Please clarify what you mean by the pastor dropped the ball and my friend didn’t. Are you saying the pastor of the church where my friend preached dropped the ball? If so, he most surely did.
-
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!
What would you do?
- Thread starter SovereignGrace
- Start date
- Status
The pastor of the church where my wife was baptized knows nothing of this, and the plan is to keep it that way.
I don’t know why ppl call ppl and tell them if a guy is wrong. If you don’t like their teaching(s) don’t go back. But stirring the pot does no good.
Yes...the pastor where your friend preached.
Your friend believes one must be baptized so I cannot fault him from urging baptism (even if misguided he is acting on his belief).
I do fault him if he knew the church held to baptist views on the topic because that would be a betrayal of the trust given him.
But every pastor is to guard the pulpit.
I am of the belief that I should never push my beliefs on anyone or any church. If they ask me what I believe, I will gladly and boldly tell them. But I won’t preach something that causes them grief.
amen! that takes courage to say, because conformity seems to be the order of the day--you believe what i believe or i won't fellowship with you!
I've been a Baptist for over 40 years, & I've always been taught by "true" Baptist pastors that, while every new believer SHOULD be baptized ASAP if at all possible, that one is saved BEFORE baptism. Why do people still ignore JESUS' example of His saving the thief on the cross who couldn't possibly be baptized? That event should seal the deal !
There is increasingly less exchange between preachers/teachers and the congregation. Very few meetings entertain Q&A sessions. A sermon is a one way speech. For this I don’t blame the congregation for sitting through bogus teachings. I’d blame the one who invited them for not vetting them.
Whenever I get invited say in a school to share, I note some sharp chaperones grill me before I get up. They want to know my beliefs, where I fellowship etc. Reason is, interrupting a sermon midway is somewhat rude.
What value does baptism add to you seeing it does not save?
Whenever I get invited say in a school to share, I note some sharp chaperones grill me before I get up. They want to know my beliefs, where I fellowship etc. Reason is, interrupting a sermon midway is somewhat rude.
What value does baptism add to you seeing it does not save?
Here’s the thing. The pastor and my friend who preached false baptism doctrine have known each other for years, preached together for years. This came out of nowhere. Unless that pastor knew his beliefs and agreed with them. I have no knowledge one way or the other that pastor’s view on baptism.
That must be one of those rare moments you get caught flatfooted.
Still,I don’t advocate shouting or heckling down a visitor. Let the pastor correct him the next meeting. What matters more is his flock. He can then meet his friend and follow up.
I have a friend pastor who I just discovered has really gone off the rails. Turned into a KJV -only ,is always slamming homosexuals, believes believers shouldn’t vote, tongues are just being multilingual etc. I mean all this came out of nowhere. There is always that small chance of our beliefs being compromised along the way.
unprofitable
Active Member
Sovereign Grace, would you give me the name of any of the baptist churches in your area who hold to this teaching that I may call and discuss their interpretation of this doctrine. People immediately assume when your are teaching baptism is necessary they assume you believe it is for salvation and as the C of C interprets baptism. When seen as a covenant commandment (ordinance) then the interpretation takes on an entirely different light/meaning. Christ says in John 14:15, "if ye love me, keep my commandments." Also, in his teaching of his new covenant, he gives the command to his church to baptize." (Mt 28:19) Since Christ gives the command and says if ye love me keep my commandments, there therefore must be an interpretation that is in unison/consistent with the doctrines of grace. It would make Christ a hypocrite and a false teacher to say he commanded baptism as a teaching and ordinance then him say "Well it really doesn't matter if you have it or not." He is the lord and does not change. We believe BAPTISM IN AND OF ITSELF DOES NOT SAVE AND ITS ADMINISTRATION DOES NOT SAVE. Baptism covenantly positions a member in the body of Christ.
As far as the thief on the cross goes, it is the one incident in the bible where it is ASSUMED that he was a lost alienated sinner from off the street and had no interest in the interpretation of the word of God. The promise of the Messiah was given to Israel and they were looking for him and trying according to the scriptures those who said they were him so they did not receive a false Christ. This is also the command to the church, the body of Christ. (Mt 24:24, I Jn 4:1) The malefactors were were doing the same They both say in essence, "if thou be the Christ..." They were the fleshly children of Abraham with one being also a son. (Jn 8:37-42) The sons of Abraham will do judgment and justice. (Gen 18:19) The thief who finally is given eyes to see by the Holy Spirit was a son of Abraham. They were NOT ignorant of the scriptures. When the teachings of Christ became hard, many fell away and walked no more with him. (Jn 6:66) This easily could have been what happened to thief. The thief on the cross was already covenantly positioned under the old testament covenant and since he was an Israelite, then circumcised. He most likely already had the baptism of John. (Mt 2:5-6)
To say the thief on the cross did not have baptism stands in contrast to all the other examples where the members did. Acts 2:41, etc I Cor 12:18 says, But now hath God set the members EVERY ONE of them (WITHOUT EXCEPTION) in the body/church as it has pleased Him. No one will ever be a member in our body of Christ without baptism." The church is commanded/charged to make sure that the members are baptized and that is administered scripturally.
As far as the thief on the cross goes, it is the one incident in the bible where it is ASSUMED that he was a lost alienated sinner from off the street and had no interest in the interpretation of the word of God. The promise of the Messiah was given to Israel and they were looking for him and trying according to the scriptures those who said they were him so they did not receive a false Christ. This is also the command to the church, the body of Christ. (Mt 24:24, I Jn 4:1) The malefactors were were doing the same They both say in essence, "if thou be the Christ..." They were the fleshly children of Abraham with one being also a son. (Jn 8:37-42) The sons of Abraham will do judgment and justice. (Gen 18:19) The thief who finally is given eyes to see by the Holy Spirit was a son of Abraham. They were NOT ignorant of the scriptures. When the teachings of Christ became hard, many fell away and walked no more with him. (Jn 6:66) This easily could have been what happened to thief. The thief on the cross was already covenantly positioned under the old testament covenant and since he was an Israelite, then circumcised. He most likely already had the baptism of John. (Mt 2:5-6)
To say the thief on the cross did not have baptism stands in contrast to all the other examples where the members did. Acts 2:41, etc I Cor 12:18 says, But now hath God set the members EVERY ONE of them (WITHOUT EXCEPTION) in the body/church as it has pleased Him. No one will ever be a member in our body of Christ without baptism." The church is commanded/charged to make sure that the members are baptized and that is administered scripturally.
Water baptism is a person's public symbolic statement that he/she is saved, & is something Jesus said we should do.
I see lotsa guesswork here. We do NOT know for sure if the thieves on the crosses were Israelis or not. (All we know is, they weren't Romans, as Romans didn't crucify Romans.) They coulda been Greex, Idumeans, etc.
And the one Jesus saved was not saved before he asked Jesus to remember him, or else he woulda said so. And he certainly was NOT baptized, but he was certainly SAVED.
1 Cor. 12 is about the different jobs within a congregation that make a complete "body". Not a word about baptism.
In effect, you're pushing REGENERATIONAL baptism, which is FALSE! I have no hesitation in denouncing it.
MEANWHILE, BACK AT THE RANCH.....
I believe the best solution to the OP's question would be to "set the record straight" at the next services. Interrupting one in mid-sermon is not only disruptive to the whole act of worshipping, but might make other speakers reluctant to be guest speakers at that church.
I believe the best solution to the OP's question would be to "set the record straight" at the next services. Interrupting one in mid-sermon is not only disruptive to the whole act of worshipping, but might make other speakers reluctant to be guest speakers at that church.
unprofitable
Active Member
Robycop,
Go to Bible Gateway and look up all the examples of who said "IF THOU BE THE CHRIST" John 10:14 says, "Then came the JEWS round about him and said unto him, How long dost thou make us doubt? IF THOU BE THE CHRIST, tell us plainly." Paul in I Cor 1:22 says," The JEWS seek a sign..." Lu 23:39 "And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him saying, IF THOU BE THE CHRIST." He was seeking a sign and WAS a Jew. Do you see a pattern developing here? More than one example. Line upon line (Isa 28:10 and 13), since the scriptures are not to be of any private (based on a single verse or example) interpretation. (2 Peter 1:20)
How do you get into the body where you attend to be able to perform the jobs in your congregation? These are members bringing forth the fruits of righteousness (jobs as you call it) that the church might be edified. One would become a member of our church by the administration of the ordinance of baptism. Look up the definition of an ordinance. It is a COMMAND and not a "should" or a "suggestion." Eph 2:10 says, "For we are His workmanship created in Christ (in His body) unto good works, which God hath before ORDAINED that we should walk in them (ordinances, sayings, commandments). Did the Father ordain baptism. Absolutely. Therefore it is a good work that the body of Christ in commanded to carry out (walk in). To make baptism a suggestion or as one of the writers said "only an ordinance" and not a command is to walk contrary to the walk we are ordained and commanded to walk in.
Go to Bible Gateway and look up all the examples of who said "IF THOU BE THE CHRIST" John 10:14 says, "Then came the JEWS round about him and said unto him, How long dost thou make us doubt? IF THOU BE THE CHRIST, tell us plainly." Paul in I Cor 1:22 says," The JEWS seek a sign..." Lu 23:39 "And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him saying, IF THOU BE THE CHRIST." He was seeking a sign and WAS a Jew. Do you see a pattern developing here? More than one example. Line upon line (Isa 28:10 and 13), since the scriptures are not to be of any private (based on a single verse or example) interpretation. (2 Peter 1:20)
How do you get into the body where you attend to be able to perform the jobs in your congregation? These are members bringing forth the fruits of righteousness (jobs as you call it) that the church might be edified. One would become a member of our church by the administration of the ordinance of baptism. Look up the definition of an ordinance. It is a COMMAND and not a "should" or a "suggestion." Eph 2:10 says, "For we are His workmanship created in Christ (in His body) unto good works, which God hath before ORDAINED that we should walk in them (ordinances, sayings, commandments). Did the Father ordain baptism. Absolutely. Therefore it is a good work that the body of Christ in commanded to carry out (walk in). To make baptism a suggestion or as one of the writers said "only an ordinance" and not a command is to walk contrary to the walk we are ordained and commanded to walk in.
You're still pushing a FALSE DOCTRINE. As a long-time Baptist, I know something about baptism !
When I was saved, I was eager to be baptized, but had to wait 3 weex as my church only had baptisms once a month. (The church I attended then had an indoor natatorium.) But had I died in that 3-week interim, I was JUST-AS-SAVED as I was afterward.
And I won't cease to keep pointing out the example of the thief on the cross! He was SAVED BY JESUS, even tho he couldn't possibly be baptized. But GOD knows when one actually can't be baptized.
And I think every new Christian should make every effort to be baptized ASAP, but if one should die before being baptized, he/she is still saved !
While Baptists have ever held salvation by grace through faith, I believe we have also changed to "frightened" language which has to always include "not for salvation" any time we speak of baptism, and which also usually implies that it is not important. It is no wonder other denominations question why we make such a big deal out of something that is unimportant. Here are some examples from Benjamin Keach's Baptist Catechism, this edition printed as late as 1851 by the American Baptist Publication Society.
Keach had already said, "Faith in Jesus Christ is a saving grace, whereby we receive and rest upon him alone for salvation, as he is revealed as the free gift of God to us, in the gospel." But he also wrote:
I point this out not to say that Keach was teaching baptismal regeneration, but that early Baptists used much stronger language in relation to baptism, language that might be misconstrued as teaching that baptism saves. In relation to this thread, I think it is important to help us understand something of Baptists relationship to Alexander Campbell. Many of them originally thought he was saying the same things they were saying, and, in my opinion, that misunderstanding was one thing that helped him draw off so many Baptists after him.
unprofitable
Active Member
Robycop3,
Please consider the following points/questions.
The question was asked, "If I had died before I was baptized, would I have not been saved/gone to hell" In Mt 10:30 and Lu 12:7, Christ points out that "the very hairs of your head are numbered." Could not the Father that numbered those hairs not preserve the member that he had drawn to the Son until that person had been baptized? Could the Father that ordained the ordinance (Eph 2:10) not accomplish that which He has commanded?
Grace by faith is taught by my Baptist brethren as if there were no intended purpose but that is contradicted by Eph 2:10 and 2 Tim 1:9 which says "Who hath saved us, and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own PURPOSE and grace, which was given us in Christ before the world began. The Purpose includes I Cor 12:18 which I have already pointed out says, but now hath God set the members EVERYONE of them IN THE BODY, as it has pleased him. The body is plainly THE CHURCH. The members are added to the body by the ORDINANCE of BAPTISM. Why? That the members might keep covenant (NEW covenant/marriage covenant) with their husband/head Christ and edify one another as a body of Christ. Christ says in Mt 16:18, "...upon this rock I will build my church..." How were the members added/church built? Through the ordinance of baptism given to it by its husband. No one has ever been added to the body where I am a member without baptism, or letter from another body stating the person had been baptized. EVERYONE of them The ordinance is given to THE CHURCH and is commanded by her husband CHRIST to administer it.
You say that the thief on the cross was not saved or ignorant of the work/intent of Christ until he asked Christ to save him. How do we reconcile that Jn 3:3 says,"...except a man be born again (from above), he cannot SEE the kingdom of God" How did the thief see/ speak specifically concerning that KINGDOM except he had been born again/saved? His eyes were opened before he asked.
I will continue my post but I am having trouble with the page leaving out what I am posting,
Please consider the following points/questions.
The question was asked, "If I had died before I was baptized, would I have not been saved/gone to hell" In Mt 10:30 and Lu 12:7, Christ points out that "the very hairs of your head are numbered." Could not the Father that numbered those hairs not preserve the member that he had drawn to the Son until that person had been baptized? Could the Father that ordained the ordinance (Eph 2:10) not accomplish that which He has commanded?
Grace by faith is taught by my Baptist brethren as if there were no intended purpose but that is contradicted by Eph 2:10 and 2 Tim 1:9 which says "Who hath saved us, and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own PURPOSE and grace, which was given us in Christ before the world began. The Purpose includes I Cor 12:18 which I have already pointed out says, but now hath God set the members EVERYONE of them IN THE BODY, as it has pleased him. The body is plainly THE CHURCH. The members are added to the body by the ORDINANCE of BAPTISM. Why? That the members might keep covenant (NEW covenant/marriage covenant) with their husband/head Christ and edify one another as a body of Christ. Christ says in Mt 16:18, "...upon this rock I will build my church..." How were the members added/church built? Through the ordinance of baptism given to it by its husband. No one has ever been added to the body where I am a member without baptism, or letter from another body stating the person had been baptized. EVERYONE of them The ordinance is given to THE CHURCH and is commanded by her husband CHRIST to administer it.
You say that the thief on the cross was not saved or ignorant of the work/intent of Christ until he asked Christ to save him. How do we reconcile that Jn 3:3 says,"...except a man be born again (from above), he cannot SEE the kingdom of God" How did the thief see/ speak specifically concerning that KINGDOM except he had been born again/saved? His eyes were opened before he asked.
I will continue my post but I am having trouble with the page leaving out what I am posting,
Last edited:
unprofitable
Active Member
The thief then had to have heard the gospel and almost without exception when we see the word gospel used it is in association with the kingdom/gospel of the kingdom preached by both Christ and John the Baptist, and that kingdom as a type in the literal, local, visible body of Christ.
You continue to say I am teaching baptismal regeneration. If the teaching of baptismal regeneration were true, how could there ever be false brethren, teachers, and prophets. It would be impossible for someone to make a false profession because baptism would save them, even if they later changed their mind about being saved. Have you heard that from me? Absolutely not.
You continue to say I am teaching baptismal regeneration. If the teaching of baptismal regeneration were true, how could there ever be false brethren, teachers, and prophets. It would be impossible for someone to make a false profession because baptism would save them, even if they later changed their mind about being saved. Have you heard that from me? Absolutely not.
unprofitable
Active Member
Again my question, why would Christ say if ye love me keep my commandments, give the command to baptize, then in essence disannul the command? Christ would in effect be divorcing himself from his own covenant which he would never do.
How do you get into the new covenant? Plainly shown by the multitude (Acts 2:41) receiving baptism as well as other examples.
Why would my past Baptist brethren suffer such persecution, hatred, torture, devastation, and death over an ordinance that had no value or purpose? They knew it did and were standing for the whole counsel of God.
I have given you verses and questions to consider. I know the points I bring up are contrary to Baptist tradition concerning baptism. If I cannot see, open my eyes with verses and not opinion or the traditions of men
How do you get into the new covenant? Plainly shown by the multitude (Acts 2:41) receiving baptism as well as other examples.
Why would my past Baptist brethren suffer such persecution, hatred, torture, devastation, and death over an ordinance that had no value or purpose? They knew it did and were standing for the whole counsel of God.
I have given you verses and questions to consider. I know the points I bring up are contrary to Baptist tradition concerning baptism. If I cannot see, open my eyes with verses and not opinion or the traditions of men
Please lock this thread. It has been hijacked. Thanks.
- Status