THE CASE FO
By:
For
years I have told people that a local New Testament Church is “a body of
baptized believers joined together for the spread of the gospel.” Since some have stated that no scripture
clearly says that baptism is necessary for church membership, is there any
imperative for baptism? We might even
wonder if the local visible church has any right to determine its doctrines or
demand and expect a certain life style or set any requirements for membership. Can a person just start attending services
and assume membership without notifying anybody?
I
have never considered baptism and the Lord’s Supper as requirements for my
salvation, but I do considered them acts of obedience, joy and praise in
compliance to the will of Jesus my saviour.
I have always felt that Jesus wanted me to be a member of the New
Testament Church which He started. He
didn’t say He wanted me to be a part of His church body in any scripture that I
can remember. Luke did say that those
who “gladly received His word were baptized and added to the church.”
It
seems that when they got their doctrine right, they declared their “repented
mind change” in baptismal waters, and then were added to the church roll. John the Baptizer told Jesus He didn’t need
to be baptized, but Jesus said “it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness.”
Well we know that Jesus didn’t have any righteousness to fulfill, so why did He
submit to Baptism? The apostle Peter
said that Jesus left us an example that we should follow in His steps (1 Pet.
Membership
in a local New Testament church is by faith in Jesus and the believer is
declaring that he understands that in Christ he has died to sin, and has been
raised to walk in new life. Baptism
becomes a living, visible portrayal of an invisible and spiritual change of
heart.
Consider
this explanation from the Holomon Study Bible of 1981, (page 1666). “All believers, who in simplicity of heart
approach the moment of reception of this rite, feel that it is majestically
solemn and immeasurably significant.
Baptism symbolizes regeneration; it is a confession of Christ before
men—a public confession faith; it signifies a new state of sin forgiven; it
heralds discipleship; its reception is an act of speaking louder than words in
proclaiming the high resolve to lead, thenceforth, a righteous life; it
typifies death to a past which is abandoned, and a new birth to a future life
of godliness. It unites sanctifying
solemnity, spiritual significance, and devotional beauty, in marking for all
who receive it their admission into the kingdom of the Master.”
Since
now there will be those who seek
membership in the church but refuse to be baptized we will not witness from
them the visible proof of cheerful obedience to the Lord’s command as stated in
the Great Commission (Matt. 28:19).
Obedience to act out this picture of death burial and resurrection will
not be displayed by them, as a proof of their new birth in Christ, and they
will have the same standing in the church as those who have submitted to the
Lord’s command. This borders on blatant rejection of the directions Jesus gave
for His followers in the Great Commission.
In
some Baptist Churches, baptism has been viewed as a means of keeping the
doctrines of the church pure. I have
often heard the expression, “Baptism will help keep our doctrines pure, and
the Lord’s Supper will keep our lives pure. Those who refuse to be baptized into the
fellowship of the
It
stands to reason, that the removal of Baptism as a membership requirement will
give a church uninhibited growth from many other faiths which would soon cause
a mixture in the doctrinal position of the church. Exchanging letters between churches would be
difficult for those churches who were interested in keeping the doctrines of
the church true to “Like faith and order.” If doctrinal unity (or purity) is
not an issue to the church body, then prospects can assume membership at their
own discretion, and would not even require a vote of approval from the
congregation. If what one believes is not important for church membership, I
can see that whether one is baptized or not wouldn’t matter either.
To
remove baptism from the requirements for membership may also suggest that we
can remove baptism from church authority. Is there an established authority for
baptism? If not, anybody could go into the “baptizing
business.” It wouldn’t have to be a
church. A prospective member could go to
a Baptizing Company, be baptized, and then bring a certificate and picture of
the baptism to the church he wants to join.
This would remove the necessity of giving proof of genuine conversion.
Baptist have land marked their denominational identity from before the
reformation through the rite of baptism, is this modern age about to unearth
our doctrinal mark?