Baptism for Church Membership

[lbaker]

No, it does not. They believe baptism is the first step of an ongoing "salvation process". They do not believe, for instance, that Baptism is effective on infants, which Baptismal regeneration teaches.

They, in fact, believe in believers baptism: they just put more emphasis upon it.

The only reason a re-baptism should EVER take place, is if the person was not saved the first time. There is absolutely no Biblical basis for re-baptizing someone over minor doctrinal differences.

I partially agree with this, except to say that the coC would more likely see baptism as the 2nd or 3rd step in the process, coming after faith in Christ and public confession of that faith.

I agree that the coC does not believe in BR either. Really their doctrinal issue is more about the timing of when salvation occurs than what it is that brings salvation - faith.

 

[Tom Butler]

No, it does not. They believe baptism is the first step of an ongoing "salvation process". They do not believe, for instance, that Baptism is effective on infants, which Baptismal regeneration teaches.

They, in fact, believe in believers baptism: they just put more emphasis upon it.

The only reason a re-baptism should EVER take place, is if the person was not saved the first time. There is absolutely no Biblical basis for re-baptizing someone over minor doctrinal differences.

The doctrinal gap between Baptists and the C of C are more than a gap--they are a chasm, and minor doesn't even come close to describing those differences.

If baptism is the first step in the "salvation process," then baptism is a pre-requsite for salvation. I know a lot of C o C folks, some are close relatives. Ask them if baptism is necessary for salvation, and they all will tell you yes.

Baptists hold that this kind of baptism is not scriptural, and thus should require anyone baptized in the Church of Christ to submit to biblical baptism--following a testimony of salvation through repentance and faith.

 

[Tom Butler]

I partially agree with this, except to say that the coC would more likely see baptism as the 2nd or 3rd step in the process, coming after faith in Christ and public confession of that faith.

I agree that the coC does not believe in BR either. Really their doctrinal issue is more about the timing of when salvation occurs than what it is that brings salvation - faith.

The big problem with this view is that salvation does not come with repentance and faith. Whatever step baptism is in the process, without it the C of C does not consider one to be saved.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Links to Relevant Chapters in Hiscox

From the Fundamental Baptist Institute:

Chapter III Church Membership

http://www.fbinstitute.com/hiscox/chapter3.html

Chapter V Christian Ordinances

http://www.fbinstitute.com/hiscox/chapter5.html

Chapter XV Christian Baptism

http://www.fbinstitute.com/hiscox/chapter15.html

Discuss

 

[Tom Butler]

Thank you, Squire. The essays you cited are pretty solid, and useful for instruction.

 

[Havensdad]

The doctrinal gap between Baptists and the C of C are more than a gap--they are a chasm, and minor doesn't even come close to describing those differences.

No, not really. Not much of a difference at all, in fact. Both believe in believers Baptism, and reject infant baptism and Baptismal regeneration. Both believe repentance and faith are the requirements for salvation. Both are big on the importance of scripture.

If baptism is the first step in the "salvation process," then baptism is a pre-requsite for salvation. I know a lot of C o C folks, some are close relatives. Ask them if baptism is necessary for salvation, and they all will tell you yes.

How many times have you heard this from a Baptist church "Have you ever personally got down on your knees and placed your faith in Christ?" Many Baptists would say the same thing about the sinners prayer.

In fact, the Church of Christ's "sinners prayer" IS baptism. Baptists even agree with this somewhat. What is Baptism, the man asks the Baptist: "A public proclamation of faith", the Baptist replies. Well, for the CoC, it is THE profession of faith, just like the sinners prayer is THE profession in many Baptist churches.

The fact is, faith and repentance saves, which is what the CoC teach> their mode of Baptism is the same> therefore, if you are going to accept the believers testimony, you should accept the believers baptism. The value of the baptism is determined by the one getting baptized, not the one doing the baptism.

What are we, Catholics?

Baptists hold that this kind of baptism is not scriptural, and thus should require anyone baptized in the Church of Christ to submit to biblical baptism--following a testimony of salvation through repentance and faith.

"Baptists" do not. SOME Baptists, do. I am SBC, and I can tell you right now that the majority of SBC churches that I know of, would not require a re-baptism of someone from CoC.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Thank you, Squire. The essays you cited are pretty solid, and useful for instruction.

They aren't essays. They are chapters from the New Directory.

And as a Historic Northern Baptist, if a CoC member came to me, first I'd make sure of his salvation. Then, I'd baptize him. It's not a matter of re-baptizing him. Read Hiscox, the CoC immersion doesn't count. Wrong meaning, Wrong Administrator (not a NT Church). And notice I didn't use the word "pastor", Baptist preachers don't carry the ordinances around in their coat pockets.

 

[Tom Butler]

No, not really. Not much of a difference at all, in fact. Both believe in believers Baptism, and reject infant baptism and Baptismal regeneration. Both believe repentance and faith are the requirements for salvation. Both are big on the importance of scripture.

Rather than just take your word for this, I cite quotes from two Church of Christ websites. From the first:

http://www.church-of-christ.org/who.html#baptism

Be baptized for the remission of sins. "And Peter said unto them, Repent ye, and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38).

From the second:
http://www.housetohouse.com/HTH/biblequestions/archive/question0149.htm[

Now, does the Bible make any connection between baptism in water and the forgiveness of sins / salvation? Indeed it does. Consider the following verses:

Mark 16:15-16 - "He who believes and is baptized shall be saved." Faith and baptism are joined by the conjunction "and," thus making both equal in their importance to receive salvation.

1 Peter 3:21 -- "Baptism does also now save us." This verse needs no explanation.

These quotes from Church of Christ folks themselves are clear and unmistakable. Your view of their views is incorrect.

The value of the baptism is determined by the one getting baptized, not the one doing the baptism.

What are we, Catholics?

Sorry, you are mistaken. Baptists and Churches of Christ both have placed a value (each different) on baptism. You may not join my church or any of theirs if you do not accept that congregation's position on baptism. The fact that Catholics do the same thing is irrelevant.

I am SBC, and I can tell you right now that the majority of SBC churches that I know of, would not require a re-baptism of someone from CoC.

I will have to say that I am shocked by this statement. If you are right (which I doubt) then we Baptists are much worse off than I thought.

I think I'm going to start a poll to see if your contention is correct.

 

[lbaker]

We are being just as arrogant and judgemental in our way as some coC churches are if we require "baptism" by someone who is coC. Our case that baptism has no role in salvation is pretty weak anyway. It is a very gray area that we (and the coC) have drawn a big red line in the middle of. What matters is faith in Christ, not how one is immersed.

 

[Tom Butler]

We are being just as arrogant and judgemental in our way as some coC churches are if we require "baptism" by someone who is coC. Our case that baptism has no role in salvation is pretty weak anyway. It is a very gray area that we (and the coC) have drawn a big red line in the middle of. What matters is faith in Christ, not how one is immersed.

Trying to be faithful to scripture is not arrogance. Trying to be faithful to scripture demands judgment. That's not judgmentalism; it's called exercising discernment.

I believe you indicated that you were once Church of Christ, now Baptist. Why, then are you still defending the C of C doctrine of baptism, on one hand, and then saying whether one is immersed is not important? You are out of the mainstream of Baptist thought. You are welcome to defend your views, but honesty demands you quit calling yourself Baptist.

There is a tendency on this board for some to treat baptism as of secondary importance. I must emphasize that Baptists have been killed for their views on baptism.

 

[Havensdad]

Trying to be faithful to scripture is not arrogance. Trying to be faithful to scripture demands judgment. That's not judgmentalism; it's called exercising discernment.

I believe you indicated that you were once Church of Christ, now Baptist. Why, then are you still defending the C of C doctrine of baptism, on one hand, and then saying whether one is immersed is not important? You are out of the mainstream of Baptist thought. You are welcome to defend your views, but honesty demands you quit calling yourself Baptist.

There is a tendency on this board for some to treat baptism as of secondary importance. I must emphasize that Baptists have been killed for their views on baptism.

Pro 6:16 There are six things that the LORD hates, seven that are an abomination to him:
Pro 6:17 haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
Pro 6:18 a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil,
Pro 6:19 a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers.


You do not determine "Baptist" doctrine. Disagreeing with you does not equal "non-Baptist" doctrine.

I can think of two very well respected Baptists who would disagree with you, from what I have read...: Mark Dever and Al Mohler.

 

[Havensdad]

BTW, for those not following the debate, John Piper, Wayne Grudem, Mark Dever and others have been discussing Church membership in association with Baptism. Mark's position is that someone who has not been baptized, or was baptized as an infant, cannot be a church member or participate at the Lord's table...HOWEVER>

From what He has wrote, other denominations adult baptisms of believers SHOULD be recognized...

 

[Tom Butler]

BTW, for those not following the debate, John Piper, Wayne Grudem, Mark Dever and others have been discussing Church membership in association with Baptism. Mark's position is that someone who has not been baptized, or was baptized as an infant, cannot be a church member or participate at the Lord's table...HOWEVER>

From what He has wrote, other denominations adult baptisms of believers SHOULD be recognized...

Can you provide a link where this discussion is going on? I respect all of these guys and would love to read what they're saying.

Pro 6:16 There are six things that the LORD hates, seven that are an abomination to him:
Pro 6:17 haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
Pro 6:18 a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil,
Pro 6:19 a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers.


You do not determine "Baptist" doctrine. Disagreeing with you does not equal "non-Baptist" doctrine

I recognize that my view (that baptism is the door to local church membership), although a widely-held view among Baptists, is not a unanimous view. I believe it to be the scriptural view, the historical Baptist view. I can fellowship with Baptists who do not hold my view, while still believing that they are wrong in this instance.

May I ask you about your purpose in quoting the Proverbs, and the underlining of "and one who sows discord among the brothers."?

 

[Havensdad]

Can you provide a link where this discussion is going on? I respect all of these guys and would love to read what they're saying.

Sorry. There are several: this has been ongoing for quite some time...

http://www.enjoyinggodministries.co...ship-just-how-together-for-the-gospel-are-we/
http://adrianwarnock.com/2007/08/wayne-grudem-replies-to-john-piper-on.htm
http://blog.9marks.org/2007/08/baptism-church-.html

I recognize that my view (that baptism is the door to local church membership), although a widely-held view among Baptists, is not a unanimous view. I believe it to be the scriptural view, the historical Baptist view. I can fellowship with Baptists who do not hold my view, while still believing that they are wrong in this instance.

I, too believe Baptism necessary for Church membership. However, as a Baptist, I believe their is nothing "conferred" in Baptism, that is, it is not a sacrament. Therefore any baptism done on a true believer(not Jehova's witnesses, or Mormons), by immersion, is acceptable. I do not require people to have an apt theological understanding of what is occurring during Baptism, because the scriptures do not require that, and were I to do that, I would then have to disallow the mentally handicapped and Children as well.

May I ask you about your purpose in quoting the Proverbs, and the underlining of "and one who sows discord among the brothers."?

I thought your statement regarding Mr. Baker not referring to himself as a Baptist, because he does not agree with you, was divisive and uncalled for. You are not the determiner of Baptist orthodoxy, and Mr. Baker is in agreement, historically, with many Baptist theologians.

 

[Havensdad]

I have also e-mailed Dr. Mohler as well 9marks(Mark Dever). Perhaps they will respond, in some form.

 

[lbaker]

Trying to be faithful to scripture is not arrogance. Trying to be faithful to scripture demands judgment. That's not judgmentalism; it's called exercising discernment.

I believe you indicated that you were once Church of Christ, now Baptist. Why, then are you still defending the C of C doctrine of baptism, on one hand, and then saying whether one is immersed is not important? You are out of the mainstream of Baptist thought. You are welcome to defend your views, but honesty demands you quit calling yourself Baptist.

There is a tendency on this board for some to treat baptism as of secondary importance. I must emphasize that Baptists have been killed for their views on baptism.

Don't remember if I said that or not. Could be. I've got relatives on both sides of that fence. Anyway, I'm now a drummer in good standing in a Baptist Church.