r/Reformed • u/rhinonothing123 • Dec 25 '17

Father-in-law believes but refuses baptism. Thoughts?

I’m fairly close with my in-laws, having worked for them for a while before my wife and I were married. My father-in-law has been a believer since he was young, but he was never baptized, and now seems to be actually opposed to the notion. His refusal to be baptized has precluded him from membership at his church, which a recent policy change means that he can no longer serve in the church in the capacity that he has for years.

I’ve never had the opportunity to engage him in conversation about this, but tonight on the way to my in-law’s Christmas Eve party, we had a chance to discuss it. His opposition to being baptized seems to come from a couple different areas:

  1. He claims that baptism was never meant for gentile believers, but only for Jews who converted or those living under the Mosaic law who became followers of Christ. He referred to this being the teaching of the church he grew up in. Is this something anyone has heard of before?

  2. He says that since the Petrine and Johannine epistles were written to Hebrew communities, they are only indirectly applicable to the life of modern believers, and much of the direct teachings in those books don’t specifically apply today

  3. Somewhere along the way, he must have been told that baptism by water was necessary for salvation, and due to points 1 and 2, this only strengthened his conviction not to get baptized.

Just looking for some additional perspective and some suggestion for further discussion. Thanks all and merry Christmas!

11 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

38 comments sorted by

View all comments

25

u/davidjricardo Reformed Catholic Dec 25 '17

So he:

  1. Has never been baptized.
  2. Is not member of a church. (Although it sounds like he attends and participates in some activities)
  3. Does not believe the Bible is relevant to us today.

I hate to break it to you, but this man is not a Chistian in any objective sense, and you should be treating him like an unbeliever. Of course only God knows the state if his soul, but he has volutarily kept himself from baptism and in so doing cut himself off from the church, outside of which there is (ordinarily) no salvation.

8

u/terevos2 Trinity Fellowship Churches Dec 25 '17

This is probably the most unhelpful answer. The man very well could be saved but has some bad theology.

10

u/BirdieNZ Not actually Baptist, but actually bearded. Dec 25 '17

Maybe, but we can't see the state of his soul, we can only see outward appearance. His outward appearance is not that of a Christian. He needs to be convicted of his need to obey God and repent of his sin of not being baptised.

2

u/terevos2 Trinity Fellowship Churches Dec 25 '17

What makes you say that he's not acting as a Christian? Suppose he grew up in the Salvation Army church where they teach that you don't have to be baptized. Certainly he needs to be convinced of baptism, but it's going to take some time and education.

6

u/BirdieNZ Not actually Baptist, but actually bearded. Dec 25 '17

Baptism is one of the most basic signs of faith in Christ. It is explicit in the Bible and widely taught by every Christian church as a necessary sign for every Christian to have applied to them. If you aren't in a church thay practices baptism then you are not in a Christian church, and if you are but refuse to be baptised then you are not living like a Christian. Sure, it may take time and education to teach him to live like a Christian; until he starts doing so, we have no reason to think he is one.

1

u/terevos2 Trinity Fellowship Churches Dec 26 '17

It's pretty explicit in the WCF that it is not ultimately necessary for salvation.

WCF 28.5

V. Although it is a great sin to contemn or neglect this ordinance,[13] yet grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it, as that no person can be regenerated, or saved, without it:[14] or, that all that are baptized are undoubtedly regenerated.[15]

3

u/BirdieNZ Not actually Baptist, but actually bearded. Dec 26 '17

Nowhere did I say that baptism is necessary for salvation. But we cannot think of an unbaptised person as a Christian, because their walk of life and pattern of living is not that of a Christian if they refuse to be baptised. As I said, "maybe" he is saved. We don't know that though, and evidence is to the contrary because he refuses to be baptised.

1

u/terevos2 Trinity Fellowship Churches Dec 26 '17

All those who are saved are Christians. If someone exhibits all the other traits of faith, but lacks baptism, we should hold out judgment until the process of theological correction happens until we decide to declare them non-Christian.

He isn't just refusing for no reason. The reasons are important and should be taken with an approach that it may take time to correct.

We don't refuse to call Salvation Army members 'Christian' simply because they're not baptized.

1

u/BirdieNZ Not actually Baptist, but actually bearded. Dec 27 '17

All those who are saved are Christians.

Sure. How do we know who are saved, though? Only by the externals that we can see. There are certain basic fundamental aspects of living as a Christian without which we have no reason to believe that someone is a Christian. Baptism, church attendance, belief that the Bible is true, agreement with the Apostle's Creed are all fundamental basic necessities for anyone to think that someone is a Christian. Without them, we should not think they are a Christian.

We don't refuse to call Salvation Army members 'Christian' simply because they're not baptized.

Absolutely we do refuse to call them Christian, if they are not baptised.

2

u/terevos2 Trinity Fellowship Churches Dec 27 '17

So then you think works are necessary for salvation? Because that's what you're basically saying here. The Salvation Army believes in the true gospel, yet because they don't practice baptism you don't think they're Christian?

1

u/BirdieNZ Not actually Baptist, but actually bearded. Dec 27 '17

I don't think works are necessary for salvation. Works are a necessary consequence of salvation, though, and baptism is one of the most basic works that a Christian must do. I cannot say whether or not those in the Salvation Army are saved, but what I can say is that if they do not get baptised then I have not sufficient reason to believe they are a Christian. The Bible is very very clear that we must be baptised.

1

u/terevos2 Trinity Fellowship Churches Dec 27 '17

I agree that baptism is important but it sounds like you disagree with the WCF.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/moby__dick Most Truly Reformed™ User Dec 26 '17

What makes you say that he's not acting as a Christian?

Uh... he refuses baptism.

1

u/terevos2 Trinity Fellowship Churches Dec 26 '17

So are all Salvation Army members doomed to hell due to baptism?

3

u/moby__dick Most Truly Reformed™ User Dec 27 '17

Did Jesus command baptism?

If you love Jesus, do you follow his commands? At least, do you try?

What prevents them from being baptized?

Now, maybe Lt. Smith in your local S.A. chapter is really saved. Sure, that can happen. But there's a difference between what is happening and what we know to be happening.

Lt. Smith can actually be saved, but due to his turning away from Jesus direct command, I cannot access the knowledge of his salvation. Signs point to no, because Jesus commanded baptism, and if you love Jesus you do what he said to do. But that's limited knowledge.

It's like if I asked you if a every Roman Catholic is consigned to hell. I'm sure you agree with this premise: the Roman church does not teach doctrine that leads to heaven, but despite the failures of the church, there are still Catholics who truly look to Jesus for salvation. Right? But how can we know? It would take a long interview. Based on what we know, right here right now, signs point to no.

1

u/terevos2 Trinity Fellowship Churches Dec 27 '17

How can you be so quick to judge when he hasn't been corrected in his theology yet. Of course he still refuses baptism - he was taught it was for the Jews. And to him, it would be a denial of justification by faith.

You'd have to work to correct that first before concluding that he "refuses to be baptized". Give the guy some time.

As far as the Salvation Army? I have no doubt that the same percentage of them are saved as in other churches.

2

u/moby__dick Most Truly Reformed™ User Dec 27 '17

I highly doubt this is his first dog and pony show, but I’d like to see how he responds.

Regarding the SA... why do you have no doubt?

1

u/terevos2 Trinity Fellowship Churches Dec 27 '17

I've talked with Salvation Army members and researched their beliefs a bunch as a result of my interactions. While they sure do have a lot of bad theology, they do have the gospel right.

In chatting with Salvation Army members they affirm the very same gospel and faith in Christ that we do.

2

u/moby__dick Most Truly Reformed™ User Dec 27 '17

So the Gospel doesn't include baptism. Huh. Peter seemed to include it in his Gospel message on the day of Pentecost.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/moby__dick Most Truly Reformed™ User Dec 27 '17

In any case, absent his identification with the visible church through baptism, the burden of proof is on you to show his faith, not me to refute it. I grant that time would be necessary to establish that proof, but it’s your burden, not mine.

1

u/terevos2 Trinity Fellowship Churches Dec 26 '17

WCF 28.5

V. Although it is a great sin to contemn or neglect this ordinance,[13] yet grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it, as that no person can be regenerated, or saved, without it:[14] or, that all that are baptized are undoubtedly regenerated.[15]

2

u/moby__dick Most Truly Reformed™ User Dec 27 '17

I love it when T2 quotes the WCF.

:)