Baptists and Baptism

[Qwikness]

I don’t get Baptists. I found out recently they believe that Baptism isn’t necessary. Faith comes first and when it does, a person is “saved” then the Baptism may follow. Of course the person has to be completely submerged. If Faith is so important, why even baptize at all? If baptism isn’t so important then why require submersion?

on a lighter note, why do they call themselves “Baptists” why not Faithists.

 

[tortdog]

I think that their tradition has changed over time. I’ve noticed that in a lot of the current sects of Christianity. The Catholics (both branches) seem to be one of the few that hold to the traditions of the past, and refuse to change based on current trends.

Note: You can see this by using Google Books and looking at earlier writings of the Baptists as compared to current views. Google Books has an amazing wealth of easily accessible information, and is genuinely a wonderful research tool.

But I agree. It does seem odd that baptism is not essential, and yet if performed it must be performed a certain way or it’s not baptism. I mean, that’s not logically inconsistent, but if the form was so important one would think that the ordinance (sacraement) would be fairly essential.

But I am also not certain that the view on being “essential” is that much different than the RC Church’s view of baptism by desire, thus not requiring the actual oridnance/sacrament either.

 

[fermat]

But I am also not certain that the view on being “essential” is that much different than the RC Church’s view of baptism by desire, thus not requiring the actual oridnance/sacrament either.

The primary difference here is that water baptism is the ‘ordinary’ means to salvation. Baptism by desire is when you desire baptism but cannot obtain it because there is no one around to administer the sacrament to you.

The notion of faithtism as the ordinary means to salvation is a product of the ‘Just me and Jesus’ philosophy. I have a co-worker who is on that boat and we have some wonderful conversations. I believe that the primary reason that he follows that path is because if he accepted the the authority of the church, then he would be bound to that authority and that would require him to change some things in his life he would rather not change.

 

[tortdog]

I believe that the primary reason that he follows that path is because if he accepted the the authority of the church, then he would be bound to that authority and that would require him to change some things in his life he would rather not change.

I think that you nail it as to the true reason with many people.

 

[jlmagee]

Baptists teach that baptism is a very important step. In just laying the foundation-

As in the thief on the cross or in many of the healing miracles, Jesus indicated that the faith of the individual in Him was salvation.

Baptists and some other evangelical groups, read that baptism is the first step in obedience, therefore, to not seek baptism would be the first step of rebellion. If it is so easy to step into such grave rebellion, how can you be sure of salvation? You are correct that the second leg is not as emphasized like it used to be. I had a baptist professor who talked about in the old days, baptism would follow that day if possible or soon after a profession of faith in Jesus Christ.

Baptists are very strict about full immersion for baptism. The Didache lays out rules that were to be followed for baptism.

I am not trying to cause an argument. This thread has me wondering. If an adult, not a cradle Catholic, would he be baptized at some point during the RCIA (I think that is what you call the classes?)? Is baptism after the classes? At what point is the person a believer who is going to Heaven?

Is this so off topic I should start a thread? I am new and do not wish to cause hardship or strat off topic.

 

[Barbkw]

If an adult, not a cradle Catholic, would he be baptized at some point during the RCIA (I think that is what you call the classes?)? Is baptism after the classes?

RCIA is correct, an abbreviation for Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults. Weekly RCIA classes begin in the early fall (mid August at many parishes) of the preceeding year and culminate at the Easter Vigil Mass (this year 2011, on the evening of April 23).

During this 9 month process, there are step initiations (called Scrutinys) where people discern if they wish to become Catholic.

At the Easter Vigil Mass, if a person has never been baptised, they will receive Baptism during the Mass. If their children have not been previously Baptised, their children can also be baptized at that time. The newly baptised adults will also receive 1st Eucharist and Confirmation at the Easter Vigil Mass.

Convert Christians who have records indicating their previous Baptisms will not be rebaptized. At the Easter Vigil Mass, they will receive 1st Eucharist and Confirmation.

Adult Catholics in RCIA - who did not received 1st Eucharist or Confirmation as children, will also be brought into full Communion with the Church at the Easter Vigil Mass.

 

[Church_Militant]

I don’t get Baptists. I found out recently they believe that Baptism isn’t necessary. Faith comes first and when it does, a person is “saved” then the Baptism may follow. Of course the person has to be completely submerged. If Faith is so important, why even baptize at all? If baptism isn’t so important then why require submersion?

on a lighter note, why do they call themselves “Baptists” why not Faithists.

Baptism The articles at that link show my thinking on this issue.

I was Southern Baptist for many years and nearly went into their ministry, so it doesn’t make much sense to me that they would make Baptism optional like they do.

Keep in mind though that they don’t have sacraments…they have “ordinances”. Part of it may be that they cannot say that Baptism is necessary because that would then infer that it’s sacramental and that would be way too Catholic for them.

 

[Qwikness]

Baptism

Keep in mind though that they don’t have sacraments…they have “ordinances”. Part of it may be that they cannot say that Baptism is necessary because that would then infer that it’s sacramental and that would be way too Catholic for them.

Yes, I think that this may a Good Work that is inconsistent with their Faith Alone.
I have had Baptist tell me they were not protestant. They were followers of John the Baptist and had to lay low through the centuries because the Catholics were out to get them.

 

[Setfree]

I don’t get Baptists. I found out recently they believe that Baptism isn’t necessary. Faith comes first and when it does, a person is “saved” then the Baptism may follow. Of course the person has to be completely submerged. If Faith is so important, why even baptize at all? If baptism isn’t so important then why require submersion?

on a lighter note, why do they call themselves “Baptists” why not Faithists.

[1]Water baptism is an outward sign of an ALREADY INWARD EXPERIENCE.
First you get saved, Then you can be baptised in water.
You have to have the inner experience of the rebirth before you can get baptised.

[2] Water baptism is a person identifying with whoever they get baptised into.
A JW identifies with the Jehovahs witnesses. A Christian with Jesus.

[3] The gentiles in Acts 10: 44–48 were saved, Baptised in the Holy Ghost and spoke in tongues, Yet they weren’t baptised in water at that time.,

The Apostle Paul was saved and baptised in the Holy Ghost, Acts 9: 17. Yet he wasn’t baptised in water at that time.
So we can see that the Bible doens’t teach salvation through water baptism.
How many times did Jesus say it is by faith?
Jn 3:16, doesn’t say,
" Whosoever is baptised in water has everlasting life".

 

[Qwikness]

Jn 3:16, doesn’t say,
" Whosoever is baptised in water has everlasting life".

But he does say in the same chapter, John 3:5
“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.”

 

[TrueLight]

The first step was to accept Jesus into your heart, usually through an altar call. That is, you made a conscience decision to serve god. Then you were “saved”.

Now, when you were really serious and wanted to make a public declaration of faith, you got Baptized by immersion.

The Baptist church I grew up in actually had a process where you had to stand before the elders, deacons and members and declare your intention to get baptized. Then the Pastor asked the members if anyone had any reason to believe the candidate was not ready for baptisim. For example, if they were cohabitating. If no one had nothing bad to say, then you were allowed to be baptized at the baptismal service.

Baptism also included pre-baptism classes, sort of like RCIA.

In no way was baptism required to be saved. However, it was a natural step in the Christian journey and you were not fully a part of the church community because you were not allowed to take communion without being baptized.

 

[tortdog]

[2] Water baptism is a person identifying with whoever they get baptised into.
A JW identifies with the Jehovahs witnesses. A Christian with Jesus.

Do JWs really get baptized as JWs, as opposed to baptized in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost?

[3] The gentiles in Acts 10: 44–48 were saved, Baptised in the Holy Ghost and spoke in tongues, Yet they weren’t baptised in water at that time.,

The Apostle Paul was saved and baptised in the Holy Ghost, Acts 9: 17. Yet he wasn’t baptised in water at that time.

I am not sure what “saved” really means, in the context that you use it. Peter never claimed that these people were “saved,” only that they were worthy to be baptized. Also, no where do the scriptures claim Paul to have been “saved,” though he did have a spiritual experience. All those incidents point out is that the Holy Spirit may work upon a man before he is baptized. I think one has to read more into the text to get to the “saved” part.

As someone just said, Christ was pretty clear that baptism by water was necessary.

 

[jlmagee]

RCIA is correct, an abbreviation for Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults. Weekly RCIA classes begin in the early fall (mid August at many parishes) of the preceeding year and culminate at the Easter Vigil Mass (this year 2011, on the evening of April 23).

During this 9 month process, there are step initiations (called Scrutinys) where people discern if they wish to become Catholic.

At the Easter Vigil Mass, if a person has never been baptised, they will receive Baptism during the Mass. If their children have not been previously Baptised, their children can also be baptized at that time. The newly baptised adults will also receive 1st Eucharist and Confirmation at the Easter Vigil Mass.

Convert Christians who have records indicating their previous Baptisms will not be rebaptized. At the Easter Vigil Mass, they will receive 1st Eucharist and Confirmation.

Adult Catholics in RCIA - who did not received 1st Eucharist or Confirmation as children, will also be brought into full Communion with the Church at the Easter Vigil Mass.

Thank you for your gracious answer. Would Baptist baptism be recognized as a valid (correct term?) baptism?

 

[Barbkw]

Thank you for your gracious answer. Would Baptist baptism be recognized as a valid (correct term?) baptism?

Yes, Baptist baptism is valid if given in the name of Trinity:

“I baptize you in the name of the Father, in the name of the Son, and in the name of the Holy Spirit” while the pouring of water.

Churches generally document Baptism and copies of the event are normally required.

 

[TrueLight]

Yes, Baptist baptism is valid if given in the name of Trinity:

“I baptize you in the name of the Father, in the name of the Son, and in the name of the Holy Spirit” while the pouring of water.

Churches generally document Baptism and copies of the event are normally required.

Yes, I was baptized by immersion in a Baptist church, in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit and was told my baptism is valid.

 

[Church_Militant]

Yes, I think that this may a Good Work that is inconsistent with their Faith Alone.
I have had Baptist tell me they were not protestant. They were followers of John the Baptist and had to lay low through the centuries because the Catholics were out to get them.

Yeah… I’ve seen that too but it doesn’t hold up to the context of Christian history. It a completely modern fabrication.

That’s sort of along the same lines as Jack Chick’s propaganda (now out of print than God!) about our alleged super computer with all the names of the Protestants in it so we can get 'em during the tribulation.

 

[Qwikness]

It is impossible for me to accept that Baptism is not necessary. I can not believe it.
Isn’t it like saying that a wedding is not necessary for marriage. The moment we fell in love we were married?

 

[Setfree]

But he does say in the same chapter, John 3:5
“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.”

Yes but Jesus didn’t say one must be born of the Spirit and baptised in water.
The water in Jn 3: 5. means the word.
Jn 15: 3. Eph 5: 26. James 1: 18. 1 Pet 1: 22-23.
Please note, None of these mention water baptism.

When Jesus said, “He that believes and is baptised shall be saved”.
The Greek emphesis for “salvation” is on the “Believing”, NOT BAPTISM.

When Peter said, “Repent and be baptised for the remision of sins”.
The Greek emphesis for “Remision”, is on the “Repenting”, NOT BAPTISM.

 

[tortdog]

Please note, None of these mention water baptism.

As opposed to what other kind of baptism?

 

[djrakowski]

The first step was to accept Jesus into your heart, usually through an altar call. That is, you made a conscience decision to serve god. Then you were “saved”.

Now, when you were really serious and wanted to make a public declaration of faith, you got Baptized by immersion.

The Baptist church I grew up in actually had a process where you had to stand before the elders, deacons and members and declare your intention to get baptized. Then the Pastor asked the members if anyone had any reason to believe the candidate was not ready for baptisim. For example, if they were cohabitating. If no one had nothing bad to say, then you were allowed to be baptized at the baptismal service.

Baptism also included pre-baptism classes, sort of like RCIA.

In no way was baptism required to be saved. However, it was a natural step in the Christian journey and you were not fully a part of the church community because you were not allowed to take communion without being baptized.

This mirrors my experience as an evangelical in nearly every detail but the pre-baptismal classes (and yet we had to attend a teaching session before having our children “dedicated” to Jesus).