I think Mr. Zeller’s contempt for Landmarkers is seen in his sarcasm when hewrites:
“If you consider yourself to be a Landmark Baptist and if any of the following ‘errors’ do not apply to you, then you are to be commended.”
Such a seemingly pridefulposition as he takes is typical of “Bible church” people. I well remember when I wascaptive to their system how we used to “look down our spiritual noses” at those “poor misled Baptists” and their narrow and shallow views.
The Aim of This Work
As a busy preacher doing mission work in a former communist country I havelittle time to reply to such an enemy as Mr. Zeller. My situation is aggravated because of ongoing weaknesses due to health problems. However, since Mr. Zeller has fired firstand hurled what we suppose are his best shots at Bible-truth, I dare to take pen in handagainst his salvo. We will fire our rounds out of the Old Reliable Weapon, the WrittenWord of God and believe that the elect people of God will be satisfied that Mr. Zeller’sfortress is reduced to rubble and that he is routed from the field.
“1) The Error of Making the “One Baptism” of Ephesians 4:5 a Reference toWater Baptism.”
Here Mr. Zeller would have us believe that the “one baptism” in Eph.4:5 refers to some kind of “Spirit-baptism.”
Circular Arguments and Careless Methods
The careful reader will notice that Mr. Zeller practices an amazing feat of circular reasoning, basing his major propositions on statements he has not yet proved. When hedoes this his conclusions fail completely. Furthermore, he displays in this section of hisa most careless method of Bible interpretation. He assumes that Paul, the author of Ephesians, is writing to a “universal, invisible church” – and by that he wants us tounderstand that he means every child of God. (He assumes such a “church” exists anddoes not bother here to prove it, so his argument falls flat, being based as it is on anunproved premise.) But he goes beyond carelessness and instead of dealing with thepassage accurately, he says that Paul is writing about the common experiences of everybeliever when it is obvious that Paul is writing about the common experiences of themembers of the Ephesian Church. Mr. Zeller does not consider that Paul is writing to areal, local, New Testament kind of Church! He goes off into a discourse insisting thatthere is a oneness that all believers share, failing to notice that Paul writes of the unity or oneness that should exist in the Church at Ephesus.There is indeed a vital union between Christ and every true believer! This isclearly taught in the Bible, but the Scriptures do not teach that every believer that ever has lived or ever shall live has a vital union with every other true believer. Such an ideaapproaches unto some kind of mysticism. He misses completely Paul’s pointedmessage to this congregation as to how they should live together and serve together asone because of the things they share in common. Instead he theorizes on some kind of universal unity he imagines is taught in the Bible.
Sound Rules of Bible Interpretation Discarded
He tries to say that the “one baptism” of Eph. 4:5 is not water baptism because
“Water baptism is not something that all saved persons share in common.”
But he failsto note that Paul was writing to a (local) Church of the New Testament sort and “water