Michelle in MO Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Heather....there are 5 pages of replies, so I didn't take time to read them all. Excuse me if this has already been said. Find yourself an indoor pool, girl, and have your sweet dh baptize this man. It will be meaningful to them both and hopefully will not introduce this man to the ridiculous politics of the "church" so new into his new-found faith. Unless there is serious doubt as to this man's genuine conversion, I see no Scriptural precedent for placing any additional burdens on this man getting baptized. Baptism may actually help to encourage him in his new-found faith. I do not believe we need to add any additional restrictions on believers that the early church and apostles themselves did not practice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Susan in KY Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Heather....there are 5 pages of replies, so I didn't take time to read them all. Excuse me if this has already been said. Find yourself an indoor pool, girl, and have your sweet dh baptize this man. It will be meaningful to them both and hopefully will not introduce this man to the ridiculous politics of the "church" so new into his new-found faith. :iagree::iagree::iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhonda in TX Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 This is very well-said and I agree. I'm actually surprised at the surprise on this topic. I don't agree with any membership requirement by any means, but pastors and priests have an obligation before God to shepherd those in their flock and I can completely understand any hesitation to offer a sacrament, publicly among a congregation for which that pastor feels immense responsibility, to a stranger--even if they are a "friend of a friend". Honestly, there's no biblical reason to refuse someone who asks to be baptized. And, I'm sure this pastor could follow up with this guy even if he's not a member of the church. However, I think the OP's husband should do the baptizing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peek a Boo Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Not sure what's wrong with trying to protect the honor of Christ. When we profess to be Christians, thereby aligning ourselves with Christ, and then act contrary to Biblical teaching, we are bringing reproach to the name of Christ. I don't know that we "need" to protect it from the standpoint of God ever "needing" anything from us. I do think we have a responsibility to act in accordance with our profession so as not to shame our Savior. Maybe I'm not using the correct vocabulary, but I believe it is the believer's duty to act in such a way that honors Christ's name in the world. maybe it is just terminology, but something here still sits wrong w/ me: Honoring Christ's name is not the goal, and is one of the biggest things that non-Christians have a problem with. We should revere His name, no doubt. But as soon as we align our pitiful actions w/ Christ's honor, we actually DIShonor Him. Christ honors US, not vice versa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KarenNC Posted January 18, 2009 Share Posted January 18, 2009 I have also never heard of waiting three years to get baptized as a PP referred to this practice in the early Christian churches (not saying it isn't true but it is news to me, that's all). Wierd. http://frterry.org/History/Chapter_3/Chap.3%20Being%20Christian%20in%20the%20Early%20Centuries.htm has a discussion on preparation for baptism in the early church in the 1st-3rd centuries. Look under "Christian initiation". The ways in which Communion or the Eucharist have been celebrated have also varied greatly over the centuries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danestress Posted January 18, 2009 Share Posted January 18, 2009 I don't understand a policy that says that you have to plan to be a member in order to get baptized. I do understand a policy that say, "we have a baptism preparation class or I would like to spend time with you talking about what this means." I disagree that Heather's husband should necessarily do the baptism himself. I think it would be really neat and special and is a great idea, but I think some people really want an ordained minister's involvement, and I understand that. If he explains that you don't have to have a priest for baptism but the guy still wants one or wants a more public ceremony, I understand that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather in Neverland Posted January 18, 2009 Author Share Posted January 18, 2009 Karen, thanks for posting the link. I read it, and I had to smile--someone who hopped from "then" to "now" would not know they had done so if they landed in the middle of a church baptism in our church--except that that in the earliest church, people were baptised NAKED!!!:eek: :) Holy smokes....I don't want to know him THAT well! :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhonda in TX Posted January 18, 2009 Share Posted January 18, 2009 I disagree that Heather's husband should necessarily do the baptism himself. I think it would be really neat and special and is a great idea, but I think some people really want an ordained minister's involvement, and I understand that. If he explains that you don't have to have a priest for baptism but the guy still wants one or wants a more public ceremony, I understand that. It should definitely be the decision of the baptizee (is that a word?). If he wants a minister, they should call around and find one. I would just hate for him to wait because of the words of one man. My dad baptized me. I love that I had such a close relationship to the person who performed that ceremony. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tree House Academy Posted January 18, 2009 Share Posted January 18, 2009 That seems to be a denominational thing. The Christian church believes that one must be baptized before their committment to Christ is fulfilled. Baptists believe that it is just a formality - and yes, it is to gain membership in that church. When you move to a new church, you aren't re-baptized, you move by letter....which just means that you were a member at the old church and you now want to be a memeber at the new church. Each church and denomination is different... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katemary63 Posted January 18, 2009 Share Posted January 18, 2009 Matthew 3:5People went out to him from Jerusalem and all Judea and the whole region of the Jordan. 6Confessing their sins, they were baptized by him in the Jordan River. Mark 16:16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. By these two verses, it seems that being baptized follows repentance. Isn't that what baptism is? An outward profession of a new life in Christ? A symbol of the washing of water (regeneration). With all due respect, I don't see why any minister would hinge any conditions on someone wanting to be baptized. :iagree: 100% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean too Posted January 18, 2009 Share Posted January 18, 2009 Heather....there are 5 pages of replies, so I didn't take time to read them all. Excuse me if this has already been said. Find yourself an indoor pool, girl, and have your sweet dh baptize this man. It will be meaningful to them both and hopefully will not introduce this man to the ridiculous politics of the "church" so new into his new-found faith. I totally agree! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evergreen State Sue Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 If he has believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, then he is saved. He was baptized by the Holy Spirit when he first believed. Baptism (by water) is an outward expression showing that you are aligning yourself with Christ. Water baptism doesn't save you. It often gives you a chance to share your testimony with others. Perhaps the pastor wants to hear his testimony first to be clear about his conversion so that it would not be confusing when others hear it. I am always blessed by testimonies. I love to hear how people came to Christ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawn of ns Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 That seems to be a denominational thing. I think that's key. There seems to be an assumption in many of the posts here that baptism holds the same menaing for all Christians when it really doesn't. The pastor's reluctance to baptize simply makes sense when viewed in light of a different understanding of baptism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizzyBee Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 I asked my dh what he would do. He said that he'd want to talk to the guy first, but then he'd probably go ahead and baptize him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetbaby Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 Matthew 3:5People went out to him from Jerusalem and all Judea and the whole region of the Jordan. 6Confessing their sins, they were baptized by him in the Jordan River. Mark 16:16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. By these two verses, it seems that being baptized follows repentance. Isn't that what baptism is? An outward profession of a new life in Christ? A symbol of the washing of water (regeneration). With all due respect, I don't see why any minister would hinge any conditions on someone wanting to be baptized. :iagree: Baptism is an outward profession of a new life in Christ, NOT church membership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.