By Dan Nelson, Pastor, First Baptist Church, Camarillo, CA

I had a discussion with someone on facebook a few months ago about believer’s baptism by immersion (a cherished Baptist belief). It became apparent we were not communicating when he didn’t understand why I shared a kinship with the Anabaptists as my spiritual ancestors, or that the name “Anabaptist” might indicate being against baptism.

The reason the name “Anabaptist” was given to them because of their beliefs about baptism, about which they felt the early reformers and Catholics had ignored Scripture. They were called Anabaptists because they rejected infant sprinkling and believed baptism was only for believers in Christ, normally by full immersion in water. Thomas White says, “They were rebaptizers because they viewed second baptism as the first legitimate baptism.”[1] The Anabaptist leaders discovered through reading the Scripture that baptism in the New Testament was for believers. So their practice caused them to contradict or oppose the traditional mode of the day — sprinkling infants. Despite their first staggering attempts at pouring instead of immersion most eventually believed immersion was the only sufficient mode of baptism.

The hotspots were in Northern Germany and particularly in Switzerland. The Anabaptist leaders such as Grebel, Hubmaier, Sattler, Simmons, Denck, and Manz all believed in justification by faith and welcomed the reformation view of being saved by grace through faith and not through works. They all favored the break with Catholicism. However, most of the Swiss movement (viewed as revolutionaries) later said that Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin did not go far enough in teaching and endorsing believer’s baptism. Hubmaier endorsed complete religious freedom to decide this crucial matter without government coercion.[2]

The perceived “radicals” also were opposed to state controlled religion, which cost several Anabaptist leaders their lives at the hands of Catholics and Protestants. Most notable was the ruthless persecution by Zwingli in Switzerland. The Anabaptists believed that Scripture alone should be the primary authority for the local church, rather than maintaining many Catholic traditions as did the magisterial Reformers. The Anabaptist movement has thus often been called “the Radical Reformation.”

Baptists today are sort of split concerning our affinity with the Anabaptists. Some Baptists say our origins are with the English Baptists from around the early 1600s under John Smyth and Thomas Helwys, who were more organized and suffered less persecution. Others, like me, still claim kinship with the orthodox Anabaptist groups.

Anabaptists were a diverse movement with no central authority, which led to some Anabaptists advocating unorthodox beliefs and (on a few occasions) unbiblical practices. These views, though, do not represent the mainstream views of Anabaptists that have survived today. The men I have listed earlier were orthodox when it came to basic Christian beliefs as compared to the other reformers like Luther and Calvin. We must not throw the baby out with the “immersion water.”

The Bible is abundantly clear that baptism of believer’s is by immersion. Jesus “came up straightway out of the water” after his baptism in Matt. 3:16. To identify with Christ in immersion seemed to be the standard practice of the church in Rom. 6:3-5. We also identify with Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection through the practice according to Gal. 3:27 and I Cor. 15:3-4.

Baptism does not save you, but it is important to follow Christ through the kind of baptism that Jesus had and the early church administered. Taken in the light of these truths, the Anabaptist movement was not as “way out” and “radical’ as some have surmised. They were just more biblical that the magisterial reformers. We are hard pressed to say this practice was not that important, especially to the early Anabaptist martyrs.[3]

“Ordinance”

With the voice of experience and the education of a scholar, Dr. W. A. Criswell shares the following definition:

The word ordinance, as we use the term in the church, refers to a religious rite ordained by the Lord Jesus Christ.  Upon his authority and institution, and following the practice of the apostles, we receive the ordinances of the church from his and their gracious hands.  The word ordinance in the Old Testament represents something prescribed, enacted, and usually refers to a matter of ritual.  For example, according to Exodus 12:14, the Passover was “an ordinance forever”; that is, a permanent institution.  The word ordinance in the New Testament is a translation of four different Greek words.  Although not technically referring to just the two ordinances of baptism and the Lord’s Supper, I like the translation of the Greek word paradoseis in I Corinthians 11:2.  “Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.”  That is what we are to do, faithfully and scripturally and perpetually.

–W.A. Criswell, Criswell’s Guidebook for Pastors (Nashville, TN: Broadman, 1980), 199.

Dr. William W. Stevens differs with Dr. Criswell and writes that the word paradoseis should be translated “traditions” instead of ordinance (William W. Stevens. Doctrines of the Christian Religion. Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1967, 324).

Southern Baptists have historically observed two ordinances: baptism and the Lord’s Supper.  Primitive Baptists and a few other groups recognize footwashing as a third ordinance by means of a literal interpretation of John 13:12-17.

Although the word is not mentioned, the Baptist Faith and Message 2000 define the two practices that we teach as ordinances:

Christian baptism is the immersion of a believer in water in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It is an act of obedience symbolizing the believer’s faith in a crucified, buried, and risen Saviour, the believer’s death to sin, the burial of the old life, and the resurrection to walk in newness of life in Christ Jesus. It is a testimony to his faith in the final resurrection of the dead. Being a church ordinance, it is prerequisite to the privileges of church membership and to the Lord’s Supper.

The Lord’s Supper is a symbolic act of obedience whereby members of the church, through partaking of the bread and the fruit of the vine, memorialize the death of the Redeemer and anticipate His second coming.

Matthew 3:13-17; 26:26-30; 28:19-20; Mark 1:9-11; 14:22-26; Luke 3:21-22; 22:19-20; John 3:23; Acts 2:41-42; 8:35-39; 16:30-33; 20:7; Romans 6:3-5; 1 Corinthians 10:16,21; 11:23-29; Colossians 2:12.

Southern Baptists have steered clear of the term sacraments in reference to baptism and the Lord’s Supper. The word “sacrament” implies a magical or mystical supposition stemming from a “transfer-of-grace” premise.  Seven sacraments make up the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox Churches, and they include baptism, confirmation, the Eucharist, matrimony, penance, holy orders, and extreme unction.

Southern Baptists totally reject sacramentalism through which the church dispenses grace.  Dr. Roy T. Edgemon teaches us that grace is conferred directly from Christ to the believer.  There is no intermediary of any kind, whether priest or substance (Roy T. Edgemon. The Doctrines Baptists Believe. Nashville, TN: Convention Press, 1988, 117).

With an understanding that the ordinances are symbolic, we should never minimize the importance of baptism and the Lord’s Supper.  Although they are not essential for salvation, they are necessary for our spiritual growth and obedience because we are asked to do them by our Lord and Savior.

Throughout the Bible we see where God sometimes leads individuals into the desert to teach them some powerful spiritual lessons. Whether it was the Israelites, John the Baptist, or Jesus Himself, the desert experience was always powerful in bringing to life spiritual truths.

I had my own experience in learning spiritual lessons in the desert, but this particular trip was because of my role as a military chaplain while I was deployed to Iraq in 2010. I serve as a chaplain with the Louisiana National Guard and deployed with the 1-141 Field Artillery out of New Orleans, Louisiana. We served in two locations of Iraq during the year. In the first part of our deployment we were stationed in Tallil, near the Kuwaiti border. Our soldiers performed convoy operations all over Iraq, starting from our base in Tallil. The second half of the deployment we were stationed in the International Zone, Baghdad. We provided security for areas of the International Zone and the US Embassy.

Though we went through loss of life and other difficult situations, I had wonderful deployment. I loved being with my soldiers and ministering to their needs. In the midst of the incredible ministry with the soldiers, God not only used me to touch their lives, but God used them to teach me a few lessons of my own that I would use when I returned to the States as I returned to my teaching ministry and church plant.

Lesson 1:  Engaging the Lost — The first lesson I learned early in the deployment was during the convoy operations. As a chaplain, I did not have to ride with my soldiers on the convoys, but my commander allowed me full access to our operations. To understand the danger they went through, I felt as though I needed to go through the same experiences. After being out on a few missions, I had a soldier that came up to me and said, “Wow, Chaps, you are one of the best chaplains we have ever had!” As we talked, he began to explain how many chaplains would just stay in their office and not go out with the soldiers. He respected me for placing myself in the same circumstances as them.

Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 9:22, “I become all things to all people so that I might save some.” God used this soldier to show me that as Christians, we must go to where the people are. In our post-Christian society, we know well that people are not flocking to churches. The only way we will reach them is by going to where they are. Jesus Himself went to the places of the “unchurched,” even to the disgust of the religious crowd. Returning from deployment, I am bolder in going to those places where I can meet non-believers, even if other Christians criticize me for doing so.

Lesson Two: Strengthening the Inner Man — The next lesson I learned was not so easy. We had several hard situations in our unit as well as on the bases I covered as a chaplain. We had one officer in our brigade killed by a road-side bomb. We had another soldier in our unit who committed suicide. I counseled several soldiers concerning marriage and relationship issues. During the last part of my deployment I was one of the few chaplains providing coverage for my area, and so I received a large load of counseling issues. I now look back and realize I had caregiver fatigue and should have set stricter boundaries for my own spiritual health. The last two months of my deployment I went spiritually numb.

During those months, however, I realized what it meant for God to give me a spiritual strength that only He can give. “I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me” literally became my theme in prayer (Philippians 4:13). A person never realizes exactly what that strength is until they have to absolutely depend upon it. I believe I was at that point because even though I had never been so emotionally and spiritually exhausted in my life, neither had I really experienced such a spiritual and emotional strength from the Lord.

Lesson 3:  Entering into the Harvest — The last lesson I learned came in the form of humility as well as blessing. I received a call from a soldier at a remote base in Eastern Baghdad. She asked me to come perform some baptisms on my last Sunday that I would be in Iraq. A civilian from Uganda had been doing some evangelism and discipleship with both the international civilians as well as the American military on this particular base. They needed a chaplain to come and perform the baptisms and offer the Lord’s Supper. Of course I was not going to refuse, but I had no idea what was going to happen in the next few weeks. Originally I was told there would be a few persons being baptized, around 10 to 15. The day I arrived, the number had risen to 57! I had several soldiers and civilians that had accepted Christ during the deployment, but due to various circumstances, these persons were not baptized. So, to be able to baptize that many my last Sunday in Iraq was quite a gift from the Lord.

In reflecting upon that last Sunday in Iraq, I was reminded of Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians 3:7 of how God causes the growth of His kingdom, though all of us play a small part. Someone else was able to do the evangelism, I was able to do the baptism, and another person has already started discipling the new believers in Baghdad. Nevertheless, God caused all the growth and I was privileged to have but a small part of what God was doing. As I have returned to the States, I am reminded that I am but a small part of what God is doing in this world to grow His kingdom on earth.

My time in the desert was not as long and perhaps as severe as some of the biblical characters we read (at least I had air conditioning!). Nevertheless, the lessons learned in Iraq will be with me for a lifetime of ministry.

In discussing the restoration of integrity in church membership, there has been a great resurgence in the biblical practice of church discipline.  Not that many Southern Baptist churches are initiating this biblical practice in their churches (personally I don’t know of any in our association), but there has been a grand discussion and even a resolution on church discipline (http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/amResolution.asp?ID=1189) offered at the 2008 SBC convention concerning this vital ministry to help a wayward brother or sister find their way back to Christ and full fellowship with the body.  I for one applaud this and hope it will take root and continue to grow.  But, as a pastor, I believe there is a bigger concern with how we accept members in the first place.  In other words, can we take care of any issues before someone becomes a member of the church?  It is my contention that many problems in our churches today are the result of poor admission traditions that have been practiced by our churches for at least the last 100 years.

The typical custom for accepting members among Southern Baptist churches is for a candidate to walk forward during the invitation.  Of course the normal questions are asked: “Have you received Jesus as your Lord and Savior and trust Him for the forgiveness of your sins?” and “Where and how were you baptized?” all the while checking the person for a pulse on their wrist.  While this parody is a bit of tongue in cheek, unfortunately, this short method of Q & A is often used as the congregation sings several verses of “Just as I Am.”  If the candidate correctly responds to both questions, the pastor then turns to those attending that morning (unfortunately, in most cases, some voting are non-members) for a vote on accepting this person as a member in good standing of the church.  In a sizable number of cases, the person has no idea of the church doctrines, covenant, order, or responsibilities of church membership.  What is most tragic is that the person says yes to these questions as a matter of rote and may not truly understand the gospel or salvation.  After all they were baptized as a kid, right?  Surely they are saved.  Unfortunately, I am finding more and more that people are looking to their baptism as their point of salvation, rather than to their conviction of sin before a Holy and Just God, seeking His mercy and grace through the atoning death of His Son, Jesus.

What’s the answer to this dilemma?  Baptist churches have not always been this way.  At one time, Baptist churches used to examine a candidate.  In 1774, a section of the Charleston Association’s “A Summary of Church Discipline” addresses how persons should be received into church membership.  Below is an excerpt:

“They should be persons of some competent knowledge of divine and spiritual things; who have not only knowledge of themselves, and of their lost state by nature, and of the way of salvation by Christ; but have some degree of knowledge of God in his nature, perfections, and words; and of Christ in his person as the son of God, of his proper deity, of his incarnation, of his offices as prophet, priest, and king; of justification by his righteousness, pardon by his blood, satisfaction by his sacrifice, and of his prevalent intercession.  And also of the Spirit of God; his person, offices and operations; and of the important truths of the gospel, and the doctrines of grace; or how otherwise should the church be the pillar and ground of truth?

Their lives and conversations ought to be such as becometh the gospel of Christ, Phil. 1:27 that is holy just and upright, Psalm 15:1, 2; if their practice contradicts their profession they are not to be admitted to church membership.  Holiness becomes the Lord’s house forever, Psalm 93:5.

They ought to be truly baptized in water, i.e., by immersion, upon profession of their faith, agreeable to the ancient practice of John the Baptist and the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ, Matt. 3:6, John 3:23, Rom. 6:4, Acts 8:36-38.  It is allowed by all that baptism is essential to church communion and ought to precede it; there is not one instance in the Word of God of any being admitted without it . . .”

While I’ll agree that some of these items may be a bit extreme, this example shows that Baptist churches have been on a downward path since 1774 concerning the acceptance of church members.  Not only did a candidate need to know essential doctrinal matters, but it was also observed how a person’s life measured to their confession. From this example, there are some practical points we can derive.

First, after someone indicates his or her desire to become a member and before a vote is taken, the candidate ought to be required to complete an orientation class.

I believe a good time frame for this would be 6-8 one-hour sessions.  This orientation can include explaining such items as the gospel and salvation, the church’s statement of faith, her covenant, purpose and vision statements, the responsibilities of a church member, introduction of the staff and their responsibilities, various ministries of the church, church structure, a brief summary of church and Baptist history, the church budget, and how things work in the church concerning decisions and business meetings.  It would only be after this time of orientation and the candidate’s agreement with church doctrine, covenant, and order that the person would be admitted by a congregational vote.

Second, new member candidates can also be “yoked” with a mature church member or family during this time to help the new members become better acquainted with all aspects of church life and encourage them during these crucial first steps.

While some may ask if this is truly biblical (after all, didn’t the new believers at Pentecost all become members of the church that very same day?)  I believe that this process of church membership is not only biblical, but is essential for healthy growing churches that glorify Christ.  Pentecost was a special event that initiated the church.  If we want to hold ourselves to all that happened then, we would then sell all we have and share with others, and we would stay primarily in house churches and attend the Jewish temple or local synagogue.  While Pentecost was truly a God-inspired, God-powered event and that there are biblical truths to be gained from it, we also must look to the whole of Scripture.  As we read from the biblical account of problems and issues the early church faced as it grew, we find many warning passages against drifting away doctrinally, warning us against false prophets by commanding us to “test the spirits” to see “whether they are from God” (Matt. 7:15-20; Rom. 16:17–18; Gal. 1:6–9; Acts 20:28–31; 1 Tim. 1:3–7, 6:3–5; 2 Tim. 4:3–4, 1 John 4:1).

What is found in Scripture is that after the church was first birthed and then scattered, the Apostles’ ability to keep the church doctrinally pure was greatly diminished.  The New Testament wasn’t complete in the first century. This fed aberrant practices and beliefs that were promoted by those who were either uniformed (as was Apollos in Acts 18:24-26) or conceited and depraved (1 Tim. 6:3-5).  Although the New Testament has been completed for 1900 years, we still face these same battles.  A casual perusal of TBN should be sufficient to find many of these charlatans competing for viewers’ money and attention through false promises.  Some of these television preachers have a great influence on many pastors and churches and as such hold to beliefs that are more in line with 21^st century “name it and claim it” than 1^st century toil, struggle, and suffering.  We are also faced with the fact that many members are just mentally lazy.  They expect the pastor to constantly feed them with milk rather than the meat of digging deeper into God’s Word.  Because of busy lives, their own time of study and meditation on the Word of God is sorely lacking.  Also, pragmatism has become our first love in how we practice our faith.  I am finding more and more that many of my generation and even the generation ahead of me are biblically illiterate, not understanding the basics of our Baptist faith and practice.  Therefore, because of this, many problems in our churches can be traced to an unbiblical understanding of church, church membership, and salvation.  The pat answer of, “We are Baptists and this is how we’ve always done it” has never sufficed and it can’t now.

One final note, trying to do this will most likely be hard.  The traditional way of accepting members has been carved into stone for many.  Numerous members won’t see the need for this change because they consider it judgmentalism.  Consequently, understanding why this needs to be done may not happen for another generation, when those who are left look around and see more empty seats because of strife, division, and apathy towards the lost.  I hope and pray this is not the case.  But if we can start a nationwide discussion on how we accept church members and open our Bibles to this issue, maybe we can begin to build up healthy church members who are plugged into the teaching ministry of the church and are themselves fulfilling their own calling through their spiritual gifts as part of the body of Christ.  This is my hope and prayer for our future.

Robin Foster

There is a movement that seems to be sweeping our denomination and it is called Spontaneous Baptisms.  I for one believe, if done properly, we should not be concerned with this movement.  However, with every movement there comes some who refuse to adhere to the clear teaching of scripture and thus dumbs down the scriptural understanding.  Therefore, I call this “Baptism-lite”.  This phrase is taken from an article I saw referencing the Church of England and their uprising concerning the prayers being offered over the waters.  In the Church of England their Baptism has a salvific meaning to it and as such I would vehemently disagree with their practices and their thought that the Priests prayers does something special to the water.

Steven Furtick, Pastor of Elevation Church in Charlotte, NC, in a sermon he has prepared on his website concerning how to prepare for a spontaneous baptism service expresses some things that are completely tied to scripture and some things where he abandons the scripture to fuel his own particular beliefs. Concerning the meaning of baptism Furtick says; “Baptism is an outward expression of an inward change. The reason we dunk people all the way under the water is that Jesus went all the way into the grave and came back up again.” Amen and Amen!! PREACH IT, PREACHER!!!!! “Great opportunities necessitate immediate obedience.”  “Today my mom is choosing it to be her spiritual birthday.” “This has nothing to do with you joining a church.” This is where Furtick leaves the scripture.  Baptism has more scriptural evidence with becoming a part of a local body than it does with identifying a spiritual birthday.  Thus, the baptisms that are performed at Elevation have nothing to do with church membership because Elevation does not have a membership role.  When Elevation baptizes people they view this as baptizing them into the “universal” church and nothing to do with accountability within the local community of baptized believers we refer to as the local church.

An article in the Christian Index listed three churches that perform spontaneous baptisms.  In this article there is a very clear presentation concerning the doctrine of baptism.  According to Dr. Bryant Wright, Pastor of Johnson Ferry Baptist and our current SBC President, his church is in prayer weeks before the spontaneous baptism service and they counsel people when they come forward concerning their relationship with Christ and the meaning of baptism.  Dr. Wright says:

“Prior to our first spontaneous baptismal service we told the deacons, elders and staff so they could be in prayer…we asked everyone to consider being baptized by immersion if: (1) they had never trusted Christ for their salvation, but were ready to do so that morning; (2) if they had become a believer after being baptized (maybe baptized as a child, but later came to faith in Christ as an adult); (3) if they had already been baptized but by means other than immersion; or (4) if they were a believer who had never been baptized at all….we asked everyone to get their relationship right with Christ first, then follow through in obedience with baptism.”

Certainly this type of baptism service where the doctrine of baptism is clearly spelled out to the participants would be something everyone can celebrate. However, if these participants are not seen as coming into that local church body, then we certainly have a very serious doctrinal error. Dr. Alan Hix, Associate professor of Christian Studies at Shorter College said it this way:

“The implications for Baptist polity seem clear. Believer’s baptism is a step of obedience following conversion, which initiates the new believer into the Christian fellowship. Any broader application of baptism risks the depreciating of its significance as a testimony of a new covenant relationship of the believer with God and that believer’s membership in the people of God.”

“The physical expression of God’s people is the local church, and it is the church that is charged with the mission of carrying out Christ’s command to baptize those who have expressed faith in him.”

“This also has implications for those Baptists who have recently engaged in ‘spontaneous’ baptismal services in which people are generally baptized without intention of church membership, or who come from denominations which practice infant baptism and request immersion and then return to their denomination. This practice not only ignores the biblical model of the role of baptism as an entrance to church membership, but it also overlooks its observance as an act of obedience following conversion.”

“If a believer from a denomination that practices infant baptism wishes believer’s immersion but wants to remain in his or her tradition, the better response for us as Baptists is to offer our baptisteries for the petitioner’s own pastor to immerse them. I have done that on several occasions for persons in local Methodist congregations.”

If we truly believe our work involves the “Kingdom of God” and not the “kingdom of our personal platforms” then why not allow another congregation to baptize their own members?  Many times we become so enamored with making certain we have the numbers for Nashville that we forget the needs of the natives.  Our biggest concern should not be whether we baptize more than the next church but whether we are presenting the Gospel.  Therefore, due to the problem in presenting the Gospel, the appearance of baptismal regeneration, and the voracious appetite of American consumerism, I feel we should proceed with great caution when it concerns spontaneous baptism.

Presenting the Gospel

Part of the reason that “spontaneous baptisms” has become so popular is the excitement that surrounds a baptismal service.  We have promoted these services for the adults the same way one church, in the past, promoted baptizing children–with a fire truck baptistery.   While some spoke against a church using such a gimmick to get children to be baptized those same ones seem silent on this gimmick.  To have a service where we are calling people to make a decision for baptism on the spot reveals that the Gospel was never clearly presented to the person in the first place.  Do not get me wrong; I am not promoting baptismal regeneration.  However, I am saying that when the Gospel is clearly presented there is also presented truths about an obedient walk.  The Gospel is not about removing the past only; it is about the renewed life for the future.  That renewed life is one of obedience to our Lord Jesus Christ.  If we do not teach such obedience and how the first step to that obedience is Baptism by immersion–as the Bible teaches–we have not clearly presented the good news of Jesus Christ.  We have presented a convoluted Gospel much like a Golden Corral buffet–where one enters and has a right to choose or refuse what one places on their plate.  Salvation is not a buffet line.  Salvation is all about Jesus and as a result it is the repenting of one’s sins, asking Jesus to come live in their life, surrendering to Jesus as Lord and following in obedience to Him.  Anything short of that, presented to one that is lost, is a convoluted presentation.  Any convoluted presentation that is accepted into the life of the church results in making people two-fold the children of Satan.

Baptismal Regeneration

The way “spontaneous baptism” services appear to the average attendee is you are asking him/her to accept salvation and baptism is needed for salvation to take place.  It isn’t said in so many words but it is certainly implied.  For example Brian Bloye, pastor of West Ridge Church in Dallas says:

“It (the spontaneous baptismal service) is for people to step out in faith and identify with Christ. We have a lot of attenders from other denominations who are more comfortable participating in this way.”

Brother Bloye goes on to say they have teams on hand to make certain the ones coming forward are making a decision for Christ.  To be completely fair, West Ridge has a statement on their website concerning Baptism and how it is not salvation.  However, just the implication that coming forward, spontaneously, for baptism indicates a mindset that says; “I am going to be baptized and thus this is my spiritual birthday.”  Years from now, when a candidate that participated in a spontaneous baptism is asked about their salvation one may in all likelihood hear, “I got baptized in a spontaneous baptism service.”  May I remind us of one of the clear teaching in Evangelism Explosion to the qualifying question was that someone referencing their baptism was proof they probably were not saved? Also, one huge difference exists here as evangelism seems to be losing its zeal among Southern Baptist. Salvation is focused on a relationship with Jesus; it is not focused on identifying with Jesus through the excitement of being baptized.

As a FAITH pastor one of the criticisms I took on the chin was all the people whose homes we left that never followed up with baptism.  Another criticism I took on the chin was the people that did follow-up with baptism but after about six months we could not find them. I will take that on the chin because we evidently missed something or we did not do follow-up discipleship as we should.  But, spontaneous baptism is a monster that needs to be nailed down.  Why?  When the gospel is presented in the home, on the street, in a coffee shop, etc. etc. you then invite them to the next step of their Christian walk.  When spontaneous baptism is presented the very first step is missed completely–the blood atoning work of Jesus Christ that is needed for the salvation.  We seem to have, unknowingly, presented the water in the baptistery, pool, pond, lake, or ocean, as the necessary element to wash away our sins.  As the old hymn of the faith says: What can wash away my sins? Nothing but the water from the Baptistery?  No, nothing can wash away my sins but the blood of Jesus!

A Constant Consumerism Mentality

Spontaneous baptisms seem to rest on giving the people what they want.  Many participating in these spontaneous baptism services do not join the local church body.  If we are honest with ourselves, we have to confess that these events do not match our theology.  Why do I say that?  Many of these pastors will tell you that they are not into counting numbers, but they list these baptisms on their ACP’s, but announce they are not asking the participants to join the local church.  These pastors will tell you that they do not believe baptism saves anyone, but they do these events to remove the barriers that many use to keep from being baptized.  Why do these churches post the over 500-1000 baptisms but only post 300-400 increase in membership roles?  If I have to coax a person to get baptized by telling them it isn’t about joining a church, then I have denied a clear teaching of Scripture.  If these are truly saved people why are they not members of the church?  Which brings us to another barrier that seems to be an issue—baptism by immersion.  This excuse reveals evidences that we are not depending on the Holy Spirit to direct the new believer.  We are merely giving the people what they want. Dr. Steven Kimmel, pastor of First Baptist Smyrna said it better than anyone else I have read in his article on this subject.

“Having a candidate stand in the baptistry and declare (in word or effect), ‘I surrender my life to the Lordship of Christ,’ while in the very same instance declare (in word or effect), ‘But, I’m not prepared to be accountable or committed to the body of Christ,’ is a contradictory and confusing message for us to send.”

Conclusion

When the Gospel is clearly presented, baptism is no longer a question.  It may be that a discipleship class for New Christians is something a church needs to consistently offer.  We have heard it argued that spontaneous baptisms remove the barriers.  Could it be that the only barrier for baptism is merely what we refer to as old-fashioned discipleship?  We have heard it said that spontaneous baptism enables a person to walk in obedience to Jesus Christ.  Could it be that we are making spontaneous baptisms appear to a lost person as salvation?  Also, if a survey were commissioned in some of these churches, I believe, it will reveal that many reference their baptism as their salvation.  We have heard it said that many people will not get baptized by themselves or as a planned event.  Could it be that we find ourselves, as pastors, shaping a gospel filter that is more closely defined to the rampant consumerism that has infected the church?  This consumerism has even taken us to the very role assigned for the pulpit?  Every church, looking for a new pastor, wants a 25 year old pastor with a beautiful wife that sings or plays a musical instrument, has his doctorate, has three perfectly well mannered 4-year-old children, and twenty years of pastoral experience.  It certainly appears that many pastors today become more concerned with the significant numbers publicly presented than they are with the Spiritual Needs of the People.

Tim Rogers

7.     . . . that we are controlled by a Hierarchy

First, the Bible does not teach that we should have a hierarchy of religious officials over the church. Pastors lead the congregation as a spiritual leader while the deacons assist him. We have already asserted the independence and authority of the local church. We are a part of several groups: our denominational offices in our local association, state conventions, and then the national convention.⁴ These groups could not control us if they wanted. The local church calls the pastor, sets the types of ministry we will have, and the amount of money they will send to the denomination for their missions.

Baptists do not believe in human heads over churches. We were not started like the Methodists by Wesley, or Lutherans by Luther, or Reformed by Calvin. Instead, we can say there was not a time in the Post-Apostolic age when Baptists began.⁵ We believe our teachings are in line with what churches in Acts taught and what Christ commissioned them to do. Christ is our head. It is his church according to Matt. 16:18.

8.    . . . that we are forced to believe in certain positions as a denomination

A denomination is a group of churches that voluntarily choose to work together and have similar beliefs. Our church is not bound to amendments passed at the Southern Baptist Convention. We are not given positions that we must take in order to be Southern Baptists.⁶ The debate over Calvinism is an example of this. There is enough latitude in our denomination to arrive at different interpretations on matters that do not impact salvation or the person and the work of Christ.

We do not subscribe to creeds or traditions as equal to Scripture. We have a common statement of faith that is a consensus of what fellow churches believe. When a church departs from these affirmations and ceases to identify with these teachings, the SBC acknowledges it.

Paul did not have the final authority to decide for the church in Corinth in the matter of the immoral man still serving in 1 Cor. 5:1-5. Instead, he urged them to act as a body to correct the error. They were responsible for their own church.

9.     . . . that we are more committed to being Baptists than to Christ

Baptists never chose the name “Baptist.” Instead, enemies of immersion of the believer called us that in derision.⁷ I’m not as much concerned about the historicity of the name going back to the time of Christ as I am with the practice. When a person is immersed as a believer they identify with Christ pictorially according to Gal. 3:27. We are following Christ in this way. Most believers who are baptized by immersion say they were baptized like Baptists.

Baptists have rescued believer’s baptism by immersion from the ash heap. They correctly assert that it is the only mode for demonstrating our faith in Christ and being a part of the church. You can say all you want “I don’t want to be called Baptist,” but there are certain Baptist distinctives, just like there are Calvinism, Arminianism, and Catholicism distinctives. We introduce people to Jesus; but if they read the Bible honestly, they clearly will see the Baptist positions.

Many have taken the Baptist name off the church, saying it is a turn off to the non-churched coming in the front door. Others just say we don’t want to be Baptist. I can’t understand how people who once were Baptist but now don’t want to be. Anyway, I choose to identify this church with timeless principles that have made the difference in people’s lives through the centuries: Baptist principles.

10.    . . . that we promote Antinomianism through our belief in Eternal Security

A minority of churches is called free-will Baptists, and they believe you can lose your salvation. Most Baptists believe once you are truly saved, you are always truly saved.⁸ The problem comes with those who falsely profess belief in Christ.

The term “antinomianism” refers to saying that you are a Christian, yet you live any way you want without any regard for Christ.⁹ If you have true faith in Christ, it truly will change you and help you to depart from the sin in your life that is destructive (Titus 2:11-12). The governance of the Holy Spirit becomes a restrainer against wrong instead of a dove that flies away if we dishonor the name of Christ.

I believe that a true Christian will wear the name honorably and demonstrate their faith by their lifestyle. Your acceptance of Christ now obligates you to live under His authority in your life.

11.    . . . that we promote a doctrinal statement over the Bible

We have covered this a little under hierarchies, but this is a common argument that comes up when defending our new doctrinal statement in 2000, which only clarified our 1963 confessional statement, bringing it up to date.¹⁰ Some moderates again said we were worshipping the Bible over Christ. The Bible is clear. The Bible supplies everything we need for spiritual edification, nourishment, and equipment in the world (2 Tim. 3:15-4:2). The Baptist Faith and Message is only an expression of faith that reflects the major teachings of the Bible, unlike the Apostles’ Creed that teaches belief in the “Holy Catholic Church.”¹¹ There is no contest between the Bible and The Baptist Faith and Message.

12.    . . . that we are unloving and uncompassionate

This is a recent accusation against Southern Baptists because of our belief in traditional values. So it goes: We are hate mongers because we believe certain lifestyles are wrong. The most compassionate thing someone can do is tell the truth when you’re deathly sick.

We are to be a light to those in darkness. But many in darkness don’t want the light (John 3:19-21). We are to hold the light as a standard (Phil. 2:15). We are sinners saved by grace and people should find the love of Christ here, even though they may disagree with us.

Much of our Baptist Legacy today is disappearing like a ship on the horizon. Many are content to let it drift out of sight. Just because you can’t see it, however, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Instead of lagging behind today, I think we ought to catch up with it and bring it back safely to harbor. Will you join me in this quest because I think it is needed today more than ever?

Dr. Dan Nelson, Pastor, First Baptist Church in Camarillo, California.  This post is a summary of a message he preached at the church on June 27, 2010.

Endnotes

⁴All entities of the Southern Baptist Convention that assist local churches in missions and fellowship development.

⁵Common claims by adherents in the group attributing these individuals to the father of their movements.

⁶Common practice in the documents and understanding of Southern Baptist Convention makeup and practice

⁷A common belief among many Baptist churches; especially those who trace the origin of Baptist belief and practice to apostolic times.

⁸Free-will Baptists are strongly in the minority among the vast majority of Baptist churches. Benjamin Randall one of the final convert’s under George Whitefield’s ministry was their founder in America.

⁹Antinomianism is a term used to describe adherence in words to doctrinal stances but license to live unrestrained, usually morally, by one’s doctrine. Rigid five-point Calvinism and Hyper-Calvinism have been accused of this practice at times. Baptists also have been accused of this practice because of their belief in eternal security.

¹⁰The most recent Baptist Faith and Message was revised to address issues that the old confessional of 1963 did not address. It was affirmed by the Convention in 2000 but not without controversy from moderates and those critical of the conservative resurgence within the convention.

¹¹The Apostles Creed is one of the most ancient creeds of the Early Church. It was developed and handed down many have believed by the apostles and their successors.

The disciples were first called Christians at Antioch by people who saw their lives. They assumed they were like Jesus by how they lived. All of us have been confronted by people who think they know what Baptists believe and practice. If these practices have not been associated with Baptists, however, they are wrong assumptions.

Today people have formed wrong assumptions based on misinformation and wrong conclusions. What are these wrong assumptions?

1.    . . . that the Church is a Denomination (Acts 14:23)¹.

Baptists believe every church is an independent autonomous body of baptized believers. We have no such thing as the Baptist church. We are affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention for purposes of missions and fellowship. Other groups refer to themselves as a universal entity. Yet, the Bible makes the distinction in Acts 14:23 where Paul was assisting in the ordination of leaders in every church.

This is important because what any cooperating Baptist does is not top down but from the local church on up. We are not controlled by other higher bodies. We think the local church has the authority to decide in matters of faith and practice. Therefore, we think every believer ought to be in a local church. Paul explains that we need to do more than just profess our faith in Christ, more than just participate in a universal fellowship of believers known as the kingdom of God; we need to take an active role in our communities because the church is local.

2.    . . . that believer’s baptism by immersion is just another form of baptism.

Infant or adult sprinkling is never taught in the Bible. Instead, the word transliterated baptism (baptizo) always means immerse or dunking in water.² That is how Jesus was baptized, and that is how the early church baptized. (Matt. 3:15-17, Rom. 6:4). They did not sprinkle.

We do not accept any other mode of baptism as a valid form of New Testament baptism. It may have been meaningful to you; but we ask you to be immersed as a believer in order to show that you follow Christ, that you believe in the gospel, that you have died to life without Christ, that you are raised to walk in Him, and how we will be resurrected. No other method pictures this.

3.    . . . that we have mass chaos at all our church business meetings.

Every member has a say in our church and it must be pretty good example because James Madison used it as a model of representative government when he wrote the constitution.

We have no chief who decides for the people. Every member has a vote. Jesus told His disciples to bring matters to the church when they had a controversy (Matt. 18:15-17). The assumption is that we will operate under the Lordship of Christ and have mutual love and respect for believers. We will accept the will of the majority (as each person seeks the leadership of the Holy Spirit) and go on with Christ’s work instead of holding grudges. That is not always the case but it beats shutting people out of the process. We would rather risk controversy than take away from the voice of the people.

4.    . . . that we are part of the Reformed Movement (Matthew 28:19-12).

This is a big controversy today because of many who want five-point Calvinism to be the rule of the day in all churches. We have churches that call themselves Reformed Baptists.

The Reformation started under Martin Luther, who broke from Catholicism. John Calvin delineated Reformed theology in his book Institutes of the Christian Religion and his other writings. His teachings on salvation have been summarized in the five basic points of the “TULIP.”³

Baptists did not believe that the Reformed movement of Luther and Calvin went far enough. Baptists went beyond the “Magisterial Reformation” of Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin and became known as the “Radical Reformation.” Although the early Baptists agreed with many of the doctrinal beliefs of the Reformed Theology, they disagreed at other points and, in fact, many Baptists were persecuted for these beliefs by leaders of the Magisterial Reformation. The Reformers still sprinkled infants. They retained a Catholic church structure, and they oppressed those who did not agree with them. Baptists did not. So Baptists are not part of the mainline Reformation. Baptists called for adherence to Scripture, and did not cling to tradition like some of the Reformers.  Baptists allowed for separation from the corrupt church. We called for religious liberty, not favoritism of one group. We called for individual conscience in matters of faith and practice, not sponsorship by the family. We called for the authority of the local church, not a universal group that can give false assurance and has no accountability to a local body.

Jesus said He would be with churches that lead people to Him. Therefore, we must baptize like He was and do what He says. Baptists are not Reformed in the fullest sense.

5.    . . . that we are against political involvement of Christians

This has been hammered into the ground by moderates in the SBC who tout separation of church and state. So this point is basically for their benefit. The problem is separation of church and state means something far different today because of our heavily unchurched population. In the days of the Constitution, it meant the government could not set up a state church that forced residents to join. Today, it means that Christians have no voice at all in government or elections. That is a false assumption, for we are to be salt and light. We can stand against moral wrong—and are obligated to—without risking the government takeover of religion.

Paul told Timothy to encourage people to pray that their government officials and rulers would do right (1 Tim. 2: 1-2). That does not sound like a retreat from government, but an advance upon it. If Christians don’t stand against immorality and corruption, who will? It is perfectly okay for us to oppose wrong government.

6.    . . . that the Lord’s Supper and Baptism are Sacraments

A sacrament is a means of dispensing forgiving grace. Catholicism teaches that racking up enough of these points can earn you heaven when you die, but there is no assurance of salvation.

The Lord’s Supper and Baptism, rather, are ordinances that Christ has commanded us to observe in obedience to Him. The Lord’s Supper helps us remember Christ’s sacrifice for our sins on our behalf. They are not necessary to be saved but necessary to be an obedient Christian. The requirement for observance of each ordinance is our faith and trust in Christ as Savior, just as Philip told the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8:37-38.

Paul assumed believers would have more reverence for the Lord’s Table than what was going on in Corinth in 1 Cor. 11:25. To trust in both these ordinances for salvation is to place faith in the wrong source.  We only need to place our faith in Christ’s atoning work.

Dr. Dan Nelson, Pastor, First Baptist Church in Camarillo, California.  This post is a summary of a message he preached at the church on June 27, 2010.

Endnotes

¹All Scriptural citations and quotations are taken from the King James Version of the Bible unless otherwise indicated.

²Steve Lemke, Baptism Celebrates New Life in Christ, Vision: New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, Volume 66.1, Spring/Summer 2010.

³Sources responsible for the introduction of Reformed Theology in Christian thought and practice.

(to be continued …)

Well, I was sprinkled on top of the head with water from the Jordan River in this, liberal,  Methodist Church. I was probably 11 or 12 at the time. I was truly under deep conviction at that time, but our Pastor was as liberal as they come. When I went forward to be saved, it shocked him that someone had actually came forward during the invitation. He asked me if I believed in Jesus. I said yes, and I thought who doesnt. At that time, I thought everyone believed in Jesus. Then, he asked me if I wanted to join the Church. I again answered yes. I was ready to do whatever I needed to do to get right with God. But, he sprinkled me on top of the head, and I went home that day as lost as ever.

Later, my family left the Methodist Church when we realized that every Pastor they sent us was liberal to the core. So, we went to that Church in Memphis that had this new, young Pastor that really preached the Bible like he believed it. We went to Bellevue Baptist Church.  The fiery, young, Bible preacher was Dr. Adrian Rogers.  Well, my family decided to join this Church.  And,  I got immersed there after answering the questions of the counselor down front. The questions went sort of like: Are you a Christian? I said yea, and I thought I was…I went to Church. After all, I’d gone forward in a church service, and I believed in God.    And, they told us that we’d need to be immersed in order to be a member.  We agreed, and we were immersed. But, I was still as lost as I could be.  But, there, in that Church, my family heard the Gospel.  We heard the Bible taught and preached.  The truth of God was permeating my soul.  But, I was a teenager, and I wanted to fit in with the crowd.  So, I started living to fit in; to be a part of the crowd.  Then, we moved to a little town called Hornsby, TN in Hardeman County.

Well, at Hornsby, I kept trying to be a part of the crowd; to fit in.  And,  after a life of sin and hedonism and rebellion against all that was holy, the Lord truly saved me one night after I had gotten drunk on Jack Daniels.I really got saved one night at the age of 19 yrs old. I had been partying all night…running from God. My Mother had told me before leaving the house that she was gonna be praying for me. Her sweet words were like a knife that stuck deep in my heart. God used those words, and all that I had heard growing up from the radio preachers and Dr. Rogers and my Sunday School teachers,  to bring deep conviction to my soul.  The conviction was heavy.  I wanted to escape it.  So, I did what I always did; I partied.  I really partied.  I was so drunk that night, that I had fallen out in a parking lot of a cafe in the little, Tennessee town where I went to high school, near Hornsby.  And,  I looked up into the sky that night, and I told God that I was truly ready to surrender my heart to Him. I was tired of my sins, and the guilt, and the shame. I told Him that I wanted Him to forgive my sins. And, I surrendered to the Lord Jesus that night in faith. Even though I’d been drinking heavy that night, at that moment, I was sober…like I’ve never been sober before. And, I had peace…sweet, sweet peace. That night, the Lord saved me, and I never was so sober in all of my life….full of love and joy and peace…real peace. I knew that I’d finally found peace with God. Now, I went to my buddy’s house and threw up the rest of the night…but, praise the Lord, I was never so content and peaceful, there in that bathroom…as I lay there on the floor all night. I had joy in my heart. I felt the love of God. And, something else, I felt that God was with me. I’d always felt lonely in a crowd before; even though I had lots of friends, and family. But, not anymore. God was with me…in me.  I was changed.

So, after a period of growth and thinking on all of it, I realized that I was truly saved at the age of 19. I knew that I needed to be baptised for real…a baptism that meant something.  So, I got baptised. I got baptised for real after growing in my faith and realizing that I really got saved that night in Bolivar, TN, as a 19 year old, young man…not as a child at the Methodist Church.  I realized that my baptism at Bellevue Baptist was not a true baptism, either; because I wasn’t saved at that time.  Thus, I truly got baptised.

So, why am I a Southern Baptist?  After growing up in the Methodist Church?  After living a life of hedonism and rebellion?  I am a Southern Baptist kind of Christian, because the Lord saved me out of my lost, rebellious, hedonistic life.  I’m a Southern Baptist Christian, because the Lord led me to a Church and a denomination that preaches the Bible.  I’m a Southern Baptist Christian, because the Lord delivered me from the liberalism and heresy of the Methodist Church.  He placed me in a Church with good, sound doctrine; one that preaches the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.  Why am I a Southern Baptist Christian?  Because the Lord Jesus, in all of His mercy and grace, has provided a place for people like me to serve Him and worship Him with other Believers, who love the Lord and believe the Book.  I’m so, so, so glad that the Lord Jesus called out to a lost, rebellious young redneck; and gave this angry, young man life.  And, I thank Him and praise Him; I lift my hands in praise to Him; for leading me to a group of Believers, who value God’s word, who believe the Gospel.  Please excuse me for a second.  I want to shout.  Glory, glory, hallelujah!  Thank You, Jesus.  Thank You, Jesus.  You saved a worthless, vile sinner named David Worley, and You put His feet on solid ground.  I will rejoice and praise You, forever, for Your great kindness towards me.

Question #1:    Do you believe that a Southern Baptist Church can trace it’s beginning to the Lord Jesus Christ?  that there’s been a trail of blood?  that a true, SB Church has been in existence from Jesus until now; as the Landmarkists believed?

Robin:  I don’t believe that JM Carroll’s trail of blood is correct in its theory.  I do believe there has been a “free church” tradition witness throughout history, whether or not one can call it a “Baptist” tradition as we see it today I question.  Baptist churches, as we know them today, I believe got their start from Smyth and Helwys, while we have a spiritual connection with the Anabaptist of the reformation.

Matt:   True churches have existed from the time of Christ and will exist until He returns.  I believe my Southern Baptist church to be one of those true churches.   I am not so concerned with the ability to list the particular name of every true church that has ever existed in historical and geographical order back to the church at Jerusalem as the Roman church tries to do with popes back to Peter.

Wes:  If by that do you mean that the baptism of everyone in my church can be traced back through churches authorized to baptize in an unbroken line all the way back to the Apostles, then no, I don’t believe that. I believe that there have always been, since the time of the Apostles, faithful New Testament churches in existence, and I base this belief on Jesus’ promise that He would build His church, and that the gates of Hell would not prevail against it (Mt. 16:18).

David:  I agree with the others that the trail of blood idea of J.M. Carroll is not correct.  I do believe that there has always been NT churches in existence thru out history.  I don’t believe that they were Baptist churches, and I know that they weren’t Southern Baptist churches.  But, they were NT churches, which  preached the Gospel. 

Question #2:  Do you believe in closed communion?  that only the members of a local Church should take the LS together, as Landmarkists believe?

Robin:  No.  We practice “close” communion which to our understanding is inviting anyone to the table who has received Jesus as their Lord and Savior and has participated in believers baptism by immersion.   With this, I do believe that communion is a church ordinance and should only be practiced among the gathered local church.

Matt:  Our church follows close communion.  Just as a family gathers together around the meal table, it is the church family that should gather together around the Lord’s table.  If we have others of like faith and practice in attendance, we do not forbid them as I suspect that the believers at Troas did not forbid the Apostle Paul when he met with them on the day they celebrated the Lord’s Supper (Acts 20:7).  Occasionally we will have guests that will be invited to eat with us at the table.

Wes:  While I am sympathetic to this view based on Paul’s warning against partaking without “discerning the body” (1 Cor. 11:29), I am also in harmony with the Baptist Faith and Message on this point, and have no problem serving in churches which admit anyone who has been scripturally baptized to fellowship around the Lord’s table.

David:  I believe in a modified close communion view.  I do believe that the LS is a Church ordinance.  I do believe that it should be observed by the Church, with others  of like faith being welcomed to participate.  I do believe that baptised Believers should participate in it.  I do not believe in being so rigid that we’d have the LS police making sure that only baptised Believers of like faith are taking the LS with us.  I would not make a big deal out of who should, and who should not be taking it.  But, when I preached on it, and when we begin the LS; I would gently remind everyone about these things.

Question #3: Do you believe that SB Churches are the only true Churches out there in our world today, as Landmarkists believe that Baptist churches are the only true churches?

Robin:  No.

Matt:  By definition a Southern Baptist church is one that gives money to missions through the Southern Baptist Convention.   Giving through the SBC cannot possibly be the measure of a true church as true churches existed long before 1845. 

Wes:  No

David:  No

Question #4: Do you think that only SB’s are going to Heaven?  that they’re the only ones that are really saved? (This is a misconception that I continue to hear from people concerning the BI fellas)

Robin:  That is just simply ridiculous.  Salvation is by grace through faith and is lived out among the saints in a local New Testament Church.  

Matt:   Had the Conservative Resurgence not taken place, I probably would not be a Southern Baptist today, but I would still be a Christian.  Salvation is determined by grace through faith and not by any organization of man.

Wes:  No

David:  I have to agree with Robin that it’s absolutely ridiculous that we’d even have to respond to this kind of a question, yet I keep hearing it from people.   My answer is “NO.”

Question #5: What baptisms would you accept?  In other words, what would be the bare, basic things that would have to be true before you would consider it a true baptism?  that you would accept without asking the person to be baptised? (Landmarkists would accept only Baptist baptisms; baptisms done by another Baptist church)

Robin:  Baptism by a local church, by immersion, as a symbolic representation of union to Christ, death to sin, and resurrection to eternal life, “never to die again.” Romans 6:3-11

Matt:   A member of our church must be baptized by immersion after conversion by a church whose baptism is an ordinance of symbolism and obedience to our Lord’s command and not a means of grace. 

Wes:  I agree with the Baptist Faith and Message, which defines scriptural baptism as “the immersion of a believer in water in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It is an act of obedience symbolizing the beliefer’s faith in a crucified, buried, and risen Saviour, the believer’s death to sin, the burial of the old life, and the resurrection to walk in newness of life in Christ Jesus.” The BF&M also identifies baptism as a church ordinance. So as long as someone’s baptismal experience fits this definition, and took place under the authority of a local church, then I believe it to be biblical and would encourage my church to accept it as such.

David:  I agree with the Baptist Faith and Message, as well. 

So, hopefully this will clear things up just a little bit about who these “BI” guys are, and what they really believe.  Maybe?  I hope so.

In this first statement I have not placed emphasis on any statement.  The bold emphasis and large capital letters are placed there in the website.  Thus, the church seems to desire that one understand their belief concerning Baptism and the Lord’s Supper.

Baptism
We believe that the baptism taught in the New Testament is by immersion. Baptism is an act of obedience by a person who has received Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. Baptism does not have power to save or forgive us from sin, but the message of baptism is significant:

1) Baptism is an act of obedience symbolizing the believer’s faith in a crucified, buried, and risen Savior.
2) Baptism also is a picture of the believer’s death to sin, the burial of the old life, and the resurrection to walk in newness of life, in Christ Jesus.

Therefore, baptism is a personal statement of your faith in Jesus Christ. Baptism doesn’t make you a believer . . . it shows that you already believe.

Who Should Be Baptized?… Every person who has believed.
“Those who believed and accepted His message were baptized…” Acts 2:41
“Simon himself believed and was baptized…” Acts 8:13
“But when they believed Philip as he preached the Good News…and the name of Jesus Christ,  they were baptized, both men and women.” Acts 8:12

Jesus never asked His disciples to remember His birth. But He did instruct them to remember His death and resurrection. The Lord’s supper is a memorial meal that was instituted by our Savior the night in which He was betrayed and delivered to die for our sins on the cross. As is true of baptism, we are not saved by eating the Lord’s Supper. It is a memorial of the death of Christ, that we may always remember His sacrifice for us. When believers observe the Lord’s Supper they proclaim His death until He comes again.

Who may take the Lord’s Supper? . . . Those who have trusted Jesus as their Savior and Lord and who have been baptized in obedience to His command.

Another committee member’s website links one to the BF&M 2000.  This is encouraging as the church has linked on their website as to their beliefs concerning Baptism and the Lord’s Supper by pointing to the following statement;

Christian baptism is the immersion of a believer in water in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It is an act of obedience symbolizing the believer’s faith in a crucified, buried, and risen Saviour, the believer’s death to sin, the burial of the old life, and the resurrection to walk in newness of life in Christ Jesus. It is a testimony to his faith in the final resurrection of the dead. Being a church ordinance, it is prerequisite to the privileges of church membership and to the Lord’s Supper. (Emphasis Mine)

Another church website also links to the BF&M 2000 but has brief statements about their beliefs.  The following is found as their statement about The Church.

The members of the church are redeemed, baptized believers who have placed their faith and trust in the finished work of Christ.

This church purposely places brief statements about their beliefs.  However, when placing this link one receives the impression that this church believes and practices Baptism is an obedient act after the salvation experience.  Also, by linking to the BF&M 2000 they tacitly express to the world that Baptism is by immersion and is a prerequisite to the Lord’s Supper.

In yet another church’s website, the BF&M2000 is not spoken about as to their beliefs.  However, when one goes through the various links about the church’s belief one will find a link to Baptism & Lord’s Supper.  What is unique about this is the rendering of these two ordinances.

Christian baptism is the immersion of a believer in water in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It is an act of obedience symbolizing the believer’s faith in a crucified, buried, and risen Saviour, the believer’s death to sin, the burial of the old life, and the resurrection to walk in newness of life in Christ Jesus. It is a testimony to his faith in the final resurrection of the dead. Being a church ordinance, it is prerequisite to the privileges of church membership and to the Lord’s Supper. The Lord’s Supper is a symbolic act of obedience whereby members of the church, through partaking of the bread and the fruit of the vine, memorialize the death of the Redeemer and anticipate His second coming. (Emphasis Mine)

One can tell, while it is not the BF&M 2000 verbatim, it certainly could have used the BF&M 2000 for its source.  What makes it unique is joining the explanation of the two ordinances into one paragraph.  When you place these two together like this it speaks volumes that this church teaches, and practices, Baptism by immersion is a prerequisite for enjoying the Lord’s Table with the rest of the saints.

Thank God for these appointments and it appears that the Resolution Committee contains a good mix and a healthy Baptist Ecclesiology.