Spontaneous baptisms and a nasty case of the heebie jeebies


Over the last week, there’s been a lot of discussion about the practice of spontaneous baptism, spurred on by controversy surrounding Elevation Church’s how-to guide for “doing your part in God’s miracle.” Russell Moore’s weighed in, The Gospel Coalition released a roundtable discussion between Matt Chandler, Mark Dever and Darrin Patrick about 18 months ago, and undoubtedly many more voices are bound to say something.

None of us, of course, should be surprised that Furtick and Elevation would meticulously plan out such things—after all, anyone who has read Furtick’s books or heard him speak anywhere would be painfully aware of his Revivalist, um, “exuberance.” The first time I heard him speak was at the Willow Creek Leadership Summit a few years back where he demoed the power of Spirit Keys to set the mood during a worship gathering (and I hated Spirit Keys ever since).

Obviously there’s a lot more to be concerned about with Furtick than the spontaneous baptism issue (I’ll spare you my laundry list)—but the spontaneous baptism issue is an important one. While we see a few instances of spontaneous baptism in Scripture, which should lead us to be cautious of completely ruling it out as a practice in all circumstances, it’s still something we need to be careful of.

A bit of backstory: I was baptized in a more-or-less spontaneous situation. I’d been a Christian for about three months at that point and knew it was something I should do, but didn’t know when. One weekend in August 2005, the church we attended was performing baptisms (the majority of which were planned in advance). Emily and I watched each person and as we did, I felt compelled to get baptized. So Emily and I both talked to the youth pastor, asked if we could, the pastor got back into his wet pants, we shared what God had been doing in our lives—how He brought us to faith, how the gospel changed us—and then we were baptized.

The church I was baptized in was careful—their wasn’t a pressure for us to get baptized right away. There wasn’t an overly emotional appeal at the end, although they did invite people to come forward if they felt the Holy Spirit compel them to do so (which is fairly typical for most evangelical churches these days from what I can tell).

As you can imagine, the whole conversation is very personal to me. But here’s where I land, for what it’s worth: we should be very, very cautious to baptize anyone too quickly. I’d rather wait and (as best as any of us are able) be sure that someone is truly saved, is bearing fruit (even if it’s a tiny amount) and understands the significance of the sacrament.

What Furtick’s approach (and the revivalist mindset in general) reveals is a deficient understanding of this essential sacrament. But Furtick isn’t alone in this. We laughingly call baptism getting a bath, or getting dunked… When we’re being serious, we tend to stick to the now standard “outward declaration of an inward transformation” definition.

And while this elevator speech version is certainly true, we need to more fully express what that “inward transformation” entails. J. I. Packer’s definition of baptism is exceptionally helpful in this regard:

Christian baptism, which has the form of a ceremonial washing (like John’s pre-Christian baptism), is a sign from God that signifies inward cleansing and remission of sins (Acts 22:16; 1 Cor. 6:11; Eph. 5:25–27), Spirit-wrought regeneration and new life (Titus 3:5), and the abiding presence of the Holy Spirit as God’s seal testifying and guaranteeing that one will be kept safe in Christ forever (1 Cor. 12:13; Eph. 1:13–14). Baptism carries these meanings because first and fundamentally it signifies union with Christ in his death, burial, and resurrection (Rom. 6:3–7; Col. 2:11–12); and this union with Christ is the source of every element in our salvation (1 John 5:11–12). Receiving the sign in faith assures the persons baptized that God’s gift of new life in Christ is freely given to them. At the same time, it commits them to live henceforth in a new way as committed disciples of Jesus. Baptism signifies a watershed point in a human life because it signifies a new-creational ingrafting into Christ’s risen life. [1. J. I. Packer, Concise Theology: a Guide to Historic Christian Beliefs]

While a convert doesn’t necessarily have to understand all the implications of this reality, if they understand none of it—if they’re compelled only by an emotional experience, if there is no credible evidence of Spirit-borne fruit, if there’s no evidence they understand the gospel at all—then we are absolutely right to have a nasty case of the heebie jeebies. Baptism signifies our union with Christ, the forgiveness of our sins and is a commitment to living as one of His disciples. When people just take a bath, they’re missing the point. And when we encourage them to do so, so are we.

photo credit: Mars Hill Church via photopin cc

Posted by Aaron Armstrong

Aaron is the author of several books for adults and children, as well as multiple documentaries and Bible studies. His latest book, I'm a Christian—Now What?: A Guide to Your New Life with Christ is available now.

Reader interactions

5 Replies to “Spontaneous baptisms and a nasty case of the heebie jeebies”

  1. […] Spontaneous baptisms and a nasty case of the heebie jeebies […]

  2. I would suggest that though not spontaneous, scripture points to an “immediate baptism.” I think we intellectualize people out of their obedience to be baptized and cannot excuse every emotional experience as not being evidence. If you encounter the life altering presence of God you are going to be emotional. There is such a thing as healthy emotional experiences that coincide with what’s happening in our mind, heart and soul.

  3. Michelle Dacus Lesley February 27, 2014 at 4:04 pm

    Great article, Aaron. I agree wholeheartedly.

    I have been giving a lot of thought to baptism over the last few months. A Bible teacher I listen to regularly is a Confessional Lutheran and took the time on one of his podcasts to thoroughly explain the Lutheran view of baptism. There are a few tenets I disagree with, theologically, but overall, I appreciate the solemnity with which they approach baptism. While I feel that my own denomination (Southern Baptist) generally holds a more theologically accurate view of baptism (though certainly not without its own errors), I believe we treat baptism far too lightheartedly and insignificantly. I’d like to see my denomination move back to esteeming baptism as more weighty, significant, and God-glorifying.

  4. Let’s remember Furtick probably is not the only one doing this, and whilst I agree with some of your comments you do raise more questions. Should we be cautious to baptize too quickly, and ignore the book of acts. Should we criticize the Ethiopian for wanting to be baptized immediately? Did he show evidence of fruit? If someone wants to be baptized, should we give them an exam first?

  5. Two words: Thank you! This is so well written and I am so grateful that I (finally) found another perspective that lines up with my own. It’s been really surprising to me how openly people have received and welcomed the idea of “spontaneous (and yet methodically planned and orchestrated) baptisms.” You presented my own hesitations and hold-ups so eloquently. This is excellent.

Comments are closed.