Archive for Baptist Identity
Do Baptisms Matter Anymore?
Posted by: | CommentsIn our day and age of ecumenical awareness and knocking down the walls of denominations, are baptisms important to people anymore? to Churches? With all of the people saying that they would accept any ole kind of baptism, whether it be sprinkling, pouring, or whatever, is it important about the kind of baptism you have? With some people in Southern Baptist Churches saying that they would accept any baptism, as long as the person was saved, and the baptism was by immersion, is it important who does the baptizing? I mean, if momma’s can baptise their children in the backyard mudhole after they lead little Johnny, or Susie, to the Lord; and it be acceptable to a SB Church; does that not scream some things loudly about that Churches view of baptism? So, do baptisms matter anymore? Are people even concerned with a doctrine and practice that seems to be a very important one as you’re reading the NT.
I really believe that part of the problem today, which some people and some Churches have in some areas of ecclesiology, is that they have a John Wayne, rugged individualist, “I did it my way” mentality. And, this mentality rubs off on their view about baptism, and really, about the Church in general. And, we see this in the thinking of people when they say things like, “I ‘m satisfied with my baptism, so I don’t want to get baptised by a Baptist Church. I want to join your Church without being baptised again.” We see this kind of thinking when Pastors say things to the effect that it doesn’t matter if a new convert is baptised by an individual person in a hot tub, or if they’re baptised with the Churches presence and by the Churches blessing. It doesn’t matter to them that the Church is not involved in the baptism. Why? because it’s an individual thing, rather than a Church thing. In their view, it is a personal thing that happens outside of the Church.
You know, when you look in the Bible, baptism is a group thing; not a “lone Cowboy on the range, riding in the sunset as the coyotes howl” thing. The Lord set up the Church to be a fellowship of Believers. The Church is supposed to be where people are baptised, and taught the Word of God, and discipled, and encouraged. The Church is supposed to always be a group of Believers, who are seeking the Lord together. So, why would baptism not be a Church ordinance? Why would baptism be something that an individual could just do…out there… somewhere….apart from the Body? Why would the Church today let Western philosophy turn baptism into an individuals own personal possession, rather than something that the Church does and participates in? Could it be for convenients sake? Could it be to get more members in their Church, because they know that some people will not join their Church if they have to have a proper baptism? Could it a real reluctance to deal with controversy on the part of a Pastor? Could it be ignorance of the Bible? Could it be the desire to “fit in” with the greater, evangelical group out there? To accepted by the “cool group?” What do you think?
Well, baptism is supposed to be a testimony of the person’s conversion. Baptism is supposed to declare a message, the Gospel, to the people watching it. Baptism is supposed to be a symbollic picture of the death, burial, and resurrection of our Lord. Baptism is a picture of the blood of Jesus washing away the guilt and punishment of our sins. Baptism is supposed to be a way of formally accepting a new born baby in Christ into the Church. So, why would people even think that it’s something that’s an indvidual thing? Why would they even want baptism to be an individual ordinance, rather than a church ordinance?
Folks, baptism is a time to celebrate the new birth. Baptism is a time to rejoice in the salvation of a person. Baptism is a very special thing, and it’s something that all the Church should have the privilege to participate in. Baptism is a time for the entire Church to join with the baptismal candidate in this wonderful ordinance given to the Church by the Lord Jesus. How much would be lost and missed if everyone was just out there baptising people in their own, private hot tub, or swimming pool, or local swimming hole in the creek? I think a lot would be missed. We would be missing much of what the Lord intended to do in the life of a Church, if the Church is not allowed to participate in the baptism of new converts.
So, who should get baptised? Of course, those people who get saved by grace thru faith. Acts 2:41. Acts 10:44-48. Acts 16:30-34. How should they be baptised? By immersion. Matthew 3:13-17…Jesus came up straightway out of the water. The very word for “baptise” in the Greek means to dip under, to immerse. So, if you want to do it right, the way the Bible clearly teaches, then it must be a dipping under; an immersion. What should baptism be about? It should be a declaration to the community that a person has been saved. It should be a testimony that the person has truly, sincerely put their faith in Jesus, and they’re willing to obey Him as their Lord. Who should baptise? The Church of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Great Commission was given to the Church. Matthew 18:20. The beginning of the Church was standing before the Lord Jesus that day. The Apostles were standing there, who were commissioned to preach the Gospel to the world, and baptise the new converts, and disciple them. They were the men that God used to get the Church that the Lord Jesus founded going. The Church should be the one who baptises new converts, so that they are involved with a Church family; to be nurtured in the faith; encouraged; taught; loved; affirmed; accepted; challenged; inspired; and given much needed guidance. The Church is the one, who was given this task by the Lord Jesus, it’s Head.
So, what a Church believes about salvation and baptism does matter. Who is doing the baptising does matter. It says a lot about a person’s beliefs. I mean, if you get baptised in the Church of Christ, then you are identifying with their view of baptismal regeneration and works salvation. If you get baptised by a Mormon Church, then you are saying that you agree with them about works salvation, denying the Trinity, denying the atoning death of the Lord Jesus. If you get baptised by an Assembly of God Church, then you’re agreeing with them that salvation is not an eternal work of God; that it’s something that can be lost. If you get baptised in the Methodist Church, sprinkled on top of the head, then you were not properly baptised by immersion. And, these are not true baptisms. Now, I’m not saying that these people aren’t saved. They most certainly could be saved. But, their baptism is not a valid, proper, true baptism. They should be baptised for the right reasons, and in the right way.
Now, please don’t come into the comment section calling me a Landmark Baptist. lol. I don’t believe that Baptist Churches are the only true Churches, or that we can trace our lineage back to Jesus, or that SB’s are the only ones who can baptise. Puulease. Listen, if Muddy Creek Community Church believes like we do about salvation and baptism, then we should accept their baptism as a true baptism. If Possum Ridge Bible Church believes as we do about salvation and baptism, then I believe they have a true baptism. So, please don’t come in here with all the Landmark comments. I really don’t have the time, nor the energy to deal with that malarky. But, I do believe that baptism is important. And, it should be done right, and for the right reasons. And, I most certainly believe that it should be a Church thing.
Baptists? Methodists? Presbyterians? Charismatics?
Posted by: | CommentsSomething that I’ve been observing for quite some time now, and especially here lately, is that a lot of people, who belong to Baptist Churches, could join a Church of another denomination and couldn’t tell any difference. I can’t tell you of the people that I have heard say things like…”Well, there’s not that much difference between us Baptists and the Methodists, right?” Inside of me, I’m screaming, “Yes! Yes! How could you even begin to think that?” I’ve heard people make the comment that there’s really not that much difference between us and the Assembly of God Church, or the Presbyterians. And, in my sinking heart, I’m thinking, “What? How could you be a member of a Baptist Church for so long of a time and not know that there’s a huge Read More→
Biblically Centered, Distinctively Baptist
Posted by: | CommentsIn a day when some want to remove Baptist from our names and even distance ourselves from the name “Southern Baptist”, we have a college that is making strides to do otherwise. Truett-McConnell made great strides at their last trustee meeting to bring their faculty under accountability and strengthen their relationship with Southern Baptists. Thank God for the leadership of a Board of Trustees that is not afraid to step forward and boldly confess they believe in the inerrancy of the Word of God and that they are Baptists.
Enjoy the article from the Christian Index.
What Gets You ‘Worked Up’?
Posted by: | CommentsAfter recording the podcast which airs today (Episode 12), I have had occasion to speak with others about the issue surrounding the resolution debate which took place in our association as well as those issues which will comprise the focus of the gathering of the Missouri Baptist Convention next week. I have been involved in a discussion on Twitter regarding some interesting developments relating to an upcoming Evangelical apologetics conference. I have spoken with ministry friends over serious issues which they face in their ministries. I have spoken with church members on the burden and heartbreak which accompanies our evangelistic endeavors. In all of these conversations, I have been brought to ask myself this question: “What does it take to get me ‘worked up’?” Read More→
Podcast Episode 12
Posted by: | Comments
Scheduling conflicts prevented us from recording a podcast last week, but we’re back this week with episode 12. Joe Stewart couldn’t make it, but the rest of the gang is here, along with a special guest. Bill Tomlinson, who retired to his native Virginia earlier this year after fifty years serving as pastor to churches in North Carolina and Virginia, joined us this week, and it was an honor to have him. Our conversation started with a review of a couple of resolutions passed by a couple of our associations, and wandered in all directions from there.
Listen using the player below, or subscribe in iTunes by clicking the logo in this post, or the sidebar button. Feel free to leave comments here to let us know how we can improve the podcast, and while you’re on our iTunes page, give us a review or a rating. We appreciate the feedback, and as always, thanks for listening.
Here are .pdf versions of the resolutions we discussed:
I Officially Resign From Being A Calvinist
Posted by: | CommentsAfter graduating from seminary with my MDIVBL in 2002 and was able to immerse myself more into the Bible rather than what other people thought about the Bible, I began a quest to figure out how salvation works. In other words, how does predestination work in salvation, and what is man’s responsibility in being saved? At about mid-2004, I began to embrace what is commonly known as the doctrines of grace, except for limited atonement. It was a thrilling time for me as I discovered those doctrines and began to understand more and more of God’s love. It was at this time I hesitantly accepted the label “Calvinist.” The reason for hesitancy was that I also understood the wide definition of Calvinism and some of the false representations of what Calvinists are. This is where I have stood until recent events have caused me to rethink and reject the label of Calvinist. While doctrinally I still stand where I have been, I refused to be defined by this doctrinal label that has been mischaracterized by many on both sides of the issue.
Quixote, Peyote, and Coyotes
Posted by: | CommentsThe current debate over the perceived generational divide in the SBC brings forth a variety of conclusions. The emerging church has its roots in Leadership Network Symposiums to reach Generation X. Much morphing has transformed this movement into a polyglot of expressions. Yet one of the unexamined assumptions of the generational emphasis is the pragmatic idea that serves as the underpinning of its practice: the church growth movement outlined by Donald McGavran in his book, The Bridges of God. This movement evolved into various expressions, but many that embrace its philosophy believe it is the only valid way to fulfill the Great Commission. Scores of books and studies analyze the effectiveness of this movement and the risk of this short article is oversimplification. Three basic principles underscore the church growth mantra. The first is God wants unevangelized people evangelized. Lost people matter to God. The second essential rationale of the church growth movement theorizes that valid scientific research can reveal the obstacles to growth and the causes of growth and research can be conducted to enhance effective ministry. Much of ministry in SBC Life has this basic premise at heart. The third idea is to formulate strategies based on the conduction of this research. Church plants and plans result from such strategies. In fact, some may think this article is a Quixotic attempt at tilting at windmills. Such a pragmatic argument is anticipated.
Without splitting hairs and engendering debate on the dichotomy that often emerges in what Eugene Peterson calls the Great Omission of the Great Commission: making disciples, I want to challenge a couple of assumptions that form the foundation of the philosophy known as the church growth movement. One is the incessant need by some to somehow study cultures or even generations to target that age group with a worship style or church expression that results in the development of a congregation that is mainly composed of a particular age group. One point of such emphases is at times to disparage the existing form of the church at large and send out flyers insisting this isn’t your Grandma’s church. The unintended consequence (or perhaps anticipated) is a church that is ‘targeted’ at youngsters while devaluing the contributions of older adults (and perhaps a direct contradiction of the imperative of Titus 2). Proponents of this approach suggest: it works so don’t curse what God is blessing. Success in numbers is trumpeted to suggest the validity of the practice as culturally relevant. Critics are charged with not wanting church growth or a parochial mindset. The unanticipated consequence, if not clearly articulated and examined, is the downplaying of biblical distinctives such as the admonition that the dividing walls have fallen as in Galatians 3:28 (no Jew or Greek, male or female, in Christ Jesus). The temptation with such a strategy is to fit the gospel into the culture by adopting and adapting methodology in a capitulation to the extant culture. Today it may be alcohol. Tomorrow it could be peyote.
The danger in such a dynamic is the reduction of the church to a pragmatic tool. Van Gelder has suggested we use “church” as a noun rather than as an adjective. Perhaps the obstacle that needs to be removed for us to ‘be’ the church rather than just ‘do’ church is to realize that God will build His church and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it. Reformulating biblical language to make it user-friendly often dumbs down our worship and leads to biblical illiteracy. If you can learn to order at Starbucks you can sure learn the biblical meaning of propitiation. Downplaying biblical distinctives as not to offend the crowd is at best a misunderstanding of the imperative to preach the whole counsel of God. Embracing research without the understanding that real church growth is necessarily ‘supernatural’ engenders man-centered and pragmatic tendencies. Trumpeting God’s grace while dismissing God’s wrath creates an unbalanced gospel. It’s like killing all the coyotes to save the cute rabbits. There are new plants and churches that are faithfully strategizing and supernaturally multiplying. May God add to their number! Above all may the church be the church to the glory of God.
Acts 29 and Southern Baptist Polity
Posted by: | CommentsBefore the outset of this post let me say that this piece is not meant to criticize Acts 29. They have the right to organize the planting of churches as they feel they are led by the Lord. This post is to show the clear irreconcilable difference in ecclesiology between Acts 29 and the Baptist Faith and Message when it comes to church governance. It is also intended to show why a church planter cannot honestly accept support from the North American Mission Board and Acts 29 while affirming both ecclesiastical statements as they both drastically differ. I have no animosity towards Acts 29 and wish them God’s best in wisdom and guidance.
Covenant or Confession
Posted by: | CommentsAccording to Merriman-Webster online dictionary, the following definitions exist for the words addressed in the title of this article.
Covenant (Noun)
1 : a usually formal, solemn, and binding agreement : compact
2 a : a written agreement or promise usually under seal between two or more parties especially for the performance of some action b : the common-law action to recover damages for breach of such a contractCovenant (Verb)
transitive verb
: to promise by a covenant : pledge
intransitive verb
: to enter into a covenant : contract
Confession
1 a : an act of confessing; especially : a disclosure of one’s sins in the sacrament of reconciliation b : a session for the confessing of sins <go to confession>
2 : a statement of what is confessed: as a : a written or oral acknowledgment of guilt by a party accused of an offense b : a formal statement of religious beliefs : creed
3 : an organized religious body having a common creed
As I prepared this article I ran across the covenant at Acts 29 Network. The Acts 29 covenant uses precise language and certainly is one that holds strict accountability on those that plant churches with them. The network is a tight doctrinal group that is focused only on reproducing churches with Calvinistic doctrine. However, as one looks at the difference between “covenant” and “confession” one finds the success of the Acts 29 church plants rests not as much in their doctrine as it is in their covenant. Read More→
Comedy with a Point!
Posted by: | CommentsIn honor of today’s opening of one of these heavenly establishments less than two miles from my home in Liberty, Missouri, I present to you this bit of comic genius from Tim Hawkins…(with a point to follow)…
So, what’s your point, Scott? Here it is: Beyond that absolutely addicting Chick-fil-A sandwich, to which many among us…especially Dr. Russell Moore…can attest our own love for this culinary masterpiece, Tim’s song brings out a significant aspect of the identity which marks Chick-fil-A’s reputation. Beyond the good food and the cows, Chick-fil-A is closed on SUNDAY!
This unparalleled practice among national fast-food restaurant chains was born out of the conviction of founder Truett Cathy. On his website he states his recipe for success. Included in that recipe is:
5. CLOSED ON SUNDAY
“I was not so committed to financial success that I was willing to abandon my principles and priorities. One of the most visible examples of this is our decision to close on Sunday. Our decision to close on Sunday was our way of honoring God and of directing our attention to things that mattered more than our business.”Chick-fil-A is the only major fast-food restaurant chain to be closed on Sundays, one of the busiest days of the week in the restaurant business. Despite being closed on Sundays, Truett Cathy has led Chick-fil-A on an unparalleled record of 40 consecutive years of sales increases, with its core free-standing restaurants achieving higher sales per unit in six days (with shorter operating hours) than most major chains in the industry.
Convictional living! That is my goal for my life. That is Christ’s requirement for His churches. That is the purpose for SBC Today…that we as Southern Baptists would be readily identifiable, holding forth the word of life! Being distinct does not mean being sequestered or isolated. It does require being convictional and consistent.
May we as Southern Baptist living under the lordship of Jesus Christ have the same kind of courage and consistency from our leadership, our entities, our pastors, and our churches, as we see in men like Truett Cathy.
Sola Gratia!
Enhanced Podcast: 

