![[baptism_lifegrd.jpg]](http://bp1.blogger.com/_a78g75RPbME/RvwO-2wACGI/AAAAAAAAAVo/C12pyF7ZXFY/s1600/baptism_lifegrd.jpg)
No! I am not saying that at all! Not the least bit, but there does seem to be a lack of urgency. Oh, just in case I wanted to let you know I am not advocating baptism as a condition for salvation. I think we Romans 3:21 through chapter 4 as how a man is justified in the sight of God. However, I have been reading through Acts and I just see a sense of urgency. Acts 2, Acts 8, Acts 10, Acts 16, Acts 19, sure seems to but an urgent plea on how baptisms should work. So my questions are:
1. Why the lack of urgency?
2. What occurred between the 1st century and today that we don’t feel that water immediately proceeds profession?
3. Why are we more eager to get people into our churches (where there is no strong empahsis on scripture) than to offer them water?
4. Who is allowed to baptize and could this be one of the problems?
5. If you are a minster/pastor/elder what is your SOP on this?
1-3. I think it’s partially due to the “easy believism” we have today. We’re a wealthy country and church is treated by some as a social club of sorts. We don’t want to turn people off by actually telling them of the demands of Scripture.
4. I’m not sure. I’ve never really studied the matter. I don’t recall any specific teaching on this from Scripture.
5. n/a
Lionel,
Another great, probing question into the off kilter practice of the traditional western church.
You ask: “Why are we more eager to get people into our churches (where there is no strong empahsis on scripture) than to offer them water?”
Answer: Because we are more interested in getting people into our churches than we are in “making disciples” as Jesus commanded us.
We’re great at making converts. We’re horrible at making disciples (which is what Jesus commands us to do).
Butts in the seats = Money in the plate.
Say no more.
You ask: “Who is allowed to baptize and could this be one of the problems?”
Yes. In the early church (pre 2nd Century) any believer could lead someone to Christ and immediately baptize them on the spot. In fact usually that is how things were done. Baptism was a near immediate, first step of obedience for those who made their decision to follow Jesus.
Today, since we’re not making disciples and very few of our new converts have an idea that they are following Jesus in their daily life, baptism has become as pointless as fasting, praying daily, reading scripture, etc.
Why? Because we sell Christianity to people on the basis of “Say this prayer and you will not go to Hell when you die”. We bring them into the Church based on the idea that the Grace of God covers all of their sins forever. So, if this is true, what’s the point of spending all that time in prayer, or reading the Bible or fasting, etc.? That’s only for those fanatics who want to get all hyper-spiritual, but there’s no real “need” for those things.
Or…is there?
Only if, in your mind, you are following Jesus daily with your entire life. Then you NEED to pray daily, die to yourself, take up your cross and lean on the Grace of God for the strength to seek His face and do His will and put the words of Jesus into practice.
Following Jesus is not the same thing as being a Christian in today’s Christianity.
kg
Bro. Lionel,
In my exchanges with Bro. LAZ over on my blog, I used baptism as an example of our continued Roman Catholicism. Let me explain. Those of us who say we believe in Believer’s Baptism only believe in one side of it. We believe that a person has to be a believer in order to have a “legitimate” baptism. But we don’t believe that ANY BELIEVER can baptize another believer. Because of the laity/clergy distinction we’ve made this the privy of a select group of men. We’ve also formalized it beyond belief. We need a baptistry, pastor or elder, and witnesses. Where was the baptisty for the ethiopian eunuch? Where was his pastor or elder? Where were the witnesses?
Now, imagine if believers took back the ordinances from these select group of men and invited or rather acknowledged Christ’ presence at a baptism. My new convert neighbor, brother, visitor, etc. could come in my back yard pool, or in my large jetted tub in the master bathroom (I don’t have one of these yet, lol) and I could dip them and it would be just as legitimate as being dipped by anyone else.
This would also, in my opinion, settle the issue of infant baptism. As a sign of a parent’s dedication of their child to God, they could baptize them at home in private, as soon as they brought them home from the hospital. And it would be no one’s business.
Basically, if we understood what made a baptism legitimate, faith in Christ, there would be no need to wait until all the so-called “right” conditions were met.
Lionel,
Good Questions I will attempt to answer in order. Also note that these are reasons not excuses.
1. I think part of it is that we are attempting to make sure the conversion is genuine.
2. It is possible the answer could be more practical than anything. The Logistics of baptism in our times (Extra clothes, underwear, etc..) call for planning. Also for some this is a big occasion so they want to invite family, friends and others to participate in the experience.
3. I believe Brother Keith may have been correct in saying $$$ has a lot to do with it.
4. Once again in most churches I believe for practical and logistics it is a preacher/deacon/elder or someone else in a “leadership” role But I don’t see any biblical reason why any believer cannot baptize a new convert.
5. At my church we do it every second Sunday. We don’t have our own baptismal pool so we use another churches. However, when someone professes it is the immediate next scheduled Sunday and yes we have had times when someone will profess on a second Sunday and will be baptized that same day.
Hey I saw the blog and loved it bro. Especially the first post. I will add it to our blogroll. I appreciate the dialogue also. I agree with your statements I just stuggle with number 1. Is that our job and does anyone else do that in scripture?
Lionel,
No it is not our job but sometimes we have taken it upon ourselves (whether we realize it or not) to do so. Like I mentioned this is just a reason and not an excuse. Is there biblical precedence for it? No. Does it happen anyway in our churches and fellowships? Unfortunately…Yes. It is something that we need to move away from and trust that God has truly changed the heart of the new convert.
Here is my two cents worth.
27. The Ordinances
The New Covenant people of God have been given two ceremonies to perform. They are baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Both of these ordinances were instituted by Jesus Christ and are to be observed by the church until the Lord returns. The ordinances are outward pictures of spiritual truths. There is no saving power in the ordinances. Matthew 28:18-20, Romans 6:1-4, 1 Peter 3:18-22, Luke 22:7-38, 1 Corinthians 11:17-34
28. Baptism
The Meaning and Mode of Baptism
The ordinance of baptism by immersion is the formal profession of faith for the believer. It is an outward sign of an inward reality. When someone is baptized he is saying that he is now trusting in Jesus Christ alone for his salvation, and desires Him to be the Lord of his life. Baptism is a necessary part of the Great Commission of Jesus Christ and is to be practiced by His church until the end of the world. Romans 6:1-11, 1 Peter 3:18-22, Matthew 28:18-20, Acts 2:37-42
The Practice of Baptism
Scripture recognizes every believer as a priest. Therefore, any believer is authorized to perform the ordinance of baptism. Since baptism is the believer’s formal profession of faith, and since many of the baptisms recorded in Scripture are private, it is not necessary for baptism to be performed in a public service. It is proper for a believer to baptize someone once they have professed faith in Jesus Christ. 1 Peter 2:9-10, Acts 8:26-40, Acts 16:16-40
hi guys,
1. can a woman baptize her children if she has no husband or her husband is an unbeliever?
2. i agree with you lawrence but i’m not sure what you are talking about when you say parents can baptize their babies.
She can baptize her children if she had both!
He is talking in refernce to infant baptism and the division it causes in the church of God.
Bro Lawrence,
I agree, we’ve made many church ordinances too commercialized! Roman Catholicism has influenced the church in many ways. I believe another reason is the lack of understanding of the purpose for baptism and how it relates to salvation. This could answer why some pastors prefer to wait. They want to make sure the believer understands the significance of baptism. Just as Circumcision was of the heart, so is baptism. I believe both positions have merit – John the Baptist said to the pharisees, first show fruits worthy of baptism, so there is wisdom in waiting! But also, if the new believer has come to faith with a sincere heart, ( evidently the Holy Spirit revealed to John that the pharisees were not sincere) why not baptist them on the spot! I knew a new believer who was baptised in the bath tub! He received the Lord at a Home bible study and the bath tub was available, so, that same night they baptised him, and nobody was ordained, Just obedient believers!
I agree Marvin. I don’t think it is a “pastor’s” job to wait. We see not one example of this after pentecost.