Advice On Issue In Ministry

But is this right?? Is this not a prime teaching opportunity to teach taht church membership is just as important as baptism is??

But she cannot be obedient to the Lord without membership in a local church. There is no biblical evidence that church membership is optional or less important. You say that Scripture is "heavy" on the side that baptism is not connected with church membership, yet there is only place where someone is baptized apart from the local church and that is the Ethiopian eunuch. There is no reason to believe that anyone else was ever baptized without joining the local church at which they were baptized. As I pointed out, that is the clear implication of Acts 2.

As for the apostles creed, to believe in one holy catholic church is the universal or invisible body, made of all believers without respect to location. That has nothing to do with baptism. Water baptism is an ordinance of the local church. Matthew 28 is that command to go and plant churches.

 

The practice I have seen in many IFB churches is issue wise:
1. salvation
2.Beleivers' Baptism
3.Church membership
One cannot be baptized until they are saved.One cannot even request or apply for church membership until they are baptized.Each one is a separate issue.
We follow the Lord's example in "Beleivers Baptism".I think one should be baptized as soon as they are saved and understand what baptism is . After this a person becomes qualified to join a local new testament body and that is a separate issue.
In any case it should be done with the parents consent.
I guess I am unexposed to all of the 500 different kinds of Baptists and all of their practices, but I am used to the Pastor doing the baptizing,not the youth pastor or the song leader.I am not saying unless the pastor does it it don't count ,I'm just telling you what I normally see practiced.

 

I am not sure I get the "leading" part. What is she looking for? Does she think God is going to tell her something?? I am not sure how that works for anyone except charismatics, and I am pretty sure it doesn't work even for them. We have so mystified the leading of God into this mystical extra-biblical revelation idea.

I am not limiting obedience in the least. Far from it, I am insisting on it. If she wants to be baptized, then get baptized at the church she is going to join. Find that church and do it quickly, and get involved. There is no reason for homeless Christians.

With respect to baptism, John's baptism was not Christian baptism. Christ's baptism was an example prior to the beginnign of the church. The others you list in no way insinuate that those baptisms were apart from membership in the local church. As I already pointed out, the only baptism mentioned in Scripture apart from the local church is the Ethiopian eunuch's. There is no reason to think that those people got baptized without joining the church in which they were baptized. Those others fit very well with what I am saying. And to be honest, I still don't understand on what basis you argue against my position on Acts 2. That passage seems clear that "adding" necessarily followed "were baptized." I don't see any other way. And it can't that they were "added" to the universal body. THat would be teaching baptismal regeneration. It has to be the local body they were added to.

But hey ... whatever ...

 

What do you expect to hear??? When we talk about "looking for leading" what are we looking for??? I think one author put it very well when he said something to the effect of "Waiting on the Lord is a synonym for common indecision." I do think the Lord leads us, but how? And when someone says "I am waiting on the Lord" we need to challenge them on that.

I agree. But you have worded in a way I simply can't agree with.

Consider the text. There is no text that supports your view. As I ahve pointed out several times, there is only one person in all the NT that was baptized clearly apart from the local church. When you say all these people are baptized without joining the local church, you are saying something the text doesn't say. You are arguing from complete silence. You can't accuse me of that. I already made the biblical case that baptism is done for those joining the church. You have presented nothing but silence from the text in support of your position. I made the the best argument you have with the Ethiopian eunuch.

And not one suggests that they did not join the church.

 

I have known of cases where someone felt that they should be baptized, even though their church, the Salvation Army, didn't practice it. Having a friend in a Baptist Church, they sought to be Batized there, although not wishing to change membership. I would not have a problem with that, you would just be helping a brother follow Christ in this way.

 

Since I have already stirred the pot, let me keep at it.

Are we really helping a brother in Christ by allowing him to continue in a "church" that is at best out of order, perhaps even not a true church? The NT gives us indications of what makes up a church, and observing the ordinances is a part of that definition. If a church does not observe the biblical command of Christ to baptize, can they really be called a church? And are we helping a brother by letting him continue there?

 

Uhhh, I think it's rather presumptuous to make statements about non-Baptists. Of course, in the interest of pot stirring, I'm probably the last one to call one black . However, in regards to a non-Baptist wanting to be baptized in a Baptist church, that ain't the way it works for us. In order to be baptized according to Baptist faith and practice, then one must become a member of that Baptist congregation. If, say, the Salvaton Army doesn't practice baptism, and you want to be baptized, then one should find a pastor of another church who will baptize you without regard to denominational affiliation. For example, I don't believe the Calvareans have any congregational prerequisite for baptism, just that you must be a believer. To expect the same from a Baptist or similar church is disrespectful to that church, imo.

 

Come on now, Jeff. Where did I say anything of the sort??? I didn't say this. You are reading into my words.

My question is, What are you expecting to find? You say you are looking for peace. But what in the world is that??? And what lets you know that is from the Lord? And if you need peace, then we don't have everything necessary to equip us for service and maturity as 2 Tim 3:17 promises. I think there are serious problems with this "peace" approach. I lived way too long in my life looking for "peace" and I was a miserable Christian. I had complete peace about things that blew up in my life. I had no peace about things that were absolutely what I should have been doing. I had a man challenge me on it and ask me these questions. I started thinking about it and studying Scripture. I realized that "seeking for God's guidance" is not found by this elusive "peace," whatever that is. The Bible never speaks of God leading us through peace. Friesen's book "Decision Making and the Will of God" is very good on this issue. He really hits the nail on the head. I read that about 3 or 4 years after I came to my position and I found great peace in knowing that someone else agreed with me. I remember laughing out loud at some of his examples. I wondered if he knew me. Peace comes to the believer in obedience.

I do seek the Lord's guidance. He guides through his word, and circumstances and desires. I simply would caution people about looking for something outside of his word. He is not working that way.

Second, as to the use of Scripture in this discussion, let me say this: The first record we have of baptism in the church is Acts 2. There, the pattern is salvation, baptism, added to the church. The fact that the apostles knew there were 3000 suggests that they were in fact keeping some sort of formal records, contrary to your suggestion that that is too elaborate. Accepting that that is the pattern of the early church, we should assume the same in every other case of baptism. The references you mention should be assumed to fit that pattern, rather than fitting another pattern.

Surely you realize that your position is as much unstated in those verses as mine is. But what is the backdrop of NT theology about baptism and "added to the church." That one leads to the other. Your suggestion that these people were baptized apart from joining the church is certainly not found in the text.

As for your comment that I ignore the issue of her wanting to find the church she should be part of, I didn't ignore it at all. In fact, I specifically addressed it. I siad Why not just tell this teen to find the church they want to join and get baptized there? In fact, I said it twice. So I didn't ignore it; I said, Solve it. Find the church you want to be a member of and get baptized and join there.

 

John,

Do you think it is possible to be a NT church without practicing believer's baptism?

Do you think it is possible for a believer to be in obedience to God if they are not a part of a NT church?

 

Possible? Yes. Without obstacle? No.

Possible? Yes. Without obstacle? No.