The tract with the above title has been circulated, apparently, since 1933—with a revision in 1956. Its size, when unfolded, is less than half of an 8½ by 11 piece of paper. It is published by Lifegate, Inc., whose home is Beach Grove, Indiana, but various religious groups can personalize it with their name and address printed on the front cover. This one was distributed by a local group, “The Orlando Bible Church.”
The first tipoff that this “Bible Church” does not use the Bible correctly is that the name, “Rev. James Thomas, Pastor,” appears on the front page. Evidently, no one there has ever read Matthew 23:8-11, where Jesus told His disciples (and the multitude) not to use titles that exalt mere men. Nevertheless, men have continued to praise themselves in this manner for centuries in violation of what Jesus taught.
However, the inside contents are much more disturbing because they use the Scriptures out of context and present a plan of salvation so simple that some of the things required by God are omitted. It begins innocuously enough by asking if the reader is saved and sure that he is going to heaven. It even quotes part of John 3:7, which records Jesus telling Nicodemus, “Ye must be born again.” This is a fine verse, but one wonders why they did not cite verse 5, which contains a broader, more complete statement. What Jesus said first to Nicodemus was, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” No, the tract never returns to this passage. Could it be they did not want anyone to see that water is involved in the new birth?
The author next states: “In the Bible God gives us the plan of how to be born again….” It is ironic that, rather sticking with the John 3 passage which provides more information; they begin to skip all over the New Testament instead, which makes the reader wonder, “Just how simple is this plan?”
After rightly pointing out that sin separates us from God, which causes us to be lost, the author mentions that we will all face the judgment. He also correctly speaks of God’s love and the fact that Jesus shed His blood for our sins. He further adds a brief note about repentance, but afterward departs from applying the Scriptures correctly.
Conversions
If you wanted to show someone how to be saved, would you not go to a conversion and follow it all the way through? This tract does not. It does not say, “Let us examine carefully what happened on the day of Pentecost,” which occurred shortly after Jesus ascended into heaven. After a description of Peter preaching the risen Christ, which he established from both the Old Testament prophecies and the apostles’ own eyewitness testimony of His resurrection, then it would be simple to point out that, when they asked what they should do, Peter said, “Repent and be baptized every-one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins…” (Acts 2:38). Why did they not do that? The reason is that, although the Bible teaches baptism for the remission of sins, they (even though they call themselves a Bible Church), do not believe what the Bible teaches concerning the role of baptism in salvation.
They do not go to the wonderful conversion of the queen’s treasurer in Acts 8 (or that of the Samaritans in the first part of the chapter, either). Why do they skip this important occurrence? Could it be that, when Phi-lip preached Jesus, the eunuch said, “See, here is water [remember John 3:5?]. What hinders me from being baptized?” (Acts 8:36)? When they “preach Jesus” at the Bible church, no one asks this question, and the reason is that they are not teaching the Scriptures properly. Philip told him he could if he believed. He did and was, thus following perfectly Mark 16:16.
The tract could mention Acts 10:47, where Peter asked, “Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit as well as we?” No, all of these were passed over, and they went to Acts 16, where the Philippian jailer was converted. He truly did ask Paul and Silas, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” (Acts 16:30). However, re-member that they passed over all of the preceding conversions that mention being baptized (in addition to believing and repenting); they ignored all of those so that they could get to Acts 16:31: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.” There is no nice way to say it: The tract is intentionally misleading at this point. We know that all conversions prior to this one involved baptism, but stopping at verse 31 makes it look as though the entire process of salvation involves only believing.
But what happened next? Why, one would think, from reading this tract, that the jailer then bowed down, and said, “I believe,” and that Paul said, “Hallelujah, brother, you’re saved now!” Having read prior conversions, the reader knows that such a thing did not occur—because no one was ever saved that way in the book of Acts. No, baptism in water had always been involved. Besides, what meaning did such words have to the jailer without any additional explanation? His logical question would be, “Who is this Jesus, and what do I need to believe about Him?” One would think that Paul had concluded a lengthy sermon, as Peter had on Pentecost, and that this was his final exhortation.
The fact is that Paul and Silas were just beginning to talk about the salvation that comes through Jesus, but someone just reading this tract would not know that. In fact, the very next verse says, “Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house” (Acts 16:32). The eunuch then “washed their stripes,” and “immediately he and all his family were baptized” (Acts 16:33). The “Bible Church” left out water baptism again. What makes this event truly remarkable is that it was after midnight. If the “Bible Church” baptizes, do they do so immediately when a person is convicted of the truth—or wait a few weeks? Those who see no connection between baptism and salvation wait; those who understand what the Scriptures teach desire to be baptized immediately because they know that, in doing so, they will have salvation. It was after the jailer’s baptism that the text says that “he rejoiced, having believed in God with all his household” (Acts 16:34).
This reference to the Philippian jailer is the only account of conversion mentioned, and the tract stopped before Paul and Silas ever got to explain who Jesus is. This can only be intentional—to withhold from the reader of this tract the rest of the salvation process that occurred at Philippi—culminating in the baptism of the jailer and his family in the wee hours of the morning! Is it not Satan who is deceptive? This tract leaves out the water of the new birth in John 3, omits the first significant conversion of 3,000 on the day of Pentecost, and only presents part of the conversion in Philippi.
Ironies
This tract is full of so many ironies that it is incredible. In their aversion to baptism for the forgiveness of sins, they inadvertently call attention to it—but only for those who know the Scriptures. After the quotation of Acts 16:31 (where the author stopped and refused to go any further), he writes: “Simply believe on Him….” This makes it plain that he is not going to add anything further—just simply believe, which is not the message of the New Testament.
1. The first irony is that the tract then mentions that Jesus died in our place, that He was buried, and that He arose again. He not only did not quote a pas-sage that so teaches; he did not even reference one. Why not? Because the one will bring to mind the other, and it teaches baptism. Two passages are quoted below (in their entirety), and the pertinent words have been put in bold letters.
For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day, according to the Scriptures (1 Cor. 15:3-4).
Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection (Rom. 6:3-5).
The first passage cited above supports the tract and could have safely been referenced, but it is often linked in many Bibles to Romans 6:3-5, which explains that it is through baptism that we enter into the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. In fact, that is what baptism signifies—us dying to sin, being buried, and being raised up again.
2. The second irony is their use of John 1:12, which does not refer to anyone specifically being converted but is part of the introduction to the book of John. It states that Jesus gave power to those who believed to become the sons of God. They cite it to prove “faith only,” but it merely mentions the importance of faith and is not intended as a definitive statement regarding salvation.
3. The third irony is the bold use of Romans 10:13 and the comment following it. The verse says: “For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved,” which immediately brings to mind Acts 22: 16, in which Ananias said to Saul of Tarsus: “And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.” The Scriptures thus show that the proper and effective way to call on the name of the Lord is to do so at the moment when one is being baptized for the forgiveness of sins. Many think that Saul was saved before Ananias came and spoke to him, but he still had possession of his sins, which would only be washed away when he was baptized. For that reason calling on the name of the Lord occurs rightly at baptism—not at the point of belief.
The passage in Romans 10:13 is one that emphasizes the necessity of having a preacher. No one can call on the name of the Lord unless they hear the gospel preached. However the purpose of the passage is not to provide an account of conversion, as it is spelled out in Acts 22.
Immediately after this deceptive reference to Ro-mans 10:13 (in which Acts 22:16 is not mentioned), the author of the tract writes these words: “Whosoever includes you. Shall be saved means not may-be, nor can, but shall be saved.” The inclusion of baptism as the way one calls upon the name of the Lord was mentioned previously (by us), but now compare their comments to a verse that is even more explicit—one uttered by Jesus Himself.
“He who believes and is baptized will be saved, but he who does not believe will be condemned” (Mark 16:16). What they said about Romans 10:13 would certainly be true here: “Whosoever [He, in this in-stance] includes you. Shall [will] be saved means not maybe, nor can, but shall [will] be saved.” Why did they not include this verse in which Jesus linked together faith and baptism as prerequisites of salvation? By now the reader knows why: The “Bible Church” does not believe what the Bible teaches concerning baptism being part of salvation.
The Sinner’s Prayer
Perhaps the greatest misrepresentation of this tract is what follows. It argues: “In Luke 18:13, the sinner prayed: ‘God be merciful to me, a sinner.’” Immediate-ly after this sentence, the reader is invited to say a sinner’s prayer that is much longer. The implication is that in Luke 18 there was a man desiring to become a Christian, and what he did is what everyone should do to become a Christian. This is a classic example of taking a verse out of context, and those who publish and distribute the tract know it. One wonders how “religious” people—and especially those who call them-selves a “Bible Church” could be so dishonest. Below are pertinent observations about the text.
1. Jesus was not describing how anyone becomes a Christian. He was teaching a parable (Luke 18:9).
2. The purpose of the parable was to teach a point to those who “trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others.”
3. Verses 10-11 describe a Pharisee who, when he prayed, exalted himself, and disparaged the lowly tax collector nearby.
4. The tax collector humbly reflected on how unworthy he was and said, “God be merciful to me, a sinner.”
5. Jesus praised the tax collector for his humility and said the Pharisee remained unjustified.
6. Neither Jesus nor the Pharisee referred to the tax collector as a sinner; he described himself that way.
7. Neither the Pharisee nor the tax collector was searching for salvation. They were both Jews already in a covenant relationship with God.
After this flagrant misuse of Luke 18:13, the tract has the gall to say, “Just take God at His word and claim His salvation by faith. Believe, and you will be saved.” It is clear that they have omitted baptism, which is always mentioned in connection with conversions. No prospective Christian was ever taught to say “the sinner’s prayer.” Not once! It is clear that this tract was designed to teach “faith only.” It tries to eliminate everything else, but obedience cannot be excluded, for in every conversion we see people acting on their faith and being baptized in order to have their sins forgiven.
In response to anyone who says salvation cannot be as simple as “faith only,” the writer answers that it is that simple—and Scriptural! No, they misused and misapplied the Scriptures; they have misled anyone lacking Bible knowledge who might read this tract. Apparently, the writer knew that this “simple” message was too good to be true; so he advised the reader to “read this tract over and over.” What would do much more good would be to study the Scriptures used in their context.
Final Exhortations
At the conclusion of the tract, the reader is encouraged to be baptized—but not to obtain forgiveness of sins; instead the tract asserts that all should be baptized “in obedience to the Lord as a public testimony” of their salvation, but no Scripture is provided for this declaration. The reason is that baptism is not a public proclamation that one has been saved; it is an act of obedience by which one is saved (Acts 2:38; 22:16). The people who follow the theology of this tract are not saved since they believe they were already saved before being baptized. How many people have been taught this error and are trusting in a baptism to save them that was not for the forgiveness of sins?
Finally, the tract advises that the one saved by faith only ”unite with a Bible-believing church” (which would not be the one distributing this tract). Referring to “a Bi-ble Church” implies that several choices are available, and we wonder which ones the “Orlando Bible Church” would approve of. Most churches are manmade, teach false doctrine, and have established traditions originating with men, not God. The fact is that Jesus only built, and died for, one church—the one over which He is head (Eph. 1:22-23). Let all seek that church.