The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum HowWouldYouAnswerThis?

I must disagree with what you are saying. First of all, your conclusion would mean that baptism should have ended after the apostles since Christ is speaking to them. Secondly, this is the same rationale that led the early church into popery. Although it isn't through physical generation such as Peter's lineage, you are still saying that only those of apostolic succession, meaning beginning with the ordinations conducted by the apostles until this day are genuine baptisms. How do I know if my pastor is of a pure "spiritual" blood line?

Because Christ spoke to the apostles does not mean that the words were solely meant for them, they were meant for the whole church. He doesn't say baptize and then appoint others giving them authority to baptize, He was giving instructions to the church also.

Pilgrim, our problem is that we see baptism's purpose differently. I believe you consider it to be a holy sacrament that has some form of merit attached to it, where I see it as a step of obedience with no merit or grace giving qualities attached. The only merit or grace that we ever receive is solely through Christ, never because of anything we do. Our actions are only steps of obedience so if the heart is right by the baptized and the baptizer understands what he is doing, being orthodox, then there is no reason one cannot be baptized. As far as delay, I think this is an important step and delaying can actually cause harm if the person is at that place of conviction in their lives and desire to take this important step.

I think the steps you outlined are good, I do believe that there has to be confirmation that the teaching is correct before baptizing, otherwise it may be idolatry. I believe care must be taken to keep all the holy ordinances free from error, otherwise it is the same as false teaching from the Bible itself. However step 4 I disagree with:


I believe ordination is over rated today, and that it should be evident in a person's life whether they are called of God or not. Ordination in the denomination I am part of, is a joke, they would ordain a frog if it could speak. Sorry, but that is how I feel about ordination. BTW, I'm not ordained, nor do I intend to seek ordination, I don't really care to be included in the group. I also believe ordination is for a pastor, recognizing that person's calling. However, back to the criteria for that, as long as they have a degree and can answer the questions properly, then the person is ordained, hardly anyone seeks to determine if the person is filled with the Spirit, which was the purpose of ordination in the first place. People full of the Spirit. Sorry, off on a tangent, and off topic. My point is, it should be evident whether a person is a called pastor/teacher, baptizer or whatever, it is God's appointing/ordaining, not man's. The church's appointing is only recognizing that God has already ordained the person. During the Apostles, there was a different dynamic than we have today and we must recognize that.