Baptism the Heaven Drawn Picture

Dr. Peter Masters 

Metropolitan Tabernacle, London, England 

“Go ye therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”—Matthew 28:19

“Repent, and be baptized every one of you!” —Acts 2:38

AGAIN and again we find in the New Testament this inseparable link between conversion and baptism. In character, the two are poles apart. Conversion is spiritual, whereas baptism is merely physical. Conversion is a new birth imparted from above; while baptism is administered by the hand of a man. Conversion through faith in the blood is a powerful, soul-renewing work. Baptism is an outward picture only, devoid of soul-saving efficacy. Conversion saves the soul; baptism cannot save anyone.

Nevertheless, in the New Testament, true repentance and conversion are inseparable from baptism. Conversion is the real thing—baptism is a picture of it. But in the plan and purpose of Christ, wherever there is conversion, the picture must accompany it.

Verse 22 of Hebrews 10 is just another example of this. Access to God by the blood of Christ is spoken of. Baptism just cannot be omitted from the passage. And if Christ the Lord joins baptism with conversion, in His Word, we must not pass over this subject lightly. Let us then look more closely at the subject of New Testament Baptism.

We begin with the Great Commission of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. In these words, the Head of the Church gave His binding commission for all time to His blood-bought people. “Go ye therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in [into] the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” (Mat 28:19).

We often hear it said that there are two kinds of doctrine; essential and non-essential. (Sometimes these “categories” are called primary and secondary doctrine). What is meant is this: that certain beliefs are essential for a man to be saved. Other doctrines, though very valuable, are not essential for a man to be saved. An example is the way in which Christ shall come again. Some believe that there will be a millennium. Others say there will be no millennium—Christ will just come and usher in the eternal, heavenly kingdom. Whichever a man believes, it will not stop him being converted. So this is “nonessential” to conversion.

Now baptism is not essential to salvation. Many a man is truly born again, but very muddled and wrong in his attitude to baptism. So we agree that, in a sense, baptism is also a non-essential or secondary matter.

Some have therefore concluded that in the interests of evangelical unity we should stop emphasizing baptism. In many churches this is done, and it is a matter of relative indifference whether a believer is baptized or not. There is one vital point which is overlooked by our friends who regard baptism as unimportant. While it is true that it is not essential to conversion, it happens to be commanded by the Lord Jesus Christ. One could re-word a commonly expressed sentiment thus: “We should not make an issue over baptism, as it is not a doctrine essential to salvation, even though we are expressly commanded to give it a paramount place by our Lord Himself.” Does anyone wish to say that? Of course not.

Read more -->HERE.

Should We Allow Children Into the Membership of the Church?

by admin

Should we allow minors into the membership of the church? Most evangelical churches would, without hesitation, answer this question affirmatively. Those that practice infant baptism believe the Bible warrants the inclusion of the children of believers into the membership of the church de jure. On the other hand, many Baptist churches today pressure young children to “make a decision for Christ” and accept such decisions or professions of faith without careful reflection on credibility.


On the One Hand …

In response to these two common evangelical views, Reformed Baptists have rightly stressed the need for a profession of faith as a prerequisite for baptism and church membership (contra paedobaptism) and appropriately questioned the often superficial decisionalism that characterizes far too many Baptist churches (contra decisionalism). They have, I think rightly so, highlighted the need to be cautious about hastily accepting as genuine a child’s profession of faith in light of several factors. These include a child’s lack of intellectual maturity (1 Cor 13:11; 14:20; Heb 5:11-14; 11:24-26), a child’s tendency to be changeable in his/her opinions and commitments (Isa 3:4; Matt 11:16-17; Eph 4:13-14), and a child’s proneness to self-deception (Jer 17:9; Ps 58:3; Prov 1:1-4; Eph 4:13-14).1 It is also pointed out that Luke, in Acts, refers to adult males and females being added to the church but doesn’t explicitly refer to children (Acts 5:14; 8:3, 12; 9:1-2; 17:4, 34).2 Accordingly, some Reformed Baptist churches are hesitant to baptize children and, in some cases, require an individual to reach adult status before he/she may become members of the church.

Read more -->HERE.

Baptism and the Relationship Between the Covenants

"What has brought about this change? Ultimately the answer is rooted in Christology. The person and work of Jesus, the new covenant head, requires a change. As we progress across the canon, we move from type to antitype, from covenant heads such as Adam, Noah, Abraham, and David to Christ; and with Christ, we have change. This is the reason why it is not correct to view the church, as paedobaptists do, as simply the replacement of Israel, a kind of “renewed” instantiation of it."

For those who are wrestling through and/or would like to better understand the issue of paedo or credo baptism, this gives a wonderful explanation.

Written by Stephen J. Wellum, Baptism and the Relationship Between the Covenants.

Day 314 - A few highlights

Just a few highlights from the previous day...


Peter and John were considered to be unlearned and ignorant men.  :-)


unlearned - G62 - From G1 (as negative particle) and G1121; unlettered, that is, illiterate.


ignorant - G2399 - From G2398; a private person, that is, (by implication) an ignoramus (compare “idiot”).


I have to smile at 'their' perception of what it means to be 'learned' and 'wise.'  Obviously their perception and Father's varies greatly.  Would that we were all as 'unlearned' and 'ignorant' as Peter and John and had their boldness to boot.


Peter and John contend that:  "For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard." (Acts 4:20)


How oft do we recount, especially to hostile, ungrateful,  and/or disbelieving people those things which we have 'seen' and 'heard' of our Lord and Father?


Acts 4 records that the lame man's miracle caused all to glorify God - which caused the 'authorities' some disconcertion - they were unable to substantiate punishing them.


Recap of the lame man - he was over 40, he was lame from his mother's womb, he was STANDING with them (Peter and John) while they were being questioned.  Are we willing to stand by those who are being persecuted for the faith?


Peter and John reported back to the others - Acts 4:24-31 - they prayed and asked for boldness to speak HIS word.  God's response?  "They spake the word of God with boldness."  (Acts 4:31)


Would that the Bride of Christ - the invisible and visible church, would pray for such and be granted that same boldness.


I have recently been studying paedo and credo baptism - and because this topic is at the forefront of my mind, particular Scriptures jump out at me.  Specifically:


Acts 5:14 - And believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women).


Horrible way to break up the passage, with only a portion of a parenthetical statement - sorry!  Believers were added...not infants...not children...men and women.  This journey is almost similar in my journey upon discovering the doctrine of election - once Father had enlightened my understanding the words of election, predestination, foreknowledge LEPT off the page.  As I am studying out both positions on paedo and credo, I see Father reaffirming that believers, those who could make a confession, were baptized and added to the church.


Second imprisonment - I missed this before...the apostles - so the 12 were haled into prison.   Not just Peter and John - and God sent an angel to open the door of the prison and they are thus commissioned:


"Go, stand and speak in the temple to the people all the words of this life." (Acts 5:20)


I like Gill's commentary:
Act 5:20  Go, stand and speak in the temple to the people,.... They were not delivered out of prison, in order to go and secure themselves from danger; but to go about the work they were called to, to preach the Gospel "in the temple", the place of worship; and a proper place to meet with persons to preach to, being a public place, whither the Jews always resorted; and there they were to stand, and continue with courage and intrepidity, not fearing the reproach and wrath of men, seeing they had both Christ and truth on their side; and there declare it "to the people", the common people, the multitude, even all that came to hear: the Gospel is to be preached to all; the Spirit of God makes it effectual to some, and others are rendered inexcusable.


The counsel of Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, someone held in high esteem:  "And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought: But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God." (Acts 5:38-39).


What has Father 'called' you to?  Are you fearful, afraid?  Do not want to be seen as odd or different?  Afraid of being ostracized?  Our Father has told us to stand firm, and having done all to stand, stand therefore.


Where Father guides, He always provides - He will never leave, nor forsake us.  Lord, that we would have the boldness, the fervency of the early church to go, stand and speak.


The seven appointed:  Stephen, Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas and Nicolas.  The first two, Stephen and Philip have more to be discovered about them, the remaining five are blessed to be recorded as being worthy to minister to the widows in Jerusalem.


I used the Hitchcock Bible Names Dictionary for the following:
Stephen - crown; crowned
Philip - warlike; a lover of horses
Prochorus - he that presides over the choirs
Nicanor - a conqueror; victorious
Timon - honorable; worthy
Parmenas - that abides
Nicolas - (same as Nicodemus) - victory of the people


What were the requirements for those they called out?  Honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom.  Note the Nicolas name is the same as Nicodemus, it is not THE Nicodemus.  I checked Gill's Commentary, which was quite interesting regarding the names - avail yourselves of the opportunity to read it - and found this portion on the passage interesting:


It is observable, that the names of all these deacons are Greek names; from whence, it seems, that they were of the Grecian or Hellenistic Jews; so that the church thought fit to chose men out of that part of them which made the complaint, in order to make them easy; which is an instance of prudence and condescension, and shows of what excellent spirits they were of.


We all have a 'job' within the body of Christ - are we aware and functioning as HE has directed?  Would that we were all:





We are enjoined:


"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." (2 Timothy 2:15)


and



Walk in wisdom toward them that are without, redeeming the time. 

Let your speech be alway with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man. (Col 4:5-6)