Author: W. Keith Brenton

The New Patternism?

/ W. Keith Brenton / 17 Comments

I just commented on Jay Guin’s excellent blog (on the topic of George Barna/Frank Viola’s Pagan Chrisitanity? and church autonomy):

Is it morally wrong to have (or serve under) a hierarchical system of church government? Is congregational – or even city-wide – autonomy morally superior?

I have another problem, and it’s with Pagan Christianity? (the new version; the only one I’ve read).

Why is the church model that Barna and Viola insist upon the one at Corinth? If we want to resort to true first-century primitivism, why not the church at Jerusalem at the end of Acts 2? Why not meet every day – at homes and at our places of worship? stick to the apostles’ teachings, have fellowship, pray, break bread, and even sell our possessions and give to the poor?

To me, all of the debate over church structure falls into the category of time misspent. Go be Christ to the world, and let church be church … whenever, wherever Christians gather to worship and serve God. Let the shepherds lead by following Christ, and let the flock follow.

Apologies to Dr. McCoy in Star Trek VI, but this ain’t rocket surgery.

Yes, I think it’s very interesting that all kinds of writers are returning to scripture – even at the cost of cherished church tradition – to seek out the way God wants followers of Christ to gather, worship, self-govern, structure hierarchy and a gazillion other things. And that some are coming to conclusions that are similar and sometimes identical to conclusions that Restoration leaders of more than a century ago formulated.

At the same time, I see a gathering danger that all it may lead to is Patternism, Wave II. (I pray I’m wrong.)

Face it folks, if we try to use scripture as some sort of blueprint to build a structure on our own foundation – or as a roadmap to a destination short of the one God intends for us, which is at home, with Him forever – we are tempting failure and arrogance and the lure of having the knowledge of good and evil … and sin.

There is one pattern. He is Jesus, the Christ.

We are to follow Him. If that seems too difficult, we can follow evangelists like Paul, or shepherds who follow Him. They are to lead us to Him.

That is the purpose of scripture, too. If we can come closer to being Christ in this world, I feel confident that the rest will fall into place: God will govern us. He will be our King. We will serve in His kingdom. Absent clear, specific commandments in scripture – however we do that under His Kingship seems to have been left up to us, hasn’t it? (It is a simple plan that has the virtue of never having been tried … for about the last 1900 years.)

Trying to make a blueprint or roadmap out of scripture leaves us with a document that is full of holes and blank spaces, because that isn’t its purpose. God could have easily filled in all the specifics we want to know about what to do, and how, where and when. (It would have been a GARGANTUAN document, yet He could have.) But He doesn’t. He tells us who He is, and expresses His desire for us to seek Him.

The holes and blank spaces are part of His design:

Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field. – Genesis 2:19-20, emphasis mine

God could have foreknown what the man would name the critters, but He wanted to see. From the beginning, He gave us choice, in order to see what we would choose after having become aware of His goodness and love toward us.

So He doesn’t answer every specific question about who, what, when, where or how we are to do.

He shows us Whom we need to be.

At the same time, God didn’t give Moses a map of the wilderness and turn him loose to make the best sense of it that he could and somehow reach the promised land. No, God went with Moses and Israel (and led them in circles when they disobeyed) until He brought them where He wanted them to be all along.

He does the same with us – He gives us His very Spirit within to help us find His nature within a volume of collected works that is neither blueprint nor roadmap – but biography … the story of God and us.

Why do we still think that searching the scripture in order to “do church right” will somehow lead us closer to God, rather than trying to be more like God in Christ, and just seeing where it leads us?

If we start filling in the holes and blank spaces the way we think they should be filled, where will that lead us?

Patternism presumes that there is only one “right” way to “do church” or anything else, and that God has encrypted it in scripture, and given us rational minds to correctly decrypt it and then follow it or else. There are no holes, no blank spaces. And silence gives condemnation.

Was there only one “right” name for each animal that Adam named?

Is there only one “right” way for groups of God’s people to be governed under His sovereignty – centralized or autonomous? If so, which one is it?

On questions like these, patternism says we can and must know – and must condemn all dissenters – or be damned ourselves.

Grace says we can and must reflect God’s love and righteousness.

We’ve been given choice. It’s a simple one to make.

Ain’t no rocket surgery.

Pray for Kinney

/ W. Keith Brenton / 8 Comments

I wanted y’all to know I just read in an e-mail church bulletin from my church family in Abilene (Highland Church of Christ) a prayer request for:

“Kinney Mabry – son of Gary Mabry, chemistry teacher at AHS – in Kerrville hospital with double pneumonia, as well as being anemic”

… and I’m guessing it’s our favorite preacherman. So I ask you to pray for our brother while he’s ill and away from the keyboard.

I Will Get In Trouble For This

/ W. Keith Brenton / 7 Comments

I just read the first two sections of Alan Hirsch’s The Forgotten Ways, and I know I will have a difficult time proceeding.

There are plenty of books in the market today which analyze the market in which Christianity currently finds itself and each one’s author feels certain that he or she has discerned the way in which Christians need to conduct the commerce of Christ in it.

The way.

And that’s where I have the problem.

Superimposing what may have worked in one culture, time, or place – even in the first century – and concluding that it is the way for the church to work here and now.

As managing editor for New Wineskins, as a blogger, as a member of the support staff for the ministry at a good-sized metro church, as a dad and a husband and just as a follower of Christ … I have read a few of these books. Many have superb points to make. Some may even be inarguable. A few might even be, dare I say, inspired – in some way, at least. Not all of them claim to be the way to do church in 21st century America, but virtually all leave that strong implication.

I admire the credentials of many of these authors. I cannot help but salute their attempts to write toward that goal. And I tend to believe that the motivation of most of them is pure – they truly, deeply want to help promote the story of Christ in a world that is increasingly unfamiliar with Him and uncaring about Him. Most are not in the business of writing these books to be in the business of making money writing these books.

Part of the problem is that I have a background in marketing, advertising, public relations, and journalism.

There is no such thing as a single, contiguous, uniform, universal, predictable, cross-sectionable, profilable, 21st century America. (Hirsch’s work recognizes this, but it does not seem to deter him from coming to his conclusions – many of which I happen to agree with, so far.)

So the attempt to lock down the way to do church in 21st century America is like trying to manufacture one-size-fits all unisex underwear, or a single-color skin-tone adhesive bandage.

And the other main part of the problem I have with this genre of books is that I feel not only is the target missed, but that the wrong target is being aimed at.

The target they’re aiming at – one way or another – is “doing church.” Not always, but often. The emphasis is on analyzing and contextualizing and revolutionizing and rethinking and reparadigm-ing and reimagining.

What’s the right target?

I think it’s being Christ in the world. And many of the books I’ve read refer to this, though too many refer to it as a way that should form and inform doing church, as if that were the target – just as too many books of a previous generation refer to doing church right as the way to be Christ in the world. There’s nothing essentially wrong with reading – or writing – about those things. But reading, writing, thinking, pondering, discussing, and debating is time-consuming. Could that time be better spent?

My friend David Underwood is always encouraging me to write a book. The reason I haven’t been able to, David, is that I am afraid I will end up writing a book that is essentially no different in its target than any of the ones I’ve already read – and far less informed. Far too much of what I’ve written on this blog has been concerned with the way of doing church right.

There is one Way; one Truth; one Life.

We need to be living it.

I need to be living it.

If we do, church will follow. We’ll gather because we can’t help ourselves. We love each other; we love God through His Son Jesus, the Christ. Getting those two life passions together in our lives will be inevitable.

We’ll worship Him because we simply can’t avoid it. We’ll spend time in His word in order to know how; what pleases Him most and we’ll do it because it will become second nature to us. We’ll accommodate what speaks to others in worship and they’ll participate in what speaks to us in worship because we are completely given over to our love for God and His children. We’ll get together in groups with whom we naturally communicate, and we’ll be driven by our love for others with whom we don’t – to the point where we’ll get together in groups with them, too.

We will be unable to NOT worship, because our lives will be continual worship – giving of self to others out of devotion to them and to God.

This “method” isn’t reductionism. It’s just simple. It isn’t doctoral-thesis-in-ecclesial-missiology stuff.

It’s the nature of Christ and you can find it in any Bible.

And it’s what we need to be all about.

The church at Philippi began differently from the church at Ephesus, or Jerusalem, or Corinth. They worshiped in different places: by the river then at Lydia’s house; at a synagogue and then at a lecture hall; at the temple and from house to house; at a synagogue and then at the synagogue ruler’s house. They may have worshiped differently: how often they shared the communal meal, in what way, how many spoke and for how long.

The plain fact is, there are modern ways of being Christ that work for modern people. There are post-modern ways of being Christ that work for post-modern people. The measure of effectiveness for any way of being Christ is not solely quantiative, nor is it solely qualitative. There are right ways to worship God, and there are wrong ways. There are right ways to communicate His Story to others, and there are wrong ways.

There is no single “right” way to “do church.”

I know this is not the position that a lot of folks will want me to take. Some will want me to say that God has spoken clearly, we have understood perfectly, and if we do not worship Him as a church in the way we have “always” worshiped, we will go to hell and take innocent converts with us. Others will want me to say that we should be open to any way that one can worship – whatever works for any given person is okay with God even if it seems absurd to others; and too many souls are being lost because we don’t encourage them to worship any way they want to – for instance, as gatherings of gay pride.

I can’t say either of those things.

I can only recommend constantly referring to scripture – not as a cookie-cutter pattern, but as a guide revealing as much of God’s will for us as we must have – and constantly supplicating the Holy Spirit – not as a magic 8-ball – but as the very presence of the God who wants us to have answers to our questions about serving Him, and also wants us to work out our salvation in fear and trembling.

On this Independence Day, I wish we could declare independence from the tyranny of both the idea that “the old way isn’t working and must be changed” and the idea that “the way we’ve always done it is the only right way.”

That’s all I can recommend, whether I write a long, expensive book about it or a medium-long, free blog post:

Discernment.

And I will almost certainly get in trouble for it.

Outside the Walls: Unauthorized Worship, Part 4

/ W. Keith Brenton / 7 Comments

The high priest carries the blood of animals into the Most Holy Place as a sin offering, but the bodies are burned outside the camp. And so Jesus also suffered outside the city gate to make the people holy through his own blood. Let us, then, go to him outside the camp, bearing the disgrace he bore. For here we do not have an enduring city, but we are looking for the city that is to come.

Through Jesus, therefore, let us continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise—the fruit of lips that confess his name. And do not forget to do good and to share with others, for with such sacrifices God is pleased. ~ Hebrews 13:11-16

Under the first covenant, the people of Israel encamped in a circle around the center of worship: the tabernacle. The Levite clans were to surround it as the first layer; each of four clans was assigned a compass point and a particular responsibility along with it (Numbers 3). Wherever the cloud signifying the Lord’s presence went or stayed, the entire camp followed or remained (Numbers 9:15-23). Sin had no place in that camp. Offerings for sin were to be released or burned and discarded outside it (Leviticus 16:1, Exodus 29:14, Leviticus 4:21, 16:27, et al). The bodies of Aaron’s sons Nadab and Abihu were taken outside of the camp, away from the sanctuary (Leviticus 10:4). Even sickness and temporary uncleanness and Gentiles were to be outside the camp (you can look all these up; they’re too numerous to list).

No sacrifice for sin was to be made outside the camp, and the penalty was excommunication from Israel (Leviticus 17:3-7). And no one outside the priest’s family could consume what remained of the sacrifice on the altar at the sacred center of the camp (10:31).

But the writer of the letter to Christians (and seekers) among the people of Israel said that all that had changed.

Worship is now acceptable outside the camp; outside the city walls, where the sacrifice of Jesus had taken place. All are welcome to participate in that sacrifice – and not only by consuming Him, but also by being consumed with confessing His name and doing good, and sharing with others.

That is what Jesus taught before He died and that is what His followers taught after He was raised and returned to the throne to serve as intercessory high priest before God.

And that, my good friends, is pure innovation.

Nothing in the law spells that out as acceptable by God’s commands to and through Moses. Poets and prophets would warn that He desired mercy above sacrifices (Psalm 51:17, Amos 5:21-24, Hosea 6:6). Jesus would teach it (Matthew 9:13; 12:7) and personify it in both His life and His death – and His followers would say that we should imitate it. Paul would cast it as our worship (Romans 12:1); Peter would describe it as our priesthood (1 Peter 2:5).

But it was not the law of the wall and the camp.

Yet we continue to gather inside the walls of our so-called holy places one hour of one day each week – our expensive automobiles encircling the sanctuary like encamped Israelites – and seem to think that the first covenant is somehow still in place; that all of our worship for that week takes place at that time and that enclosure. We sacrifice our 2.5% (according to the Barna Group), sing a few songs, consume a bit of bread and a sip of juice, pray a moment, hear a tidbit of hope or reprimand, spend our 0.59% of the hours in that week glorifying God and we’re done. We’re good. We’re graced.

While, outside the walls, sin reigns. People are unclean there. They are the dis-graced. They are sick; they are poor; they hurt; they hurt others and cheat others and kill each other; they lie and covet and steal and worship self … not really that much unlike the people who gather within:

Us.

In our supposed conformity to command, haven’t we taken a turn back in the wrong direction? Back to law, back to inside-ism, back to priest-ism and clan-ism and time-ism and place-ism?

Should we not return to practicing the innovation bought by blood, paid in full, offered for free and open to all: any place, any time, anyone?

Shouldn’t we worship outside the camp, sharing His disgrace with the dis-graced, and bringing His grace through doing good and sharing what we have?

Would that not please God as much or more than all of the worship we could muster inside the sanctuary?

At the Table: Unauthorized Worship, Part 3

/ W. Keith Brenton / 16 Comments

The Passover meal was celebrated by Israel at twilight, in haste, on the fourteenth day of their first month each year, by command of God. The commandments and specifications regarding it were numerous, and always tied to the story of God saving Israel with a mighty hand from captivity in Egypt. The penalty for disobedience was strict: to be cut off – excommunicated – from the people of Israel.

The only exception that God made was a time when the nation re-instituted the practice on the fourteenth day of the second month after many years of not observing it at all (2 Chronicles 30).

No stranger to the commanded custom of Passover, Jesus told his closest followers that He had looked forward to celebrating it with them in Jerusalem that final time.

When the hour came, Jesus and his apostles reclined at the table. And he said to them, “I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I tell you, I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in the kingdom of God.” After taking the cup, he gave thanks and said, “Take this and divide it among you. For I tell you I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you. ~ Luke 22:14-20

No one in Israel’s history before was ever recorded as identifying the matzoh with a body, let alone his own. No one was quoted as identifying the blood of the grape as human blood, certainly not his own. The hint of cannibalism would have taken the Israelite of century one back to days when Samaria and later, Jerusalem, had been under siege and about which a song of lament asked, “Look, O LORD, and consider: Whom have you ever treated like this? Should women eat their offspring, the children they have cared for?” That abomination had been prophesied early on by God Himself (Leviticus 26:29).

Jesus was also no stranger to their disgust at the notion; He had encountered it while teaching in Capernaum (John 6:43-66).

Nothing in the law permitted anyone to speak in such a way about the Passover as He did at the table, nor to turn it in any direction away from that moment of God’s salvation from slavery in Egypt.

But Jesus had a greater salvation to achieve for all people and all time – not just Israel of 2,500 years before – and He had in mind this meal as the way His followers would remember it.*

So He innovated.

I don’t know what else you can really call it, but “innovation.” We can look back on it and say that Passover and the Lord’s Supper were type and fulfillment; but that is the advantage that hundreds of years of history gives us. For the people around the table in the upper room, it was innovation: taking something familiar and putting it to a use it had never had before; it was the act of starting something for the first time; it was a change in customs and contrary to established customs, manners, or rites.

And those who followed Jesus adopted it as a new part of their culture. They recognized His authority as the Son of God to institute it.

But how often did they observe it?

If they followed the 2,500-year-old pattern of Israel, they would have celebrated it one time a year, on the fourteenth day of the first month.

If the term “broke bread” has the same significance in Acts 2:42-47 as it does later in Acts 20:7 and 1 Corinthians 10:16, they did so frequently; perhaps as often as daily, or at least weekly.

Do we have a record of how often Jesus instructed them to observe it?

The closest we can come is Paul’s recollection of the event – which was related to him either by man or God’s Spirit, since he was not present at it – and that is the phrase ” ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.’ For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (1 Corinthians 11:25-26). The first “whenever” seems to be quoting Jesus. The second seems to be Paul’s reminder.

How often is “whenever”?

Obviously, the when of it is not nearly so important as the how of the Supper: in remembrance.

So, it would seem, at the table Jesus left to His followers the privilege of innovation as well – regarding the when of it. And perhaps sometimes it was daily, and sometimes it was weekly. (One can only assume weekly from Acts 20:7 from the fact that no mention was made of breaking bread at the Feast of Unleavened Bread – the Passover – twelve days before when the mission team was at Philippi.)

Most church fellowships would argue convictedly that Sunday – the first day of the week – is the only day authorized by scripture to celebrate the Lord’s Supper. Some hold for weekly observance; others for annually or even semi-annually.

But I have to wonder, in view of two things:

  • the early followers’ enthusiasm and the possibility that they may have celebrated it daily

  • the implication even from the Old Testament (2 Chronicles 30) that the penitence of heart was more crucial than the date of the Passover

… I have to wonder if the how has always been more important than the when with regard to feasting in honor of God’s salvation among us.

And I have to wonder if we aren’t, in fact, expected to innovate in some matters of when we celebrate that communicate the grateful, penitent, anticipatory how of our hearts.

*Someday I hope to blog about why I believe the Bible is one testament, though two covenants.

I Am A Centrist

/ W. Keith Brenton / 10 Comments

I do not like it when people use labels for other people. I understand the usefulness of them in describing a set of characteristics, beliefs, points of view, or praxis. I also understand the abuse of them when people use them against other people.

I’m okay with calling myself a centrist, and am about to explain why and what that means to me.

But, as a general rule, labels divide. Labels allow one to classify a group of individual people and assign to them a set of characteristics or beliefs or practices to which perhaps only some of them adhere.

Labels allow one to be crass and insulting toward a whole group of people and therefore avoid the stigma of being crass and insulting toward just one person.

Labels aren’t always accurate by common definition. What may constitute “conservative” and “liberal” to one person may be wholly different from the way another person defines the terms.

These things are true whether you’re discussing esoteric theories or politics or religion or Christianity.

I suspect I would be described as “liberal” by many of the people in the fellowship of Christianity where I identify myself. I suspect I would be described as “conservative” by a lot of other people who think of themselves as Christians.

So what am I?

I’ve decided I am a centrist.

I seek to be centered on Jesus Christ.

Everything else is peripheral. That’s not to say that everything else is unimportant. But if any facet of “everything else” does not have its roots in Christ, its trunk in Christ, its lifesap and its branches and twigs and leaves and fruit in Christ – it’s fit for nothing more than to be cut down and thrown into the fire (Matthew 3:10).

If any instruction of Christ is being neglected and withering on the vine, it needs to be tended and watered and nurtured and grown.

If your view of a certain doctrine or mine, whether considered liberal or conservative, does not bear good fruit, it cannot be of Christ and it needs to be pruned out.

There were plenty of doctrines in century one that were not of God through Christ and His Spirit, but of man. Of one of them – circumcision required in order to become a Christian – Paul wrote:

For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.~ Galatians 5:6

Responding to the teachings that Jesus was either man or God but not both, John wrote:

Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist—he denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also. ~ 1 John 2:22-23

This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world. ~ 1 John 4:2-3

On the subject of taking up labels – even self-applied ones – Paul said:

I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought. My brothers, some from Chloe’s household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. What I mean is this: One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephas”; still another, “I follow Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized into[b] the name of Paul? I am thankful that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, so no one can say that you were baptized into my name. (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.) For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power. For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. ~ 1 Corinthians 1:10-18

Notice what’s important in these citations: Who Jesus is. What He teaches. What He does.

Notice what’s not important: What man teaches about how man sees things.

Notice what’s even less important than Christ: baptism. Yes, even baptism takes a back seat to the gospel. Because if the gospel is preached – if the Story of Jesus is told – then it becomes obvious that baptism is one of the important ways God wants for us to have a new life and become a part of His kingdom. Baptism is rooted, trunked, branched, twigged, leafed and fruited in Christ.

So it cannot be the center of the gospel.

Neither can any of the other essentials of faith. Neither can any of the peripherals of faith. And certainly, neither can any of the matters which are of a faith that is not centered in Christ.

If I teach anything, say anything, write anything, do anything that is not centered in Christ, I beg you to call me on the carpet. It’s not just important to me. It is the single most important aspect of the way I live my life.

I hope to take your correction humbly, positively and penitently if found true and valid. I hope you will permit me the same grace if I feel compelled to challenge the way you view or practice your life in Christ. I believe there is divine wisdom in the fact that God puts us, the lonely, in His family in order to encourage and edify each other.

That is part of faith expressing itself in love. That is the very nature of Jesus, the Christ.

And nothing else counts.

The Bible tells me so.

David Kinnaman Interview is Now Live

/ W. Keith Brenton / 1 Comment

My interview with David Kinnaman, president of the Barna Group and author of unChristian: What a New Generation Really Thinks About Christianity … and Why It Matters, is live on the New Wineskins e-zine site at ‘Not Enough to be Transformed.’

The title is taken from the next-to-the-last paragraph in the interview. There is more to the interview that you can hear on the MP3 recording of it, but it seemed like a powerful observation and a good closing line.

In the course of the interview, I mentioned some other books which might seem to be in the same vein: Jim and Casper go to Church; They Like Jesus But Not the Church – but I would have to say that unChristian has the more valuable approach to the subject, with statistical as well as anecdotal research to offer.

In addition, it includes short essays by well-known Christian leaders from a variety of evangelical backgrounds (such as Dan Kimball, Brian McLaren, Rick Warren, John Stott, Chis Seay, Jim Wallis and Chuck Colson), responding to the information presented in the previous chapters.

But I’ll hold my other thoughts on the book. I’m working on a review of it for New Wineskins‘ next issue (July – October) and I don’t want to preview all of them here!

I Can’t Find It

/ W. Keith Brenton / 19 Comments

Where do we get the oft-repeated notion that “at baptism we contact the blood of Christ”?

Where does that come from in scripture?

We can go to 1 John, where the passages about water and blood are cryptic at best and the connection to baptism tenuous at most. I think there might be a connection, but it is not explicit – and the concept there is that they are two out of three different things that testify; not one that connects you to another.

If we go to passages like Hebrews 9:14 or 1 Peter 1:2 and tat them to baptism, we will have difficulty as immersionists – for both of these talk about being sprinkled with blood.

If we are willing to sew two unrelated passages together and form such a notion, I guess we could go to 1 Peter 3:21 and lap-stitch it to Romans 5:9 and say the magic words quid pro quo. But I am left unsatisfied with that. (Or with any concatenation of scriptures which are not generally aimed in the same direction – whether it’s Romans 6:3 with John 19:34 or any other patchwork quilt of scriptural scraps and the thread of human logic.)

Lots of things save us, including baptism. Can we embroider any of them in the same way and say that through any of them we contact the blood of Christ? As if it were exclusively through any one of them that we do?

I think I could make a better case for the notion that we contact the blood of Christ when we commune together at His table. After all, that’s what the cup contains. (1 Corinthians 10:16-17)

Don’t misunderstand; I’m not saying that the phrase “at baptism we contact the blood of Christ” is in error or ignobly born or repeated in an intentionally misleading way.

I’m saying that I simply don’t find that notion expressed in scripture.

I’m saying that we often repeat it as if baptism were the only way in which we contact the blood of Christ – because we don’t say that about any other act of penitence or obedience or Christ-imitation – and that, therefore, the reason for saying it while excluding anything else is suspect.

I’m saying that there is more to a life that seeks salvation than simply being immersed, or confessing Christ, or repenting, or even believing for just that one moment after an invitational hymn is sung. Baptism is not just the means to the end of salvation, but to the beginning of it. Baptism is an incredible gift, through which we as believers receive many others.

It is undeniable that His blood and our salvation are inextricably knotted.

When, and where, and how He applies it to cleanse us is not a matter of great concern to me. I trust Him. He will do what is right by each of us who live a life of faith in Him – at His own time, at His own place, in His own way.

That kind of life involves constantly confessing Him, repeatedly repenting, boldly believing, and immutably immersing ourselves in His way of living.

I find that throughout scripture.