The Truth In Print Vol. 15 Issue 6, July 2009
A Publication of the
Valley church of Christ,
2375 W. 8th Street,
Yuma, AZ 85364 (928-782-5058)
Website Address ~ http://yumavalleychurchofchrist.com
The Phrase “Baptized
Believer”
Sometimes I’m told,
“Well I consider you and Wanda to be baptized believers.” The truth is when
one uses the phrase “baptized believer” it may mean any number of things. If
you plug “baptized believer” into your search on the internet you’ll probably
get “Believer’s Baptism.” Likewise that phrase may mean any number of things. I
know because I did it and I’m going share with you some of the things. A careful consideration of the wide variety
of meanings that exist concerning the use of “baptized believer” should serve
as a warning concerning its use.
I. To
believe in baptized believers is to deny infant baptism.
If
you are truly a Christian then you know of a certainty that the New Testament
does not teach infant baptism. Infants cannot “hear” or “believe” the Gospel,
nor can they repent or profess the belief in the deity of Christ as the Son of
God that is necessary to become a Christian (Cf. Acts 2:37-38, 41; Rom.
10:9-10). When Peter preached on Pentecost he commanded his listeners to “hear”
(Acts 2:14, 22). Because they “heard” the Word they were pricked in their
hearts and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, What
shall we do? This ability to hear and believe God’s Word does not exist for
infants! Infant baptisms as practiced by many religions professing
“Christianity” are void of any scriptural basis being the product of mere human
tradition.
Again, with absolutely no scripture that supports the idea I found that
some so called Christian theologians regard baptism as analogous to the Jewish
practice of circumcision. A child was circumcised on the eighth day under the
Mosaic Law. This meaningless conjecture would also lead one away from the New
Testament teaching that belief and subsequent obedience is based upon hearing
the Word (Cf. Rom. 10:17, Acts 2:41).
II. Baptism is not for conversion but
effects admission into a local church.
In this understanding of many
denominations, the baptism is effective for full admission into a local church
if that person was baptized “following” what they consider to be their
conversion. And this works for similar churches should one relocate elsewhere.
In other words baptism is not for the remission of sins as taught by Peter in
Acts 2:38. This explanation left me wondering where that would leave the
Ethiopian eunuch who was baptized by Philip somewhere along the road to
Damascus (Cf. Acts 8:26-40). There was no local church out there for him to be
attached to! The eunuch’s baptism was indeed part of what is necessary to be
saved (converted) and be “in Christ” (Cf. Gal. 3:26-27).
III. Baptism does not effect one’s salvation but symbolizes the person’s
prior conversion to Christ.
Here again some evangelicals teach that
one’s baptism is a public display of one’s faith, while figuratively
representing their “prior” conversion.
Again error is displayed by the explanation
that though such responses as belief, confession, repentance, and even prayer
may be required “baptism” follows conversion.
IV. Churches
of Christ baptize for the remission of sins and in order for entrance into the
kingdom of Christ.
Notice the distinct
difference in the belief that baptism is for the remission of one’s sins and entrance
into the kingdom of Christ (Cf. Col. 1:13, 2:11-2). The New Testament teaches
that baptism is necessary in order to have the remission of sins and without it
one cannot enter the kingdom of Christ (cf. Mk. 16:15-16; Acts 2:38, 41; Acts
22:16; Rom. 6:3-4; Gal. 3:26-27; I Pet. 3:21, etc.).
V. Being
a baptized believer combines one’s confirmation and infant baptism.
What appears to lie
behind this “combination” is that scriptural baptism isn’t made to be repeated,
thus there is a transfer of what is called Christian life from infant baptism
to confirmation. I read that some believe that “believer’s baptism” combines
two rites. The New Testament teaches no such thing! Since it does not teach
infant baptism, it certainly does not teach those who are scripturally baptized
are combining baptism with “infant baptism.” Jesus commanded both belief and
baptism in order to have the remission of sins (Mk. 16:15-16). Since the New
Testament does not teach infant baptism scriptural baptism does not mark or denote
in any fashion infant baptism. The infant being baptized cannot profess faith
in the deity of Christ! It is impossible according to the teaching of the New
Testament for baptism to mark infant baptism.
VI. Most
prefer immersion over affusion.
Scriptural baptism by
definition is immersion and not sprinkling or pouring. The thing commanded by
definition is “immersion” (Acts 2:38; 8:36; 18:8, etc.). The command to be
baptized necessitates an immersion in water for the remission of one’s sins
(Acts 2:38). Baptism should never be thought of as something that might be
changed in “mode” because someone prefers something different. “Affusion” refers to the acts of sprinkling or pouring water
over the one being baptized. Nowhere in
the New Testament is one commanded to be “sprinkled” with water, or have water
“poured” on them for baptism.
Concerned reader, you must go to the New Testament to gain the right
understanding of baptism—- its meaning and purpose.
Christians Pay Close Attention to What They Hear Others
Say
I. Apollos was teaching inaccurately (Acts 18:24-28).
Luke records how Acquilla and Priscilla, two Christians, helped Apollos get some necessary things straight in his life. He
was teaching inaccurately! Look at him: “This man was instructed in the way of
the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake
and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John”
(Acts 18:25).
Dear
reader, Apollos’ knowledge was deficient as regards
“baptism” into Christ. Notice now what Luke says: “And he began to speak boldly
in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto
him the way of God more perfectly” (Acts 18:26). The following verses show that
he responded to their instruction concerning scriptural baptism, obeyed, and
was recommended by christians
to christians elsewhere (Cf. Acts 18:27-28).
II. The
Twelve at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).
Paul’s brief stay at Ephesus includes the account of about twelve men being
baptized into Christ. Please pay attention! Here they are baptized not because
baptism was made to be repeated (See point V.), but because they never were
baptized in the name of Christ to begin with. While some writers have referred
to these twelve as already being christians
that is not possible. The word “disciples” refers to their being disciples of
John knowing only John’s baptism (Acts 19:1-3). When Paul met these twelve they
did not have the status that “disciples” who were called “Christians” in
Antioch had (Acts 11:26 — Going backwards compare Acts
9:25, 6:1, 2:38, 41).
Notice Paul’s use of a question as he strives to interest them and gain
opportunity to show them their obedience is lacking: “And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's
baptism” (Act 19:3). Their knowledge of the Gospel was in the same incomplete
condition as Apollos’ before he met Priscilla and Acquilla. They did for Apollos
what Paul did for these twelve at Ephesus (Acts 18:24-26). John’s baptism was
only valid for a time as he and the disciples of Jesus baptized with John’s
baptism. Christians pay close attention to what
they hear others say about baptism! With a proper explanation these twelve
realized that they needed to be baptized into Christ: “Then said Paul, John
verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that
they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ
Jesus. When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord
Jesus” (Acts 19:4-5).
The
baptism of the Great Commission (Mk. 16:15-16) is into the body of Christ from
one who is outside the body of Christ (cf. I Cor. 12:13). Scriptural baptism
is the point of exit from one state into another — compare “added” (Acts 2:41), “translated into
the kingdom” (Col. 1:13, 2:11-12). The disciples of John were re-baptized, not because baptism is designed to be
repeated, but simply because they never were baptized in the manner prescribed
by the Lord in the Great Commission (Mk. 16:15-16).
Conclusion: The phrase “baptized
believer” often includes many false concepts concerning salvation and baptism.
You will never be misunderstood when you can say what Peter did in Acts 2:38,
and explain that both belief and baptism are necessary for the forgiveness of
sins. Baptism is into the one body, the church (I Cor. 12:13). At the point of
baptism one enters the kingdom of Christ (Col. 1:13, 2:11-12; Gal. 3:26-27).
By
Bob Lovelace
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To
learn more call, visit or visit our website at:
http://yumavalleychurchofchrist.com