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!

Which dispensationalist is right about baptism?

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by UZThD, May 21, 2005.

  1. UZThD

    UZThD New Member

    Dec 24, 2004
    Likes Received:
    Chas. F. Baker, a grad of Dallas TS and pres emeritus of Grace Bible College in Grand Rapids, is a dispensationalist and has written, "A Dispensational Theology" (Grace BC Pub:Grand Rapids, 1971).

    In this textbook on Systematic Theology Baker says, "Water baptism was just one of the practices which passed with Israel's complete setting aside." (557). Baker thinks that WB was for the "Kingdom Gospel," not the Gospel of the Church. WB is NOT for today (553).

    On the other hand, Merrill F. Unger is also a dispensationalist who graduated from and taught at Dallas TS as well. Unger has written "The Baptism and Gifts of the HS," Moody:Chicago,1974).

    In this book Unger says, in the NT WB was not just administered to Jewish churches but also regularly to Gentile ones...WB is a visible portrayal of placing the believer into Christ...immersion symbolizes the belivers death, burial, and resurrection with Christ...and WB IS for today. (32,33,35).

    As both dispensationalism and WB are recently discussed in some threads in this forum, and as, after all, we ARE "Baptists" and as that very name implies an interest in Baptism, what is your opinion about this disagreement between two dispensationalists re WB?

    Is Baker right or is Unger?


    [ May 21, 2005, 12:24 PM: Message edited by: UZThD ]
  2. carlaimpinge

    carlaimpinge New Member

    Jul 2, 2004
    Likes Received:
    Doctor Bill,

    Baker is a hyperdispensationalist. The gospel of the kingdom at hand WAS NOT preached after the crucifixion. (Acts 1) He, along with Stam and Ohare, have made a grave error. His theory is "tainted" for Paul baptized under HIS COMMISSION, (1 Cor.1) which was "not" according to the twelve's. (Gal.1, Eph.3, Gal.2) They preached the gospel of the circumcision (Luke 24, Gal.2), which was a message proclaimed unto Jews EARLY IN THE ACTS PERIOD which connected water baptism with salvation and reception of the Holy Ghost. (Mark 16, Acts 2,8,11)

    It was "transitional" UNTIL the fall of Israel, which occurred before Paul's salvation. (Rom.11) He SPOKE of it, as a fact.

    Paul's WATER BAPTISM is not associated with salvation OR the gift of the Holy Ghost. (1 Cor.1, Rom.1, Eph.1)

    It is an ACT OF TESTIMONY in belief of the message as evidenced by Lydia. (Acts 16) Water baptism has "always" been a visible act of testimony of those who believed since John the Baptist.

    Believers IN THE BIBLE get baptized, whether they are Jews, Gentiles, hearing the kingdom message or under the dispensation of the grace of God.

    In Christ Jesus,