strife, wrangling" (Th. P. 249). Certainly any religious discussion (debate) where there is a contentious spirit (Rom. 2:7-10) is sinful, and will result in the contentious person being lost. A religious discussion where you earnestly contend for the faith (Jude 3) is certainly good and Scriptural. When false brethren (Gal. 2:4, 5) came down to Antioch from Jerusalem, "Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them" (Acts 15:2). If it was "No small dissension and disputation", then it was a big dissension and disputation with them. When brethren teach error, we not only have the right, but responsibility to try and convert those in error from the error of their way (Jas. 5:19, 20). We should do everything we can to keep false brethren (Gal. 2:4, 5) from leading people away from the truth, as Paul and Barnabas did (Acts 15). When brethren become heretics, they should be admonished, and if they fail to take the admonitions, rejected (Tit. 3:10). Those who cause divisions contrary to the doctrine of Christ, should be marked and avoided (Rom. 16:17). Paul disputed with people everywhere he went. (Acts 15:7; Acts 19:8, 9). Even Michael the Archangel disputed with the devil, about the body of Moses (Jude 9). He just didn't bring any railing accusations against him, even though he was the devil. But, bro. Adams, what do you think we have been doing? You have mailed your material, apparently to Ohio, Kentucky, Alabama, Arkansas, Tennessee, and Missouri. You promised you would extend it to other places. You dispute with all who differ with you. You offer arguments to support what you believe. You and I have been carrying on a religious discussion (debate) that is written. Now, please explain to me, and those who read this material, why it is right to discuss (debate) the scriptures in written form, and a work of the flesh, which will condemn our souls to hell, if we do it orally. Now, I will admit it is easier to have a written discussion (debate). You have more time to think about how you are going to reply. You don't have to face people when you are embarrassed and turn red in the face. Your opponent can better point out to the audience that you are evading and dodging. Bro. Adams, I believe this is the reason you won't have an oral discussion. It would certainly be hard for you to sit there, in the presence of an audience, when your opponent points out the fact that you attack the Son of God, and tell people that if we do what Jesus told us to do, we will not enter the true church of Christ and that we will be lost in hell. You can cry all you want to that debating is wrong, but everyone knows that is exactly what you and I are doing. You know, it might be that you wouldn't feel as comfortable saying that I am a hypocrite, dumb, disoriented, before an audience publicly; while I am nice to you. It might be embarrassing to you to sit, or stand before an audience and call me King Wiser, while I refer to you as my dear brother.

In the last paragraph on page 5 you say, "To believe that Matthew 28:19 will save you from your sins is to reject the prophets Isaiah and Micah, it is to reject the promise that Jesus made to the disciples the purpose for the Comforter coming upon them and by accepting Matthew 28:19 as the baptism in the Church which was not revealed by the Holy Spirit, you remain in your sins". My dear brother, I can see why you don't want an oral discussion. It would really be embarrassing to sit before an audience and listen to my reply to such a statement. Now, you can read it while no one else is around, in the privacy of your home. In the first place you are telling us Jesus told us to do something that will not save us. Jesus told Peter, along with the rest of the Apostles, and He did not expect the Apostles to do this alone (2 Tim. 2:2), to go teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (Mt. 28:19). Yet, if Peter and the rest of us do what Jesus told us to do it will not result in anyone being saved, but it will result in all of us going to hell. I believe this would embarrass you more if you were sitting before an audience who heard me say this. I can see why you don't want to have an oral discussion. Somehow you think that following the teaching of Jesus Christ would cause us to reject the prophets Isaiah and Micah. Of course it would not. The prophets Isaiah and Micah did not tell us what to say when we baptize someone. Neither did Jesus in Mt. 28:19, or Peter in Acts 2:38, tell us what to say when we baptize someone. The Bible does not contradict itself. I do not reject anything the Bible says from Genesis 1 to Revelation 22:21, by accepting what Jesus said in Mt. 28:19. Isaiah and Micah said the word of the Lord would go forth from Jerusalem, but there is no difference in the word of the Lord that went forth from Galilee and the word of the Lord that went forth from Jerusalem. Jesus Christ spoke in Galilee and Jesus Christ spoke in Jerusalem, because when you hear Peter, you hear Christ (Lk. 10:16). I do not reject the promise of Christ to send the Comforter, who would bring to the remembrance of the Apostles all things Jesus had taught them (Jno. 14:26), which would include what He taught them in Galilee, Samaria, and Jerusalem. I do not reject the promise Jesus made to send the Spirit of truth, who would guide them into all the truth (Jno. 16:13), which would include what He taught them in Galilee, as well as everywhere else. I do not reject anything the Scriptures teach, whether spoken in Galilee, Samaria, Jerusalem, in the home of Cornelius, or anywhere else. However, my dear brother rejects what our Savior taught in (Mt. 28:19), one of the things He taught in Galilee. My dear brother teaches that what my Lord taught in (Mt. 28:19) was not revealed by the Holy Spirit. He may mean, was not revealed by the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, but he doesn't say this. It really doesn't matter, because he is wrong anyway, because there is no difference between what we do to be saved in (Mt 28:19; and Acts 2:38). The Bible does not contradict itself.

On Page 6 he says, "Matthew 28:19 is not rejected by baptizing in the name of Jesus Christ, (Acts 2:38), but to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost you reject the name of Jesus Christ. You cannot get the name of Jesus Christ out of a title such as the Son. The Name of Jesus Christ is the power to forgive". Bro. Adams, neither is Acts 2:38 rejected by baptizing in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (Mt. 28:19). You do not reject either one by doing what the other teaches. However, if you make both passages teach a formula of words to be said while baptizing someone, whenever you express what you consider to be a formula of words to be said in Mt. 28:19, you reject what you consider to be a formula of words to be said in Acts 2:38. And when you express what you consider to be a formula of words in Acts 2:38, you reject what you consider to be a formula of words in Mt. 28:19. Bro. Adams, this is your problem. There is no formula of words to be said while baptizing anyone taught in the Bible. As long as you contend there is, you will have to reject Mt. 28:19. This is exactly what you do, in spite of the fact you say you don't. When you baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, you do not reject the name of Jesus Christ. You have now admitted that in the name of means by the authority of. Therefore, when you baptize someone in the name of Jesus Christ, you are baptizing them according to His authority, and He authorized men to be baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (Mt. 28:19). You say, "You cannot get the name of Jesus Christ out of a title such as the Son". My dear brother, you are wrong. Mr. Webster defines name: "A word or phrase by which a person, thing, or class of things is known, called, or spoken to or of; appellation; title" (Webster's new world dictionary of American English, Third college edition). The Bible says, "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace (Isa. 9:6) This passage is talking about Jesus Christ. He is the Son that is given. His name is Wonderful. His name is Counselor. His name is the mighty God. His name is the Everlasting Father. According to the Bible His name is Son, and his name is Jesus Christ. According to the Bible His name is Everlasting Father, as well as Jesus Christ. Therefore, when I baptize someone in the name of the Father, I am baptizing him in the name of Jesus Christ, because Jesus Christ is the Everlasting Father (Isa. 9:6). The name of Jesus Christ that is the power to forgive, is not the title Jesus. The name of Jesus Christ that is the power to forgive, is the word of Jesus Christ (Rev. 19:13) or authority of Jesus Christ, which is the Gospel of Christ (Rom. 1:16).

On page 7 of his answer to my second tract, he talks about my statement that Mt. 28:19 was one of the last things Jesus said to the Apostles. He went on to say it was the first thing He said to them after He arose from the dead. He also said that the last thing Jesus said to them is recorded in Luke 24:47-49. He is right that I said Mt. 28:19 was one of the last things Jesus said to them, and it was. He is wrong when he says this is the first thing He told them after He arose from the dead. Read Luke 24 and see where he talked to two as they walked to Emmaus. This was the day He arose (Lk. 24:21). He explained the Scriptures to these two brothers (Lk. 24:25-27). Luke doesn't tell us when He went to Galilee. But my dear brother would have you believe that Jesus gave the great commission of Galilee in (Mt. 28:19, 20) forty days before He ascended back to Heaven. In fact, on page 8 he says it was on the day of His resurrection. It would be very interesting to see him prove this. Jesus met with the Apostles in Jerusalem the night of the day He arose from the dead. He could not have been in Galilee on the day of His resurrection (Lk. 24). He says, "why would Jesus take His disciples away from Jerusalem only to say to them the commission of Matthew 28:19"? I don't know why. I don't know that this is the only thing Jesus told them in Galilee. Bro. Adams doesn't know why either. This would be the law of supposition. I don't have a problem with this, because I believe Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever more (Heb. 13:8). He is the same whether in Jerusalem, or Galilee. He taught the same thing, no matter where He was. He taught the same thing in Galilee that He taught in Jerusalem (Mt. 28:19, 20; Acts 2:38).

On page 7 he says, "the man that goes back to Galilee has departed from the place that was chosen of God, and that man or woman whoever they be has wronged God, His Son, the Holy Ghost and the commandments of the Apostles". Bro. Adams, the one who has wronged God is the one who makes the Bible contradict itself. The one who has wronged Jesus Christ is the one who has Jesus telling the Apostles to do something He would not allow them to do. This sure cast a bad reproach upon our Savior. To have Jesus tell the Apostles to "go teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost", and then not allow them to do what He told them. The one who has wronged the Holy Spirit is to have Him say one thing that Matthew records (Mt. 28:19, 20) and something else that Luke records (Acts 2:38). The one who has wronged the Apostles is the one who has them contradict one another, Matthew one thing (Mt. 28:19, 20) and Peter something else (Acts 2:38). Bro. Adams, thou art the man!

On page 8 of his answer to my second tract, he refers to one of my questions. "Now he says which formula do I believe, Is it Acts 2:38, Is it Acts 10:47, 48, or is it Acts 19:5"? Bro. Adams then says, "when all of these came out of the name of Jesus Christ at Acts 2:38. The same Jesus whom you have crucified, God has made that same Jesus both, Lord and Christ. Isn't this what Acts 2:36 is teaching us? If its in the name of Jesus, it is in the name of Jesus Christ, if it is in the name of the Lord, or the Lord Jesus, it is the name of Jesus Christ". Yes, and on the same bases, if it is in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, it is in the name of Jesus Christ. I agree with you that Acts 2:38, Acts 10:47, 48, and Acts 19:5 is all in the name of Jesus Christ. I also believe Mt. 28:19 is in the name of Jesus Christ. Where you miss it is when you teach Acts 2:38 contains a formula of words to be said, when baptizing someone. You defined formula "as a group of words that are fixed, that cannot be changed by God or man" which are to be said while baptizing someone. If that is the case, you do not have the same formula of words in Acts 2:38, Acts 10:47, 48; Acts 19:5, and Acts 8:16. This is what makes you a false teacher. You are making a law Jesus Christ did not make. Jesus did not tell us what to say while baptizing someone. He told us what to do. Acts 2:38, Acts 10:47,48, Acts 19:5, Acts 8:16 and Mt. 28:19 all tell us what to do. There is perfect harmony between all of these verses about what to do. However, there is no formula of words that cannot be changed by God or man, that is to be said while baptizing someone in any of these passages.

A person is told what to say, when he believes (Acts 8:37; Rom. 10:8-10). A person is told what to say, when he repents (Lk. 17:4). A person is told what to say, when he confesses Christ (Acts 8:37; Rom. 10:10. He is never told what to say when he is baptized. Neither is the preacher told what to say when he baptizes someone. We are told what Jesus said, when he prayed (Mt. 26:39, 42, 44). We are told what the Apostles said when they prayed (Acts 4:24-30). We are never told what the Apostles said, when they baptized someone. The Apostles were told what to say, when they prayed (Lk. 11:2-4). The Apostles were never told what to say, when they baptized someone. The Apostles were told what to say when they preached (Mt. 10:7). The Apostles were never told what to say when they baptized.

Bro. Adams, you are making a law God never made. You are adding to the word of God. We all need to preach what we are to do i.e. "Repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins" (Acts 2:38). We all need to do what the Lord told us to do i.e. "Go teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" (Mt. 28:19). We all need to tell people to be "baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus" Acts 8:16. We need to command them "to be baptized in the name of the Lord" (Acts 10:48) We need to" baptize people in the name of the Lord Jesus" (Acts 19:5). You need to stop preaching a formula of words to be said, while baptizing people, because you cannot find where the Lord told you what to say, while baptizing someone.

What will it be, Bro. Adams? Will we have an oral discussion, where you preach, and some place I will provide? Will we continue our written debate? It is left up to you. If we continue the written debate, I will look for the answers to my questions in the first part of this tract. Our readers will also be looking for your answers to the questions. Will you dodge them? Will you evade them? Or will you answer them? We will all wait and see. I want you to know I love you, and I am very interested in the salvation of your soul.

Windell Wiser
16334 Evans Rd.
Athens, Al. 35611

Back To Truth And Error Page