# Baptism of the Ethiopian Eunuch.



## Jash Comstock (Oct 6, 2011)

If Baptism is a sacrament/ordinance to be administered by the authority of the local church, how do we explain the Ethiopian Eunuch? He was not Baptized by a church or a congregation of believers, in fact, quite the opposite. How do we rationalize this?


----------



## Peairtach (Oct 6, 2011)

He was baptised by an apostle with apostolic authority from Christ.

Properly constituted presbyteries and kirk sessions have apostolic authority.


----------



## Jack K (Oct 6, 2011)

Some would question whether the Philip in Acts 8 is the same guy as Philip the apostle. But regardless, Philip was preaching and ministering in Samaria under the authority of the church in Jerusalem and with the apostles' blessing: _"Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John, who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit"_ (Acts 8:14-15). So Philip, despite being directly sent to the Ethiopian by the Spirit, was not a lone ranger with regard to the church. He was closely tied to the apostles.


----------



## KMK (Oct 6, 2011)

Jack K said:


> So Philip, despite being directly sent to the Ethiopian by the Spirit, was not a lone ranger with regard to the church. He was closely tied to the apostles.



Agreed. Also, the Book of Acts is not exactly normative for the church today anyway.


----------



## Poimen (Oct 6, 2011)

KMK said:


> Jack K said:
> 
> 
> > So Philip, despite being directly sent to the Ethiopian by the Spirit, was not a lone ranger with regard to the church. He was closely tied to the apostles.
> ...



Actually, you heretic, it is. For I proclaim that if the person who baptized you does not fly away at the moment the sacrament is completed, you are truly outside the fellowship of the saints (see Acts 8:39).


----------

