You are here: Home / Archives for Ken Blue

HOW A BAPTIST BRIDER EVADES THE ISSUE #4

by

#4

Ken Blue

(This is a response from a Baptist brider who refuses to state the content of the gospel we preach, or compare it to that gospel which was preached by John the Baptist and the other disciples prior to Christ’s resurrection. Read the previous blogs for context. Although he continues to state that salvation has always been by faith, he refuses, or does not know WHAT THE CONTENT OF THAT FAITH WAS. He says:)

Romans 3:20,28 “Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight…. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith wihtout the deeds of the law” Romans 4:3 “Abraham (in the OT) believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness” Romans 5:1 Therefore being justfied by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ” Romans 4:5 “…his faith is counted for righteouness” If you read my first response closely I DID answer your every question in regards to what I believe. Salvation has always been and will always be by grace through faith in Christ, whether coming, present or past. (If the reader will note the above answers, he will see that the CONTENT of their faith is absent. By now, I am convinced the brider does not know the answer to the question. He assumes that he has answered it, and then turns to misrepresent and attack me. He implies that I brought up the subject of the church. He mentions the “church” six times before I say one word about it! He wants others to believe that I have a problem with Ruckman, and dispensations. My question for him is crystal clear, but he dare not answer it.)  If my original satement of “Ruckmanites believe that people have been saved by different means in different dispensations” is what you have a problem with then you must believe that there has been or will be different ways of getting saved. Since you brought up the church in the wilderness, this confirmed that your true beef is with the main premise of my article (which would make sense because this is the article in which you chose to debate dispensationalism). I know you know the difference between the OT church and “my church” (Matthew 16:18). The fact is that Jesus was building His church during His earthly ministry. He was the cornerstone, the apostles were the foundation, it was being built, it had ordinances, it had a commission but it did not receive the power to fulfill that commission until Pentecost. Did the earth not exist on day one just because there were no plants, no wildlife and no humans? Genesis 1:1 “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void..” But being a hyper-dispensationalist you probably believe there is a “gap” between verses 1 and 2 anyway but my point is that the earth existed before it was complete. The church existed prior to its completeing empowerment in Acts 2. I do not have to “explain from Scripture what was required in each dispensation for salvation” (Note that he refuses to answer the question, or is unable to. One thing for sure; if he answers it, it will drive the final nail in the Baptist bride coffin.) because that is not the aim of this post or the blog. Your only reason for stearing this post that way is to attack my postion on when the church started. If my answers here are not good enough then you do not have to answer my YES or NO questions.

(The answer was NOT good enough. In fact, it was not an answer at all to my original question. However, in my next blog, I do answer his questions, even though he dare not give a Scriptural answer to mine.)

HOW A BAPTIST BRIDER EVADES THE ISSUE #3

by

#3
By Ken Blue

 

(This is my response to a Baptist brider who refuses to state the content of the gospel we preach, or compare it to that gospel which was preached by John the Baptist and the other disciples prior to Christ’s resurrection. Read the previous blogs for context.)

Dear Brother, Thank you for your response. I stated that I was confident you were a dispensationalist. You confirmed that. I also agree that people have always been saved by grace through faith, but you did not clarify the object of that faith. Also, the word “require” does not mean works. Faith was a “requirement.” Is that a work?

However, if you will note my question, “I believe it is important to your readers that you respond and explain from Scripture what was required in each dispensation for salvation. What were they required to believe? What did the Twelve Disciples believe, if they were saved?” You did not give a Scriptural answer to these questions.

I am sure you would not classify yourself a hyper-dispensationalist. Normally, anyone to the right of us is considered hyper. However, I could find professing Christians who would consider you a hyper-dispensationalist as well.

My comment about “mature” was not intended a “personal attack.” It was in response to the comment, “You have to have more than child like faith to believe that mess.” My sincere prayer is that I will have “child like faith.”

I know what you believe. What I can’t understand is your position that everyone got saved by believing the same thing. I ask, what is required that a person believe today in order to be saved? You did not answer that question. Then I gave you a Scripture (Luke 18:31-34) which showed that no one from Matthew 1:1 to John 21:25 believed what you and I preach as a means of salvation today. You stated, “Did they understand everything about salvation?” Then you said, “No…” The truth is, dear brother, not only did they not “understand” it, they did not believe it! You and I know that no one believed the gospel we preach today. Therefore, theirs was another gospel. You may not be willing to admit that, but everything in the four gospels screams loud and clear that His death and resurrection had no part in anyone’s theology.

Now, I have absolutely no problem answering your “YES and NO” questions, when you are willing to answer my questions scripturally. You said, “I believe that John preached the same salvation message that we preach as explained in John 3:36 where John said, “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.

I don’t know how you can say, “John preached the same salvation message that we preach…” when, neither he, nor anyone else believed Jesus would die and be resurrected from among the dead. Therefore, when John said, “He that believeth on the Son…” what was it about the Son they were to believe?

When we “slice and dice” the Scriptures, we must not overlook the fact that there was a “Church” in the wilderness, and it was baptized and kept certain ordinances. “This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:” Acts 7:38. “And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; 1 Corinthians 10:2. You did not answer my questions, but resorted to attacking me, and men you assume I approve. I am sure you can do better that that. Ken Blue

(Note: When debating, if you cannot accurately answer from Scripture, attack the other person’s character or others whom they may have quoted. Just because you quote a man does not mean you agree with him in every matter. However, it does not mean the quote is wrong. One good example of that is Acts 17:28. “ For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.” Paul quotes an unsaved poet to establish his point.)

HOW A BAPTIST BRIDER EVADES THE ISSUE #2

by

#2
By Ken Blue

The following is the first response to my blog about what the means of salvation was in other dispensations. I have purposely omitted the name and web page of the correspondent because I have no interest in smearing his name or hurting his personal ministry. There will be inserted into this response notes showing how the briders avoid the questions and attack me and all who disagree with them. Those inserts will be in blue. Read the previous blog for content.

“I too am a dispensationalist because both the word and the principle are taught in the scriptures but I am not a hyper dispensationalist. I believe that God was working in different ways thru different people at different times (example: OT and the Jews/NT and the church). BUT SALVATION HAS ALWAYS BEEN BY GRACE THROUGH FAITH. You said, “it is important to your readers that you respond and explain from Scripture what was required in each dispensation for salvation.” The word “required” lends to the idea that salvation is by works. Do you believe that some have been or that some will be saved by works? (Notice that the word “required” is twisted to turn against me in order to deflect the argument away from the issue) Surely you don’t believe that rightly dividing the word of truth is limited to and solely focussed on dispensational theology! I believe that John preached the same salvation message that we preach as explained in John 3:36 where John said, “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.” The disciples believed in the Lord Jesus Christ just like those in the OT believed in a coming Messiah. Did they understand everything about salvation? No, and I didn’t understand everything about salvation when I got saved either. Does the fact that John did not understand the entire depth and meaning of his baptismal ministry iligitimize his baptism? (Watch again, as the brider attempts to turn on me personally and suggest that I ask him the question because I did not LIKE his article. I have not said one word about when the church started and you will discover that I don’t care when it started) No! I don’t believe you liked my article because you probably believe the church started at or after Acts 2 and so therefore you have attempted to attack my position on dispensationalism. The problem with hyper dispensationalists is that you interpret EVERYTHING thru this theological view to the point that it gets in the way of what the Scripture teaches. We should rejected theology from eccumenicalists such as Darby, Crutchfield and Scofield. I know you asked for a “mature” response and I am but I can sense the sarcasim in your words and know that “maturity” is not your trademark because you named a book “Baptist Briders BOLONEY”. You have stated in a book summary that everyone that is saved is in the body of Christ but I believe that the Scripture teaches that the church is a local assembly and that the church is that body. The fact of the matter is, prior to the book of Acts there was a body of baptized believers that was started by Jesus who had local church ordinances. That may not fit in to your slicing and dicing of the Scriptures but it is plain as day. I’ve never met a Ruckmanite who called himself one but I have met several Ruckmanites who want to defend other Ruckmanites. I know you have written several books and have addressed this issue several times. I will make no bones about the fact that I strongly oppose hyper dispensationalism because I must earnestly contend for the faith. It is disturbing to me that there are brethren walking among us who believe and passionately yet deceptively promote this non-Baptist hyper dispensationalism so I am calling you out! When you respond I would like simple YES or NO answers to these: Do you believe that everyone has or will get saved the same we get saved today? YES or NO Do you believe that John’s baptism is the same baptism we practice today? YES or NO Do you believe the NT church existed prior to the events found in Acts? YES or NO Do you believe all the saved are in the body of Christ? YES or NO

(The reader will once again see how the “worm has turned.” My question was simple, it was, “Perhaps you could define the gospel message we preach today and then find where it was preached in Matthew through John’s gospel.” That question is not hard to understand, but it is impossible to answer. That is why the blog will be an attack to the end. He dare not answer the question by giving a clear description of our gospel and that of the John and the Twelve. That would blow his Baptist baptism right out of the water.

HOW A BAPTIST BRIDER EVADES THE ISSUE

by

By Ken Blue

Some months ago I came across a Baptist Bride webpage. As I read some of the comments, I read the following. “Good point Brother, But even the hyper-dispensationalists reject that as support for Old Testament salvation by grace thru faith. Those Ruckmanites believe that people have been saved by different means in different dispensations. You have to have more than child like faith to believe that mess.”

Below is my response and question for the blogger. Dear Brother, I am not a Ruckmanite, but I am a dispensationalist. To be obedient to the Scriptures, one must rightly divide them. You stated, “Those Ruckmanites believe that people have been saved by different means in different dispensations. You have to have more than child like faith to believe that mess.”

I am confident that you also believe that people were saved in different dispensations by believing different truths. Perhaps you could define the gospel message we preach today and then find where it was preached in Matthew through John’s gospel.
No one expected Jesus to die, or be resurrected. How do you explain the following? “ Then he took unto him the twelve, and said unto them, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of man shall be accomplished. For he shall be delivered unto the Gentiles, and shall be mocked, and spitefully entreated, and spitted on: And they shall scourge him, and put him to death: and the third day he shall rise again. And they understood none of these things: and this saying was hid from them, neither knew they the things which were spoken.” Luke 18:31-34. Surly you aren’t going to tell me they preached His death, burial, and resurrection and then got a brain freeze.

If I am in error on this subject, I am willing to be corrected with Scripture. I believe it is important to your readers that you respond and explain from Scripture what was required in each dispensation for salvation. What were they required to believe? What did the Twelve Disciples believe, if they were saved?

Thank you for your time. I look forward to you “mature” answer.
Ken Blue

The reader should notice how straight forward and clear my requests were. My next blog will reveal that briders are ignorant of their Bible, or they are purposefully evasive when pressed for a clear answer. If the reader would like to answer the question, please feel free to do so,

A CONSERVATIVE CHURCH IN A LIBERAL WORLD

by

HOW TO HAVE A CONSERVATIVE CHURCH TODAY

churchBy Ken Blue

Societies and cultures are not static. Some countries continue to live in the Stone Age; others are still living in the culture of the Old Testament, while much of the world continues to move into the space age of satellite technology. Is progress really good? If it is bad or good, how do we choose between the two?

It is relatively easy to find a Bible verse to defend, or defy any position we take concerning the church. Each person believes his views are biblically based, and yet each may be light years from each other. For example, there are pastors who use Old Testament Scripture to prove that women should only wear dresses. “The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.” Deuteronomy 22:5. To them, all women who wear pants are an abomination to God!

A good friend of mine teaches that women must keep silent in the church, thus no testimonies or special music by women. Women are not allowed to cut their hair. Pre-recorded background music is not permitted.

Some churches believe Sunday has replaced the Sabbath. It is the Lord’s Day and must be kept holy. They honor Sunday by not washing their car on Sunday, playing sports, or watching television. I have also met Christians who believe it is a sin to serve meals in the church anytime.

Some pastors will not allow guest speakers to sell their books after a service, while others allow t-shirts, CD’s, and jelly beans to be sold.

I know a godly pastor who is opposed to cowboy boots, wire-rimmed glasses, and jewelry. I know an evangelist who rails on PowerPoint but continues to use the overhead projector. (?)

[perfectpullquote align=”right” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””]We are under grace, and we should never allow others to bring us under their bondage.[/perfectpullquote]

Some pastors are petrified of the brethren. It is their fear that controls them. They will only use musical instruments they believe their cronies will approve. Everyone pretends that everything else is too progressive. They do not realize the absurdity of their view.

It is not the form or formality believers should be fighting over. These differ and change. No one should be rejected because his or her service differs from yours. It is biblical truth for this dispensation we should be conserving and defending. There’s not one church in a thousand that adheres to the conservative views held a hundred years ago. Paul never made an issue over days, diets, dress, facial hair, or sideburns. We are under grace, and we should never allow others to bring us under their bondage. Grace is not a license to sin. However, it is not a sin for others to differ from you. Neither is it wise to carry money through a neighborhood of thieves just because you have traveled that path for years.

We must adjust our convictions to those of the dispensation of grace as taught by Paul, the Apostle to the church. If we fail to adjust to this dispensation, we can make the Bible teach anything we choose. You can have a conservative church in a liberal world if you know what to conserve, and what to change.