on that
Menu•SiteMap | Guests







My Stand: No. 4

• Gordon Rainbow     § Jeff Kuns     † Guest

§ The Testimony and Religious Holidays
§ A Response and Reply
Wrong Attitude towards Women: By 'modern' exclusives
Paul and Peter: The Spheres of their Commissions
Unsolicited Email: Abuse of the Internet
• § S. M. Anglin re Baptism and Circumcision, and 'Baptism' by S. E. Hesterman






 



PLEASE NOTE: For the security of our readers, all @ signs have been changed to 'AT' in order to prevent unsolicited email. If you wish to contact any of our guests please remember to replace the @ sign in the address line of your email.






THE  TESTIMONY
and  RELIGIOUS  HOLIDAYS
In this letter to his family, Jeff Kuns sets out his convictions.
See also Doctrine: Religious Holidays

October 2001

Jeff Kuns

My Dear Family, and Brethren in the Lord Jesus,

I have written some difficult letters in my recent history but I expect that this letter will perhaps be the most difficult I will ever have to write,

It has been over two years, by God’s sovereign grace alone, since I took up considerably serious study of the Scriptures and sought to have what I was studying in practical ways.

So I would request that each one keep in mind Who it is with whom we have to do. I ask all of you to go before the Lord with what I will say here; I ask that you all would be patient in meditation on them.

The first reason this must be now delivered to you all is that, if the Lord has not yet come, you may be wondering why I have said or done certain things.

The second reason is that I can no longer participate in the Christmas holiday, among other things, when they are taken up.

I have had a small problem with Christmas for many years because of the gross materialism connected with it – a common enough complaint, I think –

But for information only, in case anyone is unaware, I will provide these few details:

Christmas was brought into widespread practice by the Roman Catholic system in the 4th century in order to compete with the pagan celebration of the birth of Mithras, a pagan sun god.

This holiday did not begin at Rome but was carried through from the Babylonian mystery religion, where into the Roman form were incorporated Babylonian symbols and practices which were then cloaked with a noticeably thin veil of Christian terminology.

Further details can be discovered easily, I leave that to your own study, but I can assure you that most of the ‘Christian’ details have a corresponding pagan meaning and some of the details did not even get that far, retaining the pagan signifi-cance to this day.

The facts appear, to my mind, little more than a case of the deceived trying to deceive the deceived.

Please do not think that I blame all of the ills of Christendom on Christmas – it would be a mistake because I do not.

Therefore, Christmas is symptomatic of larger problems before us as Christians in this day and it would be

‘Well, can’t we celebrate it without the paganism?’ and ‘Doesn’t Christian liberty enter into the equation?’ were things I asked myself for a long time.

Second, to say that Paul proposed liberty toward practice of pagan ritual under the pretense of doing honor to the Lord Jesus is nonsense.

I can only say one thing more, that there is not a whisper of a suggestion in the Scripture for us to commemorate His birth and it is simply not possible for us to proceed beyond that without causing division.

The holidays are not for us to celebrate but are carried on by those having no hope and without God in the world, and even we were of that order, but are no longer. I encourage each one to search the Scripture on it.

No doubt, the giving up of mere forms does not automatic-ally secure blessing, in fact, without the Lord in your view it would be a sad thing having nothing with which to replace them.

These are frightful times we’re in and I did not take this up to restate what is obvious to anyone with even a little spiritual intelligence, but there is a final reason this letter has been written.

This general blindness, of necessity, comes from a misunderstanding about the difference in Scripture between the ‘body’ and the ‘house’.

For example, in 2 Timothy 2: 19-22 we get:

Yet the firm foundation of God stands, having this seal, The Lord knows those that are his; and, Let every one who names the name of the Lord withdraw from iniquity.

But in a great house there are not only gold and silver vessels, but also wooden and earthen; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. If therefore one shall have purified himself from these, he shall be a vessel to honour, sanctified, serviceable to the Master, prepared for every good work.

But youthful lusts flee, and pursue righteousness, faith, love, peace, with those that call upon the Lord out of a pure heart.


This, in part, is describing the difference between two kinds of vessels in the same house. They manifest themselves to honor or to dishonor.

But what is this ‘great house’? It appears to me that this house is filled with those who make a profession

Now a mustard tree is not normally a great tree; it only grows to 8 feet or so. So what we have here is something that is abnormal,

What we ought to be thinking now is that what we have in these last days in the churches, simply even in terms of organization, is not of God but of the adversary.

Now what I mean when I say the testimony is just what I said above, that “God has made this Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ”.

Continuing with this line, the most obvious thing at all in scripture is the way the Lord in the gospels and the apostles in their letters describe and warn, not only of the condition of things in the world,

I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot; I would thou wert cold or hot. Thus because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I am about to spue thee out of my mouth.
Because thou sayest, I am rich, and am grown rich, and have need of nothing, and knowest not that thou art the wretched and the miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked … Revelation 3: 15-20


I won’t recount church history, there’s no need to recall the murders and tortures, the inquisitions and crusades in the name of Christ, such things are unusually conspicuous.

Along these lines we have in part –again, please search the Scripture:

Sectarianism, denominationalism, party divisions; creating organizations around personal preference in doctrine, worship, and government (see 1 Corinthians 1: 10; 3: 1-4; 2 Corinthians 13: 11; Philippians 2: 3; 4: 2; 1 Peter 3: 8; Ephesians 4: 3; James 3: 13-18, and elsewhere) which is dishonoring to the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and outside the scope of His prayer in John 17.


Clericalism, the reclassification of spiritual gift into that of office, secured by the decision of men, congregational or ‘elder’ election and typically based on the proper education (the criteria of ‘proper’ being subject to sectarian interpretation); thus, a denial of the practical power of the Spirit to provide useful gift among the saints and also the suppression of those truly gifted and assigned by God which results (see 1 Corinthians 7: 7; 9: 8; 12; 2 Corinthians 9: 8; Ephesians 4: 7-8; James 1: 16-18; 1 Pet. 4: 10, and elsewhere).

It is also a denial of the practical headship of Christ Himself over the assembly (see Ephesians 1: 19-23; 4: 15-16; 5: 23; Colosians 1: 18; 2: 9-10, 19; 1 Peter 2: 7-10, and elsewhere).


Systematic theologies, creeds, catechisms, hermeneutics and educational organizations established on worldly principles and sciences; apologetics and the mind of man assume the place of spiritual intelligence as taught of God through the Spirit and in assembly (see 1 Corinthians 1: 17-30; 2; 3: 19; Ephesians 4: 14; Colossians 2: 6-9, and elsewhere).

This, combined with the acceptance of sectarianism and clericalism, has resulted in the formation of ‘specialized ministries’ modeled after worldly organizations: colleges and seminaries, radio and TV stations, music and bookstores and publishing houses which sell the ‘ministry’ of thousands upon thousands of so-called teachers for their own financial gain and the spiritual impoverishment of those who follow (see 2 Timothy 4: 3-4; 1 Peter 2: 3, and elsewhere).


These things cannot be made light of, yet some may say, ‘We admit the problems. But, there is nothing we can do, so we must continue on and do the best we can with the situation’.

I wouldn’t let anyone say that there is no light to be had in some of the systems; if there was no light at all none of us would be saved; God in His mercy allows some little light to get through.

We know of the times before the man of sin is revealed. We know that he will not come until there is first apostasy

Now we beg you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to him, that ye be not soon shaken in mind, nor troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter, as if it were by us, as that the day of the Lord is present. Let not any one deceive you in any manner, because it will not be unless the apostasy have first come, and the man of sin have been revealed, the son of perdition. 2 Thess. 2: 1-3


And that this is promoted by false teachers who were going to come in early; and there were going to be many of them and they would continue their work up to the end:

Take heed therefore to yourselves, and to all the flock, wherein the Holy Spirit has set you as overseers, to shepherd the assembly of God, which he has purchased with the blood of his own. For I know this, that there will come in amongst you after my departure grievous wolves, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves shall rise up men speaking perverted things to draw away the disciples after them. Acts 20: 28-30
But there were false prophets also among the people, as there shall be also among you false teachers, who shall bring in by the bye destructive heresies, and deny the master that bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction; and many shall follow their dissolute ways, through whom the way of the truth shall be blasphemed. And through covetousness, with well – turned words, will they make merchandise of you: for whom judgment of old is not idle, and their destruction slumbers not. 1 Peter 2: 1-3
Little children, it is the last hour, and, according as ye have heard that antichrist comes, even now there have come many antichrists, whence we know that it is the last hour. : John 2: 18
But wicked men and juggling impostors shall advance in evil, leading and being led astray. 2 Timothy 3: 13


Scripture has no other thought but that things will be in confusion, terrible denial of the Lord, and apostasy – and it began almost immediately after the apostles went to be with the Lord.

Wherefore also Jesus, that he might sanctify the people by his own blood, suffered without the gate: therefore let us go forth to him without the camp, bearing his reproach: for we have not here an abiding city, but we seek the coming one. Hebrews 13: 12-14
If therefore one shall have purified himself from these, he shall be a vessel to honour, sanctified, serviceable to the Master, prepared for every good work. 2 Timothy 2: 21
Come out of her, my people, that ye have not fellowship in her sins, and that ye do not receive of her plagues: for her sins have been heaped on one another up to the heaven, and God has remembered her unrighteousnesses. Revelation 18: 4-5


It cannot be reformed; the churches and systems are to be used as the tool of Antichrist and simply must be given up, and this, I’m afraid, means reproach.

I am fully aware of the difficulties of presenting this, both yours and mine –

I really hope everyone takes time with these things and please do not phone me to argue about it – I beg you all to wait and take it to the Lord.

Ezra, who lived in a broken day similar to our own, also knew the sorrow we need to become familiar with over the liberties taken in joining with the peoples of the nations and their things.

Now when these things were completed, the princes came to me, saying, The people of Israel, and the priests and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the peoples of the lands, according to their abominations, even of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites; for they have taken of their daughters for themselves and for their sons, and have mingled the holy seed with the peoples of the lands; and the hand of the princes and rulers has been chief in this unfaithfulness.

And when I heard this thing, I rent my mantle and my garment, and plucked off the hair of my head and of my beard, and sat down overwhelmed. Then were assembled to me every one that trembled at the words of the God of Israel, because of the unfaithfulness of those that had been carried away; and I sat overwhelmed until the evening oblation. And at the evening oblation I arose up from my humiliation; and with my mantle and my garment rent, I fell on my knees, and spread out my hands to Jehovah my God, and said:

O my God, I am ashamed and blush to lift up my face to thee, my God; for our iniquities are increased over our head, and our trespass is grown up to the heavens. Since the days of our fathers, we have been in great trespass to this day; and for our iniquities we, our kings, our priests, have been given into the hand of the kings of the lands, to the sword, and to captivity, and to spoil, and to confusion of face, as it is this day. And now for a little space there hath been favour from Jehovah our God, to leave us a remnant to escape, and to give us a nail in his holy place, that our God may lighten our eyes, and give us a little reviving in our bondage. Ezra 9: 1-8


Now the ‘nail’ spoken of is Christ, He is the nail in a sure place – see Isaiah 22: 23 – and upon him hang all of the vessels, and all of the vessels are to be filled with the testimony – large or small – but all are to hang on Him separate from all the mischief we have been a part of.

But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the Judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks better than the blood of Abel. Hebrews 12: 22-24.


So you see it is not only the holidays we must re-think, it is all that we are accustomed to and all that we may very well have a genuine affection for.

Ye therefore, beloved, knowing these things before, take care lest, being led away along with the error of the wicked, ye should fall from your own stedfastness: but grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen. 2 Peter 5: 17-18


Yours in our Lord Jesus, Love, Jeff.

Page Top

A  RESPONSE  and  REPLY
Re:  The  Testimony  and  Religious  Holidays
Jeff Kuns replies to a response from a member of his family.


January 23, 2002

Dearest –,
I want you to know that I appreciated your comments on the phone very much. The fact that you took the time to write some of your thoughts down is also nice.

I have quoted portions of your letter below so you don’t have to go back and forth reading the reply to your various statements.

QUOTATION from the response to Jeff's letter to his family:
The first issue is that of observance of holidays. If the standard were that all things accepted by the believer should be of a regenerate source then the list of things “acceptable” would be extremely short. By this I mean that if I reject Christmas on the basis that it comes from pagan tradition then I must reject a whole host of other things that also come from godlessness. I would necessarily have to reject most hymns because they are often melodies taken from popular music and bar songs. And if in my righteous pursuit I were to eliminate things from my life that were directly descended from evil, my list would be even shorter. I couldn’t wear designer clothes because most designers are homosexuals. I couldn’t wear generic clothes because underpaid child workers mostly manufacture them. I would not drive a ____ because of the companies’ use of Jewish slave labor during the Nazi regime. In fact, I couldn’t use any car because most of the gasoline I buy is purchased from Muslims in the Middle East or Atheists in Russia …

Rejecting everything merely because you find it in this world is beyond what I was trying to express in the first letter, and rather extreme.

There are found in the Scripture principles of separation both from evil and also of sanctification to God – we might say, that there is what we are saved from and also what we are saved to.

QUOTATION from the response to Jeff's letter to his family:
… driving a car doesn’t mean I’m an Atheist-Muslim. _____’s don’t make me a Nazi. My clothes don’t make me homosexual or abusive to children. Most importantly, singing hymns don’t make a brawler and celebrating Christmas doesn’t make me an idolater. This whole debate may boil down to the stronger vs. weaker brother concept. I can eat meat sacrificed to idols because I know that it has no more power or meaning than it did when it was grazing in the field. God’s grace allows me to eat it. Someone intended for that meat to be an offering to idols. God meant it to be nourishment to my physical body. In the same way, I can have a Christmas tree in my house without any fear of it being an idol. The tree has no more meaning or power that it did while planted in the ground. Christmas, Easter and Thanksgiving are no different. Someone intended for Christmas to be a pagan holiday but between God and His children it now means something else. I don’t dispute the origin but I will submit that God is more than able to claim everyday for Himself. We can celebrate those days because they have been given true meaning… celebrating the true Christmas can do more to encourage “The Body” toward righteousness than not celebrating it ever could.

I don't see how eating meat sacrificed to idols is comparable to taking up pagan religious practices – because that’s exactly what was taken up by Rome, and I’m very glad you admit that.

Don’t get me wrong your personal motive is good. I don’t wish to dampen any zeal to glorify God. But motives must always be kept in company with the Spirit of truth.

Some offerings to God are unacceptable, but we are not left wondering over that because He has expressed His feelings about it so that His mind can be known.

When Abraham was commanded to sacrifice Isaac, another typically priestly service, Jehovah said,

Nadab and Abihu, priests, were slain by Jehovah after they “presented strange fire before Jehovah, which he had not commanded them”.

Following Israel’s captivity, Haggai’s question to the priests was,

All this leads us to the priesthood of believers, the members of the body, ‘My assembly’ – Matthew 16: 18 –

QUOTATION from the response to Jeff's letter to his family:
“There is a concept that I like to call “Negative Righteousness” which is righteousness defined by the list of things I don’t do. (I don’t drink alcohol, smoke or chew tobacco. I don’t dance or go to PG13 movies. I don’t drink anything with caffeine in it and I don’t eat meat on Fridays.) I think scripture shows the Pharisees and Sadducees as ones who practiced negative righteousness. Christ, on the other hand, taught positive righteousness …”

I understand what you call ‘negative righteousness’ and your use of the Pharisee and Sadducee to explain it, and as far as your observation of their behavior, I would also agree.

Where does one read of the Pharisee or the Sadducee or Zealot before the gospel accounts? Where do you hear of a synagogue as a place of gathering for Israel in all the books of Moses? or the remainder?

QUOTATION from the response to Jeff's letter to his family
The problem in “The Church” today is no different than it was in the first century. And we are no more or less equipped (or obligated) as the first Christians were to deal with it …

In the Pharissee and Saducee you have a full-blown religious establishment, and I believe that is where most christians have been for a very long time now.

QUOTATION from the response to Jeff's letter to his family:
Yes, there are many flawed churches because they are comprised of sinners and led by sinners. But does this mean that I should reject “The Church” as a whole? Marriage is another flawed organization because it is also comprised of and led by sinners. Does that mean that I should disassociate myself from my wife? The only problem with the church is sin and it is pandemic. There is nothing I can do alone or in a church that is not stained by the presence of sin. God calls me to fellowship with “The Body” and I think scripture is clear about that. The question then isn’t whether or not to fellowship but how to fellowship as a sinner in a body of sinners. The majority of the New Testament contains Paul’s letters to churches that were flawed due to sin. Never does he tell them to go it alone as individuals nor does Paul reject “The Church” because of their corruption in sin. His counsel is to always continue to struggle together toward righteousness … I can’t love my neighbor (regenerate or degenerate) while locked in my house because of all the things I won’t do. Just like I can’t be part of “The Body” if I chose to be amputated because I can’t face my own sinfulness or the sinfulness of the other parts …

We can’t simply say all of Paul’s letters are of the same character because he wrote them,

I strongly believe that the Scripture is full of examples of men and women who did indeed ‘go it alone’ in faith, and it’s plain that the concept is not foreign to Paul. But you are right in saying that Paul did not reject the church.

Now I speak more for myself when I say that the time is far past when we ought to be grown men, ‘for by this time you ought to be teachers’.

We are not under law, but legitimate subjects of Christ, going as far as we can with all brethren with inexhaustible patience – some of whom are snared, opposing themselves, 2 Timothy 2: 25-26.

In regard to your comment on marriage you will no doubt find other features of responsibility due to your wife …

In our Lord Jesus, Love, Jeff.

P.S. These link to further reading which you may find helpful. Essays:
Separation, grace, unity;
JN Darby
'Woollen and Linen', JG Bellett

Page Top

WRONG  ATTITUDE  TOWARDS  WOMEN
The following comments were originally in a letter of
Mon, 22 Jan 2001, to Sarah Clarke.

Dear Sarah,

… Certainly there was and is a wrong attitude towards women in general and single women in particular among modern so-called 'exclusives'.

Such women had always been respected and valued by the brethren.

Most if not all younger than I am – brothers and sisters alike – will not have any personal, or other, knowledge of the position of women among the brethren prior to 1959.

Besides yourself, MB has had a number – too few relatively – of single and married women as guests.

Affectionately in our Lord Jesus, Gordon.

Page Top

PAUL  and  PETER
The  Spheres  of  their  Commissions
A reply to Richard Willoughby.

Mon, 27 May, 2002

Dear Richard,
Welcome to 'My Brethren'. Yes, I do have some comments on your remarks.

For literalness, I too prefer the translation of ethnos, in its various cases, by JND as 'nation(s)'.

Paul's commission, as the Lord explained to Ananias, was as

However, he was not "sent out by Jesus of Nazareth", but he and Barnabas were "sent forth by the Holy Spirit".

In the synagogue at "Antioch of Pisidia … many of the Jews and of the worshipping proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas", Acts 13: 14, 43.

Paul's ministry of "the glad tidings … both to Jew first and to Greek", Romans 1:16, would doubtless be supported by his great affection and concern "for my brethren, my kinsmen, according to flesh", Romans 9: 1-5.

If, as you suggest "Paul's apostleship should be seen as one in which he was sent out to the Jews of the Dispersion, rather than to Gentiles",

Matthew 28: 16-18 clearly does not limit Peter and the others to the nations, i.e. non Jews.

Time available does not allow further exploration of this interesting matter, but I trust you will find the above of value in your considerations.

In the Lord, Gordon.

UNSOLICITED  EMAIL
Abuse  of  the  Internet
A response to Gary Cuccia who says
"I have been writing devotions on the Internet for some 2 or 3 years".

To: Gary Cuccia
Wed, 21 Aug 2001

Dear Gary,
Thanks for your reply and explanation.

'My Brethren' has received earlier complaints from some guests because they believe they are the target of unsolicited and unwanted email as a result of their email addresses appearing on MB.

In the Lord, Gordon.

Page Top   Article Top

S. M. ANGLIN
Re  Baptism  and  Circumcsion
1. A response to Stephen Hesterman who disagrees with Mr. Anglin's position.
2. A response to Stephen's subsequent booklet on Baptism'.

Sat, 1 Apr 2006

Dear Stephen,
On March 7, 2006 you wrote, "I have had some correspondence with a brother about Anglin's baptism article ... Anglin likens New Testament baptism to Old Testament circumcision in the manner of the Heidelberg Catechism of 1562, and I don't believe this is supported by Scripture ... nor by the Biblical ministry of Godly men which we appreciate.

In answer to your second paragraph. As noted on 'My Brethren':

The article 'What Baptism Is And Who Should Be Baptized' on the Doctrine: Baptism page is from the fourth edition of an old booklet (no date) published by Geo. Morrish, 20, Paternoster, Square, E.C., London.

Information as to Mr. Anglin is scant, but he was evidently an able and valued teacher in the 1890's. In addition to the article on Baptism, this is borne witness to by four papers on the Ministry: S. M. Anglin page.

Your suggestion that "Anglin likens New Testament baptism to Old Testament circumcision in the manner of the Heidelberg Catechism of 1562"

In the doctrinal portions of the New Testament 'circumcision' is referred in various passages in two distinct ways":

  1. "circumcision in the flesh done with hand", Ephesians 2: 11 – and elsewhere – the literal act and public bearing of circumcision to which S.M.A. refers.

  2. "circumcision not done by hand … in the circumcision of the Christ", Colossians 2: 11. Your quotations from J.B.S. and J.T. appear to only refer to the spiritual sense of circumcision for us as in Colossians and do not bear on the point you raise.

As to "the Biblical ministry of Godly men which we appreciate" – on that same Doctrine: Baptism page Mr. C. W. Wycherley in his well known 'Letters on Baptism', published by Stow Hill Depot, says:

I take it that a person is baptised in view of living upon earth, a sphere which is, as apart from Christ, under death and exposed to judgment; and not in view of going to heaven; it is the initiatory act that introduces into the Christian sphere, out of Judaism, or out of heathenism. As circumcision was in Judaism, no uncircumcised persons could partake of the privileges of the house of God; to attempt to do so was profanity. In like manner, no unbaptised person has any footing in Christianity. He may have faith in Christ, know forgiveness of sins, and be fit for heaven, but he is not a Christian outwardly until baptised. He puts on Christ outwardly in baptism, and not by faith. Every person born into the world, is born into the world (and he remains in the world), outwardly exposed to its condemnation until he in figure dies out of it. He may be a believer and entitled to eternal forgiveness, or even have it in the faith of his soul, but his position is anomalous; he is outwardly in association with a system that is under judgment. If you say, 'Why?' my answer is, 'Because God has been pleased to connect these things together, and what He has joined man should not put asunder'.

And Mr. J. Taylor, in 'Spiritual Formation for Assembly Service (5)' Glasgow, July 1-3, 1947, on Colossians 3: 1-17 says:

It is clear that the part of the chapter read involves the conclusion, in the apostle's mind, of the doctrinal part of the epistle. It therefore reverts back to chapter 2 especially, again recalling what we have had before us as to the crucial side of the subject and the place death has in these chapters. In chapter 3 (including what is said of it in chapter 2) the allusion is to baptism. It is, as it were, what each one of us has had our hand in, for baptism enters into Christianity as a public sign as over against the Passover or circumcision in Israel,   J.T. 63: 84.

We believe the above answers your objection to S.M.A.'s position as to which you say that "baptism in New Testament times is not analagous to circumcision in Old Testament times and does not 'supersede' it".

The following dictionary definitions show that these words leave room for a general likeness of terms without claiming absolute exactness:

"analogous adj. having resemblance; similar; corresponding in certain ways"

"analogy n. partial similarity between things that are somewhat different".

From the above we trust you will understand why we cannot accept your conclusion that "it is clear that Anglin's traditional teaching as to circumcision and baptism is not Biblically sound and should not be relied on as a basis for the baptism of infants in a believer's household".

But lest anyone, from your statement above, should think that Mr. Anglin is espousing 'infant baptism' as practised among the sects we repeat his remarks to clarify his position:

Nobody amongst us, that I know of, contends for infant baptism as such, that is, that infants ought to be baptized because they are infants; those, therefore who are opposing this are combating an imaginary error of their own devising.

That some infants ought to be baptized I have no doubt, not because they are infants, but because they are the children of believing parents; and that believing parents ought to have their children baptized I am equally assured of; but as this is the chief point of dissent with many we will go into it more fully.

All arguments considered, Mr. Anglin's article will remain on 'My Brethren' without qualification.

Despite having to disagree, Stephen, be assured that we do appreciate both your brotherly interest in what appears on 'My Brethren' and the fact that, as we believe, there is a great body of teaching which we all value and hold.

Affectionately in our Lord Jesus, Gordon and Jeff.

Page Top   Article Top

'Baptism' by S. E. Hesterman

Wed, 5 Apr 2006

Dear Gordon,
I received your email reply, and I would like to send you and Jeff a booklet with several articles concerning baptism, including one by C. H. Mackintosh.

I would be thankful for your impressions after prayerfully considering these articles.

Love in Christ to you both. Your brother in Him,

Stephen Hesterman.

Mon, 1 May 2006

Dear Stephen,
Dear Stephen, We received your booklet 'Baptism' which you asked us to consider "prayerfully". We have both carefully reviewed the articles and offer our comments.

Jeff was brought up in an Anabaptist type group and baptised eight full years after his confession, his wife, baptised with the same group and then re-baptised only a few short years later in order to join the local Baptists with her parents.

We believe that you are mistaken in your interpretation and the position you have now taken, but in view of your definite rejection of what we believe is sound ministry on the subject there does not appear to be any value in answering all of your remarks point by point.

It is interesting to note that when Gordon left the legal sect in the early 1970's, in his disillusionment he sought various points of doctrine to attack, seeking to justify both his position and the state of things.

We note that you only lightly object to J.N.D.'s views of textual matters –

Also, there are several remarks you make which cause us serious concern:

Page 9: "F.E.R.'s teaching shows the influence of unbiblical Anglican church teachings and practices as to baptism."

Page 11: "Here J.T. downplays the importance of infants … And when J.T. says that it is not infant baptism that is being advanced, is he not playing with words?"

Page 11: "it is also sobering to consider J.T.'s household conditions and the evil influence which arose out of it …"

Page 12: "… cleverly worded statements in the Wycherley letters",

Page 13: "C.W.W.'s clever use of the phrase 'strict letter' … tends to unfairly bias the readers' mind to devalue the authority of Scripture."

What saddens us is that your tendency to use such pejorative remarks – in the manner of those we have left – serves to discredit the ministers personally not just their ministry – servants whose commitment, devotion and service, we believe, far exceeds ours and yours.

Having published your position, as you have, tends to make it unchangeable but, nevertheless, we hope and trust that you will "prayerfully" reconsider your views.

Andrew Robertson, to whom you also sent your booklet, shares our concerns.

Affectionately In our Lord Jesus, Gordon and Jeff.

Page Top   Article Top


Your guest entries and messages will show that
the continuation of My Brethren is important to you.

Page Top