Are there valid reasons for avoiding baptism??

After having the HS change my entire life, getting dunked in a pool & having water go up my nose didnt do it for me. I was already a new man so a tub of water seemed anti climatic...sorry.

 

But the "symbol" should be identifying with the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, hence immersion. Without the symbol of immersion there is no identifying with the death, burial or resurrection. (Romans 6:4) Simply placing water on the head in any fashion has no value or symbolism.

 

Yep, that's it. It is a symbol, but it ought to be the correct symbol--sprinkling does not give an accurate picture of death, burial and resurrection.

I guess that's technically correct. As an autonomous congregation, you can call sprinkling immersion and make it stick. But my autonomous congregation would not knowingly accept a sprinkled believer as a member.

 

Boy, am I glad, too, because on a rare occasion I have been wr.....wro....wrrrro.

I'm glad I can appeal to the final authority, the Scriptures. Even those denominations which sprinkle agree that the Greek, baptizo, is properly translated dip, plunge, immerse. And most of them will immerse a new convert if requested.

Now, Brother Sag, maybe you can explain how my appeal to scripture for my view is pharisee-like. Unless, of course, you weren't referring to me, then, never mind.

 

Guess I see a different symbol in the following picture:

(1Co 10:1) Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;

(1Co 10:2) And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;

(1Co 10:3) And did all eat the same spiritual meat;

(1Co 10:4) And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

Musta missed the part where he called sprinkling immersion.

:thumbsup:

 

Yes Tom, I was referring to you. You scriptural appeal is not valid. But, thanks for interjecting your opinion and negating a legitimate alternative in the case of a woman that I could not immerse but still wanted to follow the command of Christ as closely as she could.

 

I guess that's technically correct. As an autonomous congregation, you can call sprinkling immersion and make it stick. But my autonomous congregation would not knowingly accept a sprinkled believer as a member.

In 99% of the cases I would agree with you. My church only accepts baptism by immersion. In fact, we require those coming to join our church from other denominations or churches with significant doctrinal differences to submit to believer's baptisms as a demonstration of their having become Baptist. But, in the case of the senior saint who could not be immersed we made an exception.

 

Play this out for me Sag. I'm a committed reformed believer & I was baptized in a pool by a Congregational Pastor. Does your church necessitate that I be re-dunked?

 

I'm not familiar with a congregational church. But, if there are significant differences then we might ask that you identify with us by being baptized not as a sign of salvation but as a sign that you are now a Baptist of like faith and mind. There are lots of SBC churches and Independent churches that have this requirement for membership.

 

I don't know. They left our church for another one 20 years go and I've lost track of them.

 

I understand and sympathize with your desire. But following Christ's command closely as possible is not quite following it exactly.


Earlier, I said:
I guess that's technically correct. As an autonomous congregation, you can call sprinkling immersion and make it stick. But my autonomous congregation would not knowingly accept a sprinkled believer as a member.

I appreciate your church's position. But the exception you made is an admission that it's not actually baptism. An act of kindness, certainly. But not baptism.

 

What if we used an empty baptistry and just went through the dunking motions? Would it still symbolize death, burial and resurrection? Like in the desert of sand and no water!

Cheers,

Jim

 

Here, we are definitely on the same side. Jesus could have gotten anybody to baptize him, but he traveled a long way to submit to baptism by the proper administrator.

 

Smyth, the so-called founder of the baptist church, was never immersed. He baptized himself by pouring water on his head!

Cheers,

Jim

 

We got our name from our enemies. I can imagine their shouting an epithet at our ancestors: "You, you, cursed immersers!"

We also incurred their wrath because we would immerse believers only.