"The COC's '5-step gospel plan' was never taught to anyone in Scripture, nor was it taught by anyone in Scripture."

The above (promoted by William Vanderpool, and others) is an assault on the word of God. It was designed to do damage to the Lord's church and the truth and to justify denominational teaching that does not measure up to the word of God. The Psalmist said, "The sum of your word is truth, and every one of your righteous rules endures forever" (Psalm 119:160 ESV). There are people in this world who claim to be Christians yet simply dismiss God's word. They want to limit God's conditions for salvation to just one item, instead of the "sum" or ALL of what God has commanded.

The "5-step gospel plan" (as its adversaries call it) is based upon scripture derived from examples of conversion and comprises not a human denominational doctrine but conditions for being added to the family of God. These steps, which happen to be five, are not any more unreasonable, unscriptural, or unnecessary than the seven dips that Naaman was commanded to complete in the Jordan River to be cleansed of Leprosy (2 Kings 5). We have no record of anyone's reasoning that some of the steps were not commanded, that they were unimportant, or that the "7 dip plan" was in any way evil or based upon tradition. Naaman's problem was not with the number of dips, but with the uncleanliness of the river. He was about to reject the whole plan, and go on his way, when a servant said, "If he had bid you do some great thing, would you not have done it?" Similarly, we have people today who complain about the number of steps God has prescribed as conditions for cleansing.

When we add up the things God teaches us to do to be saved (looking at examples of conversion) we get the "sum." Hear (John 6:45; Romans 10:13-17); believe (Hebrews 11:6); repent (Luke 13:3; Acts 2:38); confess (Matthew 10:32, 33; Romans 10:9, 10); and be baptized (Mark 16:15, 16; Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16). Now, which of these five Bible teachings are not there? On what basis should anyone reject one or more of these?

If someone gives you several conditions, IN WRITING, for what you must do to receive a gift, at what point should "reasoning" call for rejection of doing any of them? What right do you have to change the conditions? Will you receive the gift if you accept as essential only the first thing you are told to do, and fail to do the others? Suppose Naaman had decided that only the first dip was important and refused to dip the other six times? He would not have obeyed God and he would not have been cleansed. This is because God keeps His promises. The promise was cleansing after the seventh dip in the place He commanded. How is the above different from the denominational teachings that reject all the five acts God requires to be saved except for the first one - believing in Jesus?

Let's take a closer look at the context surrounding this "sum of your word is truth" concept:

Psalm 119 (ASV) "Hear my voice according unto thy lovingkindness: Quicken me, O Jehovah, according to thine ordinances."

The Psalmist sought life according to God's ordinances.

150 "They draw near who persecute me with evil purpose; they are far from your law."

He had enemies who rejected God's teachings.

151 "But you are near, O LORD, and all your commandments are true."

He did not reject any of God's commandments but confirmed that they were true.

153 "Look on my affliction and deliver me, for I do not forget your law."

He sought deliverance for being faithful to God's law, none of which he forgot or rejected.

154 "Plead my cause and redeem me; give me life according to your promise!"

He sought redemption according to God's promise - not according to the tradition of men.

155 "Salvation is far from the wicked, for they do not seek your statutes."

This seems to be a warning to those who do not seek to learn of and obey God’s statutes or precepts.

156 "Great is your mercy, O LORD; give me life according to your rules."

He not only recognized that God has "rules" (some who purport to be Christians do not), he acknowledged that following God's rules is the basis for receiving life.

157 "Many are my persecutors and my adversaries, but I do not swerve from your testimonies."

He refused to allow his persecutors, those who were far from God's law, to weaken his faith in God's word and His promises.

158 "I look at the faithless with disgust, because they do not keep your commands."

He was disgusted with those who show no faith by not keeping God's commandments.

160 "The sum of your word is truth, and every one of your righteous rules endures forever."

He did not reject ANY of God's rules and held to the idea that His rules would never change.

170 "Let my plea come before you; deliver me according to your word."

He recognized that his deliverance would be according to God's word.

Should not all who claim to believe in God and who accept the Bible as being inspired by Him have the attitude of the Psalmist? As supported by scriptures (above) the five acts are biblical. Some have a hang-up when it comes to the "5 steps" (which anyone can count), but the doctrine remains true - it is still from God and is authoritative. Those who object to the teaching will never be able to show that any of the five are to be rejected, so why reject all five?