Again, when the emphasis is placed upon "command" rather than the love behind "the gift," we put the em-fasis on the wrong sly-able. And I agree that we shouldn't belittle it, but should go back to it daily and thank God for what He has done IN US through it---as Luther notes we should do. ;) Blessings, Randy > I have often stated that the ordinances of Believer's Baptism and the > Lord's Supper are vivid representations of the gospel in depicting the > death, burial, and resurrection of Christ and His coming again. > > So, "picture"??? Yes. "Funny picture"??? Certainly not. > > How dare we belittle something so sacred stemming from the command of > Christ! > > Jerry > "Therefore they stayed there a long time, speaking boldly in the Lord, who > was bearing witness to the word of His grace, granting signs and wonders > to be done by their hands" (Acts 14:3). > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jerry Krewson > To: pastorsforum@... > Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 12:56 PM > Subject: Re: [PastorsForum] scriptural baptism protects the church > > > Gary, > I myself have heard on many occasions the term, "Baptism is a picture > of...." I hear it quite often from TV preachers, and several times when > I am attending other denominational services. Now the full term Randy is > alluding too, "...'pretty' picture," I don't recall having heard. But > irregardless, the operative word Randy is pointing to is "picture." > jerry k > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Gary Webb > To: pastorsforum@... > Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 4:52 AM > Subject: Re: [PastorsForum] scriptural baptism protects the church > > > Your repeated phrase "just a pretty picture" is totally new to me, and > probably to all who hold to believer's baptism by immersion as a > symbolic memorial of Christ's work at Calvary. While it is a > sarcastic criticism, it is not what I've ever heard from any Baptist > preacher. Have you? > > > GARY WEBB > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > From: shieldwolf@... > Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 11:00 PM > To: pastorsforum@... > Subject: Re: [PastorsForum] scriptural baptism protects the church > > > > Wow a lot of stuff there. Mostly proof-texting rather than actually > understanding in context, but I was a fundamentalist once. I know the > drill. > > I am sorry, but the view that it is just a pretty picture is not > scriptural. > > Blessings, > Randy > > > Randy wrote: > > > > So the person didn't understand what > > baptism was all about (from your perspective) what you are saying is > that > > unless you have "the proper understanding" that the baptism is > invalid. > > > > also besides a proper understanding which btw would make him a > proper > > candidate and then there must me the proper mode....and the proper > > authority all these must be present including the proper motive to > have > > scriptural baptism.. > > > > Scriptural Baptism PROTECTS The Church > > In many ways, scriptural baptism is a shield of protection to the > church. > > Many have not considered is from this standpoint. > > > > Scriptural Baptism Protects the Church From Doctrinal Error. > > Scriptural baptism protects the church from the false doctrine of > > "baptismal regeneration." In the 2nd century, some of the churches > began > > to teach that baptism was necessary for salvation. in the 1st > century Paul > > had dealt with those who taught that you had to be circumcised and > keep > > the law, to be saved. He repudiated that doctrine. Even so, those > > preachers and churches who were sound in the faith, during the 2nd > > century, repudiated baptismal regeneration, However, large numbers > > continue baptizing for the wrong purpose. This eventually led to the > > formation of the Roman Catholic Church. > > > > Scriptural baptism protects the church from the false doctrine of > "infant > > baptism." Those who were teaching baptismal regeneration (salvation > by > > Baptism), decided that if baptism was so important, then the sooner > it > > could be performed, the better. This led to infant baptism. At first > the > > infants were immersed, for until this time immersion was the only > method > > of baptism known. > > > > Scriptural baptism protects the church from the false method of > > "sprinkling" for baptism. The churches who believed in "baptismal > > regeneration and infant baptism," changed the method of baptism from > > immersion to pouring, and then later on to sprinkling. By the 4th > century, > > Constantine had formed the Roman Catholic Church, and in 416 A.D., > infant > > baptism was established by law. The Protestants who teach baptismal > > regeneration, infant baptism, and sprinkling, are merely following > the > > example of the roman Catholic Church. > > > > The three doctrinal errors listed above, violate the first three > > requirements for scriptural baptism. (1) Baptismal regeneration > requires > > sinners to be baptized. Scriptural baptism requires the saved to be > > baptized. (2) Sprinkling requires little water, while scriptural > baptism > > requires "much water." John 3:23. (3) Infant baptism requires little > > infants who are unable to bear and believer to be baptized, but > scriptural > > baptism requires that believers only be baptized. > > > > Scriptural Baptism Protects The Church From Protestant Denominations > Since > > Protestant denominations came out of the Roman Catholic church, it > is not > > surprising that all of them contend for one or more of the above > doctrinal > > errors. The Lutherans, Episcopalians, Presbyterians and Methodists > all > > sprinkle infants, and all believe in some form of baptismal > regeneration. > > All other Protestant denominations are either branches off of the > Roman > > Catholic Church, or one of the above Protestant denominations, > and/or > > accept the baptism of them. > > > > Baptists are not Protestants, but have existed in every century > since the > > 1st century. They have existed under different names such as: > Christians, > > Montanists, Donatists, Paulicians, Waldenses, Ana-Baptists and > Baptists. > > (Arose by any other name smells the same.) > > > > Baptists cannot accept the baptism of churches that are wrong on the > > matter of salvation. This is one doctrine that is vital to the > Christian > > faith. Although it is not generally know, the Protestant > denominations do > > teach baptismal regeneration, as the following notes from "The > Church that > > Jesus Built," by Roy Mason, clearly show: > > > > > > The Episcopal Catechism says: "Baptism is that wherein I was made > a > > member of Christ, a child of God . . . " > > The Presbyterian Confession reads: "Baptism is a sacrament of the > New > > Testament ordained by Jesus Christ, not only for the solemn > admission of > > the party into the visible church, but also to be unto him a sign > and a > > seal of the covenant of grace, of his ingrafting into Christ, or > > regeneration, of remission of sin . . . " > > > > The Methodist ritual reads as follows: "Sanctify this water for > His holy > > sacrament and grant that this child, now to be baptized, may receive > the > > fullness of Thy grace, and ever remain in the number of Thy faithful > and > > elect children." > > > > The Methodist articles were based on those of the English Church > > (Episcopalian) . . . Concerning the articles of the English Church, > to > > which he belonged, we find John Wesley writing as follows (Sermons, > > London, 1872, Vol. 2, sermon 45, p. 74): "It is certain our church > > supposes that all who are baptized in their infancy are at the same > time > > born again; and it is allowed that the whole office of the baptism > of > > infants proceeds on this supposition." > > > > Again, let us examine the Lutheran view. This is expressed by the > > founder in the Augsburg Confession as follows: "Concerning baptism, > they > > teach that it is necessary to salvation . . . and condemn the > > Anabaptists, who hold . . . that infants can be saved without it." > > (Neander, History of Christian Dogmas, Vol. 2, p. 693). (End of > quote > > from Roy Mason). > > > > > > Scriptural Baptism Protects The Church From Interdenominationalism > > While there are many different forms of Interdenominationalism and > > Nondenominationalism, our experience has been that none of these > groups > > hold the line on baptism and the Lord's Supper. All of them, as far > as we > > know, will accept people into their membership who have been > immersed > > (regardless of who did the immersing), as long as the member is > satisfied > > with his baptism. Unfortunately there is a growing number of Baptist > > (so-called), who take this position. We say that such Baptist should > take > > down their sign, and call themselves Interdenominational, for that > is all > > they are. We believe that when a Church is wrong on salvation and/or > > baptism, it is not a scriptural Church, regardless of the name. > > > > Many Interdenominational churches will accept into their membership > those > > who have been sprinkled, or even have received no form of water > baptism at > > all. How sad to see people take this position and yet contend that > they > > believe the Bible. > > > > > > Scriptural Baptism Protects The Church From The Ecumenical One World > > Church > > No Baptist Church that holds the line on SCRIPTURAL baptism can ever > be a > > part of the Ecumenical movement and the coming World Church. > Scriptural > > baptism stands as an impassible barrier and an unbridgeable gap > between > > sound Baptist Churches and the Ecumenical movement. As long as we > will not > > accept the baptism of the Catholic and Protestant Churches, we > cannot > > ecumenicalize with them. (This is not the only reason why we should > not, > > but it stands as a barrier so that we cannot.) > > > > Already the Catholics and some Protestant denominations have untied > some > > of their schools, so that theological students from various > denominations > > are studying in the same school. Steps have already been taken by > some > > denominations to accept the ordinations of ministers from other > > denominations. A number of denominations have merged, and the Harlot > > Church of Revelation 17 is being formed. > > > > > > Baptist Who Accept Alien Immersion Are Helping To > > Pave The Way For The Ecumenical One World Church > > This is a serious statement,,but we are willing to stand upon it. > Any > > Baptist Church that accepts the baptism of the Protestant Churches, > is > > preparing the way for joining the Ecumenical Church at a later date. > If > > their baptism is valid, then why not join them? But Protestant > baptism is > > not valid, because they do not have scriptural authority, nor do > they > > baptize the right people for the right reason or purpose. > > > > How can scriptural Baptists fellowship with, cooperate with, or > receive > > baptism from churches that are Baptist in name, but who receive > baptism > > from every denominational Tom, Dick and Harry that comes along. > Baptism > > does not hinge upon whether the person is satisfied with it, but the > > question is, is the Lord satisfied with it? Does it meet the > teaching of > > the Scriptures? > > > > We know some preachers and Baptist Churches, that seem to be sound > on > > baptism as far as the local congregation is concerned. However, > these same > > preachers and Churches do not seem to be embarrassed as they work > together > > with "alien immersion Baptists." These preachers with divers > positions on > > baptism, swap pulpits for revivals, Bible conferences, etc. They > also work > > together in sending out missionaries, both "board" and "independent" > in > > method. They work together in building schools for the training of > > preachers. What they will be able to teach in the schools on baptism > and > > church truth, remains a mystery tome. "Can two walk together, except > they > > be agreed?"Amos 3:3. "Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the > whole > > lump?" I Cor. 5:6. > > > > Lest some reader should misunderstand, we do not doubt that there > are many > > saved people among the Protestants and Interdenominationalists. > Salvation > > is of the Lord and is by grace. A person can be saved and be a > member of > > any church or no church. (We do not mean that by so doing, that the > saved > > person is pleasing tot he Lord in all things. For it is at this > point that > > the problem arises.) Salvation is of the Lord, but baptism must be > > administered by man. But if that man does not have the Bible > authority to > > baptize, then his baptism is no more authentic, real, or scriptural, > than > > some false brand of salvation. We contend that his authority rests > in a > > scriptural New Testament Church, and we have never seen a Church > that > > could meet that test, other than some Baptist Churches. > > > > > > > > TABERNACLE BAPTIST CHURCH > > 1911 34th St., P.O. Box 3100, E. L. Bynum, Pastor > > Lubbock, Texas 79452 > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: pastorsforum-join@... > > > > To unsubscribe, send a message to: > pastorsforum-unsubscribe@... > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: pastorsforum-join@... > > To unsubscribe, send a message to: > pastorsforum-unsubscribe@... > > > To subscribe, send a message to: pastorsforum-join@... > > To unsubs > cribe, send a message to: pastorsforum-unsubscribe@... > > > > > > > = > To subscribe, send a message to: pastorsforum-join@... > > To unsubs= > cribe, send a message to: pastorsforum-unsubscribe@... > > > > = > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG. > Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 269.24.0/1462 - Release Date: > 5/23/2008 7:20 AM > > To subscribe, send a message to: pastorsforum-join@... > > To unsubscribe, send a message to: pastorsforum-unsubscribe@... > >