00B.29 Chapter 22. Denominational Baptism--No. 2

XXII. Denominational Baptism No. 2 The second question that was raised in the letter we published last week was: In what sense do we accept or reject people on their baptism or any other condition? Brethren frequently ask whether or not we should "accept people on their baptism." We should first ask: What part do we have in accepting or rejecting people on any con­dition? If we accept people on their baptism, who does the accepting? Does the preacher alone do this, or does the congregation join with him in this act of "accepting" some­body? If the congregation participates in this, in what way do the people make known their willingness to accept the person? Would it not be necessary to state the case and take a vote? The denominations all have methods of accepting or receiving members. These methods differ somewhat with the different denominations, each sect having its own pe­culiar manner of receiving people "into the church." They open the doors only at stated times. But the door to Christ’s own church has never been closed since the day of Pente­cost. People enter that church, which is the house, house­hold, or family of God (1 Timothy 3:15; Hebrews 3:3-6; Ephesians 2:19-21; Galatians 6:10), by a spiritual birth (John 3:3-5). Under another figure this church is spoken of as the body of Christ (Ephesians 1:23; Colossians 1:18), and people enter into Christ, into his body, by a faith that is perfected and actualized in baptism (Galatians 3:26-27; 1 Corinthians 12:13; Romans 6:3-6). The same fact is presented in still another form when it is shown that people are convicted of sin by the Holy Spirit through the gospel, comply with the conditions of pardon, and are then saved, and God adds them to the church without any further choice or act or ceremony on the part of man. (Acts 2.) This being true, we see then that human beings have nothing to do in making Christians—members of the Lord’s body, which is his church—but to teach, preach, and then baptize those who believe—those who are subjects for bap­tism. (Matthew 28:18-20; Mark 16:15-16; Luke 24:46-49.) But who is a subject for baptism? Any responsible person who has heard the gospel and believed it and who is willing to repent of all sin and obey Christ from now henceforth forevermore. But who is to decide whether a man believes and is willing to repent and obey? Each man must decide this for himself, and he will tell of his decision to the preacher, to the church, and to the world by his public con­fession of his faith and then by his public act of obedience and always thereafter by his righteous life. (Romans 10:9-10; Php 2:9-11; Romans 6.) But suppose a man who hears the gospel does not believe it? Then he will of his own accord go his way and claim no part or lot with us in this matter. We can do nothing for him unless we can by some manner of presenting the truth make a believer out of him. But suppose, again, some man believes the gospel, but is not willing to repent? Then the preacher cannot baptize him. He will have to go with Felix, Agrippa, and the devil. (Acts 24, 2 G; James 2.) But suppose, still again, a man believes, repents of his sins, begins living a righteous, prayerful life, but will not be baptized? Well, of course, the preacher cannot baptize him against his will. He can only teach him what the Lord says about baptism, and this will be to tell him plainly that the Lord has not promised to forgive his sins until he is bap­tized; that he is not in Christ until he is baptized "into him." He must show him that those who love Christ will do what he commands, and that those who claim to love him, but will not obey him, are called liars in the Scriptures. (John 14:23; 1 John 2:4; 1 John 5:3.) But suppose after a man has been taught all this he still refuses to be baptized and continues to meet with the breth­ren and participate in the religious services, even partaking of the Lord’s Supper? Is there anything we can do then? It is hardly supposable that anyone would do this after having been shown that he has not become a Christian; is not in Christ, in his body, which is the church: and does not, therefore, have any scriptural right to anything that belongs only to those who are in Christ. But if such a case should exist, there is nothing that Christians can do beyond teaching the points already mentioned. But let us suppose that some man hears the gospel, un­derstands it, and tells us that he long ago believed this same gospel, repented of his sins, and was baptized for the remission of sins or in order to obtain the blessings of God, one of which is forgiveness of sin, but that he has since been worshiping with denominational people, wearing a denomi­national name, supporting a denominational institution, all of which he now believes to be wrong and desires to quit. What shall we say to him? As in a former article, we should show him clearly what scriptural baptism is, what the par­ticular denomination that baptized him teaches on the subject of baptism; and then if he says he has obeyed the Lord in this respect, we can no more question his word about the scripturalness of his baptism than we can about the scripturalness of his faith or of his repentance. We shall have to take his word and encourage him to be faithful in the Lord’s service as a Christian only. From all of these supposed examples and from the Scriptures that have been cited we see clearly that we as Christians have no rule, no law, no requirement of our own to which any person must submit in order to have our fel­lowship; and yet it is clearly shown that we do have a great deal to do in teaching the Lord’s will, the Lord’s law, and helping people to understand and obey it. So we have something to do in making Christians or bringing people into the church, after all. This is what brethren refer to when they speak of our accepting persons on their baptism. They mean: should we approve the man’s baptism and sanc­tion his act in that respect? The third question is: Does the fact that people are sat­isfied with their baptism have any weight in determining the scripturalness or unscripturalness of their baptism? Sometimes this question is alluded to as if some preachers among us make no higher requirement in reference to bap­tism than that the individual himself be satisfied; or that these brethren make no effort to ascertain what sort of baptism the man who presents himself has had; that they only ask the man if he is satisfied with his baptism, and if he answers in the affirmative they ask no further questions and give the matter no further consideration. I think this is a wrong impression; but if there are such preachers among us, they are entirely too indifferent or lax about teaching the will of the Lord. All informed persons know that the mere fact that a man is satisfied with his attempt to obey the Lord docs not prove that his obedience has been acceptable to the Lord. Methodists are satisfied with sprinkling. Holy Rollers are satisfied with what they take to be Holy Spirit baptism. Quakers are satisfied with no baptism at all. So on ad infinitum.

We do not receive members into the church by asking them to conform to some laws of our own. We do, neverthe­less, have something to do in bringing men into the church of the Lord. It has already been shown that we are to teach the word of the Lord in reference to baptism in the plainest possible terms and point out the errors of any denomination that may concern the baptism in question, and that we must insist that persons who are baptized scrip­turally must have been baptized according to the teaching of the Scriptures, and not according to the teaching of any denomination. When we have done this, there is nothing more we can do. Then it is that the individual himself must make the decision. He must say what he did when he was baptized, what his motive was. In this respect he is the man to be satisfied—that is, satisfied in his own conscience as to whether or not he has obeyed the Lord.

Experience shows us that the number of cases of this kind are vastly in the minority. Only in rare instances do we find men who even claim to be satisfied with their baptism after the teaching of the New Testament has been clearly set before them in contrast with the teaching of the denomination in which they have held membership.