The “Westminster Confession of Faith,” Specifically on Baptism

Recently I participated in a Bible class encouraging us ro share the simple, New Testament gospel with those who have “subscribed” to (accepted) various manmade creeds and confessions. We may not realize just how different we are from those who submit to these documents. In order to talk with them and reach them, we must understand the nature of the writings that they accept. One such document is known as the Westminster Confession of Faith (“WCF”).

As Wikipedia notes, “In confessional churches, office-bearers (such as ministers and elders) are required to “subscribe” (or agree) to the church’s confession of faith. In Presbyterian denominations, this is the Westminster Confession of Faith, while in Confessional Lutheranism it is the Book of Concord. The degree to which subscribers are required to agree with the confession varies from denomination to denomination”. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confessional_subscription

The WCF has received strong, unqualified support from many. Nick Batzig of Ligonier Ministries, which R. C. Sproul founded, writes, “… church history reveals that the Christian church has long perceived a need for creedal doctrinal statements (e.g., the Nicene Creed, the Apostles’ Creed, the Athanasian Creed, etc.). During the era of the Protestant Reformation, there was an increasing need for doctrinal clarity on account of the spurious teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. The Westminster Confession of Faith has long been the most well-known and most frequently appealed to Protestant confession of the seventeenth century. There are numerous reasons why believers should commit to a diligent study of the Westminster Confession of Faith. The first is its historical background; the second, its biblical priority; the third, its doctrinal fidelity; and the fourth, its spiritual applicability. https://learn.ligonier.org/articles/why-read-westminster-confession

It’s important to remember, as we study the Bible with those from these “confessional churches,” that they may (at least to some degree) have accepted such man-made, uninspired declarations of doctrine. So, are such creedal statements as the WCF really that different from the Bible itself?

Yes, in some areas, a confession such as the WCF, the teaching is quite different from the actual words of scripture. In fact, if the WCF simply restated what the Bible itself teaches, the WCF would not be necessary. 

To illustrate the kind of contradictions I find between the WCF and the Bible, I have chosen the section from the WCF on baptism. First I will quote the entire section (with the reference), so that you can read and consider it for yourself. Then I will discuss each numbered point and respond to it. First, here is the word-for-word teaching in the WCF.

Chapter XXVIII—Of Baptism

1.  Baptism is a sacrament of the new testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, (Matt. 28:19) not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church; (1 Cor. 12:13) but also to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, (Rom. 4:11, Col. 2:11–12) of his ingrafting into Christ, (Gal. 3:27, Rom. 6:5) of regeneration, (Tit. 3:5) of remission of sins, (Mark 1:4) and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in newness of life. (Rom. 6:3–4) Which sacrament is, by Christ’s own appointment, to be continued in His Church until the end of the world. (Matt. 28:19–20)

2.  The outward element to be used in this sacrament is water, wherewith the party is to be baptized, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, by a minister of the Gospel, lawfully called thereunto. (Matt. 3:11, John 1:33, Matt. 28:19–20)

3.  Dipping of the person into the water is not necessary; but Baptism is rightly administered by pouring, or sprinkling water upon the person. (Heb. 9:10, 19–22, Acts 2:41, Acts 16:33, Mark 7:4)

4.  Not only those that do actually profess faith in and obedience unto Christ, (Mark 16:15–16, Acts 8:37–38) but also the infants of one, or both, believing parents, are to be baptized. (Gen. 17:7–8, Gal. 3:9, 14, Col. 2:11–12, Acts 2:38–39, Rom. 4:11–12, 1 Cor. 7:14, Matt. 28:19, Mark 10:13–16, Luke 18:15)

5.  Although it be a great sin to condemn or neglect this ordinance, (Luke 7:30, Exod. 4:24–26) yet grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it, as that no person can be regenerated, or saved, without it: (Rom. 4:11, Acts 10:2, 4, 22, 31, 45, 47) or, that all that are baptized are undoubtedly regenerated. (Acts 8:13, 23)

6.  The efficacy of Baptism is not tied to that moment of time wherein it is administered; (John 3:5, 8) yet, notwithstanding, by the right use of this ordinance, the grace promised is not only offered, but really exhibited, and conferred, by the Holy Ghost, to such (whether of age or infants) as that grace belongeth unto, according to the counsel of God’s own will, in His appointed time. (Gal. 3:27, Tit. 3:5, Eph. 5:25–26, Acts 2:38, 41)

7.  The sacrament of Baptism is but once to be administered unto any person. (Tit. 3:5) [1]

Now I will review and respond to each of these numbered paragraphs one by one.

1. A “sacrament” is defined as “a sign or symbol of a spiritual reality”. This word is not found in the New Testament (“NT”), nor is baptism ever called a sign or a symbol in the Bible itself.

The WCF views baptism as a sign or seal of a prior covenant relationship that one already has with God. Because Old Testament (“OT”) circumcision was such a sign and seal for Abraham (Rom 4:11), the WCF claims that baptism fulfills the same role in the NT. The passage cited, Col 2:11-12, does not refer to baptism as a sign or seal of a previous covenant relationship with God. It simply notes that, while OT circumcision was the removal of the flesh, in baptism God by grace removes one’s personal sins.

2. The WCF is correct in noting that the element in which baptism occurs is water. However, note the scriptures that are excluded. These include “born again of water and spirit (John 3:3-5)”, the Ethiopian beginning to rejoice after his baptism (Acts 8:26-40), the mention of “washing away sins” with baptism (Acts 22:16), and “the washing of rebirth (Tit 3:5)”. These scriptures connect baptism with one’s actual, personal rebirth and reception of the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38).

The WCF says that one is to be baptized by “a minister of the Gospel, lawfully called thereunto”. This statement implies that those who are not "official" ("ordained") ministers are not authorized to baptize. The scriptures noted (Matt. 3:11, John 1:33, Matt. 28:19–20) do not state any such limitation or restriction.

3. The WCF dictates that dipping (immersion) in water as the mode of baptism is not necessary, but that it’s equally right simply to pour or sprinkle water on an individual. Read each of the sources that are cited in paragraph 3. Not one of these biblical texts describes baptism as a pouring or sprinkling of water.

Heb 9:10 … since they relate only to food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until a time of reformation.

Heb 9:19 For when every commandment had been spoken by Moses to all the people according to the Law, he took the blood of the calves and the goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, 20 saying, “This is the blood of the covenant which God commanded you.” 21 And in the same way he sprinkled both the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry with the blood. 22 And according to the Law, one may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

Ac 2:41 So then, those who had received his word were baptized; and that day there were added about three thousand souls.

Ac 16:33 And he took them that very hour of the night and washed their wounds, and immediately he was baptized, he and all his household.

Mk 7:4 (… and when they come from the market place, they do not eat unless they cleanse themselves; and there are many other things which they have received in order to observe, such as the washing of cups and pitchers and copper pots.)

There is nothing in these scriptures that authorizes pouring or sprinkling for baptism. Rather, the WCF authors drew inferences that were not actually stated in the Bible. Why? Look at history.

The practice of sprinkling or pouring water on infants was first introduced by the Roman Catholic Church. The Protestant Reformers (such as John Calvin and Martin Luther) were formerly Catholics, already accustomed to this practice. 

However, John Calvin, a recognized authority in churches influenced by the WCF, insisted that "the term baptize means to immerse, and that this was the form used by the primitive Church." See the fuller quotation and citation here:

“Whether the person baptized is to be wholly immersed, and that whether once or thrice, or whether he is only to be sprinkled with water, is not of the least consequence: churches should be at liberty to adopt either according to the diversity of climates, although it is evident that the term baptize means to immerse, and that this was the form used by the primitive Church”. (John Calvin and Henry Beveridge, Institutes of the Christian Religion, vol. 3 (Edinburgh: The Calvin Translation Society, 1845), 344).

So, Calvin understood that the Greek term baptize meant to immerse! He further knew that the first-century church practiced immersion as “the” form of baptism! Yet he also said that the mode of baptism was “not of the least consequence” and that “churches should be at liberty to adopt either (mode)”. Calvin in effect overruled the Bible’s clear teaching on immersion. 

Hence lies a root problem of manmade confessions such as the WCF. These confessions take the conclusions of fallible men and then write them in stone. Leaders in these confessional churches are then required to “subscribe to” (agree with) them.

Here's a significant irony. The Protestant movement, in opposition to Catholicism's human traditions, initially declared its emphtic commitment to sola scriptura (the authority of “scripture alone”). Yet the Protestants went on to create their own additional traditions and authorities! They wrote and relied upon uninspired confessions – not scripture alone – to define further their beliefs and practices.

One more thought. If the NT actually did authorize pouring and/or sprinkling for baptism, there would be no controversy. But it does not. The same is true of the next claim made by the WCF, that infants of one or more believing parents are to be baptized.

4. Read the scriptures cited in support of infant baptism. These include Gen. 17:7–8, Gal. 3:9, 14, Col. 2:11–12, Acts 2:38–39, Rom. 4:11–12, 1 Cor. 7:14, Matt. 28:19, Mark 10:13–16, and Luke 18:15. If any of these scriptures, even one, clearly taught that infants are to be baptized – and only the infant children of believing parents! – that would settle the question. There is no such scripture. For that reason, confessions such as the WCF were designed to declare and enforce beliefs and practices that were not clearly taught in the Bible.

Based on their mistaken belief that NT baptism was parallel to OT circumcision in every way except one* (see below), the WCF authors actually used Gen 17:7-8 to justify infant baptism. Since circumcision was administered to every newborn male as a sign of the covenant, they surmised that baptism fulfilled the same purpose in the NT.

In this way, they disconnected baptism from personal faith, personal repentance, and personal confession of Jesus Christ. None of these elements was to them a necessary part of baptism, because these elements were not necessary for OT circumcision.

*Obviously, OT circumcision was only for males. If NT baptism were parallel, it would logically follow that only newborn males are to be baptized. This discrepancy is not resolved or even mentioned in the WCF.

The WCF maintains that it is a “great sin” to “neglect this ordinance” (of baptism). This is based in part on Ex 4:24-26, which notes that Moses had failed to circumcise his son. Again, this is based on the alleged circumcision/baptism parallel. Ironically, for Moses not to circumcise his son was not just a “great sin;” it was a matter of life or death! The parallel with baptism – if it were accurate – would necessarily mean that baptism is also a matter of life or death.

5. However, the WCF, in the very next paragraph, denies that baptism is necessary for one to be regenerated or saved. Strangely, it cites the record of the conversion of Cornelius in Acts 10, in which God took extraordinary steps to show Peter and his companions that Cornelius and his companions had to be baptized. After the Holy Spirit fell miraculously, Peter recognizes this necessity. He says, “Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?” And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ (Acts 10:47-48).

By citing Acts 8:13, 23, the WCF implies that Simon the sorcerer, though he believed and was baptized, was not actually saved at that point. Why not? After he was baptized, he sinned so as to be back in “the bondage of iniquity.” In other words, according to the WCF, if Simon had truly been regenerated, he could not have been later bound by his personal sin.

6. The sixth paragraph is hard to process, at least for me. It mentions the “efficacy” of baptism, but how can a mere “sign” or “seal” (as previously claimed) baptism have any real efficacy? Then the WCF says that this “efficacy” is not tied to the moment at which one is baptized. Yet it also says, “by the right use of this ordinance, the grace promised is not only offered, but really exhibited, and conferred, by the Holy Ghost.” So, the “efficacy” seems to be “the grace promised” to one who is baptized. In that case, the WCF connects the reception of God’s grace to baptism! Yet the WCF had just said that baptism was not necessary! So this one left me confused.

7. In the final paragraph, the WCF says that one is to be baptized only once. Read carefully the scripture cited. It is an important one.

Tit 3:5 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit …

Note the words “on the basis of” and “by”. God saves us according to his mercy to sinners, not “on the basis of” our own righteous deeds. Nothing we do pays any part of our salvation. It comes based on God’s grace and the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

While God saved only and always “one the basis of” his mercy, note the “by”. God saves us “by” the washing of regeneration (new birth) and renewal by the Holy Spirit.” The WCF is correct in seeing this as a reference to baptism.

So, why don’t we all set aside the WCF (and other confessions and creeds) as an authoritative document and just go back to the Bible teaching about baptism? It’s simple. It’s clear. It’s from God and not man.

Acts 22:16 “Now why do you delay? Get up and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name.”

---

^[1] The Westminster Confession of Faith (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1996).

 

What is the “Church of Christ?”

I recently received an email from a fine college student, whose Baptist friend wanted information about what he called “Church of Christ beliefs” and “Church of Christ Churches”. He had asked, “Is the Church of Christ biblical?” “What is the history of the Church of Christ?” He had studied various denominations. He was very curious about the differences, and he really wanted to go from what the Bible says.

As I wrote this student a reply I realized that other young people – and those of all ages – are asking the same kinds of questions. So I have posted my reply here.

If you wish to be notified of future posts, please follow these steps. On the bottom of the left side of this page, you will see the words, "FOLLOW BY EMAIL." Enter your email in the box, click "Submit," and check the "I am not a robot" box.

You will receive an email from "Feedburner" that says, 

Activate your Email Subscription to: CoryHCollins 

You must open that email and click the link in order to confirm your subscription. Then, whenever there is a new post on the blog, you will receive an email notification.

Please forward this message to anyone that you think would benefit from the blog. They will not be added unless they personally follow the steps above.

---------------------------------------------------------

Dear ______,

Thank you for getting in touch with me! Great questions!

Many of our religious neighbors have been told that “Church of Christ” is a denomination like “Baptist” or “Catholic.” They will talk about “Church of Christ beliefs,”  ”Church of Christ preachers,” and even ”Church of Christ churches!” They will ask, “What does the ‘Church of Christ’ (or ‘your church’) teach about this or that?” They may have even been told that the “Church of Christ” began in the 1800s, was started by someone like Alexander Campbell, and follows the doctrines that he or someone else developed. They may have been told that we think that only “our denomination” is going to heaven.

When a person researches “Church of Christ” online, they will often see this kind of denominational language. Then these sites will list various teachings and traditions of this so-called “Church of Christ” denomination. Those who write such things do not understand who we are. That is why certain beliefs are listed on these sites that many of us do not accept as true.

We are not a denomination. We have no councils or other governing bodies beyond the local congregation. We have no creed book that we follow (except the Bible). We have no rules for membership except the Bible. We are congregations of Christians. “Churches of Christ” is a biblical phrase that simply means “congregations that belong to Christ.” 

Rom 16:16 All the churches of Christ greet you.

Nobody “joins” “our church.” We don’t own a church! When a person obeys the Lord as Acts 2 teaches, God adds that person to His church. God added you and me to His church (that belongs to Christ) when we repented of sin and were baptized for the forgiveness of our sins. You and I have never joined any denomination or agreed to follow any teaching that we cannot see for ourselves in the Bible.

We simply choose to be Christians. We want to believe, teach, and practice what the New Testament teaches the church and Christians to do.

Jesus built one church, and He called it “My church” in Matt 16:18. It is one church, not a denomination or a group of denominations. It belongs to Christ. In other words, it is Christ’s church, or the church of (that belongs to) Christ.

The Bible says: Eph 4:4 There is one body (church) and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.

The Bible forbids divisions (denominations). 

1 Cor 1:10 Now I exhort you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all agree and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be made complete in the same mind and in the same judgment. 11 For I have been informed concerning you, my brethren, by Chloe’s people, that there are quarrels among you. 12 Now I mean this, that each one of you is saying, “I am of Paul,” and “I of Apollos,” and “I of Cephas,” and “I of Christ.” 13 Has Christ been divided? Paul was not crucified for you, was he? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

So, if we do what the Bible teaches, we are members of that original church! Christians! Disciples of Christ! We are not “Church-of-Christ Christians.” We are just Christians, because, when we repented of sin and were baptized, God added us to the church - His church - Christ’s church.

Our plea is for people to abandon ALL denominations and to return with us to the original pattern that God gave the original church.

The Bible simply does not describe or authorize the Catholic Church, the Baptist Church, the Community Church, etc. 

So when someone says, “What does your church teach about ...?” - or “What does the Church of Christ teach about ...?” I always change the question to ... ”What does the Bible teach about ...?”

So if they ask about baptism, the Lord’s Supper, elders and deacons, a cappella singing, or anything else that seems “different” from various denominations, I take them straight to the Bible for the answer.

For example, Southern Baptists typically teach that one is saved before baptism. In other words, they are told that baptism is not necessary for salvation, because it is a “good work,” and we are not saved by works. The Bible teaches differently! Baptism is not a good work at all. It is an expression of faith and repentance that God requires. This is very clear in Acts 2:38; Rom 6:1-4; 1 Pet 3:21; Gal 3:26-27. This is not a “Church-of-Christ doctrine,” as if it belongs to some denomination. It is the Bible’s clear teaching! So it’s the truth, not because you and I agree with it and do it, but because God said it!

The Bible never - never - never calls Christ’s followers “Baptists,” “Catholics,” “Protestants,” or any other man-made name. The Bible does not refer to ANY denomination. They all started long after the Bible was written.

All the apostles and first-century Christians belonged to the same church - the one church - described as beginning in Acts 2.

So when someone asks about “Church-of-Christ” history, how the church began, etc., I will often study Acts 2 with them.

If they will believe and do what the Bible teaches in Acts 2, God will add them to the same church - the one church - that began that day. And they will be Christians, nothing more or less. Then we can teach them about the faith, practice, and worship of that original church. As we do that we will teach them what that “church belonging to Christ” or “church of Christ” was taught about singing, the Lord’s Supper, etc.

Here are two blog posts I have written, that you and your friends may want to review.

Good News! An Evangelistic Bible Study Based on Acts 2

http://coryhcollins.blogspot.com/2018/01/good-news-evangelistic-bible-study.html

Are You a Christian? Are You Saved? Are You SURE?

http://coryhcollins.blogspot.com/2016/11/are-you-christian-are-you-saved-are-you.html

Please write again! God bless.

History of the Beginning of Some Modern Denominations

"The Church of the Rock," in Helsinki, Finland

Jesus prayed that all His followers might be one, just as He and the Father are one (John 17:20-21). In the beginning He established one church, which He called "My church" (Matt 16:18), to which all the apostles and other first-century disciples belonged. 

However, starting in the second century, changes were made to the leadership and organization of the church. Thus began a process which resulted over time in many departures from the original pattern, and in the formation of Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestant groups which were unknown in the New Testament.

It is impossible to list all the religious groups that exist today. Many of those noted below, such as “Baptist,” actually consist of multiple groups (American Baptist, Independent Baptist, Freewill Baptist, Primitive Baptist, Reformed Baptist, Southern Baptist, etc.). The same can be said of Lutheran, Presbyterian, Methodist, and so on.

Of course, in addition to these, the so-called non-denominational “Community” churches represent a fast-growing trend as well. These groups may take names like “Fellowship,” “Keystone,” “Met,” “Grace,” “Cornerstone,” "Northwood," and many others. They are often associated with the founding “pastor” or a key “pastor,” as the Lakewood Church in Houston is connected with Joel Osteen.

The more one considers these divisions, the more one can appreciate the plea to abandon all departures and restore the teaching given to the first-century church.

330 EASTERN ORTHODOX – These churches, organized in many eastern European nations, began at various times. The movement, however, was launched when Constantine moved his capital from Rome to Byzantium.

606 ROMAN CATHOLIC – An exact beginning date cannot be determined because Catholicism gradually evolved out of changes in New Testament doctrines and practices. The year 606 marks the time when the bishopric of Rome became more dominant than others.

1517  LUTHERAN – In this year Martin Luther registered his ninety–five theses against Catholicism, not intending to start a new church. However, the Lutheran Church became reality following the Longer and Shorter Catechism (1529), the Augsburg Confession (1530), the Smalcald Articles of Faith (1537) and the Formula of Concord (1577).

1525  MENNONITE – The Mennonite movement began in Zurich, Switzerland.

1560  PRESBYTERIAN – The Presbyterian church grew out of the teachings of John Calvin, which were further refined by John Knox.

1608  BAPTIST – The Baptist movement began in Holland under the leadership of John Smyth. Roger Williams led the development in Colonial America, with a Baptist church being organized in Providence, Rhode Island, in 1639. The largest Baptist organization, the Southern Baptist Convention, began in May, 1845.

1614 REFORMED CHURCH IN AMERICA – This group, better known as Quakers, were organized by George Fox.

1708 CHURCH OF THE BRETHREN – This group started in Schwarzenau, Germany, with eight members. Under the leadership of Peter Becker, the American movement began in 1719 near Philadelphia.

1740 METHODIST – Methodist societies began at Oxford University under the direction of John and Charles Wesley.

1783 PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL – This American version of the Church of England began in Annapolis, Maryland.

1796 UNITARIAN – The Unitarian group tarted in Boston.

1830 LATTER–DAY SAINTS – Better known as Mormons, this group was founded by Joseph Smith.

1844 SEVENTH–DAY ADVENTIST – This church was founded by William Miller, who predicted the end of the world would come between March 21, 1843, and March 21, 1844.

1866 CHURCH OF CHRIST, SCIENTIST – Also known as Christian Science, this movement was started by Mary Baker Eddy in Lynn, Massachusetts.

1878 SALVATION ARMY – This group was started in London by William Booth.

1881 CHRISTIAN AND MISSIONARY ALLIANCE – Started in New York by A.B. Simpson.

1844 JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES – Founded by Charles Taze Russell, this religious body was known as the Millenial Dawnist until 1931.

1903 CHURCH OF GOD – Many religious bodies have used this name. The movement now counts some 200 branches.

1907 CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE – The Nazarenes began in Chicago when groups centered in New York and New England merged with a California group.

1914 ASSEMBLIES OF GOD – Founded in Hot Springs, Arkansas.

1931 CONGREGATIONAL CHRISTIAN – Formed by a merger of the Congregational church and a branch of the Christian church.

1934 EVANGELICAL AND REFORMED – Organized in Cleveland, Ohio, with a merger of the Evangelical Synod of North America and the Reformed church in the United States.

1946 EVANGELICAL UNITED BRETHREN – Began in Johnstown, Pennsylvania, with a union between the United Brethren in Christ and the Evangelical church.