Closed Baptism

[Jerome]

I looked at the doctrinal statement of the E-Free Church of America, and found it generally to be sound. . . .Based on the doctrinal statement I read, I could accept E-Free folks as members of my church. But I'd need to know more about the other stuff.

used to attend one for 3 years, in between my assemblies of God to baptsit days!

From what i remember on thier statement of beliefs, they would be classifed by us as being 'baptist like"

Christianity Today July 2008

the denomination allows this option [infant baptism], said Greg Strand, the EFCA's director of biblical theology and credentialing. He said the EFCA historically accommodated refugee Methodists and Presbyterians who still wanted to baptize their infants.
Unlike Baptist denominations, adult baptism by immersion is not a requirement for membership in the EFCA. This practice dates back to the EFCA's roots in the Scandinavian free churches that split with the Lutheran state churches. The free churches recoiled against requiring anything but a profession of faith in Jesus Christ for membership. But the EFCA's openness on baptismal modes has led churches to de-emphasize baptism altogether, Strand said.

From the Evangelical Free Ministerial Forum periodical:

When it comes to baptism, I consider myself fairly typical in the Evangelical Free Church of America. By that I mean that baptism has not played a prominent part in my pastoral ministry.

Commonly in our churches, one’s baptismal status has no connection to church membership or to participation in the Lord’s Supper.

Evangelical Free denominational President Bill Hamel:

In the three Free Churches I attended as a child and young man, baptism was ignored

http://www.efca.org/files/document/pastoral-care/Ministerial_Forum_9-05.pdf

 

[gb93433]

As far as the knowledge of a local church pastor compared to a denomination type situation, and also the accountibility, it is the repsonsibility of the local church to call a pastoral candidate. The local church can use whatever procedure it wishes, oral exam, trial sermons, questioning by the deacons or congregation etc. If the church just picks a warm body as you put it, then they reap what they sow. What I am not understanding is why you think a hierarchy would better serve making a pastor more accountable or knowledgable than a local congreagation.

I completely agree with your point about the Mormon bishop. I would not let one near our church. Mormonism is about the last cult that would enter our building because of how they view Jesus Christ. They are evil, dangerous, and basically like an infection. I will take it further. There is no way I would vote for one, which seems to be pretty important this year.

I thought your story about the Lutheran minister and baptism was very revealing. Thanks for the post.

I am of the opinion that godliness promotes godliness. A godly group of men who are trained to deal with churches or pastors that are in trouble can be used of God in a mighty way. I have been involved in several situations to replant and/or turn churches around and have seen some incredible works of God. If the church is allowed to struggle and die then people leave focused on the hurt and demise of their local church. Too much has been focused on the pastor rather than the leadership in a church. I have been successful and unsuccessful but the common factor is the leadership in the church. I have never seen a case when a dying church has healthy leadership. Too often it is the leadership who must agree to dissolve and let the pastor select the leaders. I select leaders who are able to reach others who want to grow.

If a group of pastors are focused on turning a church around but take a psychological approach which is not biblical then it helps the church go down the same road. A friend of mine was involved in an organization whose focus was on church health. There are a few things they require before sending a pastor to the church. They require that the leadership of the church be dissolved and let the pastor select the leaders he chooses to work with. The other things is that the church is expected to do all ministry in the community. The pastor doers not visit people. The people do. The intentional interim pastor helps prepare the church for the next pastor. So that when the pastor comes the church is healthy.

A friend of mine who was a missionary in Ethiopia was involved in church planting and discipleship. He told me that they had a group of pastors who led and mentored other pastors. They were pastors among pastors much like Paul was. If a church or pastor was in trouble that group of pastors would come in for up to 3 days to deal with the situation. If the church was being divisive then they worked with the church with the pastor to create health. If the pastor was the problem then they dealt with him. It takes men who are more than just a pastor. It takes someone who is discerning and is able to stay focused. It takes a lot more work to turn a church around than to start a new church. How many churches will have to die until we learn to help churches gain health.

While I was pastoring a church that invited the Mormon bishop to come and teach, I contacted my local association. They refused to take any action and talk with the church leaders. I went further out and contacted the state and then a former president of the denomination. The former pres. told me to leave and move on. A lot of people were trusting me to turn that church around. When I was unsuccessful many left and the church has declined since. The pastor they have now is waiting until he retires. I have known that to happen to a man I knew who was the pastor in a church which grew from 75 to almost 600 in six years. He got no assistance from the denomination and eventually left. The church had died to about 75. Much the same thing happened to the church I pastored. It is continuing to die. The sadddest thing is how it affected the children and youth at the time. When I ask about them they have struggled. A number of them are not attending any church at all. Satan uses those situations to get what he wants. In that same church was a deacon who had an altercation with a youth and earlier had thrown a brick through a plate glass window in a business in town. Those were some of the kind of people in leadership. Two of the deacons asked me not to call on them to pray. If the leadership had been dissolved and the church dealt with there is no doubt that the church would be very healthy today and I think some of the leaders would have grown to the point where they needed to be. Because the situation was allowed to remain it did nothing to help the leaders to grow and it has allowed the church to die. Those who were leaders then, are now leading a dying church. In essence they are leading it to its death. Hopw can one rejoice in a dying church. To let it continue without any help is to demonstrate a lack of care for them by anyone.

 

[saturneptune]

I am of the opinion that godliness promotes godliness. A godly group of men who are trained to deal with churches or pastors that are in trouble can be used of God in a mighty way. I have been involved in several situations to replant and/or turn churches around and have seen some incredible works of God. If the church is allowed to struggle and die then people leave focused on the hurt and demise of their local church. Too much has been focused on the pastor rather than the leadership in a church. I have been successful and unsuccessful but the common factor is the leadership in the church. I have never seen a case when a dying church has healthy leadership. Too often it is the leadership who must agree to dissolve and let the pastor select the leaders. I select leaders who are able to reach others who want to grow.

If a group of pastors are focused on turning a church around but take a psychological approach which is not biblical then it helps the church go down the same road. A friend of mine was involved in an organization whose focus was on church health. There are a few things they require before sending a pastor to the church. They require that the leadership of the church be dissolved and let the pastor select the leaders he chooses to work with. The other things is that the church is expected to do all ministry in the community. The pastor doers not visit people. The people do. The intentional interim pastor helps prepare the church for the next pastor. So that when the pastor comes the church is healthy.

A friend of mine who was a missionary in Ethiopia was involved in church planting and discipleship. He told me that they had a group of pastors who led and mentored other pastors. They were pastors among pastors much like Paul was. If a church or pastor was in trouble that group of pastors would come in for up to 3 days to deal with the situation. If the church was being divisive then they worked with the church with the pastor to create health. If the pastor was the problem then they dealt with him. It takes men who are more than just a pastor. It takes someone who is discerning and is able to stay focused. It takes a lot more work to turn a church around than to start a new church. How many churches will have to die until we learn to help churches gain health.

While I was pastoring a church that invited the Mormon bishop to come and teach, I contacted my local association. They refused to take any action and talk with the church leaders. I went further out and contacted the state and then a former president of the denomination. The former pres. told me to leave and move on. A lot of people were trusting me to turn that church around. When I was unsuccessful many left and the church has declined since. The pastor they have now is waiting until he retires. I have known that to happen to a man I knew who was the pastor in a church which grew from 75 to almost 600 in six years. He got no assistance from the denomination and eventually left. The church had died to about 75. Much the same thing happened to the church I pastored. It is continuing to die. The sadddest thing is how it affected the children and youth at the time. When I ask about them they have struggled. A number of them are not attending any church at all. Satan uses those situations to get what he wants. In that same church was a deacon who had an altercation with a youth and earlier had thrown a brick through a plate glass window in a business in town. Those were some of the kind of people in leadership. Two of the deacons asked me not to call on them to pray. If the leadership had been dissolved and the church dealt with there is no doubt that the church would be very healthy today and I think some of the leaders would have grown to the point where they needed to be. Because the situation was allowed to remain it did nothing to help the leaders to grow and it has allowed the church to die. Those who were leaders then, are now leading a dying church. In essence they are leading it to its death. Hopw can one rejoice in a dying church. To let it continue without any help is to demonstrate a lack of care for them by anyone.

I have been very blessed by your posts as of late, and want to apologize for the exchange we had some time ago. I can see the value of outside help for a dying church. Sometimes things can go beyond the point of no return on a local level, and maybe too late anyhow. If a local church allows apathy about visiting and missions set in for decades, it tends to become stagnant. With no new members coming in, the church ages, and one day, one realizes it has become a social club for the elderly, and that a person age 60 is considered young. This is one of many ways a church could die. There is a common thread between where I worked, the church, and organizations I have belonged to. That thread is that only a small percentage of people are willing to jump in, roll up their sleeves, and do the work that is required. At church it might be an attitude of someone else will visit the lost and the sick, or someone else will fix the church pot luck meal I am going to eat, etc. That is fine for a while, but time catches up with all organizations that skate by, and there is a day of reckoning. The Lord never meant for us to be pew sitters or to put His ministry on auto pilot. My opinion is that it is nothing but pure laziness. What I hate about what you are talking about is that the lingering church always is helping someone. Our church has a Wednesday night ministry where we pick up some kids at a trailor park, and some of the women teach them for a few hours about the Lord. They have good fellowship, snacks, and most of all, the kids are shown the love of God. For some of them, this is the only bright spot in their lives, as their parents are probably passed out on drugs or alcohol, in jail, or have rotating bed partners every night. Without this minsitry, these kids would have no idea what a normal life is. It would be devestating if something took that away from these kids. The point is, everyone needs to help. Thanks again for your post.

 

[Tom Butler]

Regarding Jerome's post #41, about the EFCA and infant baptism. Even though most of its doctrines and practices are close to baptistic, I'm afraid that would be a deal-breaker for me.

 

[michael-acts17:11]

Men place so many rules & traditions upon baptism that cannot be found within the pages of Scripture. In fact, Scripture never even records a single person being baptized in a local church. Even baptists can't seem to keep themselves from adding our own rules to God's Word in order to exercise some form of control over others. Scriptural baptism involved the repentant sinner, the one who evangelized them, & the public witness of those who happened to be present(the unsaved). All the rest is just man-made tradition that is wrongly sold as Biblical doctrine.

 

[OldRegular]

Regarding Jerome's post #41, about the EFCA and infant baptism. Even though most of its doctrines and practices are close to baptistic, I'm afraid that would be a deal-breaker for me.

Is there a real difference between baptizing an infant and a child of a few years?

 

[OldRegular]

It is strange. Folks get upset about the Church and its practice of receiving members saying there is no Scriptural basis.

In Paul's letter to the Church at Corinth [1 Corinthians 14] we are presented a pattern for the Church at worship. Now how many things have been added to this simple pattern that are not Scriptural: rock bands and music, dramatic presentations, imitations of the crucifixion, pastors being drawn up over the congregation simulating the ascension, living Christmas trees, ad infinitum....................

 

[michael-acts17:11]

It is strange. Folks get upset about the Church and its practice of receiving members saying there is no Scriptural basis.

In Paul's letter to the Church at Corinth [1 Corinthians 14] we are presented a pattern for the Church at worship. Now how many things have been added to this simple pattern that are not Scriptural: rock bands and music, dramatic presentations, imitations of the crucifixion, pastors being drawn up over the congregation simulating the ascension, living Christmas trees, ad infinitum....................

Chapter 14 is speaking to the use of tongues within the congregation. It is not an outline for "worship" meetings. It also does not mention sound systems, HVAC, padded pews, electric lights, soft carpeting, etc. If you are going to hold to the "if it's not in Scripture then it must be sin" position, then please be consistent to its logical conclusion.

 

[Tom Butler]

Is there a real difference between baptizing an infant and a child of a few years?

An infant is not a believer who has repented of sin and trusted Christ for salvation.

The Lord saved me when I was nine years old, and I knew exactly what I was doing.

Maybe you would expand on "child of a few years." How few?

I've heard of some six-year-olds and seven-year-olds who have made professions of faith and were baptized. I get a bit nervous about those professions, and I hope the pastor knows what he's doing in those situations.

BTW, every infant baptism I've ever heard of involved sprinkling water on the baby our pouring a small amount. I've never heard of immersing an infant. Either way, deal-breaker.

 

[OldRegular]

Chapter 14 is speaking to the use of tongues within the congregation. It is not an outline for "worship" meetings. It also does not mention sound systems, HVAC, padded pews, electric lights, soft carpeting, etc. If you are going to hold to the "if it's not in Scripture then it must be sin" position, then please be consistent to its logical conclusion.

You are the one raising unreasonable complaints about Churches, baptism, and Scripture. Now you can deny that the following Scripture is not a pattern for worship but that does not make it so, as anyone with a Spiritual mind can readily see!

1 Corinthians 14:26-33, KJV
26. How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.
27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.
28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.
29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.
30 If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.
31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.
32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.
33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

Now please notice that Paul states: when ye come together. What do Christians normally come together for: a clambake, a free meal, a concert, a drama? No! Normally they come together to worship. At least that is what we are instructed to do:Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching. [Hebrews 10:25] Now the folks in Corinth are being told to exhort one another!

And as the Apostle Paul tells us above: For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

 

[OldRegular]

BTW, every infant baptism I've ever heard of involved sprinkling water on the baby our pouring a small amount. I've never heard of immersing an infant. Either way, deal-breaker.

Expand your horizons Tom! Read about triune immersion in the Orthodox Church!

"There are two dyings: our death with Christ on the Cross; and our daily dying to sin as we walk in newness of life [Orthodox Study Bible, p. 352]. This burial is made visible by the physical element of the sacrament—water. Through the full immersion of baptism, we are buried with Him in baptism [Colossians 2:12]. This is one of the reasons for the strong preference in the Church for full immersion. In the Church the candidate is immersed three times, in commemoration of Christ’s three-day burial [Carlton, p 82]. Without the full immersion, we lose sight of the connection between baptism and our burial with Christ [Schmemann, pp. 56–57]."

http://www.westernorthodox.com/baptism.html

The Lord saved me when I was nine years old, and I knew exactly what I was doing.

I've heard of some six-year-olds and seven-year-olds who have made professions of faith and were baptized. I get a bit nervous about those professions, and I hope the pastor knows what he's doing in those situations.

So a nine year old child is guilty before God while a seven year old child is not?

 

[Salty]

...BTW, every infant baptism I've ever heard of involved sprinkling water on the baby our pouring a small amount. I've never heard of immersing an infant. Either way, deal-breaker.

Actually the Greek Orthodox do immerse their infants.
(but wouldn't you expect the Greeks to know the proper translation and proper meaning of baptism?)

Click here from a Fundamental web site

 

[Jerome]

Circa 1611, the preferred mode of the Church of England was immersion. Book of Common Prayer: "dippe it in the water".

"Sprinkling" was an innovation of the the Westminster Divines in the 1640s. They excised "dippe" from the liturgy and replaced it with "sprinkling".

 

[michael-acts17:11]

You are the one raising unreasonable complaints about Churches, baptism, and Scripture. Now you can deny that the following Scripture is not a pattern for worship but that does not make it so, as anyone with a Spiritual mind can readily see!

1 Corinthians 14:26-33, KJV
26. How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.
27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.
28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.
29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.
30 If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.
31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.
32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.
33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

Now please notice that Paul states: when ye come together. What do Christians normally come together for: a clambake, a free meal, a concert, a drama? No! Normally they come together to worship. At least that is what we are instructed to do:Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching. [Hebrews 10:25] Now the folks in Corinth are being told to exhort one another!

And as the Apostle Paul tells us above: For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

It is not an "outline" of exactly how events should transpire when we gather. Ever notice that it says, "every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation"? The gathering is focused on every individual; not on one man on a stage. Where is the exhortation? Where is the edification? There is none; only the sermonizing of a priestly pastor with no Biblical interaction among the members. According to these Scriptures, modern baptist churches are unScriptural in practice. As I have written before, our baptist churches have more in common with the Catholic Church than with the Church in the First Century.

 

[OldRegular]

Actually the Greek Orthodox do immerse their infants.
(but wouldn't you expect the Greeks to know the proper translation and proper meaning of baptism?)

Click here from a Fundamental web site

Sadly they did not know the proper subjects!

 

[Tom Butler]

Expand your horizons Tom! Read about triune immersion in the Orthodox Church!

"There are two dyings: our death with Christ on the Cross; and our daily dying to sin as we walk in newness of life [Orthodox Study Bible, p. 352]. This burial is made visible by the physical element of the sacrament—water. Through the full immersion of baptism, we are buried with Him in baptism [Colossians 2:12]. This is one of the reasons for the strong preference in the Church for full immersion. In the Church the candidate is immersed three times, in commemoration of Christ’s three-day burial [Carlton, p 82]. Without the full immersion, we lose sight of the connection between baptism and our burial with Christ [Schmemann, pp. 56–57]."

http://www.westernorthodox.com/baptism.html

Thanks, OR. I do need to get out more.

So a nine year old child is guilty before God while a seven year old child is not?

This is a tricky area for me. I'm not doubting that six year olds can be saved, but kids are easily manipulated and very trusting. It's incumbent upon those who work with kids to be very careful and very discerning in this area.

 

[gb93433]

The local Orthodox pastor in the city where I live is a part of the group at http://www.antiochian.org/

He is definitely a follower of Jesus. He does see himself as a protestant or Catholic but Orthodox. He mentioned that protestants tend to focus a lot on Christ's death but they focus on Christ's resurrection.