Here's a quote from John Gill's Introduction: "When I say it [baptism] is not a church ordinance, I mean it is not an ordinance administered in the church, but out of it and in order to admission into it and communion with it. It is preparatory to it and a qualification for it. It does not make a person a member of a church, or admit him into a visible church. Persons must first be baptized and then added to the church, as the three thousand converts were (Acts 2.41)."
This echos the sentiments of the 1689 LBCF, which says in paragraph one of chapter 29: "Baptism is an ordinance of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, to be unto the party baptized, a sign of his fellowship with him, in his death and resurrection; of his being engrafted into him; of remission of sins; and of giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to live and walk in newness of life."
This is opposed to the Presbyterian view (and other reformed traditions, as the Dutch Reformed as stated in the Belgic Confession article 34). This view is found in the Westminster Confession of Faith 28.1: "Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church...." The WCF cites 1 Corinthians 12.13 as its proof-text that baptism is the sacrament by which men are made members of the visible Church.
What are you thoughts? How does this particular aspect of the ordinance of baptism affect our understanding of the church in general, and this ordinance in particular?
Baptism is the sign to show we have been sealed with the Holy Spirit, that we are partakers in the New Covenant, dying to ourselves by being submerged in the water and walking in the newness of life coming out.
“We must allow Abraham’s covenant to be a peculiar one and of a mixed kind: containing promises of temporal things to him and his natural seed, and [promises] of spiritual things to his spiritual seed—or, rather, that there was at the same time when the covenant of circumcision was given to Abraham and his natural seed, a fresh manifestation of the covenant of grace made with him and his spiritual seed in Christ. That the temporal blessings of it belonged to his natural seed is no question; but that the spiritual blessings belong to all Abraham’s seed after the flesh and to all the natural seed of believing Gentiles must be denied.” -section on the subjects of baptism All about the covenants. This is the simple understanding of the Abrahamic covenant based on the clear apostolic teaching we find in Galatians 3. This is the redemptive-historical hermeneutic applied. We must view all the OT through the lens of the NT. Thoughts?
This is certainly a baptist distinctive. Baptism is an ordinance that is for the individual, administered by representatives of a local church, and a prerequisite to the corporate ordinance of the Lord’s supper. As we continue to read through this work, Gill establishes this truth by parsing particular passages of scripture related to the issue at hand.
I forgot to mention: don't feel like you only have to answer the questions I asked. Those were just some thoughts I had. Feel free to post whatever thoughts/reflections you had from this week's reading.