Unconverted worshippers?

General Christian Theology
Hats Off
Posts: 2532
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:42 pm
Affiliation: Plain Menno OO

Re: Unconverted worshippers?

Post by Hats Off »

Heirbyadoption wrote:This last page or two has been fascinating, especially the Beiler piece. Personally, I would probably take issue with his (at least partial) dismissal of water baptism and its placement in his preferred order, but that's another thread entirely. So for you sprinkle or pour types on here, I'm curious about something, and I don't ask in order to start a defensive back and forth on the validity of immersion versus pouring, the deeper issue seems to be the answer of a good conscience before God - you don't need to feel that your original baptism is being threatened - please keep this in mind before you answer! I'm simply curious your thoughts on what seems to be an unbalanced emphasis. It's possible I'm just completely missing something...

I understand how Ezekiel and other OT prophecies and the concept of the Holy Spirit are drawn upon to justify pouring, but why then do you feel it acceptable that the other images and contexts associated with baptism in the New Testament not get equal emphasis, such as "burial" and "being clothed" and baptizing where "there was much water" and going "down into/up out of" the water, etc, etc? Again, we can argue immersion versus affusion later - I'm just curious why affusionists consider this dismissal/overlook to be justifiable.
I totally get it; if I had been immersed, I would struggle to understand our pouring method. However, I was baptized by pouring and I am content with that as well.
0 x
Sudsy
Posts: 5854
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 3:32 pm
Affiliation: .

Re: Unconverted worshippers?

Post by Sudsy »

Heirbyadoption wrote:
Hats Off wrote:Anabaptist baptism consists of two steps or processes; first the actual baptism "in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit." The second, separate step is that of welcoming the newly baptized as a member of the congregation. "In the name of the congregation I (the bishop) offer you my hand; arise to a new beginning as a member of the congregation."
Any thoughts (really from anybody, not just HatsOff) on when membership became a hard and fast linkage with water baptism in Anabaptist thought? It doesn't seem quite so tightly linked in the early accounts of various itinerant preachers.
I don't see where anyone has offered any thoughts on this question. In my searching I ran across this MB article as to why Mennonite Brethren, my church, link the two - http://www.mennonitebrethren.ca/resourc ... embership/

It does note this -
Usually, we have connected membership to formal reception into the fellowship of a local church. But the New Testament actually tells us nothing about becoming “church members.” It only speaks about being “members of Christ” (1 Cor. 6:15) and “members of the body of Christ
Seems the answer I hear most often is that the earliest churches we read of in the NT are in an 'infant' stage and what we don't read in the NT as some of our practises today, are in a more 'mature' stage. I need more convincing to accept that myself.
0 x
Pursuing a Kingdom life in the Spirit
silentreader
Posts: 2511
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 9:41 pm
Affiliation: MidWest Fellowship

Re: Unconverted worshippers?

Post by silentreader »

I listened very lately to a message that described a typical Mennonite church's progression.
It starts with a man, becomes a movement, turns into a machine, and ends up as a monument.
Many of our conservative Mennonite churches are probably well into the machine stage.
I pray that we may not continue our course and become only a monument.
0 x
Noah was a conspiracy theorist...and then it began to rain.~Unknown
ken_sylvania
Posts: 3969
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 12:46 pm
Affiliation: CM

Re: Unconverted worshippers?

Post by ken_sylvania »

Sudsy wrote:
Heirbyadoption wrote:
Hats Off wrote:Anabaptist baptism consists of two steps or processes; first the actual baptism "in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit." The second, separate step is that of welcoming the newly baptized as a member of the congregation. "In the name of the congregation I (the bishop) offer you my hand; arise to a new beginning as a member of the congregation."
Any thoughts (really from anybody, not just HatsOff) on when membership became a hard and fast linkage with water baptism in Anabaptist thought? It doesn't seem quite so tightly linked in the early accounts of various itinerant preachers.
I don't see where anyone has offered any thoughts on this question. In my searching I ran across this MB article as to why Mennonite Brethren, my church, link the two - http://www.mennonitebrethren.ca/resourc ... embership/

It does note this -
Usually, we have connected membership to formal reception into the fellowship of a local church. But the New Testament actually tells us nothing about becoming “church members.” It only speaks about being “members of Christ” (1 Cor. 6:15) and “members of the body of Christ
Seems the answer I hear most often is that the earliest churches we read of in the NT are in an 'infant' stage and what we don't read in the NT as some of our practises today, are in a more 'mature' stage. I need more convincing to accept that myself.
1 Corinthians commands that wicked people be "put away from [the assembly]." This would suggest that the church must have known who was "in" and who was "out" at a local level.

I'm not sure what you're driving at here. Are you suggesting that it should be normal for a person to be a "member of the body of Christ" without being a "church member (member of a local assembly of the church)?"

I really don't know where you would go in the NT to find an example of someone being considered an ongoing "member of the body of Christ" but not being baptized. Neither do I know where to find a positive example of someone being baptized but considering himself "not a part" of the local assembly where one was available.

I think the link between baptism and membership in a local church has tended to be looser during times of persecution or in pioneering areas. That doesn't mean such should be considered ideal.
0 x
EdselB
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 8:01 pm
Affiliation: conservative Menno

Re: Unconverted worshippers?

Post by EdselB »

Heirbyadoption wrote:This last page or two has been fascinating, especially the Beiler piece. Personally, I would probably take issue with his (at least partial) dismissal of water baptism and its placement in his preferred order, but that's another thread entirely. So for you sprinkle or pour types on here, I'm curious about something, and I don't ask in order to start a defensive back and forth on the validity of immersion versus pouring, the deeper issue seems to be the answer of a good conscience before God - you don't need to feel that your original baptism is being threatened - please keep this in mind before you answer! I'm simply curious your thoughts on what seems to be an unbalanced emphasis. It's possible I'm just completely missing something...

I understand how Ezekiel and other OT prophecies and the concept of the Holy Spirit are drawn upon to justify pouring, but why then do you feel it acceptable that the other images and contexts associated with baptism in the New Testament not get equal emphasis, such as "burial" and "being clothed" and baptizing where "there was much water" and going "down into/up out of" the water, etc, etc? Again, we can argue immersion versus affusion later - I'm just curious why affusionists consider this dismissal/overlook to be justifiable.
If you are interested in the traditional Mennonite rationale for pouring which answers some of the questions you have, I would suggest you look at Henry Funk, Mirror of Baptism, originally written in German and published in 1744. Here is a link to an English translation:

https://archive.org/details/mirrorofbaptismw00func

Christian Funk also addressed the question in his 1792, Address to the Young. It can be found in Conversation on Saving Faith; Here is a link to an English translation; the relevant pages are 229-238:

https://archive.org/details/christianspiritu01menn

Peter Burkholder also addressed the question of baptism, including the mode in the Confession of Faith of the Christians Known as Mennonites, 1837. See pp. 405-423, in the following link:

https://archive.org/details/confessionoffait00menn

I am providing you the links for your information, without any intention of getting into a controversy. However, I would note that as these writings illustrate, Mennonites have not avoided the questions you raise and they have sought to answer them.
0 x
temporal1
Posts: 16275
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 12:09 pm
Location: U.S. midwest and PNW
Affiliation: Christian other

Re: Unconverted worshippers?

Post by temporal1 »

ohio jones wrote:
temporal1 wrote:
ohio jones wrote: It's not up to a church to decide when someone receives the Holy Spirit, nor does He read the label before deciding when to move in.
would you share more about your understanding?
It is my understanding from scripture and experience that the Holy Spirit takes up residence in the life of a believer at the time of the new birth.

This may happen at a gathering of the church, or at another time and place, but it has nothing to do with a formal ritual nor does it require the presence of a priest or minister.

The church may pray for it to happen, but it is done by God (and on his schedule) not by the church. :)

The end of my comment may have been a bit snarky, but I do not believe that the Holy Spirit delays his indwelling of some people until they ask for it, while immediately baptizing others, depending on the theological tradition the person finds themself in.

Water baptism, then, is a separate and subsequent event of public confession that symbolizes and bears witness to the new birth and the baptism of the Spirit (and in the language of Schleitheim, "repentance and amendment of life").
you know, i think the best example of this must be when John baptized Jesus.
only Jesus could have/would have requested this. one of the most fascinating accounts in scriptures.

i fully agree, the Holy Spirit determines all. gestures, alone, are not the full story, but, neither are gestures excluded wholesale by the Holy Spirit.

another factor, the Holy Spirit exists, with or without scriptures (praise God.)
there is more than scriptures.

however.
there is the question of receiving the Holy Spirit without benefit of scriptures -
as opposed to - having knowledge of scriptures (without the Holy Spirit) then rejecting them!
which happens. the Holy Spirit determines timing+outcomes.

my words are inadequate. maybe you can help me. :-|

(fwiw, i did not find your words snarky, but, succinct+candid; effectively thought provoking.)
0 x
Most or all of this drama, humiliation, wasted taxpayer money could be spared -
with even modest attempt at presenting balanced facts from the start.


”We’re all just walking each other home.”
UNKNOWN
Valerie
Posts: 5309
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 6:59 am
Location: Medina OH
Affiliation: non-denominational

Re: Unconverted worshippers?

Post by Valerie »

Sudsy wrote:
Heirbyadoption wrote:
Hats Off wrote:Anabaptist baptism consists of two steps or processes; first the actual baptism "in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit." The second, separate step is that of welcoming the newly baptized as a member of the congregation. "In the name of the congregation I (the bishop) offer you my hand; arise to a new beginning as a member of the congregation."
Any thoughts (really from anybody, not just HatsOff) on when membership became a hard and fast linkage with water baptism in Anabaptist thought? It doesn't seem quite so tightly linked in the early accounts of various itinerant preachers.
I don't see where anyone has offered any thoughts on this question. In my searching I ran across this MB article as to why Mennonite Brethren, my church, link the two - http://www.mennonitebrethren.ca/resourc ... embership/

It does note this -
Usually, we have connected membership to formal reception into the fellowship of a local church. But the New Testament actually tells us nothing about becoming “church members.” It only speaks about being “members of Christ” (1 Cor. 6:15) and “members of the body of Christ
Seems the answer I hear most often is that the earliest churches we read of in the NT are in an 'infant' stage and what we don't read in the NT as some of our practises today, are in a more 'mature' stage. I need more convincing to accept that myself.

Sudsy what conclusion might you draw from the very earliest days of the Church in Acts 2 & 4 - as to being 'added to the Church' - after all, Christ is the head of the Church
Colossians 1:18
And He is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

Acts 2:
37Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? 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. 39For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. 40And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. 41Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

The Fellowship of Believers

(Acts 4:32-37)

42And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

43And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles. 44And all that believed were together, and had all things common; 45And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. 46And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, 47Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

You asked how infant baptism would fit into this- that would be another topic, probably not appreciated here & now.
This is in hopes of showing where Scripture has conveyed in the earliest days of the Church that there was repentance, baptism, receiving the Holy Spirit- and as Acts 4 points out- there were those 'added to the Church daily', do you witness a connection there? I realize it seems to have gotten complicated later to become a member- or to get baptized- in Acts, from the previous hard hearted Jews whose eyes were opened, to the jailor, to the Ethiopian Eunich- there was not a delay in their baptism and being added to the Church it seems I wonder too, how it became more complicated & took longer as time went on. Catechisms- teachings- I don't know- it is difficult at times to accept what changed but maybe there were good reasons? We weren't there!
0 x
Heirbyadoption
Posts: 1012
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 1:57 pm
Affiliation: Brethren

Re: Unconverted worshippers?

Post by Heirbyadoption »

Hats Off wrote:I totally get it; if I had been immersed, I would struggle to understand our pouring method. However, I was baptized by pouring and I am content with that as well.
Actually, I get/understand your pouring method and rationale. I'm not necessarily challenging it here at this point, but actually asking a different question. Would it be fair to say that since pouring was the method you have been taught/received, therefore all references and Scriptural imagery to baptism are filtered through that? This would explain, at least for me, why the aforementioned imagery suggestive of burial, clothing, going into/up out of, etc, etc is downplayed or explained away from being in at all suggestive of immersion. It is what it is, I'm just curious on this particular facet. Edsel, you (or any other pouring types, really) would be welcome to answer this as well.
0 x
Sudsy
Posts: 5854
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 3:32 pm
Affiliation: .

Re: Unconverted worshippers?

Post by Sudsy »

ken_sylvania wrote:
Sudsy wrote:
Heirbyadoption wrote: Any thoughts (really from anybody, not just HatsOff) on when membership became a hard and fast linkage with water baptism in Anabaptist thought? It doesn't seem quite so tightly linked in the early accounts of various itinerant preachers.
I don't see where anyone has offered any thoughts on this question. In my searching I ran across this MB article as to why Mennonite Brethren, my church, link the two - http://www.mennonitebrethren.ca/resourc ... embership/

It does note this -
Usually, we have connected membership to formal reception into the fellowship of a local church. But the New Testament actually tells us nothing about becoming “church members.” It only speaks about being “members of Christ” (1 Cor. 6:15) and “members of the body of Christ
Seems the answer I hear most often is that the earliest churches we read of in the NT are in an 'infant' stage and what we don't read in the NT as some of our practises today, are in a more 'mature' stage. I need more convincing to accept that myself.
1 Corinthians commands that wicked people be "put away from [the assembly]." This would suggest that the church must have known who was "in" and who was "out" at a local level.

Or this could just be saying that if an unrepentant brother or professing brother is assembling with you then don't treat that one as a brother. I grew up in a church with no 'list of members' but this occurred if someone who chooses to assemble at the church was a unrepentant sinner. Christians can 'assemble' without some formal membership of who is 'in' and who is not. In our MB church, as this article explains, a form of membership is followed although church directories and mailboxes include anyone that makes our church their 'home church' and they are given various opportunities to serve.

I'm not sure what you're driving at here. Are you suggesting that it should be normal for a person to be a "member of the body of Christ" without being a "church member (member of a local assembly of the church)?"

No, I agree with this article that we need to be in fellowship with other believers locally if at all possible. I don't agree with some of the add ons to scripture that many make to 'sign up' Christians to a local church roll. As I said, I grew up in such a local assembly and if you made our church your home church (choose to fellowship with others at this location) then you were as 'in' as anyone else.

I really don't know where you would go in the NT to find an example of someone being considered an ongoing "member of the body of Christ" but not being baptized. Neither do I know where to find a positive example of someone being baptized but considering himself "not a part" of the local assembly where one was available.

Agree but neither do we have details on things such as the apostles being baptised in water, do we ? We don't have an example in the NT of a local church 'statement of faith' or 'rules of conduct' either. Various things we do today in our church activities are not found in the NT and many things that do describe church activities, we don't do. Do we 'do church' like this - "How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying." 1 Cor 14:26

I think the link between baptism and membership in a local church has tended to be looser during times of persecution or in pioneering areas. That doesn't mean such should be considered ideal.

I'm not sure what is 'ideal' regarding formal church membership even though the MB church I attend does have a formal membership. In my experience, there are many that count on their 'church membership' as their seal of salvation. I ran across this often in door-to-door evangelism. And water baptism is also thought by many to be their means of claiming they are born again regardless of any change in life. The Salvation Army in the early days recognized this that meaningful symbols had become meaningless rituals to many. The Salvation Army places the emphasis on personal faith and on a spiritual relationship with God which is, in their view, as independent on anything external.
0 x
Pursuing a Kingdom life in the Spirit
Sudsy
Posts: 5854
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 3:32 pm
Affiliation: .

Re: Unconverted worshippers?

Post by Sudsy »

Valerie wrote: Sudsy what conclusion might you draw from the very earliest days of the Church in Acts 2 & 4 - as to being 'added to the Church' - after all, Christ is the head of the Church

My conclusion is that Christ did 'add to the Church' in Acts which is 'His Church' which is made up of many local assemblies of Christians throughout the world. These assemblies of Christians were originally geographical and not what man later made them into with denominations and what not. He continues to add to His Church today inside and outside these man made assemblies of Christians. It is man who created these special groupings of churches which should not be confused with His Church. The only true church is His Church. He alone perfectly knows who they are.

Colossians 1:18
And He is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

Acts 2:
37Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? 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. 39For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. 40And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. 41Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

The Fellowship of Believers

(Acts 4:32-37)

42And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

43And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles. 44And all that believed were together, and had all things common; 45And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. 46And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, 47Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

You asked how infant baptism would fit into this- that would be another topic, probably not appreciated here & now.
This is in hopes of showing where Scripture has conveyed in the earliest days of the Church that there was repentance, baptism, receiving the Holy Spirit- and as Acts 4 points out- there were those 'added to the Church daily', do you witness a connection there? I realize it seems to have gotten complicated later to become a member- or to get baptized- in Acts, from the previous hard hearted Jews whose eyes were opened, to the jailor, to the Ethiopian Eunich- there was not a delay in their baptism and being added to the Church it seems I wonder too, how it became more complicated & took longer as time went on. Catechisms- teachings- I don't know- it is difficult at times to accept what changed but maybe there were good reasons? We weren't there!

True, we were not there. However, we do know that in the NT there is, I think, strong indications that splitting up into man made groups had begun and Paul tried to put it down. I tend to think man tends to complicate things and strays from simply following the two main commandments. And sometimes into defining what all is heresy, has gone far beyond what I can find in scripture and that may be my fault.

Well, regardless if I think man has really messed up what we call Christianity, I still believe within this mess He is at work to accomplish His plans and 'we will understand better by and by'.
0 x
Pursuing a Kingdom life in the Spirit
Post Reply