Baptism for Church Membership

I partially agree with this, except to say that the coC would more likely see baptism as the 2nd or 3rd step in the process, coming after faith in Christ and public confession of that faith.

I agree that the coC does not believe in BR either. Really their doctrinal issue is more about the timing of when salvation occurs than what it is that brings salvation - faith.

 

The doctrinal gap between Baptists and the C of C are more than a gap--they are a chasm, and minor doesn't even come close to describing those differences.

If baptism is the first step in the "salvation process," then baptism is a pre-requsite for salvation. I know a lot of C o C folks, some are close relatives. Ask them if baptism is necessary for salvation, and they all will tell you yes.

Baptists hold that this kind of baptism is not scriptural, and thus should require anyone baptized in the Church of Christ to submit to biblical baptism--following a testimony of salvation through repentance and faith.

 

The big problem with this view is that salvation does not come with repentance and faith. Whatever step baptism is in the process, without it the C of C does not consider one to be saved.

 

Thank you, Squire. The essays you cited are pretty solid, and useful for instruction.

 

No, not really. Not much of a difference at all, in fact. Both believe in believers Baptism, and reject infant baptism and Baptismal regeneration. Both believe repentance and faith are the requirements for salvation. Both are big on the importance of scripture.

How many times have you heard this from a Baptist church "Have you ever personally got down on your knees and placed your faith in Christ?" Many Baptists would say the same thing about the sinners prayer.

In fact, the Church of Christ's "sinners prayer" IS baptism. Baptists even agree with this somewhat. What is Baptism, the man asks the Baptist: "A public proclamation of faith", the Baptist replies. Well, for the CoC, it is THE profession of faith, just like the sinners prayer is THE profession in many Baptist churches.

The fact is, faith and repentance saves, which is what the CoC teach> their mode of Baptism is the same> therefore, if you are going to accept the believers testimony, you should accept the believers baptism. The value of the baptism is determined by the one getting baptized, not the one doing the baptism.

What are we, Catholics?

"Baptists" do not. SOME Baptists, do. I am SBC, and I can tell you right now that the majority of SBC churches that I know of, would not require a re-baptism of someone from CoC.

 

Rather than just take your word for this, I cite quotes from two Church of Christ websites. From the first:

http://www.church-of-christ.org/who.html#baptism

From the second:
http://www.housetohouse.com/HTH/biblequestions/archive/question0149.htm[

These quotes from Church of Christ folks themselves are clear and unmistakable. Your view of their views is incorrect.

Sorry, you are mistaken. Baptists and Churches of Christ both have placed a value (each different) on baptism. You may not join my church or any of theirs if you do not accept that congregation's position on baptism. The fact that Catholics do the same thing is irrelevant.

I will have to say that I am shocked by this statement. If you are right (which I doubt) then we Baptists are much worse off than I thought.

I think I'm going to start a poll to see if your contention is correct.

 

We are being just as arrogant and judgemental in our way as some coC churches are if we require "baptism" by someone who is coC. Our case that baptism has no role in salvation is pretty weak anyway. It is a very gray area that we (and the coC) have drawn a big red line in the middle of. What matters is faith in Christ, not how one is immersed.

 

Trying to be faithful to scripture is not arrogance. Trying to be faithful to scripture demands judgment. That's not judgmentalism; it's called exercising discernment.

I believe you indicated that you were once Church of Christ, now Baptist. Why, then are you still defending the C of C doctrine of baptism, on one hand, and then saying whether one is immersed is not important? You are out of the mainstream of Baptist thought. You are welcome to defend your views, but honesty demands you quit calling yourself Baptist.

There is a tendency on this board for some to treat baptism as of secondary importance. I must emphasize that Baptists have been killed for their views on baptism.

 

Pro 6:16 There are six things that the LORD hates, seven that are an abomination to him:
Pro 6:17 haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
Pro 6:18 a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil,
Pro 6:19 a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers.


You do not determine "Baptist" doctrine. Disagreeing with you does not equal "non-Baptist" doctrine.

I can think of two very well respected Baptists who would disagree with you, from what I have read...: Mark Dever and Al Mohler.

 

BTW, for those not following the debate, John Piper, Wayne Grudem, Mark Dever and others have been discussing Church membership in association with Baptism. Mark's position is that someone who has not been baptized, or was baptized as an infant, cannot be a church member or participate at the Lord's table...HOWEVER>

From what He has wrote, other denominations adult baptisms of believers SHOULD be recognized...

 

Can you provide a link where this discussion is going on? I respect all of these guys and would love to read what they're saying.

I recognize that my view (that baptism is the door to local church membership), although a widely-held view among Baptists, is not a unanimous view. I believe it to be the scriptural view, the historical Baptist view. I can fellowship with Baptists who do not hold my view, while still believing that they are wrong in this instance.

May I ask you about your purpose in quoting the Proverbs, and the underlining of "and one who sows discord among the brothers."?

 

Sorry. There are several: this has been ongoing for quite some time...

http://www.enjoyinggodministries.co...ship-just-how-together-for-the-gospel-are-we/
http://adrianwarnock.com/2007/08/wayne-grudem-replies-to-john-piper-on.htm
http://blog.9marks.org/2007/08/baptism-church-.html

I, too believe Baptism necessary for Church membership. However, as a Baptist, I believe their is nothing "conferred" in Baptism, that is, it is not a sacrament. Therefore any baptism done on a true believer(not Jehova's witnesses, or Mormons), by immersion, is acceptable. I do not require people to have an apt theological understanding of what is occurring during Baptism, because the scriptures do not require that, and were I to do that, I would then have to disallow the mentally handicapped and Children as well.

I thought your statement regarding Mr. Baker not referring to himself as a Baptist, because he does not agree with you, was divisive and uncalled for. You are not the determiner of Baptist orthodoxy, and Mr. Baker is in agreement, historically, with many Baptist theologians.

 

I have also e-mailed Dr. Mohler as well 9marks(Mark Dever). Perhaps they will respond, in some form.

 

Don't remember if I said that or not. Could be. I've got relatives on both sides of that fence. Anyway, I'm now a drummer in good standing in a Baptist Church.