Leroy Garrett, Alexander Campbell: Saved by Faith?

No. Leroy Garrett: Alexander Campbell said that "No relation can be changed by believing, apart from the acts to which that belief, or faith, induces us" Martin Luther said the same thing, quoted below.

See the Stone Campbell "unity" movement debunked as POOR HISTORY.

See Leroy Garrett on the Restoration Movement

See the Stone Campbell Movement as new SECTARIANS.

See how Max Lucado follows the leader in distorting Campbell....And Baptism JUST a pledge of salvation by Faith Only

Jesus said that without being born AGAIN of Water and Spirit or Water and the Word you CANNOT, SHALL NOT enter into His kingdom or rule which is the Ekklesia or Christian synagogue or school of the Bible. 

The seven "spirits" of Isaiah 11:1-4 which would rest on the BRANCH are all related to forms of spiritual knowledge. Jesus said "My Words are Spirit and Life." Therefore, you might join a venue for Rock and Roll peddled as "worship" but Jesus Christ WILL NOT be your free-of-charge Teacher until He washes your spirit or mind. Only then do you have access to the seven spirits represented by the Menorah or Candlestick which gave LIGHT to the Holy Place along with the table of bread and the incense altar. Each Christian "priest" must look into the Most Holy Place with their own prayers. Then, you can enter into the Most Holy Place to meet God. Jesus said that the ONLY new PLACE is the human spirit as it gives heed to the Spirit of Truth through the Word. Don't believe the lie that "musical teams" lead you into the presence of God: that makes them claim to be God standing in the Holy Place. Not in the vilest pagan temple could singers and musicians enter into the holy precincts on the penalty of death. Don't follow people making "Christianity" viler than paganism. If you are part of the 5 out of 13,000 congregations then you have become a laughing stock just like the musical idolatrs at Mount Sinai which forfeited and continues to forfeit the Covenant of Grace.

People who refute this have a "spirit" which intends to hurt you real bad.

On the one hand, Alexander Campbell is denounced for teaching baptismal regeneration. On this hand, we have Alexander Campbell claiming (?) that we are saved by faith. Our review or other quotations in Black and blue as we review Leroy Garrett on baptism for remission of sins. When large bands of people believe what is not true we are called upon to set the record straight.

Whatever Alexander Campbell might have said at one time must be understood by what he ultimately believed. For instance, Baptists claim Alexander Campbell as their own. However, Campbell claimed that his views changed as he saw the Biblical church unfold. Click for his Baptist views.

BAPTISM FOR REMISSION OF SINS -- IN A SENSE

Well, not too straighforward for people to claim, as Leroy apparently believes, that "for" means "because of." That is, we are baptized because we are already saved by faith only. This was the UNIVERSAL understanding of baptism as proven by the Church Fathers until Zwingli invented FAITH ONLY in the year 1525. Zwingli claimed that NONE OF THE DOCTORS who lived before him (B.Z.) had ever understood "faith only." Martin Luther who used the term Sola Fide agreed that Zwingli INVENTED the idea and repudiated it. John Calvin calls the idea INSANE.

Martin Luther

John Calvin

And EVERYONE contrary to the untruth about churches of Christ.

No, we absolutely had no trouble. Only people who hate baptism have trouble.

Look at this one:

By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 1Co.15:2

Now, just remembering a sermon TO BE SAVED sounds like Leroy Garrett on Acts 16:31. Or how about JUST SPEAKING to save people?

Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost. 1Th.2:16

Or how about:

And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life. Jn.5:40

Let's look at the whole story:

And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? Acts 16:30

And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. Acts 16:31

Now, Leroy would have you believe that this is the terminus of the process. However, believe is more than an intellectual assent to facts: it is putting your trust in someone. It is the Greek:

Pisteuo (g4100) pist-yoo'-o; from 4102; to have faith (in, upon, or with respect to, a person or thing), i.e. credit; by impl. to entrust (espec. one's spiritual well-being to Christ): - believe (-r), commit (to trust), put in trust with.

My father used to say, "I believe in the Boing 747 but I just don't believe on the 747." See the difference? He believed that the plane existed but he wouldn't trust his life upon it. To get to the destination you have to believe in the plane and you have to put yourself into the airplane. In the same way, you have to believe in Jesus, but Paul in Galatians 3:27 said that we are baptized into Christ.

So, Paul knowing that "faith comes by hearing the words of Christ" began to preach the 'gospel' of salvation to him:

And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house. Acts 16:32

Notice that this is not the"core gospel" of "just the facts about" Jesus. Rather, to be faithful Paul had to preach the word of the Lord. The question was, "What must I do to be saved?" The word of the Lord was:

And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. Mark 16:15

He that believeth and is baptized shall be (future tense) saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. Mark 16:16

John was looking backward and recording the events of the life of Christ.

John 3:36 has some preamble with which to harmonize and make sense:

He that hath received his testimony hath set to his seal that God is true. John 3:33

For he whom God hath sent

speaketh the words of God: for God
giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him. John 3:34 (Words = spirit John 6:63)

The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand. John 3:35

John didn't say: "He that believeth shall receive everlasting life" because he is looking backward. Rather, he wrote:

He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life:
and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. John 3:36

Jesus used these words in Mark:

And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. Mark 16:15

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved;
but he that believeth not shall be damned. Mark 16:16

Believeth not is APISTOS. It does not mean a FAITH which demands OBEDIENCE but it means that

If you deny that "he that believes and is baptized shall be saved" as the purpose of the preaching

Then you are an APISTOS which means a treacherous enemy of Christ.

The word "hath" denotes potential:

But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house. Mt.9:6

Remission of sins, Campbell notes, does not even ultimately rest on the blood of Christ. Rather, it rests upon God's decision to make blood and water his power. The "wage" has been earned and paid long before we believe. Therefore, one who believes has a connecting length to that work of Christ.

Jesus had made salvation rest on faith but we might say that people are saved in purpose when the blood was shed -- or when God decreed both blood and water. Therefore, faith has no more intrinsic power than water. Christ then made salvation depend on faith and baptism: those who did not believe were already lost and so needed to do nothing to receive the wrath of God.

The word "hath" or the Greek echo includes ability, relation, being able. Faith gives one the possession of or the power to become children of God.

But as many as received him, to them gave he power (strength, influence) to become the sons of God,

even to them that believe on his name: John 1:12

Consistent with Acts 2-3 and the example of the Jailer, one who believeth is a baptized believer. John immediately implicates Jesus with baptism in the past:

WHEN therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, John 4:1

They didn't need books although as soon as the apostles began to preach they began to write. And "scribes" crawled all over the ancient world and copied speeches and sold them. Lucian of Samosata explained how Philo made copies of speeches or his histories, attended the grand "Jubilee-like" festivals of preachers, book-sellers, poets and dance masters and made lots of money. Every action of Jesus would have been noised abroad.

From the example of Heredotus and many others we know that as "scribes" and story tellers they attended the main events, recorded the events, made copies and sold them on the spot. It would have been the exception to the rule if there were not many records made of what happened at Pentecost. For example, we know that the events from the creation onward were recorded on clay tablets up to two thousand years before the time of Abraham. Abraham would have known these stories and may have had written accounts. When the Israelites fell into musical idolatry at Mount Sinai, Moses was inspired to write a CORRECTED copy to warn against the false Babylonian, Canaanite and Egyptian religions in Canaan. Most of the Bible seems written to correct an existing myth or legend which was destructive in nature.

We know that pericopes or major statements were circulated long before the Epistles were put into their existing form.

We don't look to individual statements about faith; we look at the command of Jesus and the explicit application of that command which always involved baptism.

They could read about FAITH in acts: why would the people be pricked in their heart if they had not believed that God in Christ has walked in their midst. Because they believed, Peter would demand that they change the direction of their lives and be Baptized. In Acts we know that they were then identified as BELIEVERS and that they were added to the church.

Not if the truth is known. Note above. Most of the people at Pentecost would have heard the gospel message in its fullness. Because they were Jews about all Peter had to do was to convince them that "this is that" which they were anticipating. Whole Bibles had been published in Greek up to 250 years before the time of Christ. This proves that at Alexandria and other places they had copies of the Old Testament books. We also know that they had synagogues around the world and they DIDN'T PREACH. Rather, synagogue was a school of the Bible and they read every Sabbath and teaching went on all during the week.

If they had read Malachi they would understand Mark's statement that the beginning or MOST IMPORTANT part of the Gospel commanded in Matthew was to be explained by the baptism of John and the disciples of Jesus. They knew several prophecies that God would WASH them of their sins much like a fuller immerses his clothing and finishes them by making "them white as snow." See some labored comments here.

The people in Rome would have read the only logical conclusion to the preached sermon which many of them had heard and perhaps recorded at Pentecost.

Before he began writing Paul heard:

And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord. Acts 22:16

How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? Ro.10:14

The readers in Roman, many of whom were baptized believers, would not follow Leroy Garrett: they would read the whole "chapter." Furthermore, they would have read Romans 6. The FACTS of the Gospel which only God in Christ could perform is called the PROTOS or prototype gospel. Paul in Romans 6--which commeth before Romans 10--says:

God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Rom 6:2

Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Rom 6: 3

Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. Rom 6: 4

For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: Rom 6: 5

Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. Romans 6:6

Repeating the deadness to sin, Paul concludes this section:

But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Rom 6: 17

Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness Rom 6: 18 .

Remembering that those being baptized at Pentecost and following were ADDED to the church. Being sanctified meant that they had received A new or holy spirit. There is no other way to be added to the church and to receive A holy spirit;

Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours: 1Co.1:2

The Pentecost Peter later wrote:

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: 1 Peter 3:21

"Answer" never means anything but ASKING or REQUESTING that God give them A good conscience which is A good consiousness or A holy spirit.

Again, looking at what the Spirit Jesus of Nazareth commanded Paul, even among secular people, one became a disciple of a master teacher by calling upon his name and identifying with him. And that often included a washing of baptism.

And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord. Acts 22:16

Calling upon is the Greek:

Epikaleomai (g1941) ep-ee-kal-eh'-om-ahee; mid. from 1909 and 2564; to entitle; by impl. to invoke (for aid, worship, testimony, decision, etc.): - appeal (unto), call (on, upon), surname.

When Peter defined baptism he wrote:

Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 1 Peter 3:21

This appeal or calling upon is similar:

Eperotao (g1905) ep-er-o-tah'-o; from 1909 and 2065; to ask for, i.e. inquire, seek: - ask (after, questions), demand, desire, question.

Not even a preacher can list the conditions of salvation in one verse. However, when we look at the entire chapter we must conclude that to be faithful to the Great Commission or what the believers heard on the day of Pentecost they would understand Paul's later letter by what they already understood. In that period "books" were easily placed in the memory because from youth the boys had been taught to memorize. They could go to the next town and read you the "Gospel according to Mark."

Absolutely, 100% wrong! When Philip preached Jesus the Eunuch wanted to be baptized. When Paul preached the Lord, the Jailer wanted to be baptized. According to Mark 16:15-16 neither Philip nor Paul would have been faithful preachers if they had not commanded baptism.

Paul's first task was not to baptize the jailer but to qualify him for baptism. His mission was to preach the gospel because only faith "gives one the power to become a child of God."

When the jailer heard the "word of the Lord" he believed and repented by washing their stripes. However, we have no mention of baptism. Where did the jailer get the idea?

Well Jesus said "go, preach and baptize believers and they will be saved" (Mark 16:15-16). And on Pentecost the people asked the same question. So preaching the gospel is preaching the Lord is preaching baptism: In fact, Mark begins the gospel and almost immediately mentions the Baptism John had been commanded to preach.

First, we should not that RECEIVED does not mean FAITH ONLY or TRUST ONLY. Received is the Greek:

Paralambano (g3880) par-al-am-ban'-o; from 3844 and 2983; to receive near, i.e. associate with oneself (in any familiar or intimate act or relation); by anal. to assume an office; fig. to learn: - receive, take (unto, with).

And Jesus going up to Jerusalem took the twelve disciples apart in the way, and said unto them, Matthew 20:17

The Jailer RECEIVED the gospel of Christ and therefore RECEIVED His messengers. His result was to show the fruit of repentence and OBEY their direct command to be BAPTIZED. Washing their wounds did not save him or remit his sins:

What did the jailer understand?

"[Paul and Silas] said to him, 'Believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved - you and all the people in your house' " (Acts 16:31).

How does faith come?

And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house. Acts 16:32

We noted above that ONE of the facts to be believe and acted on IF you have faith is that "he that believes and is baptized shall be saved" as the purpose of the preaching.

The enuch responded WHAT DOTH HINDER me from being baptized. Philip said that the HINDERANCE to being baptized is that you DON'T believe that Jesus is the Son of God.

By making that confession Philip understood that HE grasped that the "believe and be baptized" was the OPERATIVE point of being saved

How did the Jailer respond?

"At that hour of the night the jailer

Repented: took Paul and Silas and washed their wounds.

Baptized: Then he and all his people were baptized immediately" (Acts 16:33).

When the process was over -- just as in Acts 2-3 -- the jailer and the other inmates were believers:

And when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house. Acts 16:34

No one is called a believer who is not a baptized believer. Jesus said to make DISCIPLES of the believers by BAPTISM and continuing teaching of what CHRIST taught or inspired.

These disciples were called Christians: no other people were called Christians.

Therefore, a Christian is a baptized Disciple.

Paul repeated what Jesus commanded and Peter and all of the others obeyed. Therefore there is no difficulty in harmonizing Acts 2:38 and Acts 16:31.

Many of the Phillipian Jews would have been in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost. Since then, many would travel over the known world and hear the message. We cannot exclude "pericopes" or even complete letters being circulated by the early "publishing houses" or preachers.

Well, he DID line it up: calling on the name of the Lord is done ONLY when you are baptized REQUESTING that God give you A holy spirit or A good conscience.

And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord. Acts 22:16KJV

Or: And now, why delay?
        Go and be baptized and be cleansed from your sins,
        calling on the name of the Lord.' Acts 22:16LIV

Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? Acts 2:37

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you

in the name of Jesus Christ (calling upon the name of) for the remission of sins,
and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. Acts 2:38

Philip lined it up to the enuch and the he WANTED to be baptized. He CALLED upon the Name of the Lord by his confession that Jesus was the Son of God. Philip then baptized him and he went on his way REJOICING. He had assurance and rejoiced only after he had been baptized. There could not have been any assurance if he had not responded to the gospel which INSISTS on baptism as the "last chapter."

The Jailer heard the whole process and we cannot wriggle out of it by saying that Paul didn't have a baptism tract to hand to him..

Being saved by faith means being saved by what the system of faith teaches. For instance, Paul will speak of calling upon God but not before one is ready:

But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; Romans 10:8

That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus,
and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead,

thou shalt be saved. Romans 10: 9

All who believe and confess SHALL BE saved. Believing and confessing did not remit sins and therefore did not save.

Justification and Belief

Inward toward God; One who believes that Jesus is the Son of God is justified in the sense that one "has the power to become a child of God." By declaring God righteous in his demands we have access by this faith into sallvation.

Outward toward Mankind: If we confess God then God will confess us and if we deny him the He will deny us. Inward conviction is ascribed to the demons but they were ready to be baptized as their confession.

Paul then goes through the process of one who is QUALIFIED or HAS THE POWER to become the child of God:

For with the heart man believeth unto (not because of) righteousness;
........... and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. Romans 10: 10

For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified,
........... and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. Rom 10:10NIV

Other versions to prove that FOR does not mean 'BECAUSE OF' but to reach some result.

for with the heart man believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation. Rom 10:10NAS

For man believes with his heart and so is justified, and he confesses with his lips and so is saved. Rom 10:10RSV

For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. Rom 10:11

Jew and Gentile are the same in this respect: they all have the same Lord who generously gives his riches to all those who ask him for them. Rom 10:12LIV

For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. Rom 10:13

These were already baptized believers. Throughout our life, like that of Abraham, in all of our actions we are justified by our faith which works (Genesis 26:5)

Paul had told them about baptism in chapter 6. Paul then preached the word of the Lord which caused people to want to be baptized. I suspect that Paul was not unfaithful to the command but preached baptism.

Calling on the Lord in Romans 10 is explained in Acts 22 where "calling on the name" is at the time and place of water baptism. Peter in 3:21 said that baptism is the time and place where we call upon God for a clean consicience.

Calling on the name of the Lord happens ONLY at water Baptism.

Being baptized in the name of Jesus Christ meant that the candidate declared that he was trusting in the name of Jesus Christ. It did not mean that they believed that Jesus Christ lived.

In acts 22 Peter had a miracle performed on him but this was not to save him. He was BAPTIZED which was CALLING ON THE NAME

And now why tarriest thou? arise, and
........... be baptized, and wash away thy sins,
........... calling on the name of the Lord. Acts 22:16

One is saved by the blood of Christ when one believes, repents and is baptized: so saith the Lord. There is no such idea as "informal" and "formal" salvation. The Jewish scholars believed but they were not baptized: they rejected the counsel of God for their lives informally and formally.

Alexander Campbell in the preface to The Christian System said clearly:

"It is curious to observe how extremes begot extremes in every step of the reformation cause, to the dawn of the present century. The penances, works of faith and of supererogation, of the Roman church,

drove Luther and Calvin to the ultraism of 'faith alone.'"

However, faith alone did not exclude baptism because Luther saw it as a fundamental fact of Biblical faith and command.

Isn't that interesting that the "faith only" advocates turn history upside down! Garrett says that Campbell taught informal pardon when he believed; Campbell, on the contrary, claims that faith only is the ultraism of faith only which was not theology but anti-catholic or the extremism of the opposite polarity.

Alexander Campbell actually said vocally: "No relation can be changed by believing, apart from the acts to which that belief, or faith, induces us. Read the Facts.

Martin Luther wrote:

But as our would-be wise, new spirits assert that faith alone saves, and that works and external things avail nothing, we answer:

It is true, indeed, that nothing in us is of any avail but faith, as we shall hear still further. But these blind guides are unwilling to see this, namely,

that faith must have something which it believes, that is, of which it takes hold, and upon which it stands and rests.

Thus faith clings to the water, and believes that it is Baptism, in which there is pure salvation and life; not through the water (as we have sufficiently stated), but through the fact that it is embodied in the Word and institution of God, and the name of God inheres in it.

Now, if I believe this, what else is it than believing in God as in Him who has given and planted His Word into this ordinance, and proposes to us this external thing wherein we may apprehend such a treasure?

Now, they are so mad as to separate faith and that to which faith clings and is bound though it be something external.

A quote would help but if Campbell said this it was in the context of predestination and would utterly conflict with his views which we shall quote.

I don't think so. If Nixon had balked, refused to sign the document he would have gone to jail or been impeached and found guilty. Your check will bounce without a signature however 'informally' you planned to pay my salary. Bad illustration.

And all the people that heard him, and the publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John. Luke 7:29

But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him. Luke 7:30

Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him;

but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue: John 12:42

For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. Romans 10: 11

Jesus said that those who believe AND are baptized are saved. This is because those who believe and are NOT BAPTIZED REJECTED THE COUNSEL OF GOD FOR THEIR LIVES.

Paul's that those who BELIEVETH ON Jesus shall NOT BE ASHAMED. Those who refused to be baptized will be damned and ASHAMED because their BELIEF was not faith ON Jesus.

The psalmist shows the meaning of being ASHAMED:

O that my ways were directed to keep thy statutes Psa 119:5

Then shall I not be ashamed, when I have respect unto all thy commandments. Psa 119:6

Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. 1Pe.2:6

Lest haply if they of Macedonia come with me, and find you unprepared, we (that we say not, ye) should be ashamed in this same confident boasting. 2Co.9:4

All believers were informally pardoned in God's eyes when Jesus paid the price at Calvary. Like a check on the bank of heaven everyone is informally forgiven because there is nothing after the death of Christ which has any pardoning value. However, we are all formally pardoned when we follow the provisions of the Testator in His las Will and Testament.

If Leroy Garrett could find a hundred EXAMPLES to rationalize his views, he would still repudiate the Written Word of the Living Word. Nothing that comes into the mind of man can change what the Bible says. Christians are students or Disciples of that Word: there is no other resource which can be trusted. Therefore, one can be "saved by faith" and do anything they wish but they CANNOT thereby define themselves as a Christian.

I think Campbell has been wildly misquoted. For instance, in The Christian System, Proposition 7, he had an illustration:

"William Agricola and his brother Thomas, both Canadians, were once much opposed to the constituted government of New England. They both changed their views, and, as a matter of course, their feelings were changed.

William became a citizen of Rhode Island;
but Thomas, notwithstanding his change of heart, lived and died a colonial subject of a British king.l....

"So in religion, a man may change his views of Jesus, and his heart may be changed towards him;

but unless a change of state ensures, he is still unpardoned, unjustified, unsanctified, unreconciled, unadopted, and lost to all Christian life and enjoyment ... Alexander Campbell

No: Campbell in The Christian System actually said:

by these seven means--by Christ, his name, his blood, by knowledge, grace, faith, and by works. Are these all literal? Is there no room for interpretation here?

He that selects faith out of seven must either act arbitrarily or show his reason; but the reason does not appear in the text.

He must reason it out; he must infer it.
Why, then, assume that faith alone is the reason of our justification?

Why not assume that the name of the Lord alone is the great matter, seeing his name "is the only name given under heaven by which any man can be saved;" [Ac 4:12]

Campbell certainly denied that baptism was a procuring act. We have never heard a follower of Campbell who believed that baptism was one's procuring work to pay for his own sins!!! Campbell firmly believed in grace. However, he saw baptism as more than a certifying act because a "certificate" certifies that you have complied with what you believe in. Baptism was and is the ultimate act of grace.

Ephesians 2 is the favorite "salvation by grace through faith." However, Paul proves that it is BAPTISM which is the ongoing SHOWING ACT of how God in Christ bestows Grace when we believe. But, begin earlier in the chapter.

But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, Eph 2: 4

Even when we were dead in sins, hath "QUICKENED" (regenerated) us together WITH Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) Ephesians 2:5

But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. Gal 3:25

For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. Gal 3: 26
For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. Gal 3: 27

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. Gal 3: 28

And if ye be Christs, then are ye Abrahams seed, and heirs according to the promise. Gal 3: 29

Suzoopoieo (g4806) sood-zo-op-oy- eh'-o; from 4862 and 2227; to reanimate conjointly with (fig.): - quicken together with.

This is promised only at water baptism:

Then Peter said unto them, 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 or A holy spirit.

The same Paul writing to the colossians identifies our being quickened to enlivened in the spirit at baptism:

Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. Col 2:12

Sustauroo (g4957) soos-tow-ro'-o; from 4862 and 4717; to impale in company with (lit. or fig.): - crucify with.

I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. Ga.2:20

And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; Col.2:13

And hath RAISED us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places IN Christ Jesus: Ephesians 2:6

Sunegeiro (g4891) soon-eg-i'-ro; from 4862 and 1453; to rouse (from death) in company with, i.e. (fig.) to revivify (spiritually) in resemblance to: - raise up together, rise with.

Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. Col.2:12

IF ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above,

where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Col.3:1

Egeiro (g1453) eg-i'-ro; prob. akin to the base of 58 (through the idea of collecting one's faculties); to waken (trans. or intrans.), i.e. rouse (lit. from sleep, from sitting or lying, from disease, from death; or fig. from obscurity, inactivity, ruins, non- existence): - awake, lift (up), raise (again, up), rear up, (a-) rise (again, up), stand, take up.

Note: Alexander Campbell was defending his position as a Baptist. However, when he was baptized by a baptist preacher he made it clear that he did not subscribe to the Baptist view of baptism. In his Christian System he uses many of the same arguments and makes his debate comments more refined as a product of his spiritual growth.

While one cannot PROCURE salvation by one's own action, it is certain that one can SELL their birthright by minimizing the last, great Command of God in Christ which shows that He disciples us unto Himself only after He gives us A holy spirit or A good conscience.

---

Notes from the Campbell - Maccalla Debate:

In showing that "believer's baptism" always excluded infants but did not mean "baptize" those who are saved by faith only, Alexander Campbell wanted to point out--

"the important place that baptism occupies in the Christian religion, and of its great significance. Im my last address I contra-distinguished its design from that of John's baptism. In exalting baptism to its proper place, I did not exaggerate its import, as Mr. Maccalla would have it.

Nor did I elevate it so as to displace hope and charity. These are graces, the fruits of true faith and true baptism.

I know it will be said that I have affirmed that baptism "saves us," that it "washes away sins."

Well, Peter and Paul hare said so before me. If it was not criminal in them to say so, it cannot be criminal in me.

When Ananias said unto Paul, "Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord," I suppose Paul believed him, and arose, was baptized, and washed away his sins.

When he was baptized he must have believed that his sins were now washed away in some sense that they were not before.

For if his sins had been already in every sense washed away, Ananias' address would have led him into a mistaken view of himself; both before and after baptism.

Now we confess that the blood of Jesus Christ alone cleanses from all sins.

Even this, however, is a metaphorical expression. The efficacy of his blood springs from his own dignity, and from the appointment of his Father.

The blood of Christ, then, really cleanses us who believe from all sin.

Behold the goodness of God in giving us a formal proof and token of it, by ordaining a baptism expressly "for the remission of sins !"

The water of baptism, then, formally washes away our sins. The blood of Christ really washes awny our sins. [But the Mind of God REALLY cleanses us]

Paul's sins were really pardoned when he believed,

yet he had no solemn pledge of the fact, no formal acquital,
no formal purgation of his sins, until he washed them away in the water of baptism.

To every believer, therefore, baptism is a formal and personal remission, or purgation of sins.

The believer never has his sins formally washed away or remitted until he is baptized.

The water has no efficacy but what God's appointment gives it, and he has made it sufficient lor this purpose.

The value and importance of baptism appears from this view of it. It also accounts for baptism being called the WASHING OF REGENERATION. It shews us a good, and valid reason for the despatch with which this ordinance was administered in the primitive church.

The believers did not lose a moment in obtaining the remission of their sins. Paul tarried three days after he believed, which was the longest delay recorded in the New Testament. The reason of this delay was the wonderful accompaniments of his conversion and preparation for the apostolic office. He was blind three days, scales fell from his eyes, he arose then forthwith and was baptized.

The three thousand who first believed, on the selfsame day were baptized for the remission of their sins. Yea, even the jailor and his house would not wait till daylight but the "same hour of the night, in which he believed, he and all his were baptized." I say, this view of baptism accounts for all these otherwise unaccountable circumstances.

It was this view of baptism misapplied that originated infant baptism.

The first errorist on this subject argued that if baptism was so necessary for the remission of sins, it should be administered to infants whom they represented as in great need of it on account of their 'original sin.', Affectionate parents, beieving their children to be guilty of "original sin," were easily persuaded to have their infants baptized for the remission of "original sin," not for washing away sins actually committed. But of this again.

Faith in Christ is necessary to forgiveness of sins, therefore, baptism without faith is an unmeaning ceremony. Even the Confession of Faith, or at least the Larger Catechism, question 185, says, "that baptism is a sign of remission of sins." How then can it be administered to those without faith? Is it to them " a sign and seal of engrafting into Christ, of remission of sins by his blood, and regeneration by his Spirit," as the answer to this question declares?

Our argument from this topic is, that baptism, being ordained to be

to a believer a formal and personal remission of all his sins,

cannot be administered unto an infant without the greatest perversion and abuse of the nature and import of this ordinance.

lndeed, why should an infant that never sinned, that, as Calvinists say, is guilty only of "original sin," uhich is an unit, be baptized for the remission of sins!

---

A thing can be both a symbol and a means: a check is a symbol that I can get a hundred dollars from the bank. However, I don't get the money until the "symbol" becomes the "means" when submitted at the bank. This argument will just get you tossed into prison if you demand money because of grace without submitting the symbol and means.

But Alexander Campbell in The Christian System really said:

"Yes, as God first gave the efficacy of water to blood, he has now given the efficacy of blood to water.

This, as was said, is figurative; but it is not a figure which misleads,
for the meaning is given without a figure, [pg. 187] viz., immersion for the remission of sins.

"And to him that made the washing of clay from the eyes, the washing away of blindness, [John 9:6,7] it is competent to make the immersion of the body in water efficacious to the washing away of sin from the conscience. [resulting in A good conscience or A holy spirit in which God dwells by faith]

From the conscience, I say; for there its malignity is felt; and it is only in releasing the conscience from guilt, and its consequences--fear and shame,

that we are released from the dominion of sin, or washed from its pollution in this world.

Thus immersion, says Peter, saves us, not by cleansing the body from its filth, but the conscience from its guilt; [1 Peter 3:21]

yes, immersion saves us by burying us with Christ, raising us with him,

and so our consciences are purified from dead works to serve the living God. [Hebrews 9:13]

Hence our Lord gave so much importance to immersion in giving the commission to convert the world--"He that believes and is immersed shall be saved." [Mark 16:16]

Salvation or justification by "faith only" in Alexander Campbell's context always opposed the dogma that infants were predestinated and were therefore regenerated by God from all eternity. Their sign or seal was some supernatural exercise at a later date in which they put their assurance rather than in Christ and His promise.

"Our opponents contend for a regeneration begun and perfected before faith or baptism - a spiritual change of mind by the Holy Spirit, antecedent to either knowledge, faith, or repentance, of which infants are as susceptible as adults; and, therefore, as we contend, make the gospel of no effect.

By way of reprisals, they would have their converts think that we go for nothing but water, and sarcastically call us the advocates of "water regeneration."

They think there is something more sublime and divine in "spirit regeneration"; and therefore claim the title of orthodox." Alexander Campbell, Regeneration

Campbell: But we noted above: "Thus immersion, says Peter, saves us, not by cleansing the body from its filth, but the conscience from its guilt; [1 Peter 3:21]

"This, as was said, is figurative; but it is not a figure which misleads, for the meaning is given without a figure, [pg. 187] viz., immersion for the remission of sins.

When one cashes an unearned check for a million dollars then one has ASSURANCE that the gift is theirs even though they did not PROCURE it by their own works. We have ASSURANCE by outward signs and inward grace. If a person has not obeyed the direct commands of God in Christ then they can have no assurance that God has saved them.

In the same way, a check is figurative but it is not a figure which misleads, for the meaning is given without a figure, viz., "submitting the check for the receiving of the cash." The cash is yours. It has been earned and deposited in your bank. However, you have to "accept the counsel of God" or the check as symbol has no value: it is just a scrap of paper.

Well, not even faith saves in an absolute but only the blood of Christ. But then the blood of Christ hangs on the grace of God.

Regeneration In The Christian System

The Bath of Regeneration Now in Separate Article

New Birth

Renewing of the Holy Spirit

Let's quote some specifics from Alexander Campbell to see that this is not what he said:

"VI. Baptism is, then, designed to introduce the subjects of it into the participation of the blessings of the death and resurrection of Christ; who "died for our sins," and "rose again for our justification."

But it has no abstract efficacy. Without previous faith in the blood of Christ, and deep and unfeigned repentance before God,

neither immersion in water, nor any other action,
can secure to us the blessings of peace and pardon. It can merit nothing.

Still to the believing penitent it is the means of receiving a formal, distinct, and specific absolution, or release from guilt.

Campbell, like Jesus and Peter, said that baptism is the Christ-ordained means of receiving absolution and release from guilt. And furthermore, those who have not been baptized have no assurance of that pardon because they have not been pardoned:

"Therefore, none but those who have first believed the testimony of God and have repented of their sins, and that have been intelligently immersed into his death,

have the full and explicit testimony of God, assuring them of pardon.

By analogy, grace may have given you a million dollars. However, you have no explicit testimony that you have inherited the money until you execute the symbol and get the money.

Therefore, Garrett is just mistaken by some pick-up debate comments. Baptism is not a sign, seal or assurance only.

FACT: "To such only as are truly penitent, dare we say, "Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling upon the name of the Lord,"

ASSURANCE: and to such only can we say with assurance,

"You are washed, you are justified, you are sanctified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of God." The Christian System, Baptism

Among those who believe in "faith only" or predestination, there is a life-long struggle with finding the assurance that one is predestinated by God. Even an "experience" which proves it is doubted before the blood pressure goes down. However, faith trusts in Jesus to do what He promised; as soon as one has believed and obeyed in baptism the assurance of the fact is present.

Campbell held that baptism is the consumating act of the process. As spiritual conception takes place when the "seed" is emplanted and germinates, the believer has God's approval or the "right to become children of God." However, the embryo who does not come to full term and goes through the birth process will never be a citizen of the kingdom able to enjoy the benefits: they have no assurance because they have no citizenship:

"All the means of salvation are means of enjoyment, not of procurement. Birth itself is not for procuring, but for enjoying, the life possessed before birth.

"So in the analogy: - no one is to be baptized, or to be, buried with Christ; no one is to be put under the water of regeneration for the purpose of procuring (purchasing) life, but for the purpose of enjoying the life of which he is possessed.

"If the child is never born, all its sensitive powers and faculties can not be enjoyed; for it is after birth that these are fully developed and feasted upon all the aliments and objects of sense in nature.

Hence all that is now promised in the gospel can only be enjoyed by those who are born again and placed in the kingdom of heaven under all its influences.

Hence the philosophy of that necessity which Jesus preached: - "Unless a man be born again, be can not discern the kingdom of heaven," - unless a man be born of water and the Spirit, he can not enter into it.

"But let no man think that in the act of being born, either naturally or metaphorically,
........... the child purchases, procures, or merits either life or its enjoyments.

He is only by his birth placed in circumstances favorable to the enjoyment of life, and all that makes life a blessing. "To as many as receive him, believing in his name, be grants the privilege of being children of God, who derive their birth not from blood, nor from the desire of the flesh, nor from the will of man, but from God." (Christian System, Regeneration) Article on Baptismal Regeneration

May be true but God said that Abraham was approved:

Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws. Genesis 26:5

Abraham did not "earn" or "merit" God's approval by obedience. Abraham received the free gift when his obedience showed his faith.

And Paul agreed that the act didn't earn anything but keeping God's commandments are absolutely necessary:

Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing but the keeping of the commandments of God. 1 Corinthians 7:19

We have proven from Campbell that Garrett is wrong.

Because mankind cannot pay the price they are really saved by the blood of Christ when Christ shed it. However, salvation is specific to an individual in their own time and place. It is not available until after one is baptized.

Campbell understood that pardon is procured for all mankind, including Paul. Therefore, in God's purpose all have been redeemed by the one-time sacrifice of Jesus. However, that finished pardon is not Paul's until He is baptized.

Therefore, Campbell did not believe that one was saved by "faith only" in any sense except in the mind of God.

Suppose the man