Last time, of course, we've been going through the doctrine of soteriology, the doctrine of salvation. Last time, we continued showing that the Bible clearly does not teach that salvation is by works. Again, God's grace is the sole determining factor on whether one is saved or not. Then we ended last time by, as we said, kinda going down a rabbit trail, but we're gonna be somewhat thorough in chasing this rabbit, by starting to look at the work of baptism, as there are many who believe that one is saved by being baptized, at least in part, or that being baptized is part of the saving process. And we showed last time we ended by showing the purpose of baptism. Baptism is for the purpose of picturing what does save us. It pictures the death, the burial, and the resurrection of Jesus Christ. And that is what saves us. That's the gospel. It pictures the change that takes place in a convert's life in that we are by by the working of the Spirit we are raised to newness of life where we can now serve the Lord. And it pictures the future resurrection that will take place at the coming of our Lord and so shall we be with the Lord at that time. Today we want to look at some scriptures that many pervert to fit their line of thinking and my intention in this is to to go really through all at least the verses that I'm aware of that they use in order to try to supposedly prove that one is saved through baptism in some way. Now we know that there are so-called churches that believe one must be baptized in order to be saved. There is no scriptural warrant for this belief. However, these so-called churches do look to a few select scriptures that they will say prove their unfounded doctrine. That is, again, that's what we want to look at the next few lessons. Now, they are not the only ones who believe this, but probably the biggest proponents of this belief, especially in our area, are the Campbellites, the Church of Christ. So with that, much of what we may look at in some degree will be refuting their teachings and their beliefs. And I believe we'll reveal the Church of Christ not to be a church at all, but really, in fact, a cult, much like that of the Catholics or the Jehovah's Witnesses or the Mormons. First of all, the history of the Campbellites itself reveals them to be a false church. They claim that the church was started on Pentecost, which is wrong in and of itself. But here's the problem. Outside of some of their beliefs being reminiscent of Catholic teachings, you find no such body of believers that hold to the doctrines of the Church of Christ until the early 1800s. with Thomas Campbell and to a greater degree, his son Alexander. The Campbells claim that with their water Christianity, that they were restoring true Christianity. In fact, in 1835, Alexander Campbell wrote a book called Christianity Restored, in which he says the following, not until within the present generation, so it had been his generation, Did any sect or party in Christendom unite and build upon the Bible alone? Since that time, the first effort known to us to abandon the whole controversy about creeds and reformations and restore primitive Christianity or build alone upon the apostles, Jesus Christ himself, the chief coroner, has been made. In that same book, he would go on to write, a few individuals about the commencement of the present century began to reflect upon the ways and means to restore primitive Christianity. So right from the get-go, the Campbellite church proves itself to be false. Because for them to be true, then you have about a 1,700-year window without a true church of our Lord. And Christ promised that the gates of hell shall not prevail against his church. And the Bible, I believe, clearly shows that there will continue from the time of Christ, he sets his church, that from that time until he comes, that the church will be on this earth. Therefore, they cannot be a church of Christ, even though their name claims them to be. With that being said, this supposed restoration of primitive Christianity brought about the doctrine of, or at least the pushing the doctrine of water salvation. And just in case you think that the term water salvation is not accurate, let's hear a few more words from Alexander Campbell himself. Again, from the book Christianity Restored, By Alexander Campbell, he wrote, he has given it an extension far and wide as sin has spread far and wide as water flows wherever water faith in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are. There will be found the efficacy of the blood of Jesus. Yes, as God first gave the efficacy of water to blood, he has now given the efficacy of blood to water. He goes on to say, I am bold, therefore, to affirm that every one of them who in the belief or what the apostle spoke was immersed did in the very instant in which he was put underwater receive the forgiveness of his sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit. If so, then who will not concur with me in saying that Christian immersion is the gospel in water? Furthermore, Alexander Campbell wrote, I assert that there is but one action ordained or commanded in the New Testament to which God has promised or testified that he will forgive our sins. This action is Christian immersion. This is the Father of your modern Church of Christ. And it is clear by His statements that the Church of Christ's belief that according to them it is water that saves and cleanses them from sin, not the blood of Jesus Christ. Now how can they believe this? Well, they would have us to believe that it's based on the Word of God. And so, again, we want to examine these supposed water salvation scriptures and see if there is any basis to the doctrine that they hold concerning water baptism. The first we want to look at is John 3. Well, we'll start in verse 3. Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus said unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter the second time into his mother's womb and be born? Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, He cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh and that which is born of the spirit is spirit. Now the Campbellites and proponents of water salvation will tell you that the phrase born of water in verse 5 is in reference to baptism. They claim that baptism and born of water are one and the same thing. The only thing that they can cling to, however, is that word water to support that claim. However, this is ridiculous to make the word water synonymous with baptism is borderline insane. When you start examining the use of the word water in scripture, just the very next chapter, look at chapter four, look at verse 13. Verse 13, Jesus answered and said unto her, whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again, but whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst, but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life. Now surely no one would ever mistake the use of the word water in this portion of Scripture as being in reference to baptism. To do that means that we are to drink baptism. And this makes absolutely no sense at all. The only meaning that could ever really intelligently be taken from this verse is that water is used figuratively to represent the spirit of our Lord. One could object and say, I guess, and say that, you know, Christ was talking about drinking and baptism is never spoken of as drinking. Well, baptism is also never spoken as being a new birth either. So to make born of water to mean baptism is a baseless assumption. So one might ask then, well, what does this born of water refer to? Now what does it mean? Now, you know, I've heard some say, and honestly, I used to believe this as well, that this born of water means one must be born physically. So in other words, the scripture would basically read this, except a man be born physically and spiritually, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. While I can kind of see how one could come to that conclusion when they look at verse six that says, that which is born of flesh is flesh, and that which is born of spirit is spirit, I believe that that is an incorrect understanding of the text here, and I want to explain why. First off, before we go to a couple scriptures, to try to make the point that one must be born physically really seems too absurd even to mention. Why would that point even need to be made? You don't have a person without physical life being given anyway, so of course one must be born physically. Of course one must have physical life before they could ever have the chance to enter the kingdom of God. So to make the words born of water to mean physical birth, I think is to say that, or at least in my mind, that the Lord was using some vain words here. Words that really serve no purpose of being spoken at all. If I'm right about that, then what does this phrase, born of water, mean? I contend that this has direct reference to the word of God's place in the salvation of one's soul. Ephesians chapter 5. Ephesians chapter 5. Verse 25, Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word. that he might present it to himself, a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that it should be holy and without blemish." Notice how sanctification and cleansing comes by the washing of water by the Word. Again, this water could not be baptism because it's speaking of God's Word, not physical water. The washing of water by the Word. And then I think probably the most convincing is 1 Peter chapter 1. 1 Peter chapter 1 verse 22 and 23. As we read this, notice the connection between what is said here and what we read over in John chapter 3. But 1 Peter 1.22 says, Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently. Look at this, being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible by the Word of God, which liveth and abideth forever." Notice that like John 3, the context here is what? Being born again. So immediately we see a clear relationship, I believe, between 1 Peter 1 and John 3. So according to 1 Peter 1, what is used in one being born again? The Word of God. And when you see here in John 3, the connection is the Word of God with the working of the Spirit. And we know that either Immediately previous or simultaneously, somehow, the Spirit works in a soul and immediately that person believes the Lord uses the Word to cause them to repent of their sins and put their faith and trust in Jesus Christ. The Spirit causes one to be born again and in connection with the Word they are saved. For one to be born again, the Word of God in connection with the working of the Spirit is necessary. So being born of water and being born of the Spirit are both referring to being born again. In other words, the preaching of the Word as shown throughout Scripture is a means used by the Holy Spirit to quicken one unto salvation. One must be washed by the washing of the Word, the water of the Word. And I believe that this is the proper understanding of John chapter 3 and verse 5. Nevertheless, it takes a real destroyer of Scripture to make this to refer to baptism. Baptism has no relationship whatsoever to this portion of Scripture in John chapter 3. You cannot teach anything about water baptism by looking at this verse, let alone water salvation. Next portion of Scripture Mark Chapter 16. This one and acts 238 are really their their crown jewels. But Mark. 16 The camp of the crown jewels of the Campbellite church that is. Mark 16, and well, we'll start in verse 14, but we bring you here for verse 16. Afterward, He appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen Him after He was risen. And He said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned. Again, of course, the Campbellite, the Church of Christ, would say that baptism is essential to salvation, and they will say that it is proven by this verse 16, Mark 16, verse 16. Again, it and Acts 2.38 are their pet verses. However, it is impossible to prove baptismal regeneration by this verse. First off, let me state this. I believe this verse to be the inspired word of God wholeheartedly. And it states an absolute truth. However, Campbellites and those who believe in water salvation make this verse to say something that it actually does not say. The portion of this verse that mentions baptism is a positive statement. Positive statements do not tell you as much as negative statements do. Positive statements do not reveal essentials. It seems like I may have used this example here before, but if I say to you that I'll take $5 for my Bible, that doesn't necessarily mean that I won't take less than $5. Now, it could mean that, but for me to know that for sure, I would need more information. However, if I say, I will not take less than $5 for my Bible, then based on that statement, then at that point, the $5 is proven to be essential for you to buy my Bible. I hope that kind of is clear and you see what I'm trying to say there. With that in mind, let's examine this verse a little closer. What is this verse actually telling us? First part of it says, he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. And they really, when they read it, they really like to emphasize that word baptized. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. What does that tell us? That phrase tells us that the baptized believer shall be saved. That's all well and good. There's nothing wrong with that statement. That is according to the word of God. That's true. Then the last phrase, but he that believeth not shall be damned. What does that tell us? That tells us that the unbeliever shall be damned. But what about the unbaptized believer? Where is he in this verse? He's nowhere to be found. He's not mentioned in this verse. You cannot tell what the eternal state of the unbaptized believer is from this verse. Because the unbaptized believer is not mentioned in this verse. I contend that the unbaptized believer will also be saved. You must, by necessity, go somewhere else to prove that baptism is essential for salvation or that the unbaptized believer is damned, because you cannot prove that at all from Mark 16 and verse 16. And for the record, nowhere in the Bible does it declare damnation upon those that are unbaptized. Search high and low in this book but you will not find it. I like what J. H. Grimes said. Wasn't it J. H. Grimes that called Campbellites water dogs? I think it was him. But I like what J. H. Grimes said. If the unimmersed are lost, then hell is full of pious believers in Christ. And that would be true, wouldn't it? All the Old Testament saints would be there. The thief on the cross, he'd be there. All those that, and I'm not a big proponent of death, bed, salvation, but I'm sure that it's probably, I mean, it happened in the case of the thief on the cross, so I'm sure it probably has happened since then at times, but probably not as often as many like to think. But all those that have believed on their deathbed or who were saved without any opportunity to be baptized, all are in hell. Baptism is essential for salvation. Now concerning Old Testament saints and the thief on the cross, they do have a supposed explanation for that. I think it's a foolish one. Lord willing, we'll get into that later. But thankfully, baptism is not essential for salvation. Thankfully, it is actually the blood of Jesus Christ, not water that cleanses us from all sin. If it was water, then Christ is no longer our mediator. that the one who puts us under the water is. And that doesn't jive with Scripture and it shouldn't jive with us. Thankfully, salvation is by grace and grace alone. I think we probably should stop there. I pray that the Lord has blessed what has been said today and that it may have been a blessing to those that were here.