My Thoughts on Baptism and Church Membership

Wayne Grudem just released an updated edition of his Systematic Theology.  Apparently, the pagination is relatively unchanged, however; the newer format is more attractive than the previous edition and provides wider margins for note taking.  However, Grudem has apparently rewritten chapter 49 section F1 (pp. 982-983) which is titled, “Do Churches Need to Be Divided Over Baptism?”  This rewrite is quite controversial and as such, I have decided to add my two cents worth here.

Justin Taylor: Grudem’s Change of Mind regarding Differences on Baptism within a Local Church 

John Piper: Response to Grudem on Baptism and Church Membership 

Wayne Grudem: Wayne Grudem’s Response to Piper 

My response is going to be short and sweet.  First, it is clear both symbolically and semantically that the baptism of which Scripture speaks is baptism by immersion.  Symbolically in that it pictures the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ.  The dead are not sprinkled with dirt and then left to rot in the open air, nor are the dead buried and then confirmed to have died years later; the dead are submersed in the earth and Christ was submersed in the earth.  Semantically the normal use of the word baptism (βαπτισμός) or any of its derivatives is immersion.  Second, Piper’s remark that required baptism “is preemptive excommunication” is completely unfounded.  The Scriptures clearly define excommunication in Matthew 18:15-20, however; here it is presented as a result of church discipline upon sinning church members, and not upon non-members as a means of rebuke.  This is not a denial of fellowship but membership.  I share a common faith with individuals who attend other churches and I can and do fellowship with them.  Honestly, I would not allow some of these individuals to serve in or become members at a church where I was pastoring but that does not prevent us from fellowshipping with and encouraging one another.  Third, if an individual desires to become a member of a local church, is unwilling to submit to that church’s authority, and would willingly choose to attend another, possibly less Biblical, church then that individual has a problem with pride.  Ultimately, the problem lies not with the local church but the individual’s unwillingness to submit to that church.

What do you think about this?

The Conservative Emergent

I offer this post as a teaser of sorts before I begin my series of posts on the apostolic church as I am currently swamped with moving and preparing for my Ignite UK Apologetics and Worldviews class (please see the resources section for the fruits of this labor).

While most of you are familiar with the terminology, I want to quickly distinguish between the Emergent and Emerging church.  The Emergent church is both atheological and ahistorical concerned neither with the history of the church or the great statements of Biblical doctrine which have buttressed the faith since the churches inception.  The Emerging church is both theological and historical seeking to express the classic doctrinal statements in a way that addresses the modern dilemma while examining the church’s vast history in an effort to anticipate the questions raised by modernity and postmodernity.  We must be careful in our conversations not to lump these two groups into the same categories.

What is The Conservative Emergent?  Upon mentioning the Emergent church most individuals immediately think of a church that is both theologically and culturally liberal; a pragmatic church that twists the Bible so that it conforms to and supports their immoral lifestyle; an idolatrous church who has created a God in their image to serve their sin.  The Conservative Emergent appears, in many ways, to be the antithesis of such a church and because of that, its deception is far more subtle, thus requiring a far more meticulous discernment.

In his recent book, The Truth War: Fighting for Certainty in an Age of Deception, John MacArthur says,

The church has grown lazy, worldly, and self-satisfied.  Church leaders are obsessed with style and methodology, losing interest in the glory of God and becoming grossly apathetic about truth and sound doctrine.  For the moment at least, the battle appears to be turning in the enemy’s favor.

Macarthur’s statement aptly describes the Emergent church and the more subtle Conservative Emergent.  Both have lost interest in the glory of God and become apathetic about truth.  The Conservative Emergent is theologically and culturally conservative; a pragmatic church that twists the Bible so that it conforms to and supports their pharisaic lifestyle; an idolatrous church who has created a God in their image to serve their sin.

While the Emergent church and the Conservative Emergent may appear to be at the opposite ends of the same spectrum; however, they are both characterized by the same spiritual deadness and have much in common.  First, the theology and the culture of the church is determined largely by the target culture whom the church aims to reach; in regions where the culture is liberal the theology and church culture are decidedly liberal and in regions where the culture is conservative the theology and church culture are decidedly conservative.  Thus, the Emergent must cling to ambiguity and claim that the scriptures say less than they actually do, if they say anything at all, while the Conservative Emergent must rely heavily upon prooftexting and eisegesis to defend their man-made religion.  Ultimately, the concerns of both the Emergent church and the Conservative Emergent are pragmatic rather than theological; neither their message, nor their methodology, nor their theology are exegetically determined both of these movements are pragmatic to the core and that is cause for concern.

The Apostolic Church: An Update and a Request

This is both an update and a request I am planning to begin a series of posts on the Apostolic Church and as of yet I have not narrowed down/exhausted the possible subjects which these posts should cover (i.e. worship, discipleship, evangelism, apologetics, etc.).  I would appreciate comments informing me which topics you feel to be the most pertinent to this series.  Feel free to list as many topics as you can think of, the more exhaustive the list the better.  As you comment, I will add your topics to the list below and will begin researching and writing on these various subjects.

In addition, I will be adding an Exegetical Digest on Galatians 5:16-26 to the Resources page, so if you enjoy Greek be sure and check that out.  Once I begin this series on the Apostolic Church I hope to begin posting with a greater frequency, as well as adding more resources to this site, the first of which will be numerous articles dealing with apologetics and several book reviews.  Until then I look forward to your comments on this post.

Topics to be covered:

  • Apologetics
  • Baptism
  • Bible Study
  • Discipleship and Evangelism
  • Church Membership
  • Fellowship and Community
  • Leadership
  • Preaching
  • The Gospel
  • Worship

Ed Stetzer on Cultural Relevance

Ed Stetzer recently posted an fabulous post which asks the question “Why is cultural relevance a big deal?” I highly encourage everyone to read the article below are some highlights.

. . . The scriptures are relevant to this and every culture. They do not need updating, correcting, or revisioning. On the contrary, what needs revisioning is our understanding and obedience to God’s word as we live out His mission in context. When we live a humble orthodoxy and humble missiology, we will be salt and light in contemporary culture—a biblically-faithful, culturally-relevant, counter culture. . . .

. . . The irony of this [arguing against cultural relevance] is that every church is culturally relevant. It is simply a matter of whether the culture of the church is in any way similar to the culture of its community or only meaningful to itself. . . .

. . . The unchurched think that Christianity is a retrograde culture rather than a living faith. Our job is to remove the “extra” stumbling blocks of culture without removing the essential stumbling block of the cross (1 Corinthians 1:23). . . .