Baptist Brider Position?

[Frogman]

In the O.T., baptism did exist. It was called ceremonial washings and was administered by the priests.

Were these administered as immersions?

The question brought to John by the Jews in John 3.25 seems to be showing they expected the messiah to baptize as John did, this then seems to be showing a difference in mode. There then is found the question as asked in the post before yours as to where the authority is found. The pharisees questioned the authority of Jesus and he asked them to tell the authority of John's baptism. They could not, not because they did not know the source of that authority or have an opinion regarding its source, but because their answer would incriminate them either in light of the people or of God.
Bro. Dallas

 

[TC]

As far as I can remember, most were not by immersion. I am going study more in depth as it has been a while and I'm a little fuzzy on details. I hope to answer more later as time permits (Lord willing). Until then, thanks for the great questions.

 

[Pennsylvania Jim]

Originally posted by Terry_Herrington:
...I did not have any hard feelings with anyone and left on good terms. Sometimes I still miss the compassion that church showed to its members.

Troll alert!!! Troll alert!!! Everyone knows that no real Baptist ever leaves a church on good terms!

 

[Pluvivs]

Can no one then definitively answer my questions on this forum? I don't feel anyone has made a sound claim, scripturally based, to any of my points!

-Frustruvivs

 

[calvin4me]

With all respect,the "Baptist Bride" position, to me, is a spiritial narcissism that is not only rooted in the vain glorious nature of the flesh, but it is also dangerously anti-biblical.
All who are born again make up the Bride of Christ. It is this ego-centric gradiosity that that gives birth to cults.

 

[pinoybaptist]

Originally posted by calvin4me:
With all respect,the "Baptist Bride" position, to me, is a spiritial narcissism that is not only rooted in the vain glorious nature of the flesh, but it is also dangerously anti-biblical.
All who are born again make up the Bride of Christ. It is this ego-centric gradiosity that that gives birth to cults.

 

[Pluvivs]

See now, this is just the kind of thing I neither want, nor need, to hear. You're basically spouting your opinion without showing the "anit-biblical" nature of the opposing view. There have been many times I have seen or heard from scripture words that, in my flesh, I find offensive because they seem egotistical and vain--and they would be if it were not Christ or the Apostles speaking. But glory to God, He can show us such truth from those same verses if our heart is in tune.

So I ask you, calvin4me, where is authority given to a select group to baptise, but others are excluded?

-Pluvivs

 

[calvin4me]

To Pluvivs:
I believe this:
It is Christ who truly baptizes. The sacrament is a token of His grace, not a legalistic issue.
I personally believe any born again brother or sister can baptize another; it is not he/she who baptizes that matters, but our faith in the sacrament is what matters.

Sorry if I gave offense.

 

[Pluvivs]

So then, can one be baptised by an unbeliever? What are the limitations on the reception of said sacrament? If the sons of Eli burned strange fire before God, was the rest of their rites nullified?

I take no offense at anything said over the Internet, so you needn't fear that. This is a hotly debated issue in my own life however, and I am stunned at the lack of scripturally-based thoughts on this forum on the topic (NOTE: There have been some very long posts on another thread titled ' "Baptist Bride" Asserted ' which I look forward to reading in the coming days.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Since when did we Baptist deal in sacraments? In the part of the Baptist galaxy I live in, believer's baptism and the commemoration of the Lord's Supper are considered ordinances. Acts that were ordered by our Lord but not means of gaining a greater measure of grace.

 

[Frogman]

Originally posted by calvin4me:
With all respect,the "Baptist Bride" position, to me, is a spiritial narcissism that is not only rooted in the vain glorious nature of the flesh, but it is also dangerously anti-biblical.
All who are born again make up the Bride of Christ. It is this ego-centric gradiosity that that gives birth to cults.

What is wrong with cults? I find no problem with them, that is if all the saved, including members of cults, are one and the same as the chaste virgin Christ will present to himself as His Bride.

So, don't be so harsh on cults.

Now, someone tell me why should we earnestly contend for the faith once delivered?

Why does it matter what we believe?

Bro. Dallas, a landmarker Baptist and also often called a Brider, and not ashamed of it no more than I am of the Baptist name.

 

[Bro Tony]

What is wrong with cults? I find no problem with them, that is if all the saved, including members of cults, are one and the same as the chaste virgin Christ will present to himself as His Bride.

So, don't be so harsh on cults.

Bro Dallas,

Maybe I am a little dense. You are going to help me out with the above statement. Sarcasm?

Bro Tony

 

[calvin4me]

To Squire Robersson:

Perhaps I am confused about Baptist terminology.
Charles Spurgeoun, one of the greatest of all Baptist preacher, was a self-confessed Calvinist.
John Calvin uses the word sacraments in all his treatises and tracts. How different are Presbyertarians from Baptists?
In his autobiography, Spurgeon attests his most favorite writer was John Calvin...did Spurgeon speak of sacraments.

Indeed, I need to do more research on denominational differences.

 

[GREG S]

One of the questions asked was whether someone who was baptised by another person, who later thought he was not saved, then was the baptism of the person being baptised scriptural.

If your church is a scripturally organized baptist church, then these questions may help.

When someone is baptised into your church, is it by the authority of the pastor or vote, confidence and authority of the church?

When someone is excluded by your church, is it by the pastor or vote and authority of the church?

Next, can an individual be a church? No

Can an individual baptise himself? No

Can an individual observe the Lord's supper on his own? No.
According to these questions, we must conclude that the authority to observe the ordinances, and
to exercise the above authorities are only given to a body of Christ.

Now we must ask what is the body of Christ. Is it a local visible assembly or some invisible univeral body that no one can see. Many baptists say they do not believe in an invisible body but the doctrines they espouse show otherwise. An invisible body can only exclude invisible members or observe the above authorities invisibly. The epistles were written to the churches and Revelation directly is addressed to churches. The scriptures also say in Revelation, He who hath an ear let him hear what the Spirit sayeth unto the CHURCHES. These were written to churches in the plural and not to some invisible body of Christ. Who acted to exclude the member of the church of Corinth found in adultery? It was a local body of Christ. The authority to pluck out an eye or cut off a hand (churches are made up of members) can only be done by a local body of Christ. If these scripture were interpreted literally (though not out of the question) there would be a lot of maimed baptists running around.
This shows the great authority and blessings that was given by Christ to his wife, the baptist church.

Now back to the original question of scriptural baptism. Since the authority to baptism rests only with the church or authority given by the church, then the pastor or person carrying out the baptism is merely acting as an instrument or extension of the local body of Christ acting on their authority. The validity of that person's baptism rests with the church (if it is scripturally organized) and not the instrument used. The person who was baptised has scriptural baptism because that authority is given to the church, regardless of the condition of the person who baptises.
Greg

 

[Frogman]

Originally posted by Bro Tony:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />What is wrong with cults? I find no problem with them, that is if all the saved, including members of cults, are one and the same as the chaste virgin Christ will present to himself as His Bride.

So, don't be so harsh on cults.

Bro Dallas,

Maybe I am a little dense. You are going to help me out with the above statement. Sarcasm?

Bro Tony </font>[/QUOTE]Dear Brother Tony,
I am guilty of using sarcasm in that post, forgive me for it. But I think the question is valid, don't you? How can we remain separate from other groups, if in reality we are part of a greater universal body? How can we maintain discipline or even claim an authority to discipline members if they are part of a greater universal body?

This question, I think is one of time vs. eternity. I do not know whether there will be eternal distinctions in heaven, or in eternity, I think there will be a period of distinction, but I believe in eternity all the saved will be the family of God through Christ, Eph. 3.15 I think is the passage that persuades me of this, otherwise, I am honest in this, I can see no reason to assume authority to discipline unruly members, no authority to require churches to adhere to the faith that was once delivered to the saints, and certainly no authority to name other groups as cults, the term would be nonexistent, though visible in time, possessing no eternal distinction, then what is the problem with such groups?

Sorry for my insensitivity, I just don't understand why history is full of folks who died because of their belief and at other times folks feared death and thus these are one and the same members of the Bride of Christ? Are the children of a marriage the same as the Bride? Of course they possess similarities in character, resemblance, etc. But are they the same?

The comparison is made to marriage, I think for a reason. I am married. Do I have a universal invisible wife? Are all women part of my wife? Are all women the same as my wife? Then if so, there is no such thing as adultery, now speaking of spiritual things, how can there be apostasy of the church, if all the saved are members of the church regardless of their faith and practice?

God Bless
Bro. Dallas Eaton

 

[Bro Tony]

Bro Dallas,

Thanks for your reply and clarification on your position.

God Bless you

Bro Tony

 

[Pluvivs]

The subject of Church discipline is not strong in convincing/dismissing the Baptist Bride position. Any organization worth its salt should discipline its members--families, armies, nations, cults. I need not even mention scripture, because there are many passages regarding the need and practice of correction. Summary: Even if we did not have a scriptural mandate for church discipline (which I posit we do), there would be a natural mandate for it unless specifically prevented with other scripture.


Bro Dallas, your quote "Are all women the same as my wife?" says much about how Brider's see the other side of the argument. That is, they make poor strawman comparisons, such as your comparison between Christ and the Church, and your own marriage. The concept certainly is scriptural, but no non-Brider I have ever heard says that "everyone" is in the Bride--only that every saved person is. The correct version of your question quoted above would then be "Are all women who I married the same as my wife?" In the words of Chico Marx, "the answer come back, yes."

-Pluvivs

 

[Pluvivs]

Does that make sense to everyone?

 

[HankD]

The comparison is made to marriage, I think for a reason. I am married. Do I have a universal invisible wife? Are all women part of my wife? Are all women the same as my wife? Then if so, there is no such thing as adultery, now speaking of spiritual things, how can there be apostasy of the church, if all the saved are members of the church regardless of their faith and practice?

Any parabolic analogy has limitations, overstepping the boundaries of which, become the basic ingredient of cult or cultish thinking (but not necessarily your analogy concerning the "brider" position).

The parable of the "wheat and the tares" is applicable here IMO. There is in the earthly expression of the Kingdom of heaven here on earth, which I would loosly call "professing christendom", a "mixed multitude" to be sorted out at the end of the age.

"but gather the wheat into my barn", to me the wheat collected into the barn is the so-called "invisible Church" or what Jesus referred to in His statement to Peter "I (Jesus-not Peter) will build (future not past or present) my Church (singular not plural)".

My opinion of course.

HankD

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Originally posted by calvin4me:
To Squire Robersson:

Perhaps I am confused about Baptist terminology.
Charles Spurgeon, one of the greatest of all Baptist preacher, was a self-confessed Calvinist.
John Calvin uses the word sacraments in all his treatises and tracts. How different are Presbyterians from Baptists?
In his autobiography, Spurgeon attests his most favorite writer was John Calvin...did Spurgeon speak of sacraments.

Indeed, I need to do more research on denominational differences.

Here are some random answers to your questions:</font>

• Jean Calvin wrote in French and Latin so we may be faced with a matter of how the translators did their work.</font>
• I doubt the above is really a factor. Remember in classic Presbyterian/Reformed theology and polity, the "baptism" (by anointing) of infants is valid. The thinking goes something like

  As circumcision was a sign and entering into the Old Covenant, baptism is a sign and entering into the New.

  </font>
• Concerning Uncle Charlie Spurgeon, people can be sloppy in their word usage. I've read enough of his work to be of the opinion that while Brother Jean was a favorite writer of his, in practicality, Uncle Charlie was a lot less Calvinistic than what alot of modern folks would care to think. (And no, the last sentence does not make CHS a raving Wesleyean/Salvation Army/Methodist .)</font>