Archive for Ecclesiology
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.
Podcast Episode 22
Posted by: | Comments
This week on the podcast, we discuss issues surrounding the allegations made by a Dallas area television station against Ed Young, Jr., and Fellowship Church. Joining us as our guest to help define some of those issues is Dr. John Mark Yeats. Dr. Yeats is assistant professor of church history at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, and author, along with his SWBTS colleague Dr. Thomas White, of Franchising McChurch, a book that deals with issues of commercialism and “branding” among large contemporary churches. We went over our self-imposed time limit of half an hour, but hopefully listeners will find the discussion to be worth the time.
You can use the player below to listen to the podcast, or you can click the image in this post (or the sidebar link) to be taken to our iTunes page. There, you can subscribe to the podcast, download past episodes, write a review, or give us a rating. All of the above are strongly encouraged. And please leave your comment here with suggestions for how we can improve future podcasts or for guests you’d like to see in the future. And as always, thanks for listening.
Links to some items discussed:
Enhanced Podcast: One Lord, One Vote
Posted by: | CommentsA good deal of discussion in Baptist life, even some on this site, has focused upon the role of elders in the church. How should those who hold this biblical office fulfill their role within the congregation, and how should they relate to the members of the church? Much of this discussion goes ultimately to the question of how the church is governed. Is it to be ruled by elders, or are the elders to lead, with the responsibility for making decisions remaining with the congregation as a whole? As Southern Baptists, we have clearly and, I believe, biblically, answered this question in our statement of faith.
Read More→
No Longer a Church
Posted by: | CommentsIn my most recent previous post on SBC Today, I discussed “The Unique Authority of the Local Congregations.” In the text of the original post itself, I mentioned my own uneasiness with Christ’s conferral of so much heavenly authority behind the actions of the local, gathered, covenanted church. In the ensuing comment thread, we discussed whether this local churchly authority could possibly supersede the authority of the New Testament or otherwise empower human believers to employ heavenly power to thwart heavenly aims.
The Danger of Self-Diagnosis
Posted by: | CommentsMany sons of the prophets have taken to pronouncing the impending doom of the Southern Baptist Convention. Pointing to falling baptismal rates, rising ages, and static churches, we have summoned the intervention of the successful to rescue the perishing and care for the dying. As the summoned practitioners meet in special session this week, the patients fight it out in the waiting room about the deliberations until we receive the prognosis and path of treatment. A possible merger of the IMB and NAMB, a possible partnership with Acts 29, or a restructuring of the Cooperative Program have all been prescribed as the solution to what ails us from the Web MD of Baptist blogdom. Not to be pedantic, but I would encourage us to look to the Great Physician for the proper diagnosis before we give the prognosis based on a self-diagnosis.
Standing before Jesus, Peter makes his confession, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Jesus then responds with a gnomic principle, “Upon this rock, I will build my church, and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it” (Matthew 16:16, 18). I will make two presumptions. 1) We agree that the rock to which Jesus refers is Peter’s confession, and not Peter himself. 2) The existence of local churches is irreplaceably important to Christ. This leads me to deduce that, if the Southern Baptist Convention is indeed destined for the doom pronounced by the aforementioned prophets, it is not ultimately due to irrelevance, but to unfaithfulness. As the SBC stands on the brink of another time of transition, I would encourage us to remember two things.
First, let us not become so consumed with baptismal numbers that we forget that when all is said and done, baptism is not the goal, conversion is. Though baptism is our method of measurement for the effectiveness of our outreach, we must be careful that the method of measurement does not become the goal itself. In other words, if we increase baptisms without increasing conversions, we have settled for a lesser gospel, and indeed, a false gospel. A true biblical confession will involve baptism, but if we are not careful, we will separate baptism from a true confession.
The second truth we must bear in mind from this text is that the success of the futuristic, not -yet-existent universal church cannot be separated from the success of the present day local church. The activity of God is primarily seen in the local church. Not that God is dependent upon such, but God has ordained such. I pray that as we seek to return our focus to the Great Commission, that in doing so, our focus will return to the local church over and above the development of our own kingdom. Our investment to the Kingdom of God is an investment that is made in, with, and through the local church. When Jesus said His church will be built upon the rock of Peter’s confession, based on the rest of the New Testament witness, He certainly involved the building of the eternal church through the local church.
Of course, the promise of Jesus is that, given the proper confession of His people and the power of His word, the church will not be overpowered. So, need we fear the death of the Southern Baptist Convention? No, for life is a byproduct of Christ’s promise of the success of the local church built upon the confession of her members. Let us not fear the death of our beloved Convention, for upon it the Kingdom of God does not reside.
Rather, let us fear the loss of the New Testament confession of Christ as our Lord within the local churches. If we maintain the preeminence of the local church and a proper confession, our churches will flourish. If our churches flourish, our Convention will flourish. If we have healthy churches, we will have a healthy Convention. It is one thing to know the symptoms of the sickness. It is quite another to know the path to wellness. The Convention may be able to describe the symptoms, but they are incapable of producing the cure. As the Task Force deliberates today, let us pray for their focus not to be upon the programmatic and structural success of the Convention. Let us pray for their hearts to be focused upon the local churches and how they can be encouraged to maintain a healthy confession of Christ as Lord. For in Him alone is there life abundant.
A Heritage of Faithfulness
Posted by: | CommentsThis post was originally published on my own blog over three years ago. It was published in the midst of a controversy within my state regarding baptism and church membership, but the truth it contains is as applicable today as then.
My grandfather, Glen Wesley Smith, was an alcoholic. Thankfully, God saves alcoholics, and on Mother’s Day, 1950, He saved my grandfather, and called him to preach, which my grandfather faithfully did from the following Sunday until his retirement in 1983. Even after retirement, he served as interim pastor at the First Baptist Church in Poteau, Oklahoma, where he grew up. He passed away in 1989.
Among the great treasures he passed down to me is a large satchel, filled to overflowing with sermons he typed himself. I probably have close to a thousand of these typed sermons, along with a couple of well-marked Bibles. Frome time to time, I like to thumb through these yellowed pages. It often makes for great study, and, as I don’t really have clear memories of my grandfather in the pulpit, they serve as a way for me to visualize him there, preaching the Word. Read More→
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.
The Unique Authority of the Local Congregations
Posted by: | CommentsI also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.
-Matthew 16:18-19
Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.
Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven. For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst.
-Matthew 18:18-20
What Does Jesus Mean?
In one sense, these are not particularly easy passages to interpret. What will one construe of the two different words petros and petra in the passage from chapter 16, and consequently, does this have to do more with Simon Peter personally, with his confession of faith, with the community of confessors in like manner, or with the person of Christ? What, precisely, are the “keys of the kingdom of heaven”? Are there any limitations or specific contexts in mind with regard to the “binding” and “loosing” language of these passages? What does it mean to speak of one who is ubiquitous and omnipresent as being “there in [the] midst” of some group of people? Read More→
Thank you, NAMB
Posted by: | CommentsI was informed last week that the North American Mission Board has suspended the practice of serving the Lord’s Supper at its Worldchangers camps. This is a move for which I would like to commend NAMB. I believe it is a bad practice for the Supper to be practiced outside of the local gathering for at least three reasons.
First, the Supper is an ordinance that is to be practiced by believers. As a pastor, when I administer the Supper to my congregation, I emphasize this. As my students participated in the Tuesday evening service, the Supper was served to 3 of my students who had not accepted Christ. Therefore, they participated in an ordinance that was not intended for them and that, in contradiction to what their pastor has taught.
Second, the Supper is an ordinance which is restricted from those who are under church discipline. The church at Corinth had been infiltrated by pagan practices and immoral lifestyles. The Supper plays a prominent role in the book of 1 Corinthians, especially for the practice of church discipline. By administering the Lord’s Supper, Worldchangers runs the risk of serving the Supper to someone who may be under church discipline. If the first danger undermines the authority of the pastor of the local church, this one undermines the authority of the local church itself.
Third, it is a direct disregard for the Baptist Faith and Message. The primary definition of the church in Article VI says in part “A New Testament church of the Lord Jesus Christ is an autonomous local congregation of baptized believers, associated by covenant in the faith and fellowship of the gospel; observing the two ordinances of Christ.” The students that gather at youth camps or missions endeavors are not covenanted together. The practice of covenant belongs to the local church, and not to a mission board, youth camp, or any other organization outside of the church.
I am pleased that NAMB has suspended this practice and believe that they have made a decision to honor the local congregation, respect the leadership of the pastor, and show agreement with the Baptist Faith and Message. I see far too many detriments to the practice of the Supper outside of the local congregation, and no benefit.
Podcast Episode 3
Posted by: | Comments
Well, it’s that time again, and here for your amusement is episode 3 of the SBC Today podcast. We were down a voice or two this week, but what we lacked in quantity, we made up in no appreciable way whatsoever. But we did have fun.
In this episode, we begin with a bit of talk about the GCR Taskforce and the NAMB trustee meeting. At the time of recording the GCR Taskforce had not yet begun their meeting, and the NAMB trustees were in executive session, so there really wasn’t much to discuss. We ended the program with prayer for both groups.
We also talked about polyamory, which is every bit as strange as it sounds. And in the middle, taking up the bulk of the time, is a discussion about the local church, the Great Commission, and baptism.
We hope you enjoy these podcasts. You can listen using the player below, or subscribe in iTunes and have them automatically downloaded each week when they’re ready. And while you’re at our iTunes page, give us a rating and/or a review. We welcome your feedback and suggestions, which you can leave in a comment on this post or by email. Just click on “About” at the top of the page, and you’ll find email links for each member of the team.
As always, here are links to some of the things we discussed.
