Asking New Members about their baptism

[PresidingElder]

I wanted to ask if any one has a suggestion or two about how to effectively ask if one has been baptized according to Acts 2:38 without offending when accepting new members into the church body. I have a dear brother in Christ who has a new growing work. God through him are attracting many people from all denominal backgrounds who want to join the work and become active in ministry. Of course his #concern is trying to ask if they have been baptized according to Acts 2:38 without being offensive or challenging ones salvation. How could he ask or even verify without offending and if they have not, what verbage could be used to convey that as a requirement before serving in the ministry.

[scotty]

Don't ask , teach.

They will ask as God leads them.

[StillStanding]

Great question!

In my experience, the best way to approach new potential members is to have a special class titled something like, "What (name of church) Believes and Teaches". Encourage all new members to attend.

When you cover baptism, you explain in detail why your church believes the baptism in "Jesus name" is the correct formula for baptism. You don't need to tear down other formulas (trinity) at all! Keep it positive.

At our church, a high percentage will choose to be re-baptized in "Jesus name".

For the ones that don't join the others, just leave them be. Don't try to force the issue! Hopefully, with time they'll want to be re-baptized.

You have a choice with the new converts that refuse:
1. Let them be and except them with limitations. (i.e can't be in a leadership position )
2. Confront and tell them that "trinnies" aren't welcome around your church!

Which way do you think works best?

Note: Our church hardly ever preaches baptism in "Jesus name" from the pulpit, yet we have probably baptized more new converts in Jesus names than all the other churches in Tennessee combined!

[mfblume]

I showed people some encyclopedia references as to how baptism changed in the second century to the titles. Then I showed them Acts references where it was in Jesus' name and noted the apostles had insight that was lost. That made them think. Then they realized the catholic church was the culprit, and they did not like that RCC connection.

[PresidingElder]

Mr. Steinway:
Thanks. This seems to be the best approach. I am glad to know that your church has a great baptismal record. How is the retention?

[SelahForever]

I showed people some encyclopedia references as to how baptism changed in the second century to the titles. Then I showed them Acts references where it was in Jesus' name and noted the apostles had insight that was lost. That made them think. Then they realized the catholic church was the culprit, and they did not like that RCC connection.

mfblume, I was wondering what you meant by your last sentence? Were those people offended at the implication the catholic church was the culprit? (In that they were offended you pointed that out to them in a way) Or did they realize the connection and wanted to distance themselves from the catholic church?

I'm just curious. I usually lurk here; but I wanted to know what you meant here. No agendas! Thanks.

[Jack Shephard]

Great question!

In my experience, the best way to approach new potential members is to have a special class titled something like, "What (name of church) Believes and Teaches". Encourage all new members to attend.

When you cover baptism, you explain in detail why your church believes the baptism in "Jesus name" is the correct formula for baptism. You don't need to tear down other formulas (trinity) at all! Keep it positive.

At our church, a high percentage will choose to be re-baptized in "Jesus name".

For the ones that don't join the others, just leave them be. Don't try to force the issue! Hopefully, with time they'll want to be re-baptized.

You have a choice with the new converts that refuse:
1. Let them be and except them with limitations. (i.e can't be in a leadership position )
2. Confront and tell them that "trinnies" aren't welcome around your church!

Which way do you think works best?

Note: Our church hardly ever preaches baptism in "Jesus name" from the pulpit, yet we have probably baptized more new converts in Jesus names than all the other churches in Tennessee combined!

Your wisdom showeth forth.

[mfblume]

mfblume, I was wondering what you meant by your last sentence? Were those people offended at the implication the catholic church was the culprit? (In that they were offended you pointed that out to them in a way) Or did they realize the connection and wanted to distance themselves from the catholic church?

I'm just curious. I usually lurk here; but I wanted to know what you meant here. No agendas! Thanks.

They wanted to distance themselves from the RCC when they learned the titular baptism was RCC.

[Deo Gratias]

They wanted to distance themselves from the RCC when they learned the titular baptism was RCC.

Mr. Blume can you please explain what titular baptism is. I've never heard this expression before. As far as baptism goes, my understanding is that as long as the trinitarian formula is used it is valid. Baptism can be done via full immersion or pouring, either method surfices (see the Didache). Baptism infuses into the soul the seven virtues (faith, hope, charity, prudence, patience, temperance and fortitude) and leaves an indeliable mark on the soul and can never be undone. That is why re-baptism really is useless.

[SelahForever]

They wanted to distance themselves from the RCC when they learned the titular baptism was RCC.

Thank you for the clarification.

[deltaguitar]

I go to a traditionally baptist church. I indicated that I have not been baptized since my conversion on the membership covenant and they have reminded me several times that I need to be baptized. I have to attend a class first and getting to the class has been difficult.

Here is their baptism position paper. http://fm.thevillagechurch.net/resource_files/articles/Ordinances/WhyDoesTheVillageChurchRequireBaptismForMembership .pdf

[scotty]

Mr. Blume can you please explain what titular baptism is. I've never heard this expression before. As far as baptism goes, my understanding is that as long as the trinitarian formula is used it is valid. .

So baptism in Jesus name as the diciples performed is invalid ?

[Amanah]

Deo Gratias - Many here on the Forum have been Baptized in the Name of Jesus.

Some churches use the titles and say, I baptize you in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

In the bible they baptized people in the Name of Jesus, see the scriptures below:

1. Acts 2:38
Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
2. Acts 8:12
But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
3. Acts 8:16
(For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)
4. Acts 19:5
When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

[Deo Gratias]

Matt: 28:18-20 Jesus' instructions to his disciples right before He ascended into heaven.

And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth.

Going, therefore, teach ye all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost;

Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.

Ver. 19. Teach all nations. In St. Mark we read, going into the whole world, preach to every creature, that is capable of it; not only to the Jews, but to all nations throughout the whole world, baptizing them, &c.

In the name of the Father, &c. We are made Christians in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: we profess to believe, and hope for our salvation, by believing, hoping, serving, and adoring the same three divine Persons, from whence the Fathers prove the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost to be one God, and equal in all perfections.

[scotty]

Matt: 28:18-20 Jesus' instructions to his disciples right before He ascended into heaven.

And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth.

Going, therefore, teach ye all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost;

.

And what is that name ?

[Deo Gratias]

The name of God in His three divine persons, Father, Son and Holy Ghost.

[Amanah]

The name of God in His three divine persons, Father, Son and Holy Ghost.

Deo, you are possibly a Father, Son, and Spirit, but your name is Deo.

God manifests as Father, Son, and Spirit, but his name is Jesus.

Acts 4:12

Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

we are saved by baptism in the name of Jesus, for the remission of our sins.

Acts 2:38

38Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

[TGBTG]

The name of God in His three divine persons, Father, Son and Holy Ghost.

Brother, check out how Peter and the apostles baptized...They obeyed Matt 28:19. (They did NOT go and repeat the command)

Acts 2:38
Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Acts 8
14 When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to Samaria.
15 When they arrived, they prayed for the new believers there that they might receive the Holy Spirit,
16 because the Holy Spirit had not yet come on any of them; they had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
17 Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.

Acts 10:46-47
46 For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God.
Then [B]Peter said,
47 “Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized with water. They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.”
48 So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.

Acts 19
1 While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples
2 and asked them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit
Did you receive the Holy Spirit when[a] you believed?”
They answered, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.”
3 So Paul asked, “Then what baptism did you receive?”
“John’s baptism,” they replied.
4 Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” 5 On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus

[Deo Gratias]

Well the Church has always insisted that in order for a baptism to be valid, God in all His three divine persons must be invoked. The Church is just following Jesus' injunction in Matt:28:19

[Amanah]

Well the Church has always insisted that in order for a baptism to be valid, God in all His three divine persons must be invoked. The Church is just following Jesus' injunction in Matt:28:19

before the 4th century, the Church baptized in Jesus name, it got changed a few hundred years after Jesus died. Changing it was a mistake.

[Amanah]

http://www.onenesspentecostal.com/name.htm

BRITANICA ENCYCLOPEDIA

The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son & Holy Ghost by the Catholic Church in the Second Century. – 11th Edit., Vol. 3, ppg. 365-366.

CANNEY ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGION

The early church always baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus until development of the Trinity Doctrine in the Second Century.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA

Here the Catholics acknowledged that baptism was changed by the Catholic Church. – Vol. 2, pg. 263.

HASTINGS ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGION

Christian baptism was administered using the words, "in the name of Jesus." – Vol. 2, pg. 377. Baptism was always in the name of Lord Jesus until time of Justin Martyr when Triune formula used. – Vol. 2, pg. 389. NAME was an ancient synonym for "person." Payment was always made in the name of some person referring to ownership. Therefore one being baptized in Jesus’ name became His personal property. "Ye are Christ’s." – Vol. 2, pg. 377 on Acts 2:38.2

[TGBTG]

Well the Church has always insisted that in order for a baptism to be valid, God in all His three divine persons must be invoked. The Church is just following Jesus' injunction in Matt:28:19

How can the church be following Jesus' injunction if they are NOT following the apostle's injuction?

Jesus specifically sent out the apostles to preach the gospel.

The church is built UPON the FOUNDATION of the APOSTLES and the prophets...(Eph 2:20)

So if the apostles whom JESUS sent baptized in the NAME of Jesus Christ, then it would only make sense that the NAME of the Father, Son, and the HolyGhost is Jesus Christ...For the Name of JESUS CHRIST is the NAME above every other name...

The problem with the so called "church" is that if they obey Acts 2:38, it will be in direct CONTRAST to the doctrine of the TRINITY (which we all know the "church" loves to protect...)