Is the Administrator of Baptism Important

I think that only trinitarian believer's baptisms by immersion in churches that preach salvation by grace through faith in Christ should be accepted in a baptist church when an alledgedly baptized believer is applying for membership. That pretty much narrows it down to Baptist baptism.

A person needs to be baptized when he comes to faith in Christ out of an act of obedience to the Lord as a symbolic public profession of his faith.

By the way, mormons aren't christians, if they ever come to faith they should be baptized. Methodists and pelagians should be baptized as well.

 

Clear conscience

1 Peter 3:
21 and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God.[Or but an appeal to God for a clear conscience]

How would you place this in that situation?

 

Question- I must admit I have never heard of an administrator of baptism. Is this a common position? At every church I have ever attended, the pastor and the church board saw to the relevant duties.

 

Pastor

Should a Pastor have a clear conscience of who he brings into membership of the Church?

 

From the OP:
"I asked if the Pentecostal preacher sought membership, would his church require rebaptism. He said no, if he had been baptized as an adult."

A believer being baptized is following the Lord in baptism and is associated only with salvation, not church membership. To say a Christian has to be rebaptized to join your church indicates that you believe that person has not been a Chrsitian. If also indiacates that your church believes only Christians of that type of church are really saved.

I would not join a church that requires rebaptism for membership, because that church has a very extreme view of who is a Christian.

 

Here is what our church bylaws prescribe for persons joining our church from other denominations:

So no, I guess the administrator of baptism is not very important at our church.

 

Good conscience

If i am mistaken I am sorry. The pentecostal church baptize in the name of the Son, not in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

I do not think we question their salvation it is that we want a good conscience toward God.

I was saved at 11 and trusted in Jesus who the Father introduced me to. I believe this in my heart, but wasn't baptized until 26.

The church that I went to didn't baptize. I wasn't baptized until 26 when me and my wife joined a Baptist church.

I read the Holy Bible many times except Paul's letters I was afraid that I could misunderstand it to my own destruction except what was preached from the pulpit and the Roman road. I didn't understand the Holy Bible and tried to live a good life. I really thought this water baptism was going to change my life and give me what I was missing to make me whole.

Water Baptism did give me a good conscience that I did everything humanly possible, but felt no change and still couldn't understand the scripture.

Then in tears to God after reading just the Gospel my eyes was open, what I needed didn't come from me, but from Him. To humbly trust is all we can do and to God this is not work and He does the changes in our lives.

 

I see nothing magical in who performs the baptism. The importance of baptism is the finding of the new life by the new believer and his demonstration of dieing to the old life and being resurrected to the new life in Christ. It is not important who performs the baptism IMHO.

 

"If i am mistaken I am sorry. The pentecostal church baptize in the name of the Son, not in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit."

You are mistaken. Only the Onemess Penetecostal Church baptizes in the name on Jesus only. Practically all other Penetecostal churches consider the Onemess Penecostal Chuch a cult. However, the Oneness people are very vocal about these types of differences.

 

"The Bible teaches baptism as a "church" ordinance. Therefore, the one who baptizes should be authorized by the church to do so."

A church ordinance or a "Christian" ordinance? I consider it a Christian ordinance.

 

Please define church ordnance for me.

 

It is my personal belief that the (in this case baptist) church has made baptism something it was not intended to be. There is no biblical evidence that baptism was ever intended as a rite for entrance into a particular denomination. Based on biblical accounts baptism was given as a rite for entrance into THE church, not a denomination. Making it a rite for a particular denomination makes a mockery of baptism by claiming that the particular denomination IS the church instead of the particular denomination being part of THE church.

As for the Pentecostal preacher I would treat him as anyone else and want to know what his beliefs are about the plan of salvation and ask him how he became saved. While I would not require him to be baptized to join the church I would not allow him to join since the Pentecostals have a very different view on many theological and doctrinal subjects.

I would first require him to set under the teachings of the church he was seeking membership in and after some time require him to answer specific questions pertaining to his beliefs and if they now agreed with the that church. If I felt he had accepted the change then I would offer him to the church for acceptance for membership, but not through baptism as he had already went through believers baptism. The only exception would be if he felt he was not saved while under the Pentecostal teachings then I would baptize him.

As to the other denominations you mention the process would be the same as above. The only exception would be the Mormon which I hold as a cult and the person is not saved so this person would have to be baptized after being converted (saved) but the baptism would be into THE church, not the denomination. Membership could then be requested and given.

One more point. I would require this process for anyone even people who claim to be Baptists of a sister church. They would all have to go through some sort of class and answer specific questions before being offered for membership.

The question about the administrator of the baptism. As long as the baptism was done by a believer the baptism is valid. By baptism I mean submerging, not sprinkled. If sprinkled I would require them to be baptized.

About someone who wants to be baptized and not join the church that would raise questions and they would have to have a good reason why to get baptized. Something like they just got saved and want to be obedient to the command of baptism but they are about to move to another place and do not want to join only to move their membership in a few weeks. I would baptize them in that case and perhaps for some other reasons, but they would have to satisfy my concerns.

One more thing off subject. At no time would I accept any person from another church who was a deacon in that church, even another Baptist church, as a deacon into this new church. They would come as simply a member and if the time came that new deacons were needed they would be considered for the position just like any other person in the church without any consideration of past serving as a deacon in another church.

 

The way I am looking at if the administrators of Baptism will accept his Baptism OK and the person joining is OK with it and there is a joining in a clear conscience with God praise God if not then something isn't right about it.

This is between the administers of Baptism and the one joining.

 

Good question. Where did the idea come from that the ordinances are limited to a specific group of Christians or organization? Probably from the RCC as they instituted organizational control over the Christians world. The RCC could then use denial of their Church Ordinances as a punishment for those who disagreed with them.

The reformers carried over from the RCC the idea of ordinances being associated with their church organization just as they carried over the ideas of infant baptism and sinless Mary.

Baptism and communion are ordinances for all Christians, not only just for a specific group or church.

 

Dr. Bob,
If in judaism, the person went into the water and dunked himself, why did Jesus ask John to baptize him? Or Paul talk about how that others baptized, while he only baptized a few?

 

I know of Baptist pastors who baptize in the name of Jesus only saying He represents all three.

 

Scripture

Matthew 28:
19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

Acts 2:
38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.

These are the scripture that those who baptize will go either or, I see since all three take a part of our salvation that all three should be given praise in it.

The one who is Baptized and the one who is Baptizing should have a clear conscience toward God in doing so.