Is Christian Church Baptism Valid?
In most cases error is so obvious that able defenders of the church stay that dreadful plague before any great damage is done. However, many times error cannot always be so easily perceived, consequently the urgent need to be constantly vigilant.
Faithful brethren are presently engaged in an all-out effort to subdue error that has entered into the field of the work of the church. Their energies and attentions being concentrated on this immediate problem, other fields have become dangerously vulnerable. This writer is of the persuasion that one of the fundamental doctrines of Christ, namely: baptism into the one body, has become the subject of much false teaching and compromise among some of our brethren. As a result, there is an alarming amount of people being fellowshipped simply upon an oral confession, having been baptized into some denomination.
I realize that the issue of whether or not denominational baptism (more specifically, Christian Church baptism) is valid is by no means a recent one. But after talking with many gospel preachers and reading numerous articles written by our brethren I have been led to the conclusion that this particular error is making a great progress in our ranks. From both of these sources I have continually heard and read this statement, "our digressive brethren," referring in most instances to the members of the disciples of Christ, better known as the Christian Church.
Let it be known that I have no personal axe to grind but, having been "raised" in the Christian Church, I am deeply concerned about the attitude being manifested toward this issue. I shall attempt, therefore, in this article to set forth a few basic principles that have been either forgotten, overlooked or ignored by some of our brethren.
Baptized Into How Many Bodies?
"For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body ...." (1 Cor. 12:13.) It should be clear to everyone that a person can be baptized into only one body. We know that that body is the church. (Eph. 1:22; Col. 1:18.) Keeping this in mind, let us ask, "Into what body were the members of the Christian Church baptized?" If they are "brethren," digressive though they may be, it is necessary that they were baptized into the "one body," the church of our Lord. Notice this in logical form.
1. All "brethren" were baptized into the one holy.
2. But the members of the Christian Church are "brethren."
3. Therefore, the members of the Christian Church were baptized into the one body.
It is obvious to all that the Christian Church and the church of Christ are two separate, distinct bodies. Now if it is still held that members of the Christian Church are "brethren," baptized into the one body, then the "one body" is either a divided body or 1 Corinthians 12:13 is wrong. Either horn of this dilemma is fatal. Notice again in logical form:
1. All "brethren" are in the one body to-wit: the church of Christ.
2. But the members of the Christian Church are "brethren."
3. Therefore, the members of the Christian Church are in the one body, to-wit: the church of Christ.
Surely we can all see and agree that the members of the Christian Church are not members of the one body, the church of our Lord. True, they were baptized into one body. But not the one body we read about in the New Testament. They were admittedly baptized into the denominational body known as the Christian Church. I know gospel preachers that will labor arduously on a sermon identifying the one body and then perhaps in the same hour will state that members of the Christian Church are in that one body!
Does Baptism For Remission Of Sins Gain Entrance Into The One Body In Every Instance?
Without advancing any arguments affirming or denying the above query, let us first just assume that baptism for the remission of sins obtains entrance into the body of Christ in every instance. Notice the logical end to such a premise:
1. Those baptized for the remission of sins are in the one body.
2. But Mormons were baptized for the remission of sins.
3. Therefore, Mormons are in the one body.
Will anybody in the brotherhood refer to the Mormons as "our digressive brethren"? Certainly not! But why not? Simply because this syllogism violates one of the basic rules of logic inasmuch as the major premise is not true in every case. But we know it is true when we follow the New Testament's teaching on baptism. A person must be baptized for the remission of sins knowing by that act he will gain admittance into the one body.
When presented with this statement, our compromising brethren often, assert that nowhere in God's word does it say that it is necessary for the subject to know his baptism put him into the one body. I concur! But neither does it say in God's word that it is necessary for the subject to know his baptism will put him into Christ! Who will deny the necessity of knowing baptism puts the subject into Christ? In both instances there is a direct statement of scripture. Baptism into the one body — 1 Corinthians 12:13; Baptism into Christ — Galatians 3:27. Knowledge of one would be no more or less necessary than knowledge of the other. Paul tells us, "There is one body, and one Spirit even as ye are called in on hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism." (Eph. 4:4, 5.) Notice he tells us there is but one Lord. Is it not necessary to know there is but one Lord and the identity of that Lord? Suppose a person was baptized with the understanding that Buddha was the Lord into whom he was gaining entrance. We can all agree that that person was not scripturally baptized. Continuing then, let us notice that Paul also tells us there is but one body. It is just as necessary to know there is but one body and the identity of that one body, as it is to know there is but one Lord and the identity of that one Lord. Therefore, if a person was baptized with the understanding that the Christian Church was the body into which he was gaining entrance, that person was not scripturally baptized, even though it was for the remission of sins
Is The Christian Church Merely An Apostate Group?
I would agree with the above caption only if it were in the past tense. The Christian Church was an apostate group of the body of Christ. When that group of brethren initially broke away from the church, they were truly an "apostate group." Just as in the first century certain brethren began to digress, the final result being the Roman Catholic Church. The Catholic Church was an apostate group of the body of Christ. But is not now an apostate group. Why? Simply because an apostate group can exist only as long as it is composed of those who were originally members of the body from which it apostatized. It may be better expressed that an apostasy can exist only for one generation. When a group breaks away from the one body it is no longer an apostasy when the original members die. It then becomes a body separate, distinct and in no sense connected to the one body of Christ. The Christian Church was no longer an apostate group when its originators died. It then became a body separate, distinct and in no sense connected to the one body of Christ.
Where Is The Point Of Sin Which Makes The Members Of The Christian Church "Digressive Brethren"?
This question is considered by our compromising brethren to be very simple to answer. The usual unhesitating reply is, "Why, the first time they sing with the accompaniment of the instrument." But such an answer invites our investigation.
We have already seen how the Christian Church is a denomination separate, distinct and in no way connected to the one body of Christ. Hence, being without authority for its very existence, the Christian Church is sinful. Keeping this in mind, hear the words of the Apostle John: "If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds." (2 John 10-11.) Notice that the point at which one "is a partaker" of another's "evil deeds," is when "he biddeth him God speed." From this we can assuredly say that the act which associates one with "evil deeds" or sin, is the point of sin. If we can determine what act associates one with or makes one a member of the Christian Church, then we have found the point of sin. This may be done quite easily by asking any member of the Christian Church two questions. First, "Were you a member of the Christian Church before you were baptized?" The answer is invariably no. Second, "Were you a member of the Christian Church after you were baptized?" The answer is invariably yes. Therefore, the point of sin is Christian Church baptism itself! Those unfortunate souls were baptized completely in vain, that act merely putting them into another sinful relationship, the Christian Church!
Summary And Conclusion
In view of the seriousness of this problem, we should try to keep in mind these principles:
1. A person can be baptized into only one body.
2. Although a person is baptized for the remission of sins, he must know that he is being baptized into the one body, the church of Christ.
3. Upon the death of its originators, the Christian Church became a body separate, distinct and in no sense connected with the one body of Christ.
4. The point at which a person sins in relation to the Christian Church, is when he is baptized into that sinful body.
God forbid that any Christian yell "wolf" when no danger is near. But if we look about us we see congregations supporting preachers and appointing elders who were never baptized into the body of our Lord, gaining fellowship through oral confession alone. We dare not ignore this issue. Rather, we must study it with diligence, face it with courage and "rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith."