Does it matter where you are water baptized?

[righteousdude2]

Years ago, even I was led by the Holy Ghost to follow Jesus in water baptism, the problem was ..... it was not a SBC church. It was a non denominational fellowship, and the service was no different than what I used to baptize many others, including my wife, in a SB Conference church baptismal.

Yet when the conference leaders heard of my not being baptized in SBC water/tank, they wanted me to be re-baptized, or face losing my ordination papers. Of course, the rebel I was, caused me to argue water is water, and I challenged their attempt to remove my ordination, papers, and in the end, the voting body, agreed to back off their silly request, and I remain an ordained SBC pastor.

What are your views on this? Does it matter where you are immersed in baptism, and who officiates your baptism? I am interested in your view of what was a hot issue for several months fifteen years ago. Selah!

 

[Salty]

First it is believers baptism - NOT Baptist baptism - as long as it is done sciptually.
Secondly, you are not an ordained SBC minister. Your are ordained by a local church in fellowship the SBC.

But my answer would have been the same as you -

 

[Rob_BW]

I didn't join a baptist church until I was 26. When they asked about being baptized, I told them that I had been baptized in the Mennonite church that I grew up in. The pastor told me that I needed to be immersed, and I countered that getting baptized by Mennonites was an old baptist tradition. After our chuckle, I scheduled my dunking and became a full member.

This was an independent baptist church. When I joined an SBC church later on after a move, they just transferred me in.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

From what I read, you were baptized in what many refer to as a "Bible" church. I haven't heard of anybody not recognizing the validity of a Bible Church baptism.

On the other hand, I have heard of difficulties with Mennonite baptism. The accepted formula is a single dunk "I baptize you now in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. While, some Mennonites triple dunk, seemingly "In the Names of . . ."

My Baptist Polity professor at MBU, the late Dr. Richard Weeks, taught that for a baptism to be valid it had to have the following elements:

• The Proper Meaning: E.g. No baptismal regeneration, not infants
  
• The Proper Administrator: some one authorized by the local church.
• The Proper Mode: Full immersion in water, no sprinkling, pouring or anointing.

Years ago, even I was led by the Holy Ghost to follow Jesus in water baptism, the problem was ..... it was not a SBC church. It was a non denominational fellowship, and the service was no different than what I used to baptize many others, including my wife, in a SB Conference church baptismal.

Yet when the conference leaders heard of my not being baptized in SBC water/tank, they wanted me to be re-baptized, or face losing my ordination papers. Of course, the rebel I was, caused me to argue water is water, and I challenged their attempt to remove my ordination, papers, and in the end, the voting body, agreed to back off their silly request, and I remain an ordained SBC pastor.

What are your views on this? Does it matter where you are immersed in baptism, and who officiates your baptism? I am interested in your view of what was a hot issue for several months fifteen years ago. Selah!

 

[Rob_BW]

My former pastor was concerned with the mode, as it was pouring and not immersion.

I think a majority of Mennonite Churches use pouring instead of immersion, but I haven't had much interaction with Mennonites outside of western Maryland.

 

[righteousdude2]

First it is believers baptism - NOT Baptist baptism - as long as it is done sciptually.
Secondly, you are not an ordained SBC minister. Your are ordained by a local church in fellowship the SBC.

But my answer would have been the same as you -

Thanks for reminding me of that little truth! I am ordained by a local SBC church. Still, it was a great moment in the ministry He called me to!

 

[righteousdude2]

From what I read, you were baptized in what many refer to as a "Bible" church. I haven't heard of anybody not recognizing the validity of a Bible Church baptism.

On the other hand, I have heard of difficulties with Mennonite baptism. The accepted formula is a single dunk "I baptize you now in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. While, some Mennonites triple dunk, seemingly "In the Names of . . ."

My Baptist Polity professor at MBU, the late Dr. Richard Weeks, taught that for a baptism to be valid it had to have the following elements:

• The Proper Meaning: E.g. No baptismal regeneration, not infants
  
• The Proper Administrator: some one authorized by the local church.
• The Proper Mode: Full immersion in water, no sprinkling, pouring or anointing.

Thanks Squire! As for the triple dippers, that is something I never heard before, and it is now part of my history on Baptism file! Shalom!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Years ago, even I was led by the Holy Ghost to follow Jesus in water baptism, the problem was ..... it was not a SBC church. It was a non denominational fellowship, and the service was no different than what I used to baptize many others, including my wife, in a SB Conference church baptismal.

Yet when the conference leaders heard of my not being baptized in SBC water/tank, they wanted me to be re-baptized, or face losing my ordination papers. Of course, the rebel I was, caused me to argue water is water, and I challenged their attempt to remove my ordination, papers, and in the end, the voting body, agreed to back off their silly request, and I remain an ordained SBC pastor.

What are your views on this? Does it matter where you are immersed in baptism, and who officiates your baptism? I am interested in your view of what was a hot issue for several months fifteen years ago. Selah!

Dudes question:
Does it matter where you are water baptized?

My Answer:

NOPE!!!!!

 

[rsr]

My Baptist Polity professor at MBU, the late Dr. Richard Weeks, taught that for a baptism to be valid it had to have the following elements:

• The Proper Meaning: E.g. No baptismal regeneration, not infants
  
• The Proper Administrator: some one authorized by the local church.
• The Proper Mode: Full immersion in water, no sprinkling, pouring or anointing.

Certainly 1 and 3 are long Baptist practice, Baptists have not been unanimous on No. 2. Some of the Landmark persuasion have gone so far as preach that " ... t a church is unscriptural, baptism is invalid, and ministers are not duly ordained unless there is proper church authority for them. In accordance with the Word of God Landmark Baptists insists that only local Baptist churches have authority of Christ to evangelize, baptize and teach the Bible. There is no authority in the Bible or from the Holy Spirit for doing the work of the Great Commission except by the authority of a local Baptist church."
Consider the First London Confession: "The person designed by Christ to dispense baptism, the Scripture holds forth to be a disciple; it being no where tied to a particular church officer, or person extraordinarily sent the commission enjoining the administration, being given to them as considered disciples, being men able to preach the gospel." (http://doctrine.landmarkbiblebaptist.net/landmarkers.html)

On the other hand, the early Particular Baptists said that baptism is a New Testament ordinance, not a church ordinance, as outlined in the First London Baptist Confession:

"The persons designed by Christ, to dispense this ordinance, the Scriptures hold forth to a preaching Disciple, it being no where tied to a particular church, officer, or person extraordinarily sent, the commission enjoining the administration, being given to them under no other consideration, but as considered Disciples."

 

[Squire Robertsson]

I think #2 above is best interpreted as "the ordinances are not carried around in the pastor's hip pocket." I can remember the speed bump Dr. Weeks hit when he found out that more than one of the churches represented in his class didn't baptize folks directly into the membership of the local church. Over the years, I've come to believe he was indirectly influenced by Pendelton (an abolitionist) who came North during the late unpleasantness.

 

[Revmitchell]

Years ago, even I was led by the Holy Ghost to follow Jesus in water baptism, the problem was ..... it was not a SBC church. It was a non denominational fellowship, and the service was no different than what I used to baptize many others, including my wife, in a SB Conference church baptismal.

Yet when the conference leaders heard of my not being baptized in SBC water/tank, they wanted me to be re-baptized, or face losing my ordination papers. Of course, the rebel I was, caused me to argue water is water, and I challenged their attempt to remove my ordination, papers, and in the end, the voting body, agreed to back off their silly request, and I remain an ordained SBC pastor.

What are your views on this? Does it matter where you are immersed in baptism, and who officiates your baptism? I am interested in your view of what was a hot issue for several months fifteen years ago. Selah!

What conference. Only the ordaining church can ordain or "pull" your ordination.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Internet Theologian]

Years ago, even I was led by the Holy Ghost to follow Jesus in water baptism, the problem was ..... it was not a SBC church. It was a non denominational fellowship, and the service was no different than what I used to baptize many others, including my wife, in a SB Conference church baptismal.

Yet when the conference leaders heard of my not being baptized in SBC water/tank, they wanted me to be re-baptized, or face losing my ordination papers. Of course, the rebel I was, caused me to argue water is water, and I challenged their attempt to remove my ordination, papers, and in the end, the voting body, agreed to back off their silly request, and I remain an ordained SBC pastor.

What are your views on this? Does it matter where you are immersed in baptism, and who officiates your baptism? I am interested in your view of what was a hot issue for several months fifteen years ago. Selah!

I see one has assumed you were baptized in a Bible Church and am wondering if this were true.

Would it matter to anyone here if a person were baptized in the following church's:

- WoF (let's say at Joyce Meyers' church)

- Joel Osteens church (maybe they get ready to dunk the candidate then decide the person is such a champion, overcomer, and 'I am!' person, an 'I can and Will!' person and forego baptizing)

- The Restored Church of God

- A church of Christ (baptismal regeneration)

- At a prosperity gospel church (baptized by Creflo Dollar himself)

If any person came to join your church, with these backgrounds, would you accept them into membership by baptism, or would you line out their beliefs and/or be cautious in 'laying hands suddenly' on them?

 

[righteousdude2]

What conference. Only the ordaining church can ordain or "pull" your ordination.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Actually, when I responded to a SoCal Conference ad to be pulpit supply, the head of the conference interviewed me and when he discovered I was not baptized SBC he told me that unless I submitted to being baptized in a local conference church, he could not allow me to serve as pulpit fill, or any other position. He also threatened to have the ordaining denomination pull my papers, but that congregation told him they couldn't and wouldn't comply.

 

[righteousdude2]

I see one has assumed you were baptized in a Bible Church and am wondering if this were true.

Would it matter to anyone here if a person were baptized in the following church's:

- WoF (let's say at Joyce Meyers' church)

- Joel Osteens church (maybe they get ready to dunk the candidate then decide the person is such a champion, overcomer, and 'I am!' person, an 'I can and Will!' person and forego baptizing)

- The Restored Church of God

- A church of Christ (baptismal regeneration)

- At a prosperity gospel church (baptized by Creflo Dollar himself)

If any person came to join your church, with these backgrounds, would you accept them into membership by baptism, or would you line out their beliefs and/or be cautious in 'laying hands suddenly' on them?

Let's say that it was a non denominational, Bible believing church. And that is why I balked at the need to be rebaptized. There was no WoF in the church, just a bible preaching church, that had broken away from the SBC years earlier.

I believed I was acceptable in the eyes of the Father, having obeyed the Word, and followed Him in immersion, water baptism. This man was preaching legalities, and I balked.

 

[Internet Theologian]

Actually, when I responded to a SoCal Conference ad to be pulpit supply, the head of the conference interviewed me and when he discovered I was not baptized SBC he told me that unless I submitted to being baptized in a local conference church, he could not allow me to serve as pulpit fill, or any other position. He also threatened to have the ordaining denomination pull my papers, but that congregation told him they couldn't and wouldn't comply.

One has to remember that out of the SBC came those who are fundie. This is what the fundies are around these parts. In fact they are very concerned with what other church's do who are also 'independent baptist'.

There is ultimate concern with 'alien immersion' and in fact I've been called on the phone by a (late) IFB pastor who knew we took in a family from a holiness Pentecostal background. He accused of 'alien immersion'. He also called about KJV, music and other issues to know my stance. I used the KJV but never preached about it, or the 1611 issues, nor would I succumb to pressure to do so. We also used backup music, and this was a big no-no to him.

Nonetheless I assured him that we had never baptized Martian's nor any other extra-terrestrial beings. He didn't like my answer. I didn't like his nosiness. By the way, the family we took in asked me to baptize them as they didn't believe in the doctrine of the church they left. They became pillars in the church and had a thirst for truth.

 

[Internet Theologian]

Let's say that it was a non denominational, Bible believing church. And that is why I balked at the need to be rebaptized. There was no WoF in the church, just a bible preaching church, that had broken away from the SBC years earlier.

I believed I was acceptable in the eyes of the Father, having obeyed the Word, and followed Him in immersion, water baptism. This man was preaching legalities, and I balked.

Right. I just guessed the assumption was incorrect, but I wanted to get what others would accept into their* church which is why I put up that reply.

What about you?

(*in case my statement 'their church' is attacked my intention is the church where the Lord has placed them, not that it is 'theirs'.)

 

[rsr]

One has to remember that out of the SBC came those who are fundie. This is what the fundies are around these parts.

This is more a reflection of Landmarkism than of fundamentalism.

 

[Internet Theologian]

This is more a reflection of Landmarkism than of fundamentalism.

Not at all, it correctly reflects some fundies, and landmarkism is just another fundy branch off the tree.

 

[Jerome]

Sarasota Herald-Tribune - Mar 13, 1970

"Similar friction is smouldering over whether Southern Baptist congregations should still be accepted as such if they. . .recognize 'alien immersion,' baptism by immersion in some other denomination."

"state and regional associations have taken varying positions on the matter. Some, including those in Arkansas and California, have launched new studies into it. Two Arkansas congregations, First Baptist churches at Malvern and Russellville, remained excluded for allowing 'alien immersion'"

In California, by a strange twist, the Long Beach-Harbor Baptist Association last year refused to seat a man who had served the past year as its moderator. . .because his congregation received as members persons baptized in other denominations without rebaptizing them."

 

[Jerome]

Baptist Press 2007 State Annual Meeting Roundup

"By a narrow margin, messengers to the Arkansas Baptist State Convention annual meeting Nov. 6-7 rejected a proposed change to its articles of incorporation which would have eliminated the following statement: 'The Baptist Faith and Message shall not be interpreted as to permit open communion and/or alien immersion.'"