Credit: Redeemed Zoomer
Christianity, being the world's largest religion, presents with a multitude of variability in its beliefs, rituals and practices. In these differences, it is difficult to discern where to begin in our analysis of the “canonical” denomination. However, as covered in the second post of this series, we shall start with protestantism due to its vast heterogeneity in beliefs, recency of development and relative lack of proclamation for being the “one true church.” Furthermore, it is common, though not universal, for protestants to unite under their commonalities, the central being that the bible is more important than the church. In that understanding, churches may still unify spiritually despite the differences in canonical interpretation. With this heterogeneity, there is more that may be said about protestantism than the so-called "ecclesiastical" denominations (e.g, catholic and orthodox). As such, it seems prudent that we tackle this vast diversity before moving on to denominations of simpler generalizability.
While we may begin our discussion with a multitude of protestant denominations, one of great popularity, especially within the United States is that of the baptist church. With its frequency of appearance in news headlines as well as general awareness within the modern zeitgeist, we shall discuss this denomination due to its familiarity. Furthermore, Christians who identify as “non-denominational” are truly baptist in terms of their beliefs (for reasons we shall discuss shortly). With these explanations covered, we shall officially discuss our exploration of the Christians canon, beginning with baptism.
Baptism
Baptists are so named due to their differentiation in the practice of baptism, seeing it as a voluntary, personal act, referred to as “believers baptism” as they do not believe in the baptism of infants. While other denominations claim that baptism is how you become Christian, baptists believe that it is how you proclaim that you are Christian, marking baptism as an individual choice representing your rebirth in Christ.
Beliefs
Before continuing with the specifics of baptist theology, it is necessary first to establish that the baptists generally come under one of two theological substrates: Reformed baptists who uphold a Calvinistic theology, and General baptists who are proponents of Arminian theology. While these two theological schools deserve analyses in their own right, what is important for this summary is the difference in views of salvation. Calvinists believe that Jesus died for the select few who God has predetermined shall be saved, while Arminians uphold that Christ died for all and that salvation is actualized through establishing faith in Christ. Though this variation exists within baptism as a whole, general baptists are the most common, and thus baptism will be analyzed through an Arminian lens in terms of its validity. Furthermore, predestination is the only aspect of Calvinist theology that reformed baptists accept, and thus they are not “reformed” in the true sense of Calvinist denominations. Thus, praise or criticisms for the denomination as a whole may not apply to specific groups of baptism. Please put this into consideration when speculating on this post.
What distinguishes baptism from other denominations is the presence of six centralized doctrines:
Supreme authority of the scriptures. While protestants in general claim that the bible has more authority than the church, baptists claim that the bible is the unique and infallible authority of the Christian faith (Sola Scriptura).
Believers baptism: The most conspicuous feature. All members of the church should be individual believers and be baptized via full immersion in proclamation of this belief.
The church should only be composed of those who truly believe in the Christian doctrine.
Equality of Christians in all rights of the church. All believers are equal in the eyes of God and nobody occupies a higher “sanctified” position.
Independence of the local church. Baptist churches lack a centralized authority and operate under the unification of the congregation.
Separation of church and state. This reflects the concept of seeking a personal relationship. One should only be Christian via personal choice to demonstrate true belief in Jesus.
While not a central characteristic, another important notion of baptism is congregational sovereignty and the priesthood of believers. This relates to the individual relationship with Christ. Believers do not need an intermediary and each individual is free to pursue his own relationship.
A central thread to the doctrines of baptism is their prominent individualism. This is reflected in their theology, as they see Christianity as having a personal relationship with Jesus. Logically, baptists do not see the institutional church as having much importance (what is dubbed “low church"). While the church is useful in its unification of believers and the establishment of the community, God’s church on earth results from the congregation of believers and their personal orientation towards faith. Thus, the church itself is of no importance to personal salvation. All that is necessary is Christ's sacrifice for your sins. Baptists believe that the church itself lacks necessity for salvation and does not place emphasis on the church for fear that believers may mistake it as the source of salvation. Furthermore, emphasis should not be placed on believers' baptism, as this is merely a symbolic act demonstrating one’s new faith in Christ, and good works should not be seen as a means of salvation. The only thing that grants salvation was Christ's sacrifice for you. As such, all focus should be placed on Him.
The bible is considered the sole authority for baptists, encompassing the old and new testament; believing it to be inspired by God and being without error. The authority of the bible is a central tenant of baptism and is referred to as “sole scriptora" or the sole authority of scripture. As a reflection of 2nd Timothy: 16-17, baptists believe in the conversion of all nations into Christendom, leading to remarkable missionary work throughout the years. As an extension of the bible being the sole authority, baptists believe that each individual has a personal responsibility to orient themselves towards God (sole competency). The justification for forgiveness of sin lies exclusively within a believer's faith (sole fide).
While baptism is the central sacrament within the baptist church (though it is considered an ordinance as baptism is not seen as a means for salvation) the Lord’s Supper is the second sacrament present. Baptists will often perform the Lord’s Supper weekly, though it is not regarded with the same reverence as some other denominations. The practice is acknowledged to be merely a symbolic act, representative of Christ’s final encounter with his disciples and recognition of his sacrifice. Christ is not believed to be received within the ritual.
In common with other Christians, baptists are monotheistic, believing only in one God. Like the majority of denominations, they are trinitarian, believing that God encompasses three persons: Father; Son and Holy Spirit. Each person is distinct and independent, yet one-hundred percent God in their own right, despite encompassing the one God. Baptists emphasize God’s holiness, sovereignty and love and are theistic, believing God is the creator and sustainer of all things. To understand God, baptists believe that His nature is outlined in the bible, further cementing it as the ultimate authority for faith and practice. Perhaps somewhat differently to other denominations, baptists believe that God is approachable through adoration and prayer and that it is possible to have a personal relationship with Him through these practices.
Baptists believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God and the second person of the trinity, being fully human and fully divine. Christ is the means of atonement for sin, as His sacrifice is the only means of salvation. Salvation is normally seen as available to all and is a gift of God’s grace, and is received through faith in Christ.
Because baptists believe that baptism is a representation of rebirth in Christ, they commonly accept the “once saved, always saved” doctrine. In other words, if one is truly reborn in Christ then they will never truly fall away from His grace. Should one deconvert at a later date, they were never truly reborn to begin with.
Baptism has the five sola’s in common with all other protestant groups. Baptists believe that salvation is via grace alone (sola grata) through faith alone (sola fide) in Christ alone (sola christus) according to the bible alone (sola scriptura) through God’s glory alone (soli deo gloria). What differentiates baptists is the emphasis on the central importance of sola scriptura. For example, Lutherans value scripture as the sole infallible authority, but church authority, though lesser, is still of importance. However, baptists put authority solely on the scriptures. For them, if it is not found in the scriptures, it is not necessary for salvation and therefore not important.
While baptists are a very politically involved denomination, they ironically believe in separation between church and state. While it is the desire of baptists to bring Christendom to the nations, the central motive is for all to come of their own volition.
Worship
While baptists are a low church denomination, they do participate in church service. Communion generally includes praise to God, Biblical sermons and periodic eucharist participation. Traditional or contemporary hymns are typically sung as part of worship. Prayer meetings are often held during the week as a means of community gathering and biblical study. Services are often held for children as a means of facilitating gospel comprehension in the young.
The service mentioned typically functions as an exposition of the scriptures and contains extemporaneous, rather than set prayers. The ultimate authority of the church is Christ who lays his church within the foundational body of believers.
Church architecture is typically contemporary with the Latin cross being the only symbol present. This is reflective of the church's lack of institutional relevance within baptist tradition.
As mentioned, baptists practice “believers baptism” reflecting total submersion in water as a personal choice to be reborn in Christ. This act is considered an ordinance, not a sacrament, as it is not necessary for salvation, though it is symbolic of one’s declaration of being Christian. The second ordinance lies in the eucharist. Once again, this is not considered a sacrament, as it is not necessary for salvation. The point of the eucharist is for symbolic honoration of Christ's sacrifice on the cross and reverence of his last encounter with the disciples. Typically bread and grape juice are used and represent the body and blood of Christ, though He is not considered to be physically or spiritually within the elements. While Christ's sacrifice is generally considered to be for everybody, the eucharist is typically reserved for those who have undergone voluntary baptism.
The worship services are often simple. Typically they are centered around worship, prayer and singing. Service typically discusses a passage of scripture rather than scripture in its entirety. Singing hymns are often central with congregational singing being the most common.
Positive Elements
To begin, we can affirm that baptism is a Paulinistic denomination of Christianity due to its acceptance of the Nicene creed that defines these denominations, in particular relating to the nature of Christ. As with these other groups, baptists agree that Christ was fully human and fully God; that He was born of the virgin Mary; that He died for our sins; that He rose from the dead; that He ascended into heaven and that He will return to judge the living and the dead. These are the essentials for Paulinistic Christian groups, identifying baptism as non-heretical within this doctrine.
Christianity is quite clear on its doctrine of God seeking a relationship with humanity. Baptism is a faith that offers that luxury, imploring others to take the initiative towards faith and rebirth in Christ. Furthermore, its emphasis on only believers being present within the church is a logical extension of Christian belief. As Christ's sacrifice is emphasized in terms of belief in Him, this is a characteristic that baptism seems to be correct on.
The baptist position on the eucharist has positive elements. As mentioned, the baptists do not believe that the bread and (generally) grape juice literally transform into the body, blood, essence, spirit or divinity of Christ. Instead, it is seen as an ordinance that is merely symbolic and not a necessary means of salvation, but serves as an example and reverence towards Christ's sacrifice. Logically, this position is easier to defend, as explanation is needed for the mechanisms of transubstantiation. While some may conclude that the cause is a miracle of God, you must nonetheless explain the mechanism by which this happens. Because we have no empirical or logical evidence of this occurring, as well as a lack of a cause-and-effect explanation, the baptist account seems to run more parallel to reality.
Should the bible be the inherent word of God, then it is a positive note as to how baptists pay particular salience to its message. However, I would argue that within the Christian canon, sole scriptura is lacking in some fundamental theological doctrines. Nonetheless, should God be communicating with humanity through the bible, then the importance given to the bible is invariably a positive note.
Negative Elements
The first problem with baptism is its tendency to embrace Arminian theology. If Christianity is true, then there is no possibility that Arminianism is correct; the central reason being for its emphasis on Christ's universal sacrifice. Calvinistic theology understands the logic of an omnipotent, omniscient God clearer than does Arminianism in that Calvinism recognizes pre-destination. Here’s what must be understood: if an all-powerful, all-knowing God has a plan for the universe and knows everything that you are going to do before you do it, you are not free to not do what He knows you will do. Since the beginning of time, philosophers have debated whether free will exists, or if determinism is the doctrine that rules the day. Both Christians and atheists alike have used both sides of this debate as support for their own arguments and rebutting the opposition. However, in reality, while it is not clear if free will exists under the atheistic paradigm, it definitely does not under the theistic worldview. As mentioned, if the Christian God exists, we are not free to act outside of His awareness of our future actions. This not only passes determinism in intensity, but brings us into necessitarian territory. To explain briefly, necessitarianism rejects possibility; that is, everything that occurs must have occurred with no possibility of it not occurring. This differs from determinism in that determinism still acknowledges the notion of possibility. Should an omniscient God exist who has a plan for everything in the universe, therein lies no room for possibility, as everything that occurs follows necessary from God’s plan. While this criticism is not applicable to Calvinist baptists, it is a valid criticism to the denomination overall as the majority subscribe to an Arminian theology.
While personal choice to embrace Christianity has been classified as a positive note, a negative byproduct of this is its fervent individualism. While baptists see the congregation of believers as the “body of Christ” on earth, this is an ironic proposition as the whole denomination is based on a personal relationship with God. This in of itself is not negative, however, what is problematic is the further encouragement for independent interpretation of scripture. Two consequences emerge as a result of these doctrines. Firstly, baptism fails to integrate the congregation due to lack of a centralized structure. Because of this individualism, communities are merely a place for congregation but are not considered important within the context of the denomination's beliefs. It is merely about the individual rather than the collective under God’s name. Finally, the encouragement of independent interpretation will inevitably lead not only to doctrines that are incompatible with one another but to perspectives that are invariably false. Should Christianity be the true faith of the world, it is impossible that a series of contradictory theological interpretations could all be correct under the context of one theology. If there is a God who desires for a relationship with His believers, then it would only make sense that He would desire His word to be interpreted collectively and adored as a group. A God with an absolute plan and an absolute message would desire an absolute interpretation, then individual, contradictory opinions are not compatible with an objective religion.
Another issue is the separation of church and state. Let me preemphasize this with clarification: I am not an opposer of church and state separation. In my opinion, these are two distinctive modalities and should not overlap under any circumstances. Individuals should be free to have or not have a religion, and said religions acceptance should be a personal choice. However, this series is not assuming the validity of Christianity, but is meant to suggest its canonical denomination within the religions context, under the assumption that the religion is true. To that end, we are beginning with confirmation bias and proceeding from a theological, rather than a philosophical approach. While Christianity's validity will be explored in a future post, that is not the purpose of this series.
To this end, the following will likely be obvious: if the God of Christianity is the true God, why would He desire separation of church and state? Each society would be His by definition, and as such He would seek out a relationship with its inhabitants. While desiring all followers to be believers seems logical, would it not be further logical to have the state educate its citizens via religion? As God Himself desires for the world to be a theocracy under His rule, it seems a logical extension that each society should reflect that. Thus, though I agree with personal choice for the acceptance of Christianity, a life under such a God’s rule logically would not.
Another doctrine that is problematic is the “once saved, always saved” notion. This is simply not the case. Many individuals subscribe to the notion of Christianity, believing full heartedly in its tenets and obeying to the best of their abilities, yet still abandon the faith for various motives. A counterargument used for this is to claim the person was never saved to begin with, but this is hopelessly to beg the question. If they weren’t saved because they lost faith, and lost faith because they weren’t saved, we have circular reasoning that does not lead us anywhere. Furthermore, what differentiates a believer who is saved from one who is not? Why does God choose to save one believer and keep them under His arm, while allowing another to lose faith and face damnation? As we have established Calvinism as being a more valid system, we may safely conclude that God KNOWS who will be saved and who will not by nature of His omniscience and His personal choice; however, explanation must be given as to why He would abandon some believers to lost faith while permanently saving others.
Another issue with baptism is its very low church doctrine. Though valid counterarguments may be made for this, it is of this author's opinion that God seeks a communion with His followers. While this includes personal relationships, it is not at the cost of the communion. The church functions as God’s kingdom on earth, and serves as a means by which God’s congregation may commune with Him. While there seems to me nothing wrong with seeking a relationship with your God, it should not be done at the cost of the community, of which the church serves this function. As mentioned, if God has a plan for humanity, then this plan is collective by nature and is objective in its administration. As such, personal interpretation is bound to lead to error and is separative, rather than uniting in its results. While individuals should seek a relationship to God, they should also remember that Christianity is a community that serves as the congregation to God’s kingdom, meant to be actualized as a community.
Finally, we must discuss the baptist relationship with sin. If existence leads to sin as a result of humanity's fall, and baptism is the way of entering Christianity, that baby baptism makes sense under that paradigm. An infant with an infection should be prescribed antibiotics immediately, not forced to wait until adulthood to decide if it desires treatment. While personal baptism is great for declaring yourself Christian, it is not necessary for salvation and serves a symbolic value. However, if escape from sin IS necessary for salvation and baptism serves that function, then it should be administered to an infant so that they may be a child unto God before any risk of damnation is imminent. While baptists may disagree that baby baptism is necessary for salvation, I shall discuss the problems with this notion in a future denomination post.
Final Rank
Finalizing my thoughts on baptism, I rank this denomination:
While baptism has positive doctrines that every Christian should practice, there are some unfortunate problems with its theological doctrine. Baptism contains positive principles that every Christian should consider and practice, but there are not enough positive notes to consider it canon. Overall, baptism is not a bad denomination, but would not be my personal recommendation for those looking to choose a denomination.
