erroradamstwo

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

Bro. Robert Adams of 4196 Hwy. 805, Jenkins, Ky. 41357 sent me a reply to my tract: "Is There A Contradiction Between Acts 2:38 and Mt. 28:19, 20? He also wrote me a letter. In this tract, I will answer both his reply and letter. On page 8, of his reply, he says: "I hope that this man chooses to write again, maybe not to repeat himself the many times that he has in this writing, this shows a lack of confidence and a lot of confusion. What was written in eleven pages could have been condensed to about two pages or less". To this statement, I would suggest that bro. Adams read his own articles, and count the number of repetitions he has in them, and then practice what he preaches. Does his repetition show a lack of confidence, on his part, in what he is teaching? I surely hope so. I hope that our discussion will result in his learning the truth, repentance, and an effort to undo the damage he has done, with his false teaching. I want you to know, bro. Adams, that I am willing to continue this discussion until you learn the truth, or throw in the towel. If you prefer, we will have an oral discussion. You can provide a place for half of the discussion, and I will provide a place for the other half. Just let me know, and I will send you propositions for a discussion, and make arrangements for a place for half of the discussion. I am sure the brethren at Clintwood, McRoberts, Pound, or Wise would be glad to accommodate me in this.

AN ANSWER TO HIS LETTER

If we continue a written discussion, it will be very costly to put all of our correspondence together each time we write. Therefore, I suggest, if those who read this tract, do not have a copy of my first tract, contact me and I will mail you a copy. If you do not have some of bro. Adam's material, to which I will be referring, contact him, and I am sure he will send you the material.

In his letter, he says: "You have done me a great injustice by writing and having it distributed publicly through the church at Clintwood and elsewhere. When you received the bulletin why didn't you contact me first? You have done exactly what Clintwood and McRoberts did eight years ago. Don't talk to me about the gospel of Matthew, especially Matthew 18:15-17. You have failed miserably as being a Christian as have others". Bro. Adams, I did not violate (Mt. 18:15-17). Neither did those brethren at Clintwood and McRoberts. Jesus said: "If thy brother trespass against thee". What you did was no more a trespass against me, than it was against all the other people who read your articles. When you mail out your teaching, all over the country, anyone has a right to review it, and show what's wrong with it. I did exactly what you asked me to do. You said: "Will you open your gospel and by only the gospel prove me to be wrong?" I opened the gospel of Christ and proved you to be wrong. Now you claim I failed miserably as being a Christian as have others, because I did not come to your house, and privately show you were wrong. Your statement was a public statement which demanded a public answer. I can understand why you didn't want the public to see your position answered. I can understand why you didn't want the public to know you were making the Bible contradict itself. Show me where Paul went to the house of Elymus the sorcerer to correct him in private (Acts 13:8-12). Why did Paul withstand Peter to his face, in public, rather than go to his home in private (Gal. 2:11)? You say: "These men from these two congregations covenanted together to debate the issue publicly. Neither of them darkened my door privately to teach me where I was wrong". Bro. Adams, they did not violate (Mt. 18:15-17). They, along with others, did come to your house. They tried to reason with you. Why didn't you debate them? If you are so sure you are right, why didn't you debate bro. Shirley Mullins. He is a good man. He has not mistreated you. It is not right for a man to teach false doctrine, mail his material all over the country, and then say people miserably fail as Christians; because they don't drive all the way from Ohio, or Alabama to talk to you in privacy. If you don't want people to deal with your error publicly, then stop teaching it publicly.

You say, "Alabama has some True Churches of Christ that have given honor to the name of Jesus Christ in baptism". Bro. Adams, the church of Christ in Alabama, where I preach gives honor to the name of Jesus Christ in baptism. All the members were baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. I was baptized in the name of Christ. I preach baptism in the name of Christ. However, I know of no church of Christ in Alabama who insist that the baptizer must say: I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ, in order to baptize in the name of Jesus Christ. This is what you teach. Will you please tell us which churches of Christ, in Alabama agree with you, that the baptizer must say: "I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins"?

AN ANSWER TO HIS REPLY

As we have already noticed, bro.Adams said I had miserably failed as being a Christian; because I did not drive all the way from Alabama to his home, and talk with him, before publicly answering his public material. Notice other things he said about me, and help me figure out why he would say such things, after accusing me of being unchristian. He said my answer was "despicable, out of line and certainly not in the Spirit as the Gospel teaches". Also in his letter, he said I had a spirit contemptible and dishonest, and that I had committed evil. In his answer he said a number of things about me. He said I was a member of the form of the church of Christ. He said that I, along with others, are nothing more than of the world. He said my mind was pathetic and I had "no knowledge, no understanding and no will to know all of the truth about the saving power that comes in the name of Jesus Christ". He said I was hypocritical. He accused me of having the same mind set, the same anger, and the same confusion that came from the Pharisees. He said I had no desire to know what we must do. He said he feels sorry for me because I am not completely oriented. He also said I had a weak mind, and that I taught what I teach for the admiration of men. He said I had no ability to understand. Among other things, he said I had become a joke within myself. We will let the readers decide who is acting like a Christian.

Bro. Adams said: "Here is a man who is not able to understand why I have gone back to the prophets to prove that there is a pattern revealed of how one must enter into this kingdom. I have used Isaiah 2:2-3 and Micah 4:1-3 where God set the stage for what and where the Church of Christ would be delivered to the world" (The preface to his July 10, 2000 bulletin). Bro. Adams, I know exactly why you went back to those two prophets. Your point is that they prophesied that "the word of the Lord would go forth from Jerusalem". No one denies that the word of the Lord went forth from Jerusalem. No one denies that about 3000 souls, in Jerusalem, were baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. What we deny is what you have not proved and cannot prove. We deny that Isaiah and Micah and Peter told those doing the baptizing that they must say, I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ. There is nothing in Isaiah, Micah, the book of Acts, the book of Matthew, or any other book in the Bible, about what is to be said when baptizing someone. In every case they are told what to do, and not what to say. I may not have a mind, and what mind I have may be dis-oriented; but I don't have to have much of a mind to be able to determine that there is nothing in Isaiah, Micah or Acts about what the preacher is to say when he baptizes someone. This is your whole problem. This is why you think there is a contradiction between Acts 2:38 and Mt. 28:19, 20. You think both passages have a formula of words to be said, when baptizing someone. If they contain a formulas of words to be said, then there is a contradiction. However, both passages tell you what to do, and neither passage tells you what to say, when baptizing someone.

On page 1 of bro. Adams reply to my answer of his July 10, 2000 Bible Break Publication, he quotes Mt. 22:36-40 and says: "Because I love my neighbor, I must answer those questions that are asked of me and what I write, and this I will do, if God permit". Bro. Adams, why did God not permit you to answer my questions? You made an effort to answer a few of them, but you overlooked so many of them. Here, I will mention a few of those you did not attempt to answer. In Mt. 28:19-20, did Jesus tell the Apostles to do something, and then not allow them to do what He told them to do? Did Jesus speak of Himself in (Mt. 28:19) or is this also a commandment His Father gave Him, what He should say, and what He should speak? Did Jesus sin in (Mt. 28:19) and speak something without God's permission, and God the Father, through the Holy Spirit, set Peter straight on the day of Pentecost in (Acts 2:38)? How could Peter be inspired to teach one thing on Pentecost and Matthew, about thirty-five years later, be inspired to teach the opposite, according to your doctrine? Did Peter practice (Mt. 28:19)? If he did not, was Jesus "with him alway even to the end of the world" (Mt. 18:20)? If Jesus did not authorize the baptism of (Mt. 28:19) in the church, where did He authorize it? When was His teaching followed? When did Peter and the other Apostles go teach all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost? Bro. Adams, the reason you did not answer those questions is, you cannot answer those questions and contend for a formula of words to be said when baptizing someone. If there is a formula of words to be said when baptizing someone in (Acts 2:38), then there is a formula of words to be said when baptizing someone in (Mt. 28:19). This is what you believe. Therefore, you believe the passages contradict one another. In both passages, we have the word of the Lord. It was the word of the Lord in Mt. 28:19. And since, "He that heareth you heareth me" (Lk. 10:16); it was the word of the Lord in Acts 2:38. Jesus would thus be contradicting Himself, if these passages contain a formula of words to be said when baptizing someone. By repetition, let me say again: The Bible tells us what to do when we baptize someone. It never tells us what to say when we baptize someone. The name of the Father, the name of the Holy Spirit, and the name of Christ is the same name. I do not mean by name title. I know the title name for the Father is Jehovah. I also know that the title name for the Son is Jesus. Name is not used as a title in (Mt. 28:19), or in (Acts 2:38). In both passages name is used in the since of authority, word, or doctrine. " There is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved " (Acts 4:12). The gospel of Christ is the power of God unto salvation (Rom. 1:16). This name that saves us, is the same as this gospel which saves us; because His name is called the word of God (Rev. 19:13).

On page one of bro. Adam's answer he says, "First allow me to say, within the Bible itself, there is no contradiction. Mr. Wiser says; 'If the Bible contradicts itself, then the Bible is not reliable.' Notice the way Mr. Wiser's mind is working as he says; 'Apparently bro. Robert Adams, of 4196 Hwy. 805, Jenkins, Ky. 41537, thinks it does'. Is not Mr. Wiser putting words into this writing by what he thinks other than by what he is actually reading?" No, bro. Adams, I am not putting words into your writing by what I think. I am going by what you are saying. Are you not insisting that only the words: "I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ" can and must be said, when baptizing someone? Are you not saying that if one says, "I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost" their baptism is no good, and they will be lost eternally, and cannot become a member of the true church of Christ? If this is not what you are saying, then please tell us plainly what you are saying. This is what you are saying, and all of your readers know it is. This means you make the Bible contradict itself. Therefore, you also contradict yourself, because you say, "within the Bible itself, there is no contradiction". Is Mt. 28:19 in the Bible? If it is, then I have a right to baptize people in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. I have the right to say what I am doing: therefore, when I baptize someone in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, I can say: I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. However, if I do this, bro. Adams will tell them they are going to hell, and are not members of the true church of Christ. Bro. Adams, you are going to have to do what Martin Luther did. Luther said the book of James is not a part of the inspired word of God, because he thought it contradicted what Paul wrote in Rom. 4. You will have to say Matthew does not belong in the Bible, because you think (Mt. 28:19) contradicts (Acts 2:38). Bro. Adams, are you saying Matthew does not belong in the Bible, when you say, "within the Bible itself, there is no contradiction"?

Again, on page 1 of his answer, bro. Adams says: "Mr. Wiser says, This is not a personal attack against him; and I agree, it is a personal attack against God, His Son Jesus Christ, the Spirit of God and every word that proceeded out of the mouth of the apostles concerning the birth of the Church which came by the words that Peter preached at Jerusalem, Acts 2:38-47". Don't you think it strange that a man would accuse someone of a personal attack against God, Christ and the Holy Spirit, when they insist that there is perfect agreement between all the persons who make up the God head, and there is no contradiction between what Jesus said in Mt. 28:19, and what Jesus said in Acts 2:38? Bro. Adams "thou art the man" that makes a personal attack upon God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit by arraying one against the other. The word of the Lord that went forth from Jerusalem, is no different from the word of the Lord that went forth from Galilee. The preacher that makes a difference in the word of the Lord that went forth from Galilee and the word of the Lord that went forth from Jerusalem is the man that makes a personal attack upon deity. "Thou art the man".

Again, on page 1 of his answer, bro. Adams says: "You will notice that the passages that I identified from the gospel in the Church about the power that was given to the apostles was not mentioned at length. I will mention them again for the benefit of those who will receive this booklet. Acts 15:24-28, Paul says, the commandment of circumcision by the Old Law as well as the commandment for baptism must come from us, the apostles". He then mentions I Thess. 4:1-3 and 2 Peter 3:1-2. He is trying to prove from these passages that the power and words came from the Apostles. No one denies this. What we object to is bro. Adams making a difference in what the Apostles taught and what Jesus Christ taught. We object to his personal attack upon Jesus Christ, by teaching that Jesus gave one formula of words to be said when baptizing someone, in Mt. 28:19; and Peter gave another formula of words to be said when baptizing someone, in Acts 2:38). He makes a personal attack upon Jesus Christ, by choosing the Apostles over Christ. He makes Peter contradict Christ, and he is going to choose Peter over Christ. Let me say again, there is no contradiction between Jesus in Mt. 28:19 and Peter in Acts 2:38. Both passages tell us what to do, and not what to say, when baptizing someone. If I baptize someone in the name of Jesus Christ, I baptize them in the name of the Father and the Holy Ghost, because their name, (doctrine) or (word), is the same. Bro. Adams, you are the one that makes a personal attack upon God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit.

On page two of his reply, bro. Adams says: "Here he is willing to bring me back into the baptism that was told to me twenty eight years ago as the man repeated in my baptism, 'I baptize you in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost for the remission of your sins,' of which I cannot find written just that way from the day the Church was opened to Israel at Jerusalem. What I do find written is: 'Repent, and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for remission of sin, and receive the gift of the Holy Ghost,' (Acts 2:38)". Here again, he makes (Mt. 28:19) contradict (Acts 2:38). He again, makes a personal attack upon our Savior Jesus Christ. Jesus told Peter, along with the rest of the Apostles in Galilee 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" (Mt. 28:19). According to him, Peter did not do what Jesus told him to do. Peter changed it in Jerusalem to "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" (Acts 2:38). Now bro. Adams tells us to discard what Jesus said in Galilee and take what Peter said in Jerusalem, and he thinks he proves it with (Acts 15:24-28; I Thess. 4:1-3; and 2 Pet. 3:1, 2). He has Jesus Christ teaching one thing in Galilee, and the Apostle Peter teaching something different in Jerusalem, and insist that we accept what Peter taught over what our Lord, who died for us, taught; and has the audacity to accuse me of making a personal attack upon God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit. Bro. Adams, "thou art the man".

I asked him, in my first tract, "How can a person make Matthew contradict Acts and not err from the truth"? On page 2 of his answer he says: "Let me answer by all of the truth presented from the Old and the New. First I will say the man that removes Matthew 28:19 from Acts 2:38 has just erred from the faith of Jesus Christ." Bro. Adams, "thou art the man". You have said we should go to the word of the Lord from Jerusalem, and not from Galilee. I have said there is no difference in the two passages. I have said when you baptize someone in the name of Jesus, you baptize them in the name of the Father and the Holy Ghost, because their name, (doctrine), (word), is one and the same (Acts 4:12; Rev. 19:13; Rom. 1:16). You then say, "This contradiction is not there by the will of God nor the Son, but by men in the later centuries who brought Matthew 28:19 across the Spirit of God by force, Matthew 28:19 not being inspired and revealed by the Holy Ghost to the apostles forfeits too many passages that are inspired of God and revealed by the Holy Ghost. For instance, Matthew 28:19 when taken out of the name of Jesus Christ and told to the people being baptized violates such passages as; Isaiah 2:2-3 and Micah 4:1-3. It violates what God spoke through these prophets because God said it would be the word that would go forth from Jerusalem." Bro. Adams, look at what you are saying. You admit plainly that there is a contradiction between Mt. 28:19 and Acts 2:38. You say it is a contradiction, but not by the will of God nor the Son, but by men in later centuries who brought Matthew 28:19 across the Spirit of God by force. Bro. Adams, if there is a contradiction, it is by the Will of God. It was God speaking in both passages (John 12:49; 2 Tim. 3:16, 17). Men have not brought Matthew 28:19 across the Spirit of God by force. The Spirit of God gave what Matthew wrote (I Tim. 3:16, 17). Jesus Christ spoke what Matthew by inspiration of the Holy Spirit wrote down. Look at what you are saying. You are saying Matthew 28:19 is not inspired and revealed by the Holy Ghost to the apostles. Yet, Matthew, one of the Apostles wrote it down. If Matthew was not inspired, then we should remove the book of Matthew from our Bibles. Are you going to accept Martin Luther's position after all? Do you believe the book of Matthew should be left in our Bibles, if it is not inspired. You not only say Matthew 28:19 is not inspired to the Apostles, but it "forfeits too many passages that are inspired of God and revealed by the Holy Ghost". You think it forfeits and violates what God said in Isa. 2 and Micah 4, since these prophets said the word of the Lord would go forth from Jerusalem. Bro. Adams, Mt. 28:19 does not violate, or forfeit, any other passage in all of the Bible. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God (2 Tim. 3:16, 17). The Bible does not contradict itself. Mt. 28:19 does not contradict Acts 2:38, because these passages say nothing about what is to be said when baptizing someone. They both tell us what is to be done when baptizing someone. You say, "Matthew 28:19 when taken out of the name of Jesus Christ and told to the people being baptized violates these passages". The only way Mt. 28:19 can be taken out of the name of Jesus Christ is to use it as a formula of words that must be said when baptizing, because Jesus did not tell the Apostles what to say when they baptized someone. He told them what to do, i.e. baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. This is the name, (word), of Jesus Christ (Rev. 19:13). When preachers teach Acts 2:38 is a formula of words to be said when baptizing someone, they take this passage out of the name (word) of Jesus Christ. (Rev. 19:13). You are the one that takes passages out of the name, (word), of Jesus Christ. (Rev. 19:13). Again, Bro. Adams "thou are the man".

On page 2 of his answer, he says: "It violates the purpose of the promise that Jesus promised to the disciples in John 14:26 and John 16:13, which would come from the apostles on the day of Pentecost at Jerusalem". No, Bro. Adams, your teaching violates Jno. 14:26 and Jno. 16:13. In Jno. 14:26 Jesus promised the Holy Spirit would "bring all things to your remembrance whatsoever I have said unto you". Mt. 28:19 is one of the last things Jesus said to the Apostles, which the Holy Spirit would bring to their remembrance. I challenge you to produce the verse of Scripture where Jesus told the Apostles to baptize in the name of Jesus Christ, during his personal ministry. What teaching of Jesus, during his personal ministry, was brought to the remembrance of Peter on the day of Pentecost? You are saying that it was "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost". You think this is a formula of words to be said. Now 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. You are also claiming that Peter was being guided into all truth (Jno. 16:13) on the day of Pentecost, and since he never said be baptized into the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost that this is not truth, for baptizing people. If it is not truth for baptizing people, then Jesus, who is the truth, (Jno. 14:6) did not speak the truth, when he told Peter and the other Apostles 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). If Jesus did not speak the truth, then He spake a lie. Bro. Adams, if a man's position forces him to accuse the Son of God of lying, his position has to be a lie and not the truth. I beg you to "repent of this thy wickedness and pray God if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee".

Bro. Adams says: "Matthew 28:19 violates John 17:20". He mentions specifically where Jesus says, "through their word", talking of the word of the Apostles. Isn't it terrible that he makes the word of the Apostles differ from the word of Christ, and insist that we take the word of the Apostles over the word of Christ??? Some people won't accept what the Bible says unless it is written in red letters, i.e. the personal word of Christ. They don't realize that it is all the word of Christ. The doctrine of Christ, and the "Apostles doctrine" is one and the same. Bro. Adams won't take it unless it is all in black, i.e. the word of the Apostles. If Jesus personally says it, he won't have it. What a shame it is when men reject the word of Christ. What a shame it is when men make the Apostles contradict what Jesus says, and then accept the word of the Apostles over the Son of God. Shame on you, bro. Adams.

He says, "The Father and the Son have agreed upon a name that will save all of the world, it must only be believed in your heart" (Page 2). Bro. Adams, I agree with what you say here. I do not agree with what you mean by it. The Father and the Son have agreed that in the name of Christ is their salvation, because there is none other name, (Gospel), (Word), among men whereby we must be saved (Acts 4:12; Rom. 1:16; Rev. 19:13). What you mean by this statement is: there is no other formula of words that can be said, when one baptizes you, than the words, I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins. According to you, if these words are not said the person is not saved. According to you, these words were not said when you were baptized 28 years ago. Have you been baptized again? Did they say the right words the last time? Which words did they say? Did they say, I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins? Or did they say, I baptize you in the name of the Lord? Or did they say, I baptize you in the name of the Lord Jesus? If these are formulas of words to be said, which formula did they use? All of these passages tell us what to do when being baptized, or when baptizing someone. You insist that Acts 2:38 is a formula of words to be said. If so, why would not Acts 8:16; Acts 19:5; and Acts 10:48 be a formula of words to be said? If so, which formula do you use? The truth is, every passages tells us what to do and none tell us what to say.

He says on page 3 of his answer: "The only way there cannot be a contradiction is for the name of Jesus Christ to be upheld in baptism, the same that is preached in the Church". Bro. Adams, what you say here is absolutely the truth. What you mean by what you say is not the truth. The truth is, to uphold the name of Christ in baptism, is to uphold His word in baptism, because His name is the word of God (Rev. 19:13). If you follow the teaching of His word and baptize people who have been properly taught, and have repented of their sins, and confessed their faith that Jesus is the Son of God, and you baptize them for the remission of their sins, it is in the name (word) of Jesus Christ, whether you say anything or not. If you baptize them this way, you will baptize them into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, whether you say anything or not. If they have been taught error, and confess that God for Christ sake has pardoned their sins, and you baptize them because they are already saved, it is not in the name of Jesus Christ, no matter how much you say it is. Neither is it in the name of the Father and Holy Ghost. Now, what you mean by upholding the name of Jesus Christ in baptism, is for the preacher to say I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ. This position does result in a contradiction between Mt. 28:19 and Acts 2:38. I am the one who upholds the name of Jesus Christ in baptism. You are the one who adds to the word of God by insisting the Bible tells you what to say when baptizing someone, when all it does is tell you what to do when baptizing someone.

On page 3 of your answer you say: "I will say this, not everybody has the problem of contradicting the word of God, only those men who have become responsible for bringing Matthew 28:19 into the Church after the church had already been established for approximately thirty five years". No, bro. Adams, you are the one that has the problem of contradicting the word of God, because you make Mt. 28:19 contradict Acts 2:38. This statement shows that bro. Adams does not believe what Jesus taught in Mt. 28:19 was brought into the church until 35 years after the church was established. He argues this, because the book of Matthew was not written, he thinks, until 35 years after the church was established. Let's examine the consequences of his reasoning. If Mt. 28:19 was not brought into the church until 35 years after the church was established, because the book of Matthew was not written until 35 years after it was established, then none of the teaching of Christ in the book of Matthew was brought into the church until 35 years after the church was established. The church never knew anything about the teaching of Christ in the sermon on the mount until 35 years after it was established. It was 35 years after the church was established before a brother knew that if his brother trespassed against him, he was to go show him his fault, and then take one or two more, and finally tell it to the church (Mt. 18:15-18). The same thing would be true of the teaching of Christ in Mark, Luke, and John, because those books were written too, years after the church was established. This would mean the Holy Spirit did not bring anything to the remembrance of the Apostles that He had taught them during His personal ministry, until years after the church was established, as He promised to do in John 14:26. The Spirit did not guide the Apostles into all truth (Jno. 16:13) until after at least one of the Apostles was dead (Acts 12:2).. The books of first and second Thessalonians were the first books written. The Apostle James was dead before either of these books were written. This is the consequences of bro. Adam's argument, that the teaching of Jesus in Mt. 28:19 did not come into the church until 35 years after the church was established. The truth is, bro. Adams, would never have allowed the teaching of Jesus in Mt. 28:19 to enter the church. I know of some more preachers who would like to get rid of some more of the word of Christ. Shame, shame, shame on you.

On page 3 of his answer he tells us about his statement that Jesus did not give men access to Mt. 28:19. He then refers to my statement "If he did not give men access to it, then men have no right to use it." To this he replies: "Mr. Wiser has spoken more truth in this statement even, though he does not realize what he has just said. Why men have no right to use Matthew 28:19 is because Jesus chose not to reveal it by the Spirit". Bro. Adams I realize perfectly what I have said. I also realize perfectly what you have said. You are saying men have no right to use a part of the inspired word of God. Instructions which Jesus Christ, the Son of God gave to the Apostles with a promise that if they would follow these instructions He would be with them until the end of the world (Mt. 28:19, 20). I think Bro. Adams does not realize what he is saying. Bro. Adams is saying Jesus chose not to reveal Mt. 28:19 by His Spirit. Now we know that at least part of the Bible is not inspired. Jesus chose not to reveal it by His Spirit, and yet there it is in plain view. Jesus chose not to reveal it, and yet it slipped out through the pen of Matthew some 35 years after the church was established. Jesus chose not to reveal it, and yet Matthew, in spite of Jesus, revealed it. Jesus told his Apostles a few days before He ascended back to Heaven to go baptize people whom they taught in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, but he did not intend to reveal this to them, and He did not intend for them to do what He told them, and He never intended for Matthew to write it down in the Scriptures, but Matthew wrote it down in spite of Jesus, and now we have it, and poor bro. Adams, he sure wishes it never had slipped out, but it did. Shame, shame, shame. He says, "When men choose to use Matthew 28:19, by their knowledge they do not realize what they have done to the law of the prophets and to the words of our Lord as He was preparing to ascend back to the Father, (Luke 24:47)" Isn't it a shame. Our Lord Jesus Christ did not know what he was doing to the law of the prophets when he gave these instructions to the Apostles in Mt. 28:19. It is a shame Robert Adams was not there to straighten the Lord out. He could have told the Lord what he is telling us. He could have told the Lord, that He would change his mind by the time He got back to Jerusalem, ready to ascend back to Heaven. Bro. Adams, shame, shame on you.

On page 3 he says: "As surely as you have preached the name of Jesus Christ for baptism and remission of sins, just as surely you will complete that baptism by upholding the name you have preached."Bro. Adams, that is exactly what I do. I preach the name (doctrine), (word) of Christ. By doing so, I preach that men should be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. I then baptize men in the name of Christ. I do not preach that the baptizer must say, I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ. Neither did the Apostle Peter. Peter told them what to do. He gave no instructions, to those doing the baptizing, about what to say.

Bro. Adams doesn't like my bringing in Martin Luther in our discussion. He says, "Martin Luther will enter into the Kingdom of God before you". Of course he was talking about me. Bro. Adams, I was baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Why didn't I enter into the Kingdom of God? Luther was not baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. His teaching proves it. He says, "he and what he might have believed means nothing to me". Bro. Adams, it means something to me. What you believe matters to me. There was a reason for bringing Martin Luther up in our discussion. Bro. Adams, you know what that reason was. You know I told you that Martin Luther solved his problem, a problem of being unable to harmonize the book of James with the book of Romans, by saying the book of James was not inspired and should not be in the Bible. You have a problem of being unable to harmonize Acts 2:38 with Mt. 28:19. I ask you if you would do what Martin Luther did? You did not answer my question. I think you have done exactly what Martin Luther did. I think you are saying Mt. 28:19 was not inspired and ought not to be in the Bible. I think we have proved that by your statements. On page 4 you say, "I will never tell you nor anyone that any part of the inspiration of God should not be in the Bible, but I will tell you by the inspiration of God that you are wrong to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost for remission of sins and to add another to the Lord's church". Yes, bro. Adams, we have just gotten through quoting you that Jesus did not give men access to Mt. 28:19, that Jesus chose not to reveal it by the Holy Spirit. Therefore, if Christ did not give us access to it and Jesus chose not to reveal it by the Holy Spirit, then it is not inspired and should not be in the Bible. If not, pray tell us why not. If I am wrong to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost for remission of sins, then Mt. 28:19, where Jesus told the Apostles to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost should not be in the Bible. Jesus told the Apostles to do that which bro. Adams says is wrong. Jesus plainly told the Apostles to go teach and baptize them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and bro. Adams says that is wrong. There is something desperately wrong with a man that will tell you if you do what the Son of God told you to do, that it is wrong, thus sinful. Shame, shame on you. Now, bro. Adams, I do not add men to the church when I baptize them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. When I baptize people in the name of Christ, the Lord adds them to the church (Acts 2:47).

On page 4 of his answer he says, "I will take this space to write out a number of things that Mr. Wiser has said in relation to Matthew 28:19. 'Bro. Adams, what about the rest of the book of Matthew? Is there anything else in the book of Matthew Jesus did not give us access to? By what authority do you have to tell us Jesus did not give us access to Mt. 28:19? Was it not Jesus who gave Matthew 28:19? If Jesus will not allow us to use Matthew 28:19, then pray tell us Bro. Adams, who can use Matthew 28:19? Do you mean Jesus told the Apostles to "go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost", 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???' Instead of Bro. Adams answering those questions, he says, "This saddens me". Bro. Adams, is that the best you can do? It saddens you, because you can't answer the questions and continue to teach what you are teaching. It saddens me that you won't accept the truth. You then say,"It is even sadder that people who do not have the ability to search the gospel for themselves must rely upon men of this nature to guide them in a way that seemeth to be right, but the end thereof are the ways of death". Bro. Adams, it saddens me that a preacher will tell people that if they follow the instructions of Jesus Christ in Mt. 28:19 that they are traveling a way that seemeth to be right, but the end thereof are the ways of death". It saddens me that a preacher will tell people that the instructions of Jesus Christ leads to eternal death in hell. This truly saddens me. It saddens me that a preacher would tell me that I preach what Jesus said because of admiration of men. This means that Jesus taught what he taught in Mt. 28:19 for admiration of men. This truly saddens me. This truly is a fearful thing. On page 4 of his reply, he quotes some more of the questions, which I asked him, and which he did not answer, and then said: "what I read further almost makes me sick to see how a man will use the very Scriptures that God inspired to save him, how he by no ability to understand, has defied the only name given under heaven for his baptism into the church. This man and others like him has become a joke within himself by what he has written. I see no knowledge of God in what this man has written in response to the bulletin of July 10, 2000". Bro. Adams, why did you not answer my questions? I would be sick too, if I charged Jesus Christ of being a joke, and having no knowledge of God. I just simply taught what Jesus told the Apostles to do. If that makes me a joke and have no knowledge of God, then that makes Jesus a joke and have no knowledge of God. I have not defied the name of Christ. I was baptized in the name of Christ (Acts 2:38). You are the one that has defied the name of Christ. You attribute to the name of Christ a formula of words to be said when baptizing someone. Acts 2:38 does not tell us what to say, when baptizing someone. Acts 2:38 tells us what to do when baptizing someone. You are the one who defies the name (word) of Christ (Rev. 19:13).

On page 5 of his answer he says, "Because of Matthew 28:19 having been indoctrinated into the mind through many years by the doctrines of men, men cannot come to the glorious light of the gospel that the name of Jesus Christ has made possible to us". Bro. Adams talks about things that make him sick and saddens him. When any person will teach that Jesus Christ was teaching the doctrines of men, this should sadden us all, and make us all sick. Mt. 28:19 is the doctrine of Christ. Mt. 28:19 is not the doctrine of men. We need to be indoctrinated with the teaching of Christ. How can he say that Jesus Christ, who is the light of the world (John 3:19-21), and the light of the glorious gospel of Jesus Christ, which Jesus taught in Mt. 28:19 will keep men from the glorious light of the gospel. Bro. Adams, this is blasphemy.

At the bottom of page 5 in his answer, he says: "The commission from Galilee will condemn every man, woman and child who is capable of reading and searching the Scriptures unless this commission is returned to Acts 2:38". Bro. Adams the commission from Galilee was given by Jesus Christ. Bro. Adams believes the commission of Jesus Christ will condemn ever man, woman, and child, who is accountable. He says, "unless this commission is returned to Acts 2:38." Bro. Adams, there is no way you can return Mt. 28:19 to Acts 2:38. This is all nonsense talk. With your understanding of the two passages, there is no way you can harmonize the two, or return one to the other. You teach there is a formula of words to be said in Acts 2:38. You reject Mt. 28:19 because you think this is also a formula of words to be said when baptizing. There is no way you can use both passages with that misunderstanding you have. They contradict one another, as you understand the passages. This is why you say Mt. 28:19 will condemn every man, woman and child. There is no way you can harmonize the two, or return one to the other, with your interpretation. If you will open your eyes and see that Jesus and Peter are telling us what to do and not what to say, then you can understand that both passages stand and are in perfect harmony with each other. They are compatible and we don't need to get rid of either one. And certainly Mt. 28:19 will not condemn any man.

On page 6 of his answer he says: "When you separate the Father, Son and Holy Ghost from the name of Jesus Christ you have broken the will of God through the prophets, you have broken the will of God as Jesus told the disciples about the promise of the Comforter, and you have broken the will of the Father by not receiving the apostles whom Jesus sent to tell you what you must do." Bro. Adams, again "thou art the man". I am not guilty. I do not believe there is any difference in Mt. 28:19 and Acts 2:38. You are the one that believes these passages contradict one another, thus you are the one that does the separating. In fact, you not only separate them, but you reject the one in Mt. 28:19 and teach people will be lost who follow what Jesus said.

On page 6 he says, "But now we must try to help Mr. Wiser to understand about the Jesus Only Doctrine. It is no wonder that men such as I am reading after are on a destruction course with no desire to know what they must do. Mr. Wiser says, because I write the truth about the name of Jesus Christ in baptism for the remission of sins, (indicates that I believe the same thing,) Jesus Only' people believe"Bro. Adams I am not saying you believe the same thing "Jesus only" people believe about the God head. You know that, and all of our readers know that. You know, I know, and all who have read your articles know that you believe the same thing "Jesus only" people believe about a formula of words to be said when baptizing someone. I have debated several of them. They make exactly the same arguments you make about Acts 2:38 and Mt. 28:19. I have asked them some of the same questions I have asked you. They do just exactly what you do. They ignore my questions and go right back to Acts 2:38, perverting the passage, and insisting that Peter is telling the people what must be said when baptizing someone, and not what must be done when baptizing someone. They make Acts 2:38 contradict Mt. 28:19, just like you do. You don't need to make me understand, because I understand perfectly what you and the "Jesus only" people are teaching, when you use Acts 2:38.

On down further on page 6 he says, "I wonder if Mr. Wiser and his friends would be offended if I asked them if there is a formula for what is preached for the remission of sins? A formula is a group of words that are fixed, that cannot be changed by God or by man, what is that formula? Isn't it Acts 2:38?" No, Bro. Adams, I am not offended at your question. I am not even offended about all the things you have said about me. I am not even offended that you call me a hypocrite, no desire to know the truth, etc. etc. Now, let me answer your question. No, there is not a formula of words to be said when preaching the gospel of Christ for the remission of sins. You are right in your definition of formula, i.e. "A group of words that are fixed, that cannot be changed by God or by man". Peter said: "If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God" (I Pet. 4:11). A man can speak as the oracles of God without using a fixed group of words that cannot be changed. Men did exactly that when they preached the gospel of Christ. Men did exactly that when they told men how to be saved, or how to receive the remission of their sins. Jesus said: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved" (Mk. 16:16). Peter said: "Repent and be baptized, in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" (Acts 2:38). Peter said: "Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord" (Acts 3:19). Peter is saying exactly the same thing in both of these passages. " Converted" being the same thing as "be baptized", and "times of refreshing..from the presence of the Lord", being the same thing as: "Ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost". In both passages Peter is telling men what to do, and not what to say. There is no formula of words to tell them what to do, neither is there any formula of words to tell them what to say. Peter said: "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us ( not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (I Pet. 3:21). Many other passages can be cited, but this is enough to show there is "no fixed group of words to be said" when telling people what they should do for the remission of their sins.

There is no fixed group of words to be said when telling people to be baptized. Look at the following passages, where people are told to be baptized. "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" (Acts 2:38). "Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord" (Acts 3:19). "Only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus" (Acts 8:16). "And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord" (Acts 10:48). "When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus" (Acts 19:5). Bro. Adams, which one of these passages contain a "group of words that are fixed, that cannot be changed by God or by man", that are to be said, when baptizing someone??? In fact, none of these passages tell you what to say. They all tell you what to do, or what was done when being baptized, or baptizing someone. Bro. Adams, even a disoriented person, who is a hypocrite, and has no desire to see the truth; is smart enough, and honest enough, to see you are adding to the word of God, when you teach a baptismal formula. This is where you agree with the "Jesus Only" people.

On page 7 of his answer, he says: I see you have mentioned Colossians 3:17, and that is a very good passage to memorize. It tells you the right things to do, and how to do them. Colossians 3:17 is about baptism, that is a deed you will do in the name of the Lord Jesus". Yes, it is a deed you do in name of the Lord Jesus. But you don't have to say you are doing it in the name of the Lord Jesus, in order to do it in the name of the Lord Jesus. Bro. Adams, it is not only a good passage to memorize. It is also a good passage to obey. Colossians is not only a passage about baptism, that is a deed you will do in the name of the Lord Jesus; but it also includes everything you do and everything you say. The following is a list of passages talking about things we do in the name of Christ. Bro. Adams, does one have to say he does these things in the name of Christ, in order to do them in the name of Christ??? Please answer this question! "Whosoever receiveth one of such children in my name receiveth me" (Mk. 9:37). "Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name" (Mk. 9:38). "There is no one who can do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me" (Mk. 9:39). "For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name" (Mk. 9:41). "Whatsoever ye shall ask in my name that will I do" (Jno. 14:13). "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name" Jno. 14:26. "Commanded them not to speak at all, nor teach in this name (Acts 4:18). "And he spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus" (Acts 9:29) "In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ....deliver such a one unto Satan" (I Cor. 5:4, 5). "Now we command you brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly.." (2 Th. 3:6). There are many other passages that could be given. The point is, we can do all of these things in the name of Christ, without saying we are doing them in the name of Christ. We can baptize someone in the name of Christ, without saying, I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ.

On page 8 of his answer he says, "Mr Wiser says, I have pointed out that being baptized in the name of Jesus Christ in Acts 2:38 means by His authority, word, or doctrine, and you have pointed out nothing of importance. You are applying the name of Jesus Christ as meaning by the authority of. The name of Jesus Christ is the authority, without the name of Jesus Christ in baptism, you have nothing whereof that will forgive your sins. The one thing we differ in is: you believe the words of Jesus literally spoken at Matthew 28:19 before the church was established to be of the same power of the words that established the church." Bro. Adams agrees that "in the name of" in Acts 2:38 means by His authority, word, or doctrine, but says that is nothing of importance. He then says, the name of Jesus Christ is the authority. You are right, there is no other name, authority, by which we can be saved (Acts 4:12). No, bro. Adams, the one thing we differ in is you think the literal words of Jesus and Peter are formulas of words to be said, when baptizing, and that the two passages contradict one another. This is what we differ in. I believe in both passages we are told what to do, and not what to say. This is the one point of our difference.

Windell Wiser
16334 Evans Rd.
Athens, Al. 35611

Back To Truth And Error Page