Hello everyone from a church of Christ guy!

[church mouse guy]

Another denomination in which Baptism has also historically been ignored or downplayed is the Evangelical Free Church of America (EFCA).


Check this out by Bill Kynes, Council member alongside Albert Mohler, Mark Dever, etc. in The Gospel Coalition (a Calvinist fraternity made up mostly of SBC, PCA, and EFCA pastors):

EFCA Ministerial Forum (pdf)

Bill Kynes:

"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."


also, EFCA president Bill Hamel recalls:

"I had the privilege of being raised in the distinctive ethos of the EFCA by godly parents."

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

Mohler and Moore--I have been railing against them for a while now. Add on J.D. Greear. I don't see how the SBC can survive those three if they are not checked. Greear should not be re-elected; Moore's job and the ERLC should be abolished, and Mohler--what would you do with Mohler? In my book, he is an egghead who will side with whoever pays the most.

 

[kyredneck]

Well that's where many of you came from; were known as "Reformed Baptists" for a while in the 1800s before settling on other names:

The Encyclopedia of Louisville:

"Numerous Baptist congregations, including segments of Louisville's First Baptist Church, 'apostatized' to Campbellism. During the 1820s and early 1830s, Benjamin Allemn and John Curl served as supply preachers for First Baptist Church. Their appreciation for Restorationism led to a schism (1831). . . .The 1832 Louisville directory listed the 'Old Baptist church' and the 'Reformed Baptist Church', the latter the Restorationist congregation"


Some such as ARDA still class the Christian Churches and Churches of Christ in the Baptist family:

Christian Churches and Churches of Christ| Religious Groups | The Association of Religion Data Archives

The birthplace of the CoC was right here in the Bluegrass.

 

[church mouse guy]

The birthplace of the CoC was right here in the Bluegrass.

You know I thought that Campbell worked in this general area, also. The older generation in Indiana was Disciples of Christ, which is now uber liberal with women and homosexual preachers and all that cultural marxism that now even threatens the SBC.

 

[kyredneck]

You know I thought that Campbell worked in this general area, also.

Excellent information on the subject:
History of the Churches of Boone's Creek Baptist Association of Kentucky
By S. J. Conkwright, 1923

The preaching of Alexander Campbell and John 'Racoon' Smith ripped many of these churches apart.

 

[ChurchofChristguy]

You know I thought that Campbell worked in this general area, also. The older generation in Indiana was Disciples of Christ, which is now uber liberal with women and homosexual preachers and all that cultural marxism that now even threatens the SBC.

DoC has made more left turns than a NASCAR race. Difficult to conceive that it and the CoC were one-in-the-same a century ago. I know of a few former DoC folks here who left for other pastures. I live in the Bible belt and a lot of that stuff passed down from headquarters didn't fly too well.

 

[church mouse guy]

It is shocking all of the left turns that DoC has made. Difficult to conceive that it and the CoC were one-in-the-same a century ago. I know of a few former DoC folks here who left for other pastures. I live in the Bible belt and a lot of that stuff passed down from headquarters didn't fly too well.

Yeah, they went bad a long time ago. They had a guy here in Indianapolis who called himself a bishop and they let him get away with it. His name was T. Garrott Benjamin, Jr., and he was always on TV and in the newspapers, etc. He was DofC, but then so was Indianapolis-based Jim Jones of the Peoples Temple Cult in Guyana.

The DofC had some nice old limestone buildings in a park-like setting in an old upper class neighborhood. However, they had to abandon them and move downtown to an old Farm Bureau Insurance Building, but I am not sure if they are still there because their mailing address is another building. I haven't been downtown for three or four years. Indianapolis has a lot of United Pentecostals (Jesus Only), Mormons, and Jehovah's Witnesses, but almost all the cults have had a presence in Indianapolis over the years. Nearby Indianapolis is Camp Chesterfield, a major national and international center of Spiritism, now called Spiritualism, or the occult. They have an occult book store south of downtown but I have never set foot in it although I have known a couple of Spiritualists.

 

[ChurchofChristguy]

Yeah, they went bad a long time ago. They had a guy here in Indianapolis who called himself a bishop and they let him get away with it. His name was T. Garrott Benjamin, Jr., and he was always on TV and in the newspapers, etc. He was DofC, but then so was Indianapolis-based Jim Jones of the Peoples Temple Cult in Guyana.

The DofC had some nice old limestone buildings in a park-like setting in an old upper class neighborhood. However, they had to abandon them and move downtown to an old Farm Bureau Insurance Building, but I am not sure if they are still there because their mailing address is another building. I haven't been downtown for three or four years. Indianapolis has a lot of United Pentecostals (Jesus Only), Mormons, and Jehovah's Witnesses, but almost all the cults have had a presence in Indianapolis over the years. Nearby Indianapolis is Camp Chesterfield, a major national and international center of Spiritism, now called Spiritualism, or the occult. They have an occult book store south of downtown but I have never set foot in it although I have known a couple of Spiritualists.

Farm Bureau building huh? If they’d have taken 15 minutes, they might could have saved 15 percent with Geico.

 

[ChurchofChristguy]

There is a DoC massive building here that clearly used to have a couple thousand members. Now it’s maybe 150.

 

[JonC]

Baptism is an ordinance only. Two denominations do not baptize: Quakers and Salvationists. As far as I know only third wave Protestants have classified baptism as an ordinance.

There were groups separated from the Catholic Church that believed that way. In fact, many of those groups argued that the Reformers had not gone far enough away from RCC doctrine. Baptism as sacrament (as the mode through which God conveys grace to men) started with the Catholic Church and I suspect was communicated to the CoC through Campbells Presbyterian roots. This is why CoC doctrine cannot be anything but Protestant. It (like Baptist theology) is influenced at least to some degree by the Reformation and retains at least something of Reformed Catholic belief.

 

[church mouse guy]

There were groups separated from the Catholic Church that believed that way. In fact, many of those groups argued that the Reformers had not gone far enough away from RCC doctrine. Baptism as sacrament (as the mode through which God conveys grace to men) started with the Catholic Church and I suspect was communicated to the CoC through Campbells Presbyterian roots. This is why CoC doctrine cannot be anything but Protestant. It (like Baptist theology) is influenced at least to some degree by the Reformation and retains at least something of Reformed Catholic belief.

Well, Mohler, Russell Moore, and JD Greear will lead us into cultural marxism.

 

[rsr]

There were groups separated from the Catholic Church that believed that way. In fact, many of those groups argued that the Reformers had not gone far enough away from RCC doctrine. Baptism as sacrament (as the mode through which God conveys grace to men) started with the Catholic Church and I suspect was communicated to the CoC through Campbells Presbyterian roots. This is why CoC doctrine cannot be anything but Protestant. It (like Baptist theology) is influenced at least to some degree by the Reformation and retains at least something of Reformed Catholic belief.

Alexander Campbell's theology is greatly beholden to the Sandemanians in Scotland, including that of Archibald McLean, a former Sandemanian who became a leader of the "Scotch Baptists." While William Whitsitt says that McLean's writings can be construed not necessarily to entail remission of sins through baptism, Campbell arrived at that point by 1827.

In adopting his attitude toward baptism, Campbell was breaking not only with the Baptists but also the Presbyeterians, whose Westminster Confession said that " Although it be a great sin to contemn or neglect this ordinance, yet grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it, as that no person can be regenerated or saved without it, or that all that are baptized are undoubtedly regenerated."

 

[Adonia]

That’s amazing to me, when you consider there are at least one hundred references to baptism in the NT. I mean sure we can have our differences on the meaning of baptism and so forth, but to purge it completely, my goodness.

There you go! We have had this argument here before to no end and I agree with you. Most of the time I read words like "Believe AND be baptized"! Or "Baptism now saves you"! They must have been written down like that for some good reason.

 

[ChurchofChristguy]

There you go! We have had this argument here before to no end and I agree with you. Most of the time I read words like "Believe AND be baptized"! Or "Baptism now saves you"! They must have been written down like that for some good reason.

If I understand correct, traditionally the issue between the Baptists and the CoCs is whether or not baptism saves you. But it isn't quite that black and white. I don't think most CoC folks believe that water saves anyone. Peter clearly calls it a symbol.

Baptists label CoC as declaring baptism as a work of man that must be done to earn his salvation. Because of the CoC's urgency on baptism, I can understand that label but it isn't true. No work of man earns his salvation. And being baptized isn't a work, because you aren't baptizing yourself - you have to "be" baptized - someone has to do it for you. To be immersed, you have to let someone literally plunge you under water and bring you up. It is a vulnerable, momentarily helpless state that gives a lot of people the creeps. You are submitting. Hence you have a lot of folks with an aversion to being baptized and looking for scriptures to justify not doing so.

Now, CoCs have labeled Baptists as "soft on baptism" (ironic) because there isn't as much urgency to the matter. I don't think that label is necessarily true, either. The Baptist doesn't see the rush because you were already saved.

Since approximately 100 percent of believing Baptists and CofCs are baptized believers anyway, it is a mindless debate for me personally. The scenario that is brought up is, "what happens if you have believed yet you die in a car crash before you get to be baptized, are you saved" The answer to that is of course you are; God doesn't play games. He loves us and knows the heart. He isn't searching for reasons to keep us from being apart from Him in eternity.

But if someone is a believer and hasn't been baptized, citing that he is saved without it, and really just doesn't want to do it because of pride, I don't consider that believer "all in". He's holding back on Christ. There is something more going on. Now some may say "how silly that you don't think he's all in because of some water." Well, I am not the one who instituted baptism. I also don't understand why God didn't do creation all in one day instead of six. But I am not God. Far be it for me to question his ways.

 

[JonC]

Alexander Campbell's theology is greatly beholden to the Sandemanians in Scotland, including that of Archibald McLean, a former Sandemanian who became a leader of the "Scotch Baptists." While William Whitsitt says that McLean's writings can be construed not necessarily to entail remission of sins through baptism, Campbell arrived at that point by 1827.

In adopting his attitude toward baptism, Campbell was breaking not only with the Baptists but also the Presbyeterians, whose Westminster Confession said that " Although it be a great sin to contemn or neglect this ordinance, yet grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it, as that no person can be regenerated or saved without it, or that all that are baptized are undoubtedly regenerated."

I had read one of his biggest regrets was founding another denomination as it was his desire to unite Christians under the umbrella of Scripture.

 

[rsr]

So he said; but in practice that would mean uniting all denominations with his understanding of Scripture. Though the Restorationists say they have no creed but the Bible, they uphold doctrines others object to and cannot fellowship with those who hold different doctrines.

 

[JonC]

So he said; but in practice that would mean uniting all denominations with his understanding of Scripture. Though the Restorationists say they have no creed but the Bible, they uphold doctrines others object to and cannot fellowship with those who hold different doctrines.

Exactly.

 

[church mouse guy]

Campbell was smart. He wrote against the Mormons early on and it is a difficult statement to read.

With the decline of teaching of doctrine in all denominations, many here just say that they believe the Bible when asked what they believe. That helps cultural marxists like Mohler, Russell Moore, and JD Greear.

 

[ChurchofChristguy]

So he said; but in practice that would mean uniting all denominations with his understanding of Scripture. Though the Restorationists say they have no creed but the Bible, they uphold doctrines others object to and cannot fellowship with those who hold different doctrines.

There are sectarians and isolationists in the corners of every denomination or tribe. Restorationists don't have a corner on that market.

It was only last evening that some Baptist on here was declaring that I was preaching a false gospel because I have a slightly different take on baptism.

There's plenty of uncompromising dogma to go around.

 

[Salty]

If I understand correct, traditionally the issue between the Baptists and the CoCs is whether or not baptism saves you. But it isn't quite that black and white. I don't think most CoC folks believe that water saves anyone. Peter clearly calls it a symbol.

1) Then why do the COC believe that you must be baptized immediately - even that evening?
2) You quoted Acts 2:38 "Repent AND be baptized for the remission of your sins"

These two statements should be proof enough that COC believes in Baptismal regeneration

Since approximately 100 percent of believing Baptists and CofCs are baptized believers anyway, it is a mindless debate for me personally.

But 100% of Baptists have NOT been immersed! There are a multitude of reasons -
Thus it is NOT a mindless debate.

Bottome line - how does a person get to heaven: He that believeth on the Son hath life and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. John 3:36

 

[Adonia]

But if someone is a believer and hasn't been baptized, citing that he is saved without it, and really just doesn't want to do it because of pride, I don't consider that believer "all in". He's holding back on Christ. There is something more going on. Now some may say "how silly that you don't think he's all in because of some water." Well, I am not the one who instituted baptism. I also don't understand why God didn't do creation all in one day instead of six. But I am not God. Far be it for me to question his ways.

Very well said, I never thought of it that way. And then your words "Well, I am not the one who instituted baptism" should make us all think seriously of why the process is even mentioned if as some here say it is not needed.