-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Matthew 28:19-20 demands Landmarkism ecclesiology
- Thread starter The Biblicist
- Start date
Of course! Philip was an ordained deacon in the church at Jerusalem (Acts 6). His ministry was known and followed by the church at Jerusalem (Acts 8:14). Obviously the Bibical text is silent about much of the conversation that went on between Philip and the Eunuch as nothing is recorded about baptism prior to the Eunuch asking to be baptized, which means Philip or someone had instructed him in the need of baptism and most likely the rest of the commission as well. He was on his journey back home and what he did on reaching home is not stated. However, the Biblical record does support that the church at Jerusalem followed up on the work of its preachers (Acts 8:14: 11:22) as can be seen in the case of Antioch and sending Barnabas to complete the Great Commission essentials.
Silence is not an argument against precepts and consistent examples, and yet those who oppose both the Great Commission precept in Matthew 28;19-20 and its consistent examples in both the church at Jerusalem and Antioch seem to gravitate to Philip and the Eunuch as a desperate attempt to overthrow both and that simply cannot be done on silence. If any argument is going to be made on silence, then it is far bettter to argue that what the church did in Samaria when they got word, and what they did in Antioch when the got word they also did with regard to the Eunuch. Why would anyone want to argue that either Philip or the Eunuch was disobedient to the Great Commission based on silence? If he was disobedient what does that prove? Nothing except disobedience.
Is baptism IN a church necessary? Church planting missionaries often don't have a baptismal so they baptize in a river, lake, even some in the ocean. Isn't that scriptural baptism? If a person is baptized under church authority what else is required? How many on the day of Pentecost were baptized in a church building with a baptismal pool?
I'm trying to learn landmark ecclesiology brother. I agree with your sentiments.
TC has answered it as I would have answered your question. Missionaries use whatever source of available water they can find that is sufficient for immersion. When I was a missionary in Montana, I remember in the dead of winter (and it is cold in Montana) sliding down a snow covered river bank and baptizing in the frigid waters of the Kootenia River and other times using a lake. In Washington doing missionary work I remember borrowing the baptistery of the "Church of Christ" church in town. I have used lakes, rivers, streams, and baptisteries. The location of baptism is not important but the act of baptism is important. There are four essentials for an act to be regarded as scriptural baptism versus just getting wet and they are (1) Right candidate - professed repentant beleiver in the gospel; (2) Right mode - immersion only; (3) Right purpose - symbolic identification with the gospel of Christ; (4) Right administrator - NT ekklesia through its appointed representative
Last edited:
Could you please expound on point #4? Thank you
The Great Commission in its threefold process as described in Matthew 28:19-20 had not only been in practice by Christ "from the baptism of John" (Acts 1:21-22) but on Pentecost it continues to be the practice of the congregation in Jerusalem on Pentecost through the leadership of the apostles (Acts 2:40-41). Acts 2:40-41 spells it out in no uncertain terms:
1. "go" (Mt. 28:19) "preach the gospel" (Mk. 16:15) - "as many as received the word" - Acts 2:40
2. "baptizing" (Mt 28:19) - "were baptized" - Acts 2:40
3. "teaching them to observe all things" (Mt. 28:20) - "and added unto them stedfastly continuing in the apostles doctrine" - Acts 2:41.
Furthermore, the words "continued stedfast" in Acts 2:41 is the translation of a grammatical structure called a periphrastic construct. There periphrastic construct in this passage is the joining of an imperfect verb with a present tense state of being verb. The imperfect tense describes an ongoing action that began at some unstated time in the past which continues to some unstated time in the past while the present tense state of being verb demands that this continuous past incompleted action continues up to the time Luke pens these words. Most believe Luke penned these words sometime after Acts 28 or around 60-61 A.D. So what is the point this grammatical construct makes? Luke is stating clearly that this threefold process which finds its source in obeying apostotolic doctrine was the PATTERN of practice in the church at Jerusalem begun at some unstated time prior to Pentecost which contined to be their practice right up to 60-61 A.D. when Luke penned these words.
This is further proven by the fact that after Luke spells this practice out plainly and grammatically demands it was their CUSTOMARY practice, he selects one word from this practice to summarize the whole practice and that one word is "added" in verse 40 which he uses repeatedly from that point forward until Acts 6 to describe those that were saved and "added" to the assembly according to this pattern, meaning they received the gospel, were baptized and added to the church so that they could be instructed how to observe apostolic doctrine and practice received from Christ. In Acts 6 the numbers became too many to use the word "add" and so he changes math terms to "multiplied" but meaning the same thing, they were added to the church in the same manner.
This pattern not only characteried the congregation at Jerusalem but it also characterized the congregation at Antioch through its missionaries on the Missionary field (Acts 13-26). The disruption in Acts 8-11 is prefaced and finalized as a period of disruption due to Saul (Acts 8:1 and Acts 11:19). Yet even during this period of disruption the terms "disciple" and "disciples" are used to describe those who went through this same threefold process.
Throughout the book of Acts the term "disciple" or "disciples" represent those who had already been through this same three-fold process. These disciples assembling represents a congregation as the final result of this process of having been made disciples. Later in the book of Acts the congregation of disciples are referred to as "the brethren" which becomes another synonym of the congregation of disciples. The Pauline use of pronouns in all his epistles "we...us....ye....you" are to members in churches of like faith and order as that is the kind of churches constituted by Paul. This is the NT rule of thumb while any Christian unbaptized or unchurched is an extremely rare exception to that rule.
Why should anyone assume disobedience to the threefold process presented in the Great Commission during this period of disruption (Acts 8-11) when it is made clear that (1) this process was used consistently by the church at Jerusalem in Acts 1-7 and by the church at Antioch in Acts 13-27. (2) the church at Jerusalem followed up their preachers in questionable cases where the commission was not carried out to the third point in the process (Acts 8:14; 11:22). (3) the product after the church followed up in each case was then described as a church (Acts 9:31; 11:26) and/or disciples. (4) that what we consistently read about in all the epistles are churches rather than scattered church unaffiliated Christians?
1. "go" (Mt. 28:19) "preach the gospel" (Mk. 16:15) - "as many as received the word" - Acts 2:40
2. "baptizing" (Mt 28:19) - "were baptized" - Acts 2:40
3. "teaching them to observe all things" (Mt. 28:20) - "and added unto them stedfastly continuing in the apostles doctrine" - Acts 2:41.
Furthermore, the words "continued stedfast" in Acts 2:41 is the translation of a grammatical structure called a periphrastic construct. There periphrastic construct in this passage is the joining of an imperfect verb with a present tense state of being verb. The imperfect tense describes an ongoing action that began at some unstated time in the past which continues to some unstated time in the past while the present tense state of being verb demands that this continuous past incompleted action continues up to the time Luke pens these words. Most believe Luke penned these words sometime after Acts 28 or around 60-61 A.D. So what is the point this grammatical construct makes? Luke is stating clearly that this threefold process which finds its source in obeying apostotolic doctrine was the PATTERN of practice in the church at Jerusalem begun at some unstated time prior to Pentecost which contined to be their practice right up to 60-61 A.D. when Luke penned these words.
This is further proven by the fact that after Luke spells this practice out plainly and grammatically demands it was their CUSTOMARY practice, he selects one word from this practice to summarize the whole practice and that one word is "added" in verse 40 which he uses repeatedly from that point forward until Acts 6 to describe those that were saved and "added" to the assembly according to this pattern, meaning they received the gospel, were baptized and added to the church so that they could be instructed how to observe apostolic doctrine and practice received from Christ. In Acts 6 the numbers became too many to use the word "add" and so he changes math terms to "multiplied" but meaning the same thing, they were added to the church in the same manner.
This pattern not only characteried the congregation at Jerusalem but it also characterized the congregation at Antioch through its missionaries on the Missionary field (Acts 13-26). The disruption in Acts 8-11 is prefaced and finalized as a period of disruption due to Saul (Acts 8:1 and Acts 11:19). Yet even during this period of disruption the terms "disciple" and "disciples" are used to describe those who went through this same threefold process.
Throughout the book of Acts the term "disciple" or "disciples" represent those who had already been through this same three-fold process. These disciples assembling represents a congregation as the final result of this process of having been made disciples. Later in the book of Acts the congregation of disciples are referred to as "the brethren" which becomes another synonym of the congregation of disciples. The Pauline use of pronouns in all his epistles "we...us....ye....you" are to members in churches of like faith and order as that is the kind of churches constituted by Paul. This is the NT rule of thumb while any Christian unbaptized or unchurched is an extremely rare exception to that rule.
Why should anyone assume disobedience to the threefold process presented in the Great Commission during this period of disruption (Acts 8-11) when it is made clear that (1) this process was used consistently by the church at Jerusalem in Acts 1-7 and by the church at Antioch in Acts 13-27. (2) the church at Jerusalem followed up their preachers in questionable cases where the commission was not carried out to the third point in the process (Acts 8:14; 11:22). (3) the product after the church followed up in each case was then described as a church (Acts 9:31; 11:26) and/or disciples. (4) that what we consistently read about in all the epistles are churches rather than scattered church unaffiliated Christians?
Last edited:
Paul says that God "set in" the church first "apostles" and we see that in Luke 6:12-13; Mark 3:12-14 and then filling a vacant apostolic office in Acts 1:15-26 all prior to Pentecost. These are the first ordained leaders "set in" the church by Christ. When every account of the Great Commission is considered in all four gospels we find that it is that group which eventually numbered 120 in Acts 1:15-26 that received this commission. Mark's account was given to the disciples gathered in a house in Jerusalem shortly after the resurrection. Matthew's account occurred on a mountain in Galilee after Christ left Jerualem and his instructions concerning that meeting place had been given to the same "women" and "brethren" and "disciples" constituting those in Acts 1:15-26 (see Matthew 28:7-16).
I'm trying to learn landmark ecclesiology brother. I agree with your sentiments.
This same group in Acts 1:15-26 that numbered 120 at this point had been assembling consistently together since the baptism of John until the resurrection of Christ (Acts 1;21-22). Since, that time frame (from the baptism of John till the resurrection) was required for anyone to fill the vacated office of Judas, that meant that more than the twelve had been consistently assemlby with Christ during that same period or else there would have been none qualified. This sheds light on the fact that even though only the twelve are mentioned primarily from Luke 6:12-13 forward that does not mean other disciples were not also present. It only means the focus was upon training the twelve because of their leadershp position and future ministry in providing a written record of what they heard Christ teach. Luke 6:13 demands such were present along with the twelve as the twelve were chosen out of a greater assembly of disciples (evangelized, baptized, gathered for instructing):
Lk 6:13 And when it was day, he called to him his disciples: and of them he chose twelve, whom also he named apostles;
It is these "disciples" from out of which twelve were chosen that the qualified material for filling the vacated office of Judas was taken.
In Matthew 28:16 these eleven apostles are not called "apostles" by Matthew but rather called "the eleven DISCIPLES" becuase they are being addressed in the Great Commission in their representative leadership capacity in the church and on the day of Pentecost they assume that leadership capacity (Acts 2:41 "the APOSTLES doctrine").
It is the Great Commission "ye" that alone is authorized to adminster baptism. The "ye" here is a plural pronoun that is addressed to these eleven men as "disciples" who are the representative leadership of the church. In the book of Acts we find consistently those men ordained to leadership capcity administering baptism in behalf of the church. Obviously the whole church cannot administer baptism to an individual and so some individual within the church must administer it. That individual is restricted by the Great Commission to be among that "ye" which are those already baptized believers within a teaching observing assembly. That individual is among that "ye" who are LIKE FAITH and ORDER with Christ in the SAME gospel, SAME baptism and SAME kind of teaching observing assembly. In other words, that auhorized administrator of baptism is a "disciple" that acts in behalf of the church. Final administrative authority in the discipline process is the church (Mt. 18:17-18) and its ordained ministry act in its behalf and under its authority. Church "disipline" includes instructive, corrective and if necessary purgative discipline. The third aspect of the Great Commision is inclusive of the entire spectrum of Church discipline (instructive, corrective and purgative) and it is the church that is final in authority in making disciples (Mt. 18:17-18). The leadership of the church are merely ordained, thus authoried representatives of the church to adminnister its ordinances and lead in its worship and work. The administrator of baptism is an appointed male member of the church.
Last edited:
Maybe because LM Baptist viewpoint cannot be supported by the scriptures?
And I AM a Baptist, so notaainst fellow Baptists, just bad doctrine like you are teaching here!
And still see Reformed churches as legit ones, teaching hin real Gospel!
Which is entirely in keeping with Landmark ecclesiology.
I'm trying to learn landmark ecclesiology brother. I agree with your sentiments.
Th at viewpoint is still not supported by the scriptures though, correct?
The Great Commission is given to the church (generically). Therefore baptism is a function of the church. Any person who has been given authority to do so by the church can baptize new converts. Therefore the right administrator is one given authority by the church to baptize for the church.
Yeshua1, would you please butt out of this conversation? You never add anything to the discussion and keep making the same untrue statement over and over again after the scriptures have been expounded in depth and at length that support the position being championed.
Please. Find another thread to disrupt.
Yeshua1, would you please butt out of this conversation? You never add anything to the discussion and keep making the same untrue statement over and over again after the scriptures have been expounded in depth and at length that support the position being championed.
Please. Find another thread to disrupt.
Since LM Baptist views re not supported by he scriptures, why this animosity?
And Martin as laid out well the real biblical perspective, as those churches such as in Reformed camp are NT churches and in the body also ...
Thy teach real Gospel, just wrong on their understanding on Baptism and church ldership!
The scriptures have been expounded over and over and over again. You just ignore his exposition and claim it does not exist. Putting your fingers in your ears and shouting LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU is not exegesis. Please, the Biblicist has exegeted scripture after scripture after scripture over and over and over again and you ignore it and claim he didn't post it.
Enough is enough. Either show where his exegesis is wrong, by providing your own exegesis that disproves his, or just stay quiet. You may just learn something.
This is my lst poston on this thread, so you do agree wth LM Baptist views error then?
And Martin and others have exposed his errors, do you agree with them?
Martin offered scripture......you do not....maybe twice in all the time you post.
You are being asked to not post unless you offer scripture to demonstrate what you believe...No one cares what you think, unless you show it scripturally....
No one......nobody.....post scripture or do not post.....
The only authorized administrator of baptism is the designated "ye" in Matthew 28:19. The only authorized ones to bring baptized believers into a teaching observing assembly of Christ are those designated as "you" in Matthew 28:20. There is no other Biblical text in the New Testament that authorizes anyone else to do these things - none - zilch, nada!
So who are those identified as "ye...you" in Matthew 28:19-20?
1. They are the same ones whom Christ promises to be with doing these things until the end of the age - "lo, I am WITH YOU until the end of the world" - Mt. 28:20
The apostolic office does not continue doing this until the end of the age? So those who restrict this to the apostles are wrong.
2. They are not unimmersed Christians as it is unimmersed Christians who are identified in this text as "them" not as "ye....you." The contextual "ye....you" are the administrators of this commission while unimmersed Christians are the recipients of this commission. They are the ones being baptized and being brought into a teaching observing assembly rather than doing the immersing and teaching.
3. They "HAVE" already been through this threefold process BEFORE they attempt to carry out this commission to "make disciples." They "HAVE" already been evangelized under John the Baptist and/or under Jesus (Acts 1:21-22). They "HAVE" already been immersed (Jn. 4:1-2; Lk. 7:29-30; Acts 1:21-22). They "HAVE" already been taught how to observe all these things. Hence, they are not unsaved nor unimmersed nor untaught nor unassembled persons but are those first assembled immersed believers whom Christ has been teaching since the baptism of John (Acts 1:21-22) or HIS CHURCH at Jerusalem - the local visible kind of church.
All Christians are accountable to be witnesses of their salvation, but no individual Christian is authorized to "make disciples" of all nations. This is authority given strictly and only to NT congregations as the only possible contextual identity of "ye....you" in Matthew 28:19-20 is the NT congregation which is a teaching observing congregational body of plural immersed believers. It is His congregations that he promises to be "with you until the end of the world" doing this very commission.
Indeed, it is IMPOSSIBLE to obey Matthew 28:20 apart from membership in a NT congregation - IMPOSSIBLE! How so? This is a command to OBSERVE whatsoever Christ has commanded them is it not?
1. Try observing what He commanded in Matthew 18:15-17 apart from church membership
2. Try observing what He commanded in Matthew 26:12-30 apart from actually physically assemblying together in one place. He is addressing immersed believers who habitually assemble together (Acts 1:21-22).
3. Try observing what he commands in Matthew 28:19-20 apart from physical contact and physically assembling of those identified as "ye" with those identified as "them."
Paedobaptists cannot obey this commission because they are not immersed beleivers. Therefore, they fall under the category of "them" not "ye" in this commission and therefore have no authority from Christ to do what they have not obeyed themselves. This is NOT an option or a suggestion but a COMMAND of Christ and Paedobaptists are in disobedience of this command. This COMMAND does not allow for unimmersed believers to be brought into a teaching observing assembly of Christ. Do you understand what I just said. The Great Commission does not allow unimmersed believers to be brought into a teaching observing assembly of Christ, therefore such an assembly is not Christ's, it is not a product of the Great Commission, it is not obeying the Great Commission - it is not authorized to administer the Great Commission because unimersed believers are the "them" not the "ye" of this commission.
Those who are commissioned (ye.....you) "HAVE" already OBEYED this commission and all who have not are not authorized by Christ to administer it! Why?
1. Because the unevangelized can't "go" with the gospel as they don't even understand it. Those commissioned to "go" alraeady "have" received the gospel.
2. Because the untaught, and the unobserving can't teach or observe what they have not been taught.
3. Because the unimmersed are in disobedience to this commission and so how can they teach and administer to others what they are in disobedience to themselves?
So who are those identified as "ye...you" in Matthew 28:19-20?
1. They are the same ones whom Christ promises to be with doing these things until the end of the age - "lo, I am WITH YOU until the end of the world" - Mt. 28:20
The apostolic office does not continue doing this until the end of the age? So those who restrict this to the apostles are wrong.
2. They are not unimmersed Christians as it is unimmersed Christians who are identified in this text as "them" not as "ye....you." The contextual "ye....you" are the administrators of this commission while unimmersed Christians are the recipients of this commission. They are the ones being baptized and being brought into a teaching observing assembly rather than doing the immersing and teaching.
3. They "HAVE" already been through this threefold process BEFORE they attempt to carry out this commission to "make disciples." They "HAVE" already been evangelized under John the Baptist and/or under Jesus (Acts 1:21-22). They "HAVE" already been immersed (Jn. 4:1-2; Lk. 7:29-30; Acts 1:21-22). They "HAVE" already been taught how to observe all these things. Hence, they are not unsaved nor unimmersed nor untaught nor unassembled persons but are those first assembled immersed believers whom Christ has been teaching since the baptism of John (Acts 1:21-22) or HIS CHURCH at Jerusalem - the local visible kind of church.
All Christians are accountable to be witnesses of their salvation, but no individual Christian is authorized to "make disciples" of all nations. This is authority given strictly and only to NT congregations as the only possible contextual identity of "ye....you" in Matthew 28:19-20 is the NT congregation which is a teaching observing congregational body of plural immersed believers. It is His congregations that he promises to be "with you until the end of the world" doing this very commission.
Indeed, it is IMPOSSIBLE to obey Matthew 28:20 apart from membership in a NT congregation - IMPOSSIBLE! How so? This is a command to OBSERVE whatsoever Christ has commanded them is it not?
1. Try observing what He commanded in Matthew 18:15-17 apart from church membership
2. Try observing what He commanded in Matthew 26:12-30 apart from actually physically assemblying together in one place. He is addressing immersed believers who habitually assemble together (Acts 1:21-22).
3. Try observing what he commands in Matthew 28:19-20 apart from physical contact and physically assembling of those identified as "ye" with those identified as "them."
Paedobaptists cannot obey this commission because they are not immersed beleivers. Therefore, they fall under the category of "them" not "ye" in this commission and therefore have no authority from Christ to do what they have not obeyed themselves. This is NOT an option or a suggestion but a COMMAND of Christ and Paedobaptists are in disobedience of this command. This COMMAND does not allow for unimmersed believers to be brought into a teaching observing assembly of Christ. Do you understand what I just said. The Great Commission does not allow unimmersed believers to be brought into a teaching observing assembly of Christ, therefore such an assembly is not Christ's, it is not a product of the Great Commission, it is not obeying the Great Commission - it is not authorized to administer the Great Commission because unimersed believers are the "them" not the "ye" of this commission.
Those who are commissioned (ye.....you) "HAVE" already OBEYED this commission and all who have not are not authorized by Christ to administer it! Why?
1. Because the unevangelized can't "go" with the gospel as they don't even understand it. Those commissioned to "go" alraeady "have" received the gospel.
2. Because the untaught, and the unobserving can't teach or observe what they have not been taught.
3. Because the unimmersed are in disobedience to this commission and so how can they teach and administer to others what they are in disobedience to themselves?
Last edited:
Just curious as to what yo would view other Christian churches then who are not LM Baptist? Are they teaching the real Gospel, is the Lord using them to evangelize and reach the lost, train up and equip the saints, or are ty all about same as Church of Rome then?
And in the New Jersualem, will thoeholdingto those views bein or outside of that Body?