On Public Baptismal Testimonies
Written by Nathan Finn, Posted in Ministry, SBC, Theology
During my Christian life, I’ve been a member of four different Southern Baptist churches. I’ve also served in short-term interim positions in five other SBC-related congregations. Each of these churches could be characterized as theologically conservative, more or less (often officially) affirming the confessional consensus of the current Baptist Faith and Message. Each of these churches cared very much about reaching lost people with the gospel, baptizing them, and then teaching new disciples what it means to follow Jesus as Lord.
Over the course of my nineteen years as a Southern Baptist, I’ve probably witnessed a couple hundred baptisms. In most cases, the pastor administering the baptism simply introduced the baptismal candidate to the church, asked her a handful of basic questions about the gospel, then baptized her in the name of the Triune God. This was my own practice the handful of times I baptized someone on behalf of congregations I was serving as interim pastor. Yet, it always seemed like something was missing.
When Leah and I were first visiting First Baptist Church of Durham, one of the first things we noticed is that baptismal candidates share their testimonies before the congregation prior to being baptized. On the first Sunday we visited, we heard the story of a teenage boy from a strong Christian home who had recently turned from his sins and cast himself upon Christ’s mercies. As a lover of Baptist history and theology, I was elated that the church embraced what at one time was standard practice among Baptist churches. This was one of many practices that cemented our desire to join FBC Durham.
Southern Baptists are credobaptists, meaning we only baptize those who can give what appears to be a credible testimony of saving faith. But unlike some other credobaptists, Southern Baptists have historically argued that baptism is an ordinance closely tied to local churches. In fact, we have argued that it is in most cases the church itself that baptizes new converts. The individual immersing the baptismal candidate, normally a pastor, is acting as the congregation’s representative when he immerses a new follower of Jesus Christ. This emphasis on local church credobaptism is the main reason I’m such a strong proponent of every church incorporating public testimonies prior to baptism.
The church should hear the salvation testimony of the person whom they are about to baptize. This testimony serves at least three functions. Theologically, the testimony helps ensure that the congregation is actually practicing credobaptism by immersing someone who claims to have trusted in Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior. Ministerially, the testimony is an encouragement to the whole congregation as it hears about what God has done in saving a sinner and bringing him to the point of publicly identifying with the body of Christ through believer’s baptism. Evangelistically, the testimony provides a clear gospel witness to unbelievers who might observe the baptism.
Some churches might be hesitant to require public testimonies prior to baptism. What if the baptismal candidate is scared of public speaking and/or isn’t a very good speaker? I know plenty of seasoned Christians who would be scared to death to share a public testimony before the whole church. What if the testimony isn’t clear or it’s heterodox and brings confusion? We’ve all heard sketchy testimonies at one time or another. What if including testimonies adds too much time to a worship service? It’s always tough deciding what ought to be “cut” out of a corporate worship gathering when something special is added to the mix.
First, I’d recommend that any baptismal candidate meet with a pastor a couple of days in advance of the baptism to discuss the whole event, including the testimony. (I’m assuming she’s already met with a pastor one or more times for spiritual counsel related to conversion, baptism, church membership, etc.) I’d encourage the baptismal candidate to write out her testimony, not necessarily word for word, but at least in summary form. The combination of meeting with a pastor and writing out the material will help make the testimony clear, succinct, and orthodox. Frankly, this just seems like good shepherding on the part of pastors.
Second, if the Lord is blessing a church with numerous baptismal candidates, I’d recommend setting apart a special gathering for baptisms. This could be done in the place of a Sunday evening worship service or at another time when most of the body can gather together. A separate baptismal celebration would alleviate concerns about multiple testimonies adding too much time to a regular weekend worship gathering. I know of a few churches that hold monthly or quarterly baptismal celebrations, often in public places like a lake or the beach, in part because of this very scenario. (For what it’s worth, outdoor baptismal celebrations are another classic Baptist practice I’d love to see revived.)
Finally, in terms of public speaking concerns, both candidates and churches should be taught the importance of a public baptismal testimony. The baptismal candidate should know that he isn’t being asked to preach a sermon, but to give a three or four minute summary of his new-found faith. If he is really nervous about speaking, he could always write out the testimony verbatim. For candidates who have trouble speaking English, a translator should be secured (assuming the congregation is primarily English-speaking). The church should be encouraged to celebrate the testimony of all baptismal candidates, even if the speaker isn’t eloquent. After all, the church isn’t delighting in the words themselves so much as the spiritual realities the words are describing. I’m a proponent of live testimonies, but in a case where a baptismal candidate is deathly afraid of public speaking, a pre-recorded testimony could be played for the congregation.
At FBC Durham, we’ve baptized three women in the past month. One is a collegian who has been raised in one of our church’s families, but has only recently come to faith in Christ. Another is an Asian graduate student who was recently introduced to the gospel through our church’s outreach ministry to internationals living in Durham. The third young lady is a collegian who was converted several years ago, but who had never followed the Lord in believer’s baptism. I know all three of these stories because each of these women shared their testimonies with our church before we baptized them. I’m thankful they shared their stories with us and that our church provided them with an opportunity to do so. I’d urge your church to do the same.
Nathan,
I really enjoyed the insightful and intelligent way that you delivered your message here. I did not know that before recent years it was a practice of believers to give testimonies before their respective church bodies. I hope that when I am pastoring in a couple of years that church members will be open to such practices.
Dave Flanders
David,
Good to hear from you. I’m glad to hear you also see the value of this practice. I hope you’re doing well.
NAF
I am doing very well. I follow your writings often. I was particularly struck by the importance and excellence of this argument.
Nathan,
I saw this practice as Immanuel Bible Church in Springfield, VA and really was encouraged by it.
At Cornerstone Comm. Church, we have each new member to the church (new or old believer) give a testimony at a separate time from the worship gathering. It happens at our prayer meeting time, and they run from 1 to 10 minutes. Baptism is usually during morning worship.
I think our pastors have discussed having some of the long time members give a testimony so that newer members get to know their conversions, too.
Thank you for the insightful article. A church my parents attended in TX took advantage of modern technology in this regard:
When the person met with the pastor prior to baptism, they would videotape the meeting and then edit this to make a video to show before the baptism. This allowed them to share the testimony with all of the morning worship services in their church. It also helped the person who was nervous about public speaking because after a few minutes talking with the pastor they forgot about the camera and just talked with the pastor. Finally, this worked well in their worship planning because they knew in advance how long each testimony would take.
This wouldn’t work with all churches, but for those who have embraced technology it is a great option.
Kevin
Nathan, good subject to raise. I have long thought it disingenuous for church members to vote to receive a member in fellowship on their profession of faith (and baptism) when they have never heard the profession of faith.
I have been a supporter of this practice for a long time, and have even encouraged some of the churches in South Asia that we have worked with to do this practice (no takers yet, unfortunately).
One additional aspect I would mention is that preparing the testimony for their baptism also prepares them to share that testimony with friends, family, coworkers, etc. who will not be at the baptism. It’s basic evangelism training right from the beginning.
In the Reformed Baptist movement, which essentially spang from IFB or GARBC churches in the 70′s & 80′s, it was common for public testimonies to be given before church membership. This was required of every new member, even if they had been a faithful member of sister RB church (no received by letter for us!) Some would consider this ‘overkill’ but it has been a source of blessing through the years. Of course testimonies are required of any baptism candidate. This past Sunday evening we heard the testimonies and witnessed the baptism of two wonderful young ladies, both raised in Christian homes and in our church, who had come to Christ in the past couple of years.
I attended my brother’s church this weekend while I was visiting my family, and they had a short video of the various testimonies given that prior year. Several were “I was saved today”, or “a couple of minutes ago”. I was a little shocked, since this church is pretty well grounded. I would say they’re EFCA, but they’re really just an independent megachurch.
I asked you and Dr. Davis while you were giving your short seminar to Bull Street on catechising members. I mostly agree with the response that was given, in that when proposed members give a plausible testimony, then there should not be an additional step for membership. I do believe, however, that there is some wisdom in going over the BFM2000 or the Abstract of Principles, or the LBCF1689 if it’s a Reformed church personally with that new believer so they could get an understanding and a crash course in Christianity and specifically Baptist distinctives before baptism. I know this isn’t how the Apostles did it, but they were a little bit more authoritative than we are. What are your thoughts, Dr. Finn?
Marcin,
It’s good to hear from you. I don’t believe it’s necessary to go over a confession of faith prior to baptism, though I do think it’s important to make sure that the person claiming to be a new Christian understands the gospel and something about what it means to be a follower of Jesus Christ. But I don’t think we’re called to baptize theologians. We’re called to baptize disciples and then teach them to observe all things, including sound doctrine. Faith in Christ is enough for baptism, though some theology will obviously be discussed as we try to discern whether or not someone gives evidence of regeneration.
In our church we have a membership class that all prospective members must attend. This includes folks who’ve been recently baptized. In that class, we talk a great deal about our church’s confession (the BF&M 2000) and other distinctives and we expect prospective members to be on board with our church’s general direction in such matters. I can’t recall an occasion when someone was baptized and then didn’t also join our church, with the sole exceptions of a few internationals who we baptized and then who very shortly thereafter returned to their home countries.
I hope this is helpful.
NAF
I apologize that my comment didn’t fit the scope of the post, but I thank you for your thoughtful response. I’ve been giving a lot of thought about this issue lately. I will definitely consider your comments as I ponder the issue some more. In the end, I think this is an issue to be left for the local congregation to decide with a serious consideration for the cultural environment the church finds itself in.
-Marcin