On 8/19/02, I sent a post containing my reply to a heretic named Jim Blackburn regarding his letter entitled "The Thief on the Cross." Mr. Blackburn responded. My response to him is below.
One of your paragraphs says it all:
"Where in the Bible does it state we are to 'believe in the atoning blood'? I can't find it. There is this statement, however. 'Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.' Acts 16:31 You continually bring theology into the picture, even though you state, 'Theology does not save' - 'theology does not play a part in the ground of salvation. Knowledge of doctrine is not a prerequisite to salvation.'"
Wow. I am amazed at the depth of your blindness. You think that "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ" does not include believing in the atoning blood of Jesus Christ. Incredible. You think the command "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ" is devoid of a command to believe doctrine. Well, Jim, I challenge you to define for me "the Lord Jesus Christ" without using any doctrine. If you command people to "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ," what are you commanding people to believe? Is "the Lord Jesus Christ" a wombat? A dog? A tree? A river? No, you say? He's the Son of God? Uh-oh - you just brought THEOLOGY into the picture. You brought the DOCTRINE of Christ's PERSON into the picture. You can't do that. And what about this "Lord Jesus Christ"? What did he do? Did he live a normal life and die of old age? Did he sin just like the rest of us? No, you say? He lived a perfectly righteous life and died on the cross for people? Uh-oh - you just brought THEOLOGY into the picture again. You brought the DOCTRINE of Christ's WORK into the picture. You can't do that. So tell me, Jim - what does a doctrine-less, theology-free "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ" mean?
To God alone be the glory,
Marc D. Carpenter
E-mails, Forums, and Letters