Monday, November 21, 2005
Baptism...
About a year ago, a nice young man and wife went through Bible studies. They were very eager to learn and went through baptismal classes at lightening speed. They were all excited and wanted to be baptized- however, the young man was struggling with smoking- because of this, he was refused baptism while his wife went ahead into the tank. Needless to say the man was hurt and confused and the couple hasn't attended church regularly since. This was a man who had experienced rejection most of his life and then he couldn't even come to God. Talk about pouring salt in a wound! How can we as a church teach "Come to Jesus, He loves you as you are", but when someone hears the message, believes and wants to be baptized, we tell them "no"? I asked a Pastor this question recently and was told that "We cannot baptize people in their sins- it would be irresponsible." Well, this creates a dilemma for me and one that has never been answered to my satisfaction. Because, in a sense he's saying that all those he has baptized are free of sin. I know that is not the case! We baptize people with all kinds of hidden sins, some even obvious- gluttons, liars, gossips, people who struggle with lust, etc. But we bar those with obvious "sins" like smoking or drinking because we view these as especially distasteful. So, we give a mixed message, "Come as you are, but you'd better be perfect before you get in our tank- at least on the outside." Is that fair? Who is to judge? Does this go in accordance with scripture?? There are some who even feel strongly that anyone who eats meat or wears wedding bands should be refused baptism. I highly doubt John the Baptist did a background check on those he baptized just to make sure it was "safe" to dunk them. Let us be reasonable- my husband didn't wait to marry me until I did everything exactly as he wanted. No, because he knew we would grow together in love. Jesus didn't wait until the disciples were converted men before calling them to service. He offered them acceptance, took them as they were- knowing that through a relationship with Him, the sin in their lives would fall away over time. Why wait? What if the young man is killed in a car accident before he is able to stop smoking and be baptized? I find the practice of refusing baptism most disturbing! What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I just stumbled accross your blog and like it very much.
I agree that baptism should not be refused. Baptism is a symbol of dying to your old life and being washed clean. In the Bible, people were baptized right after conversion - as their first tangible act of obedience. My boyfriend recently was baptized. At the time he was baptized he was struggling with pornography and smoking. These are obvious sins but he was baptized out of a desire to follow Christ and put these things behind him. He has since made huge strides against pornography (installed a filter, began a course on sexual purity etc). He is still smoking and we are still sleeping together but he is growing and baptism was a part of that step. Just my two cents. :-)
Keep up the good work with your blog.
What's the point of being baptized anyway? According to the Scriptures, all who trust in Christ for salvation are baptized by the Holy Spirit into the Body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:13). This is the baptism that identifies us with Christ's death, burial and resurrection (Rom. 6:3,4) and is the one baptism spoken of in Eph. 4:5. If the young man truly believes, he is accepted by God into the Body of Christ anyway, whether your church wants to water baptize him or not. At any rate, his faith should be the standard for acceptance by the church, not whether he smokes or not.
AMEN Fred and thanks for commenting!! :o)
Post a Comment