1. 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!

Fulfilling the command to baptise.......

Discussion in '2000-02 Archive' started by Scott_Bushey, Jun 2, 2002.

  1. Scott_Bushey

    Scott_Bushey <img src=/scott.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2001
    Messages:
    461
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jonathan,
    You write:
    Is it possible that there is a difference between a Biblical example and a Biblical mandate?

    Scott states:
    There is a BIG difference between a biblical *example* and a biblical *mandate (command)*. The commands of God are not open to discussion, examples may be.

    Jonathan asks:
    If it is a Biblical mandate that a convert is baptized as soon as possible isn't it also a Biblical mandate that all church members sell all that they own and have all things in common?

    Scott replies:
    The command to baptize believers is clear. It is one of the 2 sacraments left to the church. The example portrayed in the book of Acts in regards to the passage you present, is just that, "an example".

    IN HIM,
    Scott
     
  2. Robert J Hutton

    Robert J Hutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2002
    Messages:
    360
    Likes Received:
    0
    Warm Christian greetings!

    It is true that the early Christians were often baptised straight away but one has to bear in mind the following: The persecution of those early believers was so savage that to be baptised was often to sign one's own death warrant. Therefore, it was not entered into lightly.

    However, in these days of "easy believism" it is possible that new converts can be baptised without really understanding what is being done.
    Consequently, it is right for the Pastor to take his time and, perhaps, have several teaching sessions with a potential candidate for baptism before satisfying himself that the person is ready.

    Kind regards,

    Robert J Hutton
     
  3. Scott_Bushey

    Scott_Bushey <img src=/scott.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2001
    Messages:
    461
    Likes Received:
    0
    Robert,
    You write:
    However, in these days of "easy believism" it is possible that new converts can be baptised without really understanding what is being done.
    Consequently, it is right for the Pastor to take his time and, perhaps, have several teaching sessions with a potential candidate for baptism before satisfying himself that the person is ready.

    Scott asks:
    Is this what the harmony of scripture implies? The gospel has not changed! Granted, some gospel messages have been seriously tampered with, but scripture is harmoniously consistant. Is it us who must be "satisfied" or God?
    One might also wonder how baptisms were handled in regards to the identifiers presented in the parable of the soils and the immediate baptisms evidenced in the book of Acts. Surely these identified in the parable as *believing for a season* were possibly baptised prior to their falling away, based upon that which Acts implies.

    IN HIM,
    Scott

    [ June 15, 2002, 06:52 PM: Message edited by: Scott Bushey ]
     
  4. TomVols

    TomVols New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have great affection for the position that we must do as they did in Acts and baptize immediately, however there are many, even in my own reformed circles, who caution that we must not baptize quickly just as we do not lay hands on someone too quickly.

    Just a question: should we take the descriptive practice of immediate baptism as prescriptive?
     
  5. Scott_Bushey

    Scott_Bushey <img src=/scott.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2001
    Messages:
    461
    Likes Received:
    0
    Tom,
    First of all, can you present me with some examples of descriptives and prescriptives?

    The idea of choosing officers for the church is much different in contrast to baptizing someone who has openly:
    1) Confessed Christ as savior.
    2) " repentance.
    3) " Belief in who Christ is.
    4) Has cast his burden on Him.
    5) Have received the free gift.

    Choosing officers in the church is to be scrutinized. We are commanded to identify certain characteristics that the scriptures elaborate upon when we choose our leaders. However, this idea is a *horse of a different color* when contrasted to soteriology.

    I believe we are to be prescriptive when choosing leaders. The prescription is presented to us. Baptism is secondary to the above items. IMO, baptism is as close to immediate as one can get, i.e. "as soon as is possible". The requirements also may be seen as prescriptive. The scriptures do not show any different processes.

    [ June 17, 2002, 07:54 PM: Message edited by: Scott Bushey ]
     
  6. rlvaughn

    rlvaughn Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2001
    Messages:
    10,544
    Likes Received:
    1,558
    Faith:
    Baptist
    These two ideas are not comparable for several reasons, but chiefly these:

    1. The church was commanded or commissioned to baptize believers (converts, those they evangelize). To choose to neglect or delay baptism involves the church deliberately disobeying the command of God, or the church admitting, either explicitly or implicitly, that they believe the person's conversion is questionable.
    2. In connection with #1, then, baptizing as soon as possible illustrates how the church carried out the command to baptize.
    3. The examples of baptism occurring as soon as possible are consistent throughout the New Testament, while having all things common was not consistently practiced throughout the New Testament.
     
Loading...