The church of Christ is the only church one must be in to be saved.

I would like to first thank WFTL for challenging me to this debate. I also want to express gratitude for him personally. From the profile image, though it is pretty small, it is my guess that he is a US Army Veteran and I wish him a happy belated Veteran’s Day. Thank you for your service in preserving my freedom. Thank God for you. The Lord bless you and keep you; The Lord make His face shine upon you, And be gracious to you; The Lord lift up His countenance upon you, And give you peace. (Num 6:24-26) As I read the opening statement, two fallacies jumped out at me and I will address those first. Hasty Generalization [1] WFTL lists six criteria for the one true church Christ established from a very small pool of information largely based on the Epistles and Acts of the Apostles, and he does so under the assumption that it is, “History of the churches of Christ according to scripture.” Which is mere assertion and nothing more. To further demonstrate, these claims are so general that many denominations I can think of would say Amen to all of them. If I were trying to prove my church was the one true church, I would cite evidence that would distinguish my church from every other church. What is particularly striking about his list is not the generality and vagueness but that WFTL knows this as he preempts my argument by saying, “although my opponent may state otherwise by claiming all churches say the same thing, or, that there are other churches mentioned in the bible, which I will prove to be false.” He knows full well that other churches meet that criteria and he wants this debate to flow in a particular direction. Enter fallacy two. Shifting the Burden of Proof [2] If you could not see it from the beginning, WFTL makes it clear in the end, “now my opponent will have to prove that the churches of Christ is not the one and only true church.” Unfortunately for WFTL, I am not the one who has to prove his church or any other church is the one true church. That responsibility is set squarely on the person making the Affirmative claim which is, “My (WFTL’s) proposition is the church of Christ is the only church one must be in to be saved.” Naturally, to do so WFTL will have to prove that the Churches of Christ is the One True Church Jesus Christ promised to establish in Matt 16:16-18 and he will not get there simply by saying that other churches are not that church and so win by default. He cannot prove his point by disproving others. Church, not Churches WFTL headlines his six points with, “History of the churches of Christ according to scripture.” But Christ did not promise to establish Churches but one Church. Matt 16:18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church…” WFTL cites Acts 2:41-47 demonstrating the work of the power of the Holy Spirit though the first of the apostles, Peter, after preaching at the Sanhedrin and the rapid growth of the church that followed but it says nothing of the church multiplying into churches. Baptism by Accountable Believers WFTL finally cites a gospel along with a verse from the preceding section from acts and presumably this is another watermark that would identify only the Churches of Christ but notice the passages only say that believers should be baptized and that Christ commands his Apostles to baptize but not that they are the only ones who can baptize nor are instructions given on how to baptize. Again, no defining watermark that would demonstrate that his church members can baptize and others cannot. How does the Churches of Christ follow the Pattern? WFTL says the church he belongs to follows a pattern given in 1 John 1:1-3 in which John writes about the apostolic witness to the Word of life, Jesus Christ, so that by their experience we to can have fellowship with Him and the Father but again, he does not demonstrate how his church does this and other do not. Again, no unique watermark. Because Acts 20:7 & 1 Corinthians 16:2 In points 4 &5, WFTL is now citing verses without explination. I know it can't be for lack of space as he used less than 3,800 of the 10,000 characters that are allotted to each person per round. Again, there is nothing that would distinguish his church from another. As a Catholic, I can tell you we tithe to our church without waiting for our overseer to arrive and have communion every Sunday as well. Again, the Churches of Christ aren’t the only ones who fit this pattern and it is up to WFTL to show us why his way is different than any other church with evidence and not simply assertion. So Jesus Told The Apostles, No Tambourines … Right ... At least it is something that would distinguish my church from WFTL’s. To address the obvious, neither Col. 3:16 nor Eph. 5:19 condemn the use of musical instruments nor bouncing balls during worship music. I wish they condemned the Christian Rock for worship music but they didn’t do that either. The very idea that using instruments is somehow violating worship is inconsistent with the Old Testament. 1 Sam 16:16-23 demonstrates that music with the use of instruments is very useful as David’s harp would repel a demon that would torment Saul. We can also look at Ephesians 5:19 in another light. First, we must ask, is Paul tells the Ephesians to sing and make melody with their voice alone, or is it possible to sing with your voice and make a melody with an instrument like a harp? If David had a harp for Saul, it is certainly possible so how do we know which interpretation is correct? As we all know, the bible did not fall from the sky in perfect King James English. From the Greek lexicon, the word for melody is psallo: [psallo,] to touch or play on a musical instrument, properly denotes such sacred songs or poems as are sung to stringed instruments, and may here refer to those of David; hymns.[3] If the author was trying to imply that the use of instruments was unauthorized and inconsistent with worship, why not use the word, humneó: to sing the praise of, sing hymns to, to sing a hymn, to sing singing of paschal hymns these were Psalms 113 - 118 and 136, which the Jews called the "great Hallel". [4] It is well known that the Greeks had a word for everything. If Paul wanted to convey a message that instruments were forbidden in worship, I have demonstrated that there are better words to use. If anything else, Eph 5:19 demonstrates that the Paul instructed the Ephesians to make melody with instruments in violation of Church of Christ doctrine of forbidden worship noise. In other words, the Churches of Christ worship is not the worship described in scripture. What Did The Early Church Ask For? WFTL asserts that the bible is talking about his church, but is it really? This problem of authenticity of the one true Church is nothing new to Christianity, and the bible test would not work as there was no defined canon of scripture until the late 4th century. Irenaeus, bishop of Lyon in the 2nd century, wrote Against Heresies around 175AD because there was a similar problem with the Gnostic's who claimed to have apostolic teachings but there was one simple way the one true church could tell who was really valid from a poser “It is within the power of all, therefore, in every Church, who may wish to see the truth, to contemplate clearly the tradition of the apostles manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in a position to reckon up those who were by the apostles instituted bishops in the Churches, and [to demonstrate] the succession of these men to our own times; those who neither taught nor knew of anything like what these [heretics] rave about.” [5] In other words, it was common to have a list of bishops to know they were apostolic in origin so everyone to know their bishops with their teachings could be trusted. Irenaeus, himself was ordained a bishop named Polycarp, and he was ordained by John the Evangelist, an apostle. [6] So to prove the Church of Christ is Apostolic in origin, I would have to ask as Tertullian does, “Perhaps some heretics may claim Apostolic antiquity: we reply: Let them publish the origins of their churches and unroll the catalogue of their bishops till now from the Apostles or from some bishop appointed by the Apostles, as the Smyrnaeans count from Polycarp and John, and the Romans from Clement and Peter; let heretics invent something to match this.”[7] Likewise, WFTL can end this debate rather quickly if he were to unfold his churches catalogue and show for us the line of succession between Barton W. Stone and Alexander Campbell and the Apostles. Again, WFTL has the positive claim and it is not on the Catholic Church to prove its origin but to demonstrate that this is not an impossible task, follow the number to a good online source. [8] Summery WFTL is going to have to provide some actual evidence for his claim. His proposition is not true just because he quote a bible verse and he says it is true. This begs the question. For example, let me go back to Matt. 16:18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” and said, see, the bible says the church must be apostolic because the bible says so with one clear successor as the leader of the entire church. WFTL would not accept this as evidence. Further, if I am the one making the claim, it is not on WFTL to prove me wrong, it is on me to prove I’m right. I would have the burden of proof. Likewise, it is on WFTL to prove the exclusive nature of the proposed bible verses to his church. Also, I would ask WFTL to describe his church for us rather than leave us to assume thing about his church, or churches, or whatever they are. Thank you. [1] http://tinyurl.com... [2] http://tinyurl.com... [3] http://tinyurl.com... [4] http://tinyurl.com... [5] http://tinyurl.com... [6] http://tinyurl.com... [7] ibid [8] http://tinyurl.com...