How Soon Do You Baptize New Converts?

As soon as they understand and desire to be baptized... I say this based my knowledge of how it was practiced in the first century.

 

Many years ago my Pastor told me he would would wait a little longer to baptize the chidren that came to faith as compared with the adults because he didn't want the children to see their baptism as being part of their salvation.

 

Very true but I agree that children would be more likely to tie the two together.

 

We are not in New Testament times. There is no urgency to be baptized after conversion. It seems that people in NT times fully understood the meaning of baptism, as a sign of a previous experience in Christ.

Each candidate is different, but I want to be certain that one has made a confession of Christ in redemption before I provide that witness in baptism. I, therefore, prefer to wait a few months before baptism takes place.

To facilitate this wait, I require baptism classes, much like the confirmation classes in the Anglican Churches. At least the new converts will have a grounding in the fundamentals of the faith and the candidate is not making a rash decision based on emotion rather than reason.

I have seen "new converts" come from some evangelistic service where tey made a quick decision to be "saved", a walk down an aisle, led, yea, sometimes dragged, by a friend who meant well, but they didn't have a clue what had happened.

If we want strong members of the local church, we want strong teaching, and allow babes in Christ to be so nurtured, weaned from the bottle and prepared for a life in Christ and His word.

Anyone can have a bath without soap, but is there an actual cleansing? Let's add the soap and be reasonably sure.

Cheers,

Jim

 

I don't want to be rude, because others know I am an "idiot", but when did we leave New Testament times? Maybe you mean "early church" times?

Amen, I agree.

Amen, I agree. I hope that class would emphasize on the importance of being baptized as the initial requirement for service, note; i.e., not salvation.

exactly why the need for time to show a fruitful beginning.

Nice and well reasoned. Also it follows what the New Testament teaches about making disciples out of converts.

 

There is some evidence from the days of the early church and even in the New Testament that as the Church grew and matured that there was a bit of space between conversion and baptism. Also, that in the baptismal formulas there was a place for a recent convert to explain their story and hold fast to a common confession. Also, there is evidence that the early church created some space in welcoming the new believer to their local community. They would let me exist with them and show them Christianity for several months before the baptism would take place. I think that is wise.

While I don't oppose baptism soon after conversion, I am a fan of holding off and sending the person through a baptism or introductory class. If all the person wants to do is get wet and then go about their life without any significant change than the ceremony is a mockery.

You can check into most of these things by reading JND Kelley.

 

Acts 8:35-39 Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him. 36 Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?”
37 Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”
And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”[a]
38 So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him. 39 Now when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught Philip away, so that the eunuch saw him no more; and he went on his way rejoicing.

 

I'm not knowledgeable enough to really give a good answer on this.

But I know my church just had a little girl who accepted Jesus into her heart and then was baptized immediately that next church service.

I really didn't have an opinion on it .. or think about it .. I was happy about it.

But this topic does make me think about it more!

I don't mean to start another topic inside this topic .. and I'll start a new one if neccessary .. but in answering this topic's questions, would you treat children any differently than adults? Perhaps wait till they get older?

 

We treat children different than adults in terms of when they are baptized. We baptize adults as soon as possible after the have believed on the Lord Jesus. We made that decision after studying the Scripture in Acts where on the day of Pentecost people believed and were baptized and the Philip baptizing the Ethiopian after he made a profession of belief.

For children, we believe that parents and children's workers are the best "judges" of the reality of a child's belief. For us, both parents and workers have to agree that a child is ready for us to baptize the child.

 

In the early church they were able to discern spirits (1 Cor. 12:10) as to if a person was saved or not - but this may not always have been true if one believes Simon was still lost (Acts 8).

 

There is a huge difference between discussing what was done in New Testament TIMES, when it could cost your physical life to profess Jesus Christ as Saviour and King, and the relative disconcern of our current AGE. "So, he got religion! When is the ballgame onTV?"

In understanding scripture a basic rule is that we understand what the passage meant to the NT believers, and then apply that teaching to us in our time and relativity.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Ahhh but the church should be in New Testament times. ~ Well maybe many churches have strayed. I guess that is how we get weird doctrine such as; one can loose one's Salvation or Salvation was intended for only a few and God selected the others to go to Hell or the office of deacon running a church or women pastoring churches and then some even believe it is God's will that practicing homosexuals can not only be active but in some churches they are leaders.
I can not find any scripture that supports this type of church.

Classes are great for new believers but they should not be a requirement for baptism. I do not think that would be scriptural.

Baptism causes nothing to magically happen,including cleansing, the cleansing should have already happened. It is not a sacrament or a requirement of salvation. However baptism is an act of obedience to a command given by Jesus Christ to show the world that we (believers) are submitting to Christ through our actions and life.
Baptism symbolizes the spiritual cleansing provided by divine forgiveness that took place upon salvation. Baptism gives the believer the opportunity to make a formal declaration of their salvation and newness of life before the church and the world.

 

Methinks there is a need for a few lessons in reading English as well.

Cheers,

Jim

 

How soon to baptize

Jedi,

These verses were on my mind from the very instance I read the title. Also, what about Acts chapter 10? As Peter was preaching in Cornelius' house, the Holy Ghost fell up them all, and Peter then stated that since they(gentiles) now receive the Holy Ghost the same as the Jews do, who can forbid water? They took them and baptized them immediately. These classes seem "iffy" to me. It takes Jesus Christ's shed blood to save someone, and then the Holy Ghost will lead them from there. If they have it when they give their hand to the church, things will go well, period. If not, you can give them all this "discipleship"(sp?) and they are still lost. To the best of my knowledge, discipleship classes don't save people.....I am not necessarily downing them, but let the Lord do the leading, and not man.

Willis

 

I dont completely disagree with baptism calsses to new converts, but I tend to lean towards disagreeing with some aspects of it. I completely agree that in the first century there were special gifts that may not be offered presently along with a much better awareness (Jews) of God's Holiness. There are many aspects of the Gospel I see that need to be re-taught biblically on with this post-modern society that have been traditionalized. In order to make the gospel message clear, in these times, we might have to get into a little more detail to break through false understandings passed down over many years. Anyway my point is that while I see the importance for discipleship I also think that we have the tendancy to try and do to much in the process, getting to philosophical and so forth. I just don't know if it is right to tell someone who has been born again (professes faith) that they must wait to be baptized. I dont have a problem with taking some time to make sure they understand what they are doing. I see the intention, which is good, in schooling new converts on baptism but I just don't know if it is necessary in every case to make them wait to be obedient.