Another important passage to consider is that of the baptism of the Ethiopian Eunuch (Acts 8:27-40) At the end of the passage it says that he "went on his way" (presumably back to Ethiopia) He certainly became part of the church universal that day and very unlikely a member of the local church in the region where he was baptized.
Brother, from your doctrinal perspective how is a sinner brought into spiritual union in Christ before and after Pentecost and what connection does that have with your view of the body of Christ?
Again, we can save a lot of time and trouble if you will simply answer which baptism is the "one" baptism and which "body" is the "one" body in Ephesians 4:5? Surely, you cannot believe that the local visible body is the representation of the so-called universal invisible body as they are opposite in every detail. None are members of the local body but properly water baptized believers whereas the so-called universal invisible body contains unbaptized, sprinkled and poured. The local body disciplines or puts out of its body the very ones that make up the universal one. The local body is local not so the universal. The local body is visible not so the universal. The local body is to defend the faith once delivered but the universal one includes the very ones who deny the faith. To say both are "one" is irrational and oxymoronic.
There is no problem as in each case it is the "one" baptism in water and in water baptism the context is that the believer is placed in Christ symbolically or in the "likeness" and so again it terminates in Christ with regard to its symbolic nature.
Concerning the preposition eis in 1 Cor. 12:13 is found with the accusative case soma. I have had 5 years of classroom Greek under four different teachers and I was taught that the preposition eis with the accusative naturally and most commonly points to termination in what the accusative case describes! In other words the action of baptism terminates in the body!
The problem I see here is that 'eis' is used with the accusative in Romans 6:3 and Galatians 3:27. So the saying that baptism gets believers 'into' a church will also have us saying that baptism gets believers 'into' Christ. Such a reading is only compatible with baptismal regeneration, which I reject (as I'm sure you do too).
It's also worth pointing out that 'eis' is used with the accusative case in 1 Corinthians 10:2, which speaks of the Israelites being "baptized unto Moses". It would be absurd to say that their "baptism" in the Red Sea got the Israelites 'into' Moses. The King James translators recognized this, so they translated it 'unto', with the sense of in connection with.
Brother, I find many things you have stated to be very subjective and not objectively consistent with the text and or context you are dealing. However, let me ask you to furnish any text in the NT that explicitly explains how Christians are “added” to church membership apart from the act of water baptism?
"Nevertheless, it is abundantly clear that new disciples were instructed regarding the communal duties that make the formation of local churches necessary. Christ explicitly provided for this in the Great Commission:
18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. (Matthew 28:18-20)"
The words "teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you" is implicit authority to gather them (baptized believers) into a teaching observing assembly. This is the authority to bring them into either an already existing church (Acts 2:41-42) or authority to constitute a teaching observing assembly (Acts 13:1-4; 14:21-23).
Moreover, this is not individual Christian authority to administer this commission nor is it elder authority or apostolic authority but church authority as this "you" is age long you existing as a teaching observing assembly composed of baptized believers who already "have" obeyed this command rather than any two or three believers outside church status. The apostolic office does not continue to function to the end of the age. This cannot be applied to unbaptized and or untaught believers as the addressed "have" already obeyed this commission and therefore exist in a church status.
First, "ye....you" is distinguished from "them....them" as the latter are unchurched baptized believers who are the recipients of this authorized action. Hence, unchurched baptized believers are not the ones being authorized to administer this commission to themselves or to anyone else.
Second, this plural "ye...you" EXIST in this teaching observing state or a churched state as Christ describes them as those already obedient to this commission "I HAVE commanded YOU."
Third, this "teaching to observe" is descriptive of the authority of those who "sit in the seat of Moses" (Mt. 23:1-2) or those who exercise the administrative use of "the keys of the kingdom" (Mt. 18:17-18) who are explicitly identified previously as "the church" - (Mt. 18:17).
Although there is mutual consent between those who want to be included in church membership and the church admitting them the final authority for admission does not rest in those requesting membership but in the church admitting them. Therefore, the great commission authority is given to the church.
Finally, there is no tension between church authority to organize baptized believers into a teaching/observing assembly and self-organization as one is the cause and the other the effect. The church authorizes the organization through sending out an ordained missionary to evangelize and baptize those who willingly choose to covenant themselves together to carry out the great commission.
"It is commonly held that it is the act of baptism which effectually joins a believer to a particular local church. We frequently hear that “baptism is the door of the church”, although this familiar saying is not found anywhere in scripture.
Often, the experience of the church at Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost is appealed to in support of this view. In Acts 2, after Peter’s powerful preaching, we read:
Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. (Acts 2:41)"
The objector is misrepresenting those who say that baptism is the door to church membership. We are not saying a baptized person can walk into our services and assume membership by the fact they are baptized. We are not saying that the church has no authority to receive or reject membership to those who are baptized. We are not saying there is not mutual willingness between the church and the prospective member in receiving them into membership.
What we are saying is that baptism acts as the door to church membership when the church administers baptism with that aim in view and without a proper profession and baptism there is no entrance into church membership. We are saying that was the aim in view in Acts 2:41. We are saying that 1 Corinthians 12:13 in its context is describing water baptism with that aim in view.
1 Corinthians 12:13 is Paul's summary of chapters 1-4 where the members in the church at Corinth had been divided over baptismal administrators (1 Cor. 1:12-14). In addressing this problem, Paul first addressed the priority of baptism in relationship with the priority of the gospel (ch. 1). He then addressed the priority of the power of the Holy Spirit in relationship to the preacher's style and abilities in preaching of the gospel (ch. 2). He then provided the solution to the problem by asserting that all those administrators they were divided over actually worked "together" as "one" under the leadership of the Spirit and therefore, God sent each one, God empowered the gospel they preached that brought each one to faith and God led them to submit to baptism and therefore it was God the Holy Spirit that built the church at Corinth, and therefore it is God the Holy Spirit that should receive the credit not the instruments in their salvation, baptism and equipping each with diverse spiritual gifts (1 Cor. 4:6). Hence, they are God's building, God's temple at Corinth.
In chapters 12-14 he deals with the problem of division over spiritual gifts in the church body at Corinth (1 Cor. 12:27). The "body" metaphor (v. 12) is used in the abstract sense in verses 12-26 describing a "body" wherein all the members know and work together with each one insomuch they know when any member in the body is suffering or rejoicing (vv. 25-26) and the kind of body that has members who operate as the metaphorical "head" in the body and members who are assigned different tasks according to how the Spirit individually gifts them so that there will be "no schism" in this body.
1 Corinthians 12:13a summarizes chapters 1-3 whereas the latter part summarizes chapter 4:6. The plural pronouns, inclusive of Paul with the use of the abstract noun "the body" is describing the church as an institution (v. 28) as all those whom Paul writes unto are baptized believers in that kind of institutional body including himself.
This "body" cannot refer to any universal invisible kind of church as verses 24-26 are impossible for that kind of body. The kind of body Paul intends is spelled out in verse 27 or the kind existing at Corinth which the Holy Spirit built through human instrumentality to be the "temple of God" at Corinth.
In that kind of body, baptism served as the door of entrance as that was the design behind the various baptismal administrators God the Holy Spirit used to build that church body at Corinth.
I read your article and again it contained many flawed arguments that makes your conclusions equally flawed. The flaws are due primarily to what biblical and historical evidence you omit. For example, you seemingly quote Acts 2:47 as the first indication of a church existing in Jerusalem which infers you support a Pentecost origin of that church, especially as you later cite Acts 2:1 as evidence for how a church is formed. Yet, you cite pre-Pentecost texts such as Mt 18 and 26 as essentials for church existence. You ignore Acts 1:21-22 as the origin of the church in Jerusalem and you ignore the present tense in Mt 18:17 as proof of a pre Pentecost existence of the church! For example you repudiate church authority behind the exercise of the Great Commission in Mt 28 but admit that it can’t be obeyed apart from concluding in church membership. Your interpretation of Acts 13:1-4 is greatly flawed as you fail to understand that at this point in time the elders of a church were gifted with revelatory gifts in order to perform their ministry as there was no New Testament scriptures and these men constituted the ordained leadership of the church at Antioch and God spoke through the ordained leadership in revealing his will to the church at Antioch and so it is the church under the leadership of the Spirit that sent them out as it is the church that administers the keys of the kingdom and not individual members thereof! Furthermore, church consent is church authority in receiving properly qualified willing persons for membership! So much more to comment on but I don’t have the time and space presently
Another important passage to consider is that of the baptism of the Ethiopian Eunuch (Acts 8:27-40) At the end of the passage it says that he "went on his way" (presumably back to Ethiopia) He certainly became part of the church universal that day and very unlikely a member of the local church in the region where he was baptized.
Hi Tim! You’re absolutely right this is a key passage for this study, one we’ll have much more to say about as we move forward.
Brother, from your doctrinal perspective how is a sinner brought into spiritual union in Christ before and after Pentecost and what connection does that have with your view of the body of Christ?
Brother, what do you do with the fact that in Classical and Koine Greek literature ekklesia is found as an abstract noun?
Again, we can save a lot of time and trouble if you will simply answer which baptism is the "one" baptism and which "body" is the "one" body in Ephesians 4:5? Surely, you cannot believe that the local visible body is the representation of the so-called universal invisible body as they are opposite in every detail. None are members of the local body but properly water baptized believers whereas the so-called universal invisible body contains unbaptized, sprinkled and poured. The local body disciplines or puts out of its body the very ones that make up the universal one. The local body is local not so the universal. The local body is visible not so the universal. The local body is to defend the faith once delivered but the universal one includes the very ones who deny the faith. To say both are "one" is irrational and oxymoronic.
There is no problem as in each case it is the "one" baptism in water and in water baptism the context is that the believer is placed in Christ symbolically or in the "likeness" and so again it terminates in Christ with regard to its symbolic nature.
Concerning the preposition eis in 1 Cor. 12:13 is found with the accusative case soma. I have had 5 years of classroom Greek under four different teachers and I was taught that the preposition eis with the accusative naturally and most commonly points to termination in what the accusative case describes! In other words the action of baptism terminates in the body!
The problem I see here is that 'eis' is used with the accusative in Romans 6:3 and Galatians 3:27. So the saying that baptism gets believers 'into' a church will also have us saying that baptism gets believers 'into' Christ. Such a reading is only compatible with baptismal regeneration, which I reject (as I'm sure you do too).
It's also worth pointing out that 'eis' is used with the accusative case in 1 Corinthians 10:2, which speaks of the Israelites being "baptized unto Moses". It would be absurd to say that their "baptism" in the Red Sea got the Israelites 'into' Moses. The King James translators recognized this, so they translated it 'unto', with the sense of in connection with.
Brother, I find many things you have stated to be very subjective and not objectively consistent with the text and or context you are dealing. However, let me ask you to furnish any text in the NT that explicitly explains how Christians are “added” to church membership apart from the act of water baptism?
Hi brother! We'll get to that in future posts, but my comprehensive answer to this can be found here: https://providencebaptist.church/formation.htm
"Nevertheless, it is abundantly clear that new disciples were instructed regarding the communal duties that make the formation of local churches necessary. Christ explicitly provided for this in the Great Commission:
18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. (Matthew 28:18-20)"
The words "teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you" is implicit authority to gather them (baptized believers) into a teaching observing assembly. This is the authority to bring them into either an already existing church (Acts 2:41-42) or authority to constitute a teaching observing assembly (Acts 13:1-4; 14:21-23).
Moreover, this is not individual Christian authority to administer this commission nor is it elder authority or apostolic authority but church authority as this "you" is age long you existing as a teaching observing assembly composed of baptized believers who already "have" obeyed this command rather than any two or three believers outside church status. The apostolic office does not continue to function to the end of the age. This cannot be applied to unbaptized and or untaught believers as the addressed "have" already obeyed this commission and therefore exist in a church status.
First, "ye....you" is distinguished from "them....them" as the latter are unchurched baptized believers who are the recipients of this authorized action. Hence, unchurched baptized believers are not the ones being authorized to administer this commission to themselves or to anyone else.
Second, this plural "ye...you" EXIST in this teaching observing state or a churched state as Christ describes them as those already obedient to this commission "I HAVE commanded YOU."
Third, this "teaching to observe" is descriptive of the authority of those who "sit in the seat of Moses" (Mt. 23:1-2) or those who exercise the administrative use of "the keys of the kingdom" (Mt. 18:17-18) who are explicitly identified previously as "the church" - (Mt. 18:17).
Although there is mutual consent between those who want to be included in church membership and the church admitting them the final authority for admission does not rest in those requesting membership but in the church admitting them. Therefore, the great commission authority is given to the church.
Finally, there is no tension between church authority to organize baptized believers into a teaching/observing assembly and self-organization as one is the cause and the other the effect. The church authorizes the organization through sending out an ordained missionary to evangelize and baptize those who willingly choose to covenant themselves together to carry out the great commission.
"It is commonly held that it is the act of baptism which effectually joins a believer to a particular local church. We frequently hear that “baptism is the door of the church”, although this familiar saying is not found anywhere in scripture.
Often, the experience of the church at Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost is appealed to in support of this view. In Acts 2, after Peter’s powerful preaching, we read:
Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. (Acts 2:41)"
The objector is misrepresenting those who say that baptism is the door to church membership. We are not saying a baptized person can walk into our services and assume membership by the fact they are baptized. We are not saying that the church has no authority to receive or reject membership to those who are baptized. We are not saying there is not mutual willingness between the church and the prospective member in receiving them into membership.
What we are saying is that baptism acts as the door to church membership when the church administers baptism with that aim in view and without a proper profession and baptism there is no entrance into church membership. We are saying that was the aim in view in Acts 2:41. We are saying that 1 Corinthians 12:13 in its context is describing water baptism with that aim in view.
1 Corinthians 12:13 is Paul's summary of chapters 1-4 where the members in the church at Corinth had been divided over baptismal administrators (1 Cor. 1:12-14). In addressing this problem, Paul first addressed the priority of baptism in relationship with the priority of the gospel (ch. 1). He then addressed the priority of the power of the Holy Spirit in relationship to the preacher's style and abilities in preaching of the gospel (ch. 2). He then provided the solution to the problem by asserting that all those administrators they were divided over actually worked "together" as "one" under the leadership of the Spirit and therefore, God sent each one, God empowered the gospel they preached that brought each one to faith and God led them to submit to baptism and therefore it was God the Holy Spirit that built the church at Corinth, and therefore it is God the Holy Spirit that should receive the credit not the instruments in their salvation, baptism and equipping each with diverse spiritual gifts (1 Cor. 4:6). Hence, they are God's building, God's temple at Corinth.
In chapters 12-14 he deals with the problem of division over spiritual gifts in the church body at Corinth (1 Cor. 12:27). The "body" metaphor (v. 12) is used in the abstract sense in verses 12-26 describing a "body" wherein all the members know and work together with each one insomuch they know when any member in the body is suffering or rejoicing (vv. 25-26) and the kind of body that has members who operate as the metaphorical "head" in the body and members who are assigned different tasks according to how the Spirit individually gifts them so that there will be "no schism" in this body.
1 Corinthians 12:13a summarizes chapters 1-3 whereas the latter part summarizes chapter 4:6. The plural pronouns, inclusive of Paul with the use of the abstract noun "the body" is describing the church as an institution (v. 28) as all those whom Paul writes unto are baptized believers in that kind of institutional body including himself.
This "body" cannot refer to any universal invisible kind of church as verses 24-26 are impossible for that kind of body. The kind of body Paul intends is spelled out in verse 27 or the kind existing at Corinth which the Holy Spirit built through human instrumentality to be the "temple of God" at Corinth.
In that kind of body, baptism served as the door of entrance as that was the design behind the various baptismal administrators God the Holy Spirit used to build that church body at Corinth.
I read your article and again it contained many flawed arguments that makes your conclusions equally flawed. The flaws are due primarily to what biblical and historical evidence you omit. For example, you seemingly quote Acts 2:47 as the first indication of a church existing in Jerusalem which infers you support a Pentecost origin of that church, especially as you later cite Acts 2:1 as evidence for how a church is formed. Yet, you cite pre-Pentecost texts such as Mt 18 and 26 as essentials for church existence. You ignore Acts 1:21-22 as the origin of the church in Jerusalem and you ignore the present tense in Mt 18:17 as proof of a pre Pentecost existence of the church! For example you repudiate church authority behind the exercise of the Great Commission in Mt 28 but admit that it can’t be obeyed apart from concluding in church membership. Your interpretation of Acts 13:1-4 is greatly flawed as you fail to understand that at this point in time the elders of a church were gifted with revelatory gifts in order to perform their ministry as there was no New Testament scriptures and these men constituted the ordained leadership of the church at Antioch and God spoke through the ordained leadership in revealing his will to the church at Antioch and so it is the church under the leadership of the Spirit that sent them out as it is the church that administers the keys of the kingdom and not individual members thereof! Furthermore, church consent is church authority in receiving properly qualified willing persons for membership! So much more to comment on but I don’t have the time and space presently