Can A Christian refuse believers baptism And not be Sinning?

[gb93433]

Biblical baptism is the outward act showing an inward work of God while proclaiming Jesus as Lord and is the first command a new believer has.

Historical baptism was a public proclamation.

 

[JesusFan]

I see three options here:

1. There is ONE correct mode of baptism, and whichever church practices that is in obedience, and all other churches their members are in a state of continual disobedience to God, even though it is based on their understanding of scripture and their desire to actually obey scriptures.
-This raises questions about which practices of the NT church we place in this category...are non-congregational churches in a state of continual sin? Do those churches who do not "hold all things in common" in sin? Are churches who don't use real wine in sin? Are churches that don't wash feet in sin? what about churches that do wash feet?

2. There is one correct mode of baptism, but those churches and Christians that practice a different form of baptism are trying their best to obey what they understand to be the truth, and so are not sinning.
-This raises questions about other issues. What if someone truly believes that thier committed, monogomous homosxual relationship is condoned by scripture...are they not sinning until they understand that it is sin?

3. There are multiple CORRECT modes of Baptism and God doesn't really care which mode we use, or when it is perfomed (infancy or post-conversion). Or, God wants it to be post-convesion, but mode (sprinkling, pouring) or multiple immersion make no difference to God.


Which of these is closest to the truth? Or is it some more nuanced combination of them?

I would tend to see it as being a combo of your points 2/3
God has one best/preferred mode, immersion, but IF the Christian is persuaded and holds to theologically his baptism is valid to God, than the Lord accounts it valid unto him!

That would be IF the person was a non baptist, but IF applying to be Baptist, would need to get adult baptised!

 

[freeatlast]

Historical baptism was a public proclamation.

That is standard brain washing teaching that most have been taught. Show me in scripture where that is taught.

 

[gb93433]

That is standard brain washing teaching that most have been taught. Show me in scripture where that is taught.

If you study what it meant to name Jesus as Lord in the first century church and those who were executed because of their stance you will find that baptisms were public and not in a church building. There are loads of historical documents available to support the historical context of baptism in the early church.

 

[JesusFan]

That is standard brain washing teaching that most have been taught. Show me in scripture where that is taught.

was seen as a public declaration of held faith in the Messiah jesus, and was especially used to signify to the jewish people that one had moved off from Judaism to placing faith in jesus as the messiah...

early Church used it also as a sign/emblem of one having faith in Christ, as a symbol of what had happened to change their lives...

 

[psalms109:31]

Is what is done in most Baptist churches today truly baptism especially considering historical baptism? Studies that have been done in a particular denomination I am aware of revealed that there were some who were "baptized" up to five times.

Am I to worry about details or some ritual none of them mattered to me, but to follow Jesus. Mark 16:16 started my desire to be baptized.

It gave me what God had planned in my life to give a clear conscience to continue to travel down the path that He has prepared for me. I want to follow Christ not some ritual. I never did or do think it is a ritual but following Jesus Christ. I do not question where, but that I do. I need to to barried once with Christ and raised a new with Him. It is a symbol of what comes from above, not a ritual.

 

[preacher4truth]

People seek for a loophole to obedience. For example, if one finds a situation that seems to logically dismiss a specific command, in this case baptism, then ones finding is used to supplant Biblical revelation, or to call this command into question.

How imprudent, but I am not in the least surprised.

Saul practice such a theology himself, in not awaiting for Samuel to come, and instead he found a loophole, which was "his reason and logic" and subsequently offered the burnt offering himself.

What a shame. Are we now back to practicing the book of Judges in our theology, having learned nothing from past history?

 

[JesusFan]

People seek for a loophole to obedience. For example, if one finds a situation that seems to logically dismiss a specific command, in this case baptism, then ones finding is used to supplant Biblical revelation, or to call this command into question.

How imprudent, but I am not in the least surprised.

Saul practice such a theology himself, in not awaiting for Samuel to come, and instead he found a loophole, which was "his reason and logic" and subsequently offered the burnt offering himself.

What a shame. Are we now back to practicing the book of Judges in our theology, having learned nothing from past history?

I was addressing Fal mainly in my postings, as your answers have been biblically sound, as it was pertaining to BAPTISTS refusing believers baptism...

My question was does God regard as valid non baptists who see/persuaded from scriptures their mode is also valid to God? As fal seems to make the case for them not really being saved IF they refuse our mode of baptism!

 

[freeatlast]

If you study what it meant to name Jesus as Lord in the first century church and those who were executed because of their stance you will find that baptisms were public and not in a church building. There are loads of historical documents available to support the historical context of baptism in the early church.

That is not what i asked,. Show me in the bible that Baptism is a public proclamation. The reason for open air baptisms back then was because they did not have baptisties not because they were trying to make it public.
Biblical baptism is the outward act showing an inward work of God while proclaiming Jesus as Lord and is the first command a new believer has and is not required to be public any more then circumcisism was.

 

[freeatlast]

was seen as a public declaration of held faith in the Messiah jesus, and was especially used to signify to the jewish people that one had moved off from Judaism to placing faith in jesus as the messiah...

early Church used it also as a sign/emblem of one having faith in Christ, as a symbol of what had happened to change their lives...

Show me in scripture that what you claim is true.

 

[preacher4truth]

I was addressing Fal mainly in my postings, as your answers have been biblically sound, as it was pertaining to BAPTISTS refusing believers baptism...

My question was does God regard as valid non baptists who see/persuaded from scriptures their mode is also valid to God? As fal seems to make the case for them not really being saved IF they refuse our mode of baptism!

Bro, it doesn't matter what label they use. Baptist or not, disobedience here is telltale.

 

[JesusFan]

Bro, it doesn't matter what label they use. Baptist or not, disobedience here is telltale.

except to those who see other modes of baptism being biblcally valid, they would say that they did obey the Lord already!

 

[preacher4truth]

except to those who see other modes of baptism being biblcally valid, they would say that they did obey the Lord already!

We had a young lady, an adultress to be frank, who came to church and professed Christ. She still practiced adultery, yet refused baptism, as according to her "its not really necessary." She left church altogether and hasn't been seen since.

Baptism seems to be a "clincher." Those that refuse it, but profess, typically go back to their wallowing in the mire.

- Peace

 

[freeatlast]

except to those who see other modes of baptism being biblcally valid, they would say that they did obey the Lord already!

AND!????

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

your not confused by this are you JF? A reformed church attendee, a presby church attendee a RC individual are all taught differently & so therefore they accept faulty doctrine however they would argue the point as you say that they "think" they are Paedo Baptistic way is correct....we however as Baptists beg to disagree. Im sure you know the arguments by now....still most are content to believe all they are taught.

Still you would have to do a thorough search in scriptures to come to your conclusions. I for one believe in credo baptism but for the sake of providing an educated counterpoint to this discussion I am attaching a paper by Matt McMahon, Founder of "A Puritan Mind" & the Puritan Board.

Take time to read it & make commentary.

http://www.apuritansmind.com/covena...es-on-infant-baptism-by-dr-c-matthew-mcmahon/

 

[12strings]

I'm curious as to where in scripture Baptism is commanded as the absolute "First step of obedience"? That is certainly modeled a lot, but where is it commanded?

 

[preacher4truth]

I'm curious as to where in scripture Baptism is commanded as the absolute "First step of obedience"? That is certainly modeled a lot, but where is it commanded?

Is it not an imperative from the apostles in Acts? I wonder where they got such authority? There's no need for you to remain "curious" which I speculate to be in all actuality cynicism.

 

[gb93433]

Can A Christian refuse believers baptism And not be Sinning

Can a Christian disobey God and not be sinning?


No, they would be sinning because they are disobeying God. Their misinterpretation of the Scripture doesn't change the fact that we are to be baptized after we are saved. Truth is truth.

So the man hanging next to Jesus was sinning by not being baptized?

 

[gb93433]

That is not what i asked,. Show me in the bible that Baptism is a public proclamation. The reason for open air baptisms back then was because they did not have baptisties not because they were trying to make it public.
Biblical baptism is the outward act showing an inward work of God while proclaiming Jesus as Lord and is the first command a new believer has and is not required to be public any more then circumcisism was.

How could one have named Christ as Lord and been executed if the confession of Christ as Lord were not public? There is no such thing as a hidden private confession of faith in following Christ.

 

[jbh28]

So the man hanging next to Jesus was sinning by not being baptized?

no, he had no opportunity to be baptized.