In many Churches of Christ, offering an invitation for baptism at the end of every sermon is customary. While well-intentioned and rooted in a desire to call people to salvation, this tradition often leaves believers wondering whether it’s a scriptural mandate. Is this practice based on clear biblical teaching, or is it more of a human tradition that has developed over time? Understanding the difference is crucial, especially in our faith, where we strive to follow the early church pattern as closely as possible.

It’s a hot topic right now, so I figured I’d jump on the bandwagon too. Check out these other articles by Christian brothers on this so far.

Jack Wilkie – The Case Against the Invitation/Altar Call (https://jackwilkie.co/p/the-case-against-the-invitationaltar)

Cougan Collins – Reconsidering the Invitation: A Balanced Perspective on Its Value in Worship (https://www.lgministry.org/post/reconsidering-the-invitation-a-balanced-perspective-on-its-value-in-worship)

Both Jack and Cougan make very valid and compelling points, but I just wanted to expound a few things and share my convictions as well. This article is longer than both of them combined, so if you make it to the end just know how much I appreciate and value everyone’s input on the topic.

The Biblical Basis for Baptism

There is no doubt that baptism is essential to salvation, according to scripture. Acts 2:38 records Peter’s words at Pentecost: “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” Similarly, Mark 16:16 states, “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” Baptism, therefore, is clearly tied to the remission of sins and entry into the body of Christ (Romans 6:3-4).

But where does offering a formal invitation after every sermon come from? You’ll find no direct command in the New Testament where the apostles instituted such a practice. If we look at how people were baptized in the early church, we see a much more organic approach.

Baptism in the Early Church

The early Christians didn’t wait for a specific moment at the end of a gathering to offer baptism. When Philip preached to the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8, the eunuch himself asked, “Look, here is water. What can stand in the way of my being baptized?” (Acts 8:36). Philip didn’t conclude his sermon and then extend an invitation; the response to the gospel was immediate, prompted by the message of Christ itself.

Likewise, when the Philippian jailer asked Paul and Silas, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” (Acts 16:30), the apostles taught him, and he and his household were baptized that very night—without any mention of a structured “invitation” as part of a formal worship service.

In the writings of early church fathers like Tertullian and Justin Martyr, we see descriptions of baptism being offered as part of an individual’s response to faith rather than a ritualized invitation at the end of a sermon. Their focus was on the conversion and spiritual transformation of the believer, not on a specific liturgical moment.

The Weekly Gathering: Edification or Evangelism?

In many Christian traditions, particularly in the Churches of Christ, the weekly gathering on the first day of the week is considered a sacred time for the congregation. But what is the true purpose of this assembly? Is it primarily an evangelistic event designed to call the unsaved to Christ? Or is it meant to edify and build up the already saved body of believers?

Scripture and early church history give us clear insights into this question, showing that the Lord’s Day assembly is not meant to be a rehashing of the basics of salvation for an already saved group but rather a time of spiritual nourishment, encouragement, and worship.

The First Day of the Week in Scripture

The earliest Christian communities gathered on the first day of the week, or Sunday, to commemorate the resurrection of Christ. Acts 20:7 says, “On the first day of the week, we came together to break bread.” This phrase, “to break bread,” signifies the celebration of the Lord’s Supper, a core aspect of early Christian worship. Similarly, Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 16:2, “On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside and store it up, as he may prosper.”

The assembly on the first day of the week is clearly a recurring event, but its purpose is not explicitly evangelistic. The focus is on gathering to worship, partake in communion, and encourage one another in the faith. This suggests that the weekly gathering is primarily for the edification of the church—the believers—rather than a repetitive call to salvation for those who are already saved.

Edification of the Body, Not Repetition of the Basics

In 1 Corinthians 14, Paul gives instructions regarding order in the assembly. His concern is to ensure that everything is done “for the strengthening of the church” (1 Corinthians 14:26). The word used here for “strengthening” (οἰκοδομή, oikodomē) refers to building up, which is indicative of spiritual growth and maturity. This shows that the purpose of teaching and exhortation during the assembly is to help believers mature in their faith, not simply to rehash foundational principles they already know, such as the plan of salvation.

The writer of Hebrews echoes this sentiment, encouraging believers to “leave the elementary doctrine of Christ and go on to maturity” (Hebrews 6:1). It is not that the message of salvation is unimportant—far from it—but that continually revisiting it to an audience that is already saved can hinder the church from growing deeper in their understanding of God’s Word and their walk with Christ. As the body gathers on the first day of the week, the goal should be to learn, grow, and edify one another.

Teaching and Preaching: Two Different Roles

Understanding the Greek terms for “teaching” (didaskō) and “preaching” (kērussō) sheds light on their respective roles within the church. In 1 Corinthians 14, the emphasis is on teaching. The Greek word didaskō (διδάσκω) refers to instruction, particularly in the context of nurturing and educating believers. Teaching focuses on providing insight, understanding, and clarifying the scriptures to build up the church.

In contrast, the word kērussō (κηρύσσω), used in 2 Timothy 4:2 (“Preach the word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage”), has a different connotation. It refers to the act of proclamation, often in the sense of heralding or announcing the gospel to those who have not heard it. Preaching is primarily outward-focused, aimed at proclaiming the good news of Jesus Christ to those who need to hear it.

The weekly gathering of the church, then, is primarily for teaching and edification, not preaching in the sense of evangelism. Of course, there will be times when non-believers are present in the assembly, and the gospel should always be ready on our lips, but the primary function of the first-day gathering is to build up the body of Christ.

Early Church Fathers on the Gathering

The writings of early church fathers reflect this focus on edification in the assembly. Justin Martyr, writing in the second century, described the Christian assembly on the first day of the week as a time when “the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read” and the leader “instructs and exhorts” the people. This confirms that the purpose of the gathering was to teach and strengthen believers.

Writing a century later, Tertullian emphasized that Christians met for prayer, scripture reading, and mutual encouragement. Evangelism happened outside the assembly, as believers shared their faith in their daily lives.

The Importance of Edification in the Assembly

Both scripture and early church practice clearly show that the primary purpose of the weekly gathering on the first day of the week is to edify the body. This time is set aside for believers to worship God, partake in the Lord’s Supper, and grow in their knowledge and understanding of His Word.

Repeating the plan of salvation each week to a group of people who have already responded to it isn’t beneficial. Instead, it keeps the congregation from learning new things and growing deeper in their faith. Paul encourages us to move beyond the “elementary teachings about Christ” and go on to maturity (Hebrews 6:1).

Let us ensure that our weekly gatherings are spaces where believers are strengthened and equipped for the work of the ministry, as Paul describes in Ephesians 4:11-13. In doing so, we build up the body of Christ and fulfill the true purpose of the church’s assembly on the first day of the week.

Why the Saved Don’t Need Constant Reminders of the Plan of Salvation

In many Churches of Christ, it is common practice to close sermons with a reminder of the plan of salvation. While the desire to preach Christ’s message of salvation is commendable, is it really necessary to remind a group of saved believers of what they have already obeyed? The apostles, early church fathers, and the scriptures themselves suggest that those who have responded to the gospel should not need constant repetition of the basics. Instead, they should be equipped to lead others to Christ through their own understanding and practical knowledge.

Salvation Is Already Accomplished for the Saved

Paul’s letters are filled with reminders that those who are in Christ are already saved. In Romans 6:3-4, Paul writes, “Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.” Notice the language—Paul speaks of these things as accomplished facts. The Roman Christians had already been baptized; they already knew what the plan of salvation was, and they had followed it.

Similarly, in Ephesians 2:8-9, Paul says, “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast.” The emphasis is on what has been done. Once you’ve been saved, the focus should not remain on the foundational message of salvation but on how to live out that salvation and share it with others.

Practical Knowledge for Evangelism

Saved believers don’t need constant reminders about the plan of salvation because they already possess practical knowledge of it. Having followed the “steps of salvation”—hearing the gospel, believing, repenting, confessing, and being baptized—they are well-equipped to guide others through the process. In Hebrews 5:12-14, the writer chastises believers still clinging to basic teachings, saying, “In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again.”

The saved are expected to mature in their faith, to become teachers themselves, sharing their practical experience with others. Constantly rehashing the plan of salvation in every sermon not only stunts the spiritual growth of believers but also implies that they haven’t yet fully grasped what they have already experienced and lived. Instead, they should focus on deepening their faith and applying their knowledge to evangelism.

Moving Beyond the Elementary Teachings

The writer of Hebrews makes this point even more strongly in Hebrews 6:1, where he says, “Therefore let us move beyond the elementary teachings about Christ and be taken forward to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death, and of faith in God, instruction about cleansing rites, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment.” The goal is not to stay forever in the realm of the basics but to move forward in maturity.

There is a time and place for teaching the plan of salvation, but that time is not continually during the regular gathering of the saved. The weekly assembly should be a time of spiritual nourishment and growth, not a repetitive reintroduction to what the believers already know and have obeyed.

Early Church Fathers on Growth and Evangelism

The early church fathers also emphasized the importance of moving beyond foundational teachings to more profound spiritual growth. Clement of Alexandria (150–215 AD) wrote about the need for Christians to go beyond basic teachings and grow in knowledge: “Being baptized, we are illuminated; illuminated, we become sons; being made sons, we are made perfect; being made perfect, we are made immortal.”

Clement’s words reflect the journey of faith—once a person has been baptized and has followed the plan of salvation, they should not remain in the basic stage of their faith. They should strive toward perfection, meaning spiritual maturity and deeper understanding. They become better equipped to guide others to salvation through their knowledge and experience as they grow.

Tertullian, another early church father, likewise emphasized that believers are to be more than just hearers of the gospel; they are to be doers, actively living out their faith and sharing it with others: “He who lives only to himself and the Lord, and serves not his neighbor, knows nothing of that charity which Christ taught.”

Encouraging Maturity, Not Repetition

If the weekly gathering becomes a place where the same message of salvation is repeated every week, believers are being held back from spiritual maturity. The focus should shift from reminding the saved of what they have already done to teaching them how to live out their faith, deepen their relationship with God, and effectively share the gospel with others.

In Ephesians 4:11-13, Paul outlines the purpose of spiritual leaders in the church: “So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors, and teachers, to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.” The church’s teaching and leadership goal is to help believers grow into maturity, not to continually remind them of the foundational things they already know.

Conclusion

The church’s weekly gathering is a time for edification, not repetition. Saved believers do not need constant reminders of the plan of salvation—they have already followed it and possess the practical knowledge to lead others to Christ. Instead, the assembly should focus on deepening the believers’ faith, encouraging spiritual growth, and equipping the saints for the work of ministry. As scripture and early church history show, we must move beyond the elementary teachings and strive toward maturity in Christ.

A Tradition Rooted in Denominational Practices

While this practice is so ingrained in our worship services that it seems unassailable, it may surprise many that this tradition is not as ancient or scriptural as it appears. The tradition of offering a formal invitation comes directly from the practice of “altar calls,” which emerged in Protestant traditions like the Presbyterian tradition that Barton W. Stone and Alexander Campbell—founders of the Restoration Movement—were originally part of. This raises an important question: If we in the Churches of Christ are so intent on not looking like other denominations, why are we so quick to defend and perpetuate a practice we borrowed from them?

The Historical Origins of the Invitation

Extending an invitation after a sermon finds its roots in the Protestant revivals of the 18th and 19th centuries. During these revivals, preachers like Charles Finney popularized what is now known as the “altar call.” In his Lectures on Revivals of Religion (1835), Finney described the “anxious seat” as a way for those seeking salvation to respond publicly, which evolved into the altar call as we know it today. While Finney was a Presbyterian, his practices strongly influenced a wide range of Protestant denominations, including the Baptist and Methodist churches, as well as movements like Stone and Campbell’s Restoration Movement.

Barton W. Stone and Alexander Campbell both came from Presbyterian backgrounds before they began seeking to restore New Testament Christianity. It’s not hard to see how the tradition of a public invitation could have been brought into their congregations and eventually into the Churches of Christ as part of their worship practices. Stone’s emphasis on revivalism and Campbell’s focus on a rational, systematic call to obedience provided fertile ground for adopting practices like the altar call.

However, nowhere in the New Testament do we find the apostles offering a formal invitation at the end of their sermons. Baptism and responses to the gospel were spontaneous and personal, as in Acts 8 when the Ethiopian eunuch sought baptism upon hearing the gospel. The structured “invitation,” as we practice it today, is, in truth, a product of human tradition rather than a scriptural mandate.

Borrowing Traditions from the Denominations We Disown

One of the ironies here is that the Churches of Christ are often adamant about “not looking like other denominations.” From its inception, the Restoration Movement sought to restore the simple, unadulterated faith of the first-century church. Alexander Campbell famously declared, “Where the Bible speaks, we speak; where the Bible is silent, we are silent.” This was intended to free the church from denominational creeds, confessions, and practices that had no scriptural basis.

Yet, when it comes to offering an invitation, we cling tightly to a tradition borrowed from denominational sources, namely Presbyterianism and later revivalist movements. We sometimes use the invitation as a litmus test for faithfulness, as if not offering one would make us less committed to the gospel. However, this exposes a certain inconsistency in our desire to “not look like denominations.”

The very denominations we claim to be distinct from are the ones from whom we picked up this tradition. To defend the necessity of the invitation is to defend a practice borrowed from those traditions from which we strive so hard to distinguish ourselves. In doing so, we reveal that the issue is not always with looking like other denominations but perhaps with selectively holding onto traditions that feel comfortable to us.

A Straw Man or a Real Issue?

Some might argue that pointing out the denominational origins of the invitation is creating a straw man. They might claim that offering an invitation is a useful way to encourage people to respond to the gospel and that its origins don’t matter. But the issue runs deeper than that. The very same people who argue against looking like a denomination often cling to traditions like the invitation and react strongly when their origins are questioned.

The idea that this is a “straw man” argument falls apart when you realize that the core concern of many in the Churches of Christ is the avoidance of denominational traditions. If we are to consistently apply the principle of rejecting man-made traditions, we must be willing to examine and question all practices—especially those that come from denominational backgrounds.

Furthermore, if we are going to elevate practices like the invitation to the level of essential tradition, we should at least be honest about its historical and theological origins. It’s not a straw man to point out that the invitation comes from denominational practices when those same people are quick to argue that we need to avoid looking like denominations.

Man-Made Traditions vs. Scriptural Authority

The problem arises when we treat customs or traditions as scriptural commands. Jesus Himself warned about this in Matthew 15:9, when He said, “They worship me in vain; their teachings are merely human rules.” Similarly, in Colossians 2:22, Paul admonishes the church not to submit to “rules based on merely human commands and teachings.”

The danger is clear: when we elevate traditions—no matter how well-meaning—to the level of divine law, we risk imposing burdens on others that God Himself did not impose. This is precisely the concern Jesus had with the Pharisees, who created numerous regulations not found in the Law of Moses and enforced them as though they came from God.

Scripture Over Tradition

Jesus Himself warned about the danger of elevating human traditions to the level of divine command. In Matthew 15:9, He said, “They worship me in vain; their teachings are merely human rules.” This should give us pause. If the invitation is something we defend so fiercely, is it because it is a command of God or because it is a comfortable tradition that we have adopted and made our own?

In his letter to the Colossians, Paul also warns the church not to get caught up in human traditions. In Colossians 2:8, he writes, “See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.”

We in the Churches of Christ must maintain clarity about the difference between biblical commands and human traditions. If the New Testament does not prescribe a formal invitation at the end of every sermon, we must be careful not to treat it as divinely ordained. Doing so puts us in danger of becoming the very thing we seek to avoid—enslaved to denominational practices that have no basis in scripture.

Freedom in Christ and the Role of Tradition

Invitations for baptism are not wrong in and of themselves; they are simply one way to help people respond to the gospel. However, we mustn’t enforce such traditions as though they are binding upon the church. If scripture does not explicitly require something, neither should we.

The church has freedom in Christ to determine how and when baptism should be offered, so long as it aligns with the spirit of the New Testament teachings. The key is not to mistake our methods for God’s commands.

Conclusion

The invitation for baptism at the end of a sermon is a long-standing tradition within the Churches of Christ, but it is not mandated by scripture. While it serves a useful purpose, we mustn’t elevate it to the status of a divine law. Scripture warns us against teaching man-made traditions as if they came from God, and we must diligently distinguish between them.

As we strive to restore the practices of the early church, let us be careful not to add burdens where scripture is silent. Instead, let us focus on the heart of the gospel message, trusting that God will work in the hearts of those who hear it, whether through an invitation at the end of a sermon or in other ways.

The truth of the matter is the invitation, as practiced in the Churches of Christ, is a tradition that originates in the denominational practices of Presbyterians and revivalist movements. While there is nothing inherently wrong with encouraging a public response to the gospel, we must be careful not to treat this practice as if it were commanded by scripture. As much as we want to avoid looking like other denominations, we are quick to defend the traditions we borrowed from them. The challenge is to be honest with ourselves and ensure that we follow Christ, not simply adhere to human traditions for their own sake.

While offering an invitation for baptism during the worship gathering has become standard in many Churches of Christ, we should consider whether this practice is genuinely productive within the context of a gathering primarily for the edification of the saints. Baptism is, without question, central to the gospel message (Acts 2:38; Romans 6:3-4), but offering an invitation for baptism during a worship service that is intended to build up the already-saved body may not be the most effective use of that time.

The Invitation for Prayer and Edification

An invitation to respond to the message in other ways—such as for prayer, repentance, or encouragement—can undoubtedly serve an important role in the worship service. Scripture encourages believers to “confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed” (James 5:16), and the regular gathering of the saints is a fitting place for this kind of mutual support and edification. This type of invitation aligns with the purpose of the assembly, as Paul describes in 1 Corinthians 14:26, where he stresses that all things should be done to strengthen the church.

In this context, an invitation serves as a way to build up the body, offering believers an opportunity to seek prayers for struggles or confess sins in a setting where they can receive encouragement and support from their fellow Christians.

Baptism and the Worship Gathering

However, offering an invitation for baptism during the regular worship service is not as productive. The assembly of the saints is, by its nature, primarily for the edification of believers. In 1 Corinthians 14, Paul emphasizes that the worship gathering is designed to “strengthen, encourage, and comfort” the body of Christ (1 Cor 14:3). It is a time for believers to grow in their faith and knowledge, not a time focused on evangelism to the lost.

While non-believers may be present in any given assembly, the church’s primary goal during this time is to build up the saved. The practice of continually offering an invitation for baptism during a gathering meant to encourage the saints dilutes the focus of the message and the worship. It risks turning a time of spiritual nourishment into a repetitive rehashing of foundational teachings that most of the audience has already responded to.

Conclusion

While offering an invitation for prayer, repentance, or encouragement can be a valuable and scripturally supported part of the worship assembly, offering an invitation for baptism during this time may not be the most productive use of the gathering. Baptism, while essential, is a step that individuals can and should take when they are ready. Those topics are better addressed in personal conversations and settings designed for evangelism rather than in a worship service intended to edify the body. We should thoughtfully consider the role of the invitation and ensure that it aligns with the primary goals of the assembly: to build up and encourage the saints.

As Jesus and Paul warned, we must guard against elevating human traditions to the level of divine command. We need to continually return to the scriptures and evaluate our practices in light of God’s Word, not in light of what is familiar or comfortable. The invitation may be a helpful tool, but it is not a scriptural requirement, and we should not treat it as such.

A Call for Grace and Christian Liberty

In closing, it is important to extend grace on the topic of offering an invitation at the end of a sermon. Whether a preacher is convicted to offer an invitation for baptism at the close of each sermon or focuses more on edifying the church without doing so, they are well within their Christian liberty. Romans 14:4 reminds us, “Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall.” Preachers should be free to follow their convictions in this matter without facing judgment or pressure from others to conform to one specific approach.

It is also vital to avoid imposing one view as the only correct practice. Offering an invitation is not mandated by scripture or abstaining from it. Instead, both approaches can coexist within Christian liberty as long as the focus remains on glorifying God and building up His church. Just as Paul urged the early church to maintain unity despite differing practices in matters of conscience (Romans 14:5-6), we too should leave room for grace and freedom in how we handle the invitation.

Ultimately, the church thrives not when everyone does the exact same thing but when we allow space for differing approaches to serve different needs, all within the bounds of scriptural teaching. Whether the focus is on calling the lost or edifying the saved, let us pursue peace and mutual encouragement, leaving room for the Holy Spirit to work in different ways through different ministers.