BAPTISM - WHAT IT IS AND WHAT IT IS NOT

BAPTISM WHAT IT IS AND WHAT IT IS NOT

This does not purport to be a definitive treatise on the subject of Christian Baptism. it is just a compilation of a few personal thoughts.

I am and have been troubled for some time over the practice of many Assemblies as to the ordinance of Christian Baptism. (Just for your assurance, I do not subscribe to either infant or household baptism, both are contrary to the N.T. Scriptures.)

What does concern me is the commonly held view that an unbaptised believer cannot be "received" into the formal fellowship of an Assembly, and consequently cannot "Break Bread" with a company of the Lords' people.

Such practice indicates that Baptism is the way of entrance into Assembly fellowship, and the essential prerequisite to being permitted to remember the Lord in His death, in His own appointed way, and in answer to the longing of His heart.

Put very simply and briefly, Baptism IS identification with a crucified, buried and risen Saviour; it has to do with discipleship. "Go ye into all the world and make disciples of all nations; baptising them..."

Baptism is NOT the key that unlocks the door into Assembly fellowship. The local Assembly DOES NOT baptise any more than it teaches! The Lords' servants, particularly evangelists baptise. (Teachers and some elders teach.) Indeed baptism has nothing to do with fellowship! 

When asked to defend the practice to which I have referred, almost invariably the answer has been, "a believer who has not been baptised is disobedient." I agree this sounds entirely plausible. But is necessarily the case? Furthermore, if it is so, is this omission of obedience worthy of such magnitude as to require one to be "put away?" This is what it amounts to! Might I also enquire As to what "judgement" is meted out to sisters with short hair; sisters who refuse to wear head coverings; brethren and sisters who "forsake the assembling of ourselves together" and are only present at the Lords' Table? Are these not cases of disobedience? Who of us determines which "disobedience" warrants which particular act of chastisement?

False teaching and immorality are to be dealt with by "putting away;" is the failure to be baptised on a par with these gross sins? I think not.

When one is born anew, born from above, there is the impartation of new life and the introduction of a new nature. Fellowship is enjoyed with the Father and the Son; and in this precious dispensation the babe in Christ becomes a member of His body, the Church. But we determine so much by "LIGHT" when all that is necessary to be received by the saints is "LIFE." We refuse them fellowship while they are enjoying fellowship with Divine Persons! We refuse to allow them a place in the local expression of the Body of Christ when they are already members of the Church universal!

Finally please permit me to use a pertinent personal experience; experience does not begin to vie with the Word of God I readily own, but it can be of help.

When I met my Wife she was in the "denominations." She was poorly taught and I was certainly not a mature believer although in Assembly fellowship. The first Lords' Dy after we were married we went to our local (nearest) Assembly and asked to be received. The brethren were very gracious and on eliciting a confession of faith from us both they welcomed us and we "Broke Bread" with them. (The subject of Baptism was not raised.) The following Lords' Day after the "Remembrance" a dear elderly brother approached me and spoke to me regarding my wifes' uncovered head. I fully agreed with his teaching on this subject and spoke to my wife, as tenderly as he had spoken to me, I hope! That week my wife went out and bought herself a hat and wore it the next week. That lovely man of God came to us and thanked us for our having bowed to the Word of God; so moved was he that he wept in our presence! Imagine how that touched our hearts. My wife had never been Baptised, but for the next few years she was permitted to remember the Lord she loved in His appointed way. Then the moment came when she was exercised as to Baptism, and speedily requested that arrangements might be made for her to identify herself with her Saviour in the waters of Baptism. I was thrilled! Looking back now I wonder what might have been if the saints then had told her she had to be Baptised or she would not be received? I truly shudder to think what consequences may have ensued. Perhaps in these days of such little enlightenment Assemblies of the Lords' people might like to reflect on such a case, it cannot be an isolated one. To be "barred" from remembering the Lord in His death fills me with horror. I cannot imagine the extent of detriment I would experience to my soul.

I know these lines will disturb and perhaps offend not a few; please believe me that is never my intention. But I fear that there are some "out there" that would be identified with us if we were just a little less determined that practices that exist are not NECESSARILY right. Please with an open mind reflect upon these things. Feel absolutely free to comment in any way you desire. I commend you all to God and the Word of His grace.