Technical details to get out of the way. I am fortunate enough to be e-mailed every time one of you comments on my blog. Which means, even if you have commented on a blog which is buried deep within the archives, that likely no one else has read anytime recently, I get an e-mail that tells me so. I respond, I think, to all of them that ask me any kind of question. So, if you comment, check to see if I respond. Secondly, I'm always taking suggestions of things to write about, or questions, or whatever, even if my original blog asking for those isn't still on the main page. You can question or comment in any of the blogs about something you want me to ramble about. See above "technical" detail to why this works for me. In this case, I have an advantage over all of you. I need not browse through archives to find new comments, but simply need to check my e-mail.
Last bit of maintenance. If you want any of your old comments to be seen by other readers, simply put that in your comment, or tell me somehow, and I'll put a blurb about it in a recent blog (as long as I find what I'm referring to appropriate).
With that said, I have been asked another question, or thought process to comment on, this could get long.
MSK asks:
Is it appropriate or inappropriate to want, have, multiple immersion baptisms? For example, suppose someone as a young adult (child) full of good intentions, made the decision for Christ, and was baptized then as an adult, realized, regretted the many sins made after that time and after prayer, desired to confess and re-confirm Christ as Lord and Savior, is it selfish to want to be baptized again?
Separate but related, for a different time, when babies are "baptized" in some religions, since it was not made by their will but someone else, does it matter to God?
I will likely only respond to the specific situation mentioned rhetorically. For a simple answer to the original question, I would answer that it is appropriate (situation depending) but will find this space far more suited for describing what I believe the Bible maintains and what I know I maintain as the importance of baptism.
Baptism is mentioned throughout the New Testament of the Bible. I can't specifically recall any baptisms in the Old Testament, but can think of examples that happened in the New Testament, before Christ was baptized, and without using his name as the reason for baptism. John that Baptist is seen practicing immersion baptisms before he understands that the Messiah has come, and is doing so without using Christ's name in his practice. He admits fully that baptism will change upon the coming of the Messiah.
Baptism, in the ancient middle eastern culture, made a very proclaiming statement. It was used to show alliance to one set of beliefs, while also renouncing another set of beliefs. A pastor recently said in a sermon, that baptism in that culture would have been as shocking a statement to the public as someone in America in the 1950's proclaiming an alliance with the Communist party. To openly confess, and show through the process of water immersion an alliance to one set of beliefs (God's), while denouncing another (in those days the Romans) would have been highly recognized as a life altering act.
Part of what is unfortunate is that America has few, if any, acts that are still seen as "life altering" regardless of the circumstances. Marriage vows fail, often. People change alliances to get their way, often. We proclaim we are someone with say, our dress, and the next day, affiliate with a completely different clique of people. Becoming a bandwagon fan is half the fun of sports for many people. There is little done anymore that is across the board seen as a life altering act. That's unfortunate. It's also unfortunate that baptism has failed to be this, not just in many people's individual lives, but in many churches' communities at large.
Baptism itself, in the Bible, was never meant to be a sign, or procedure, for the cleansing of sin. It still does not cleanse us of sin, and never will cleanse us of sin. That has never, nor will it ever be the purpose of baptism. If that ever had been the case, Jesus' need for baptism would have not existed, yet he wanted to be baptized. Forgiveness of sin, comes through repentance, Christ's death and God's mercy alone, never from anything else, including baptism. That is one case in which some churches have failed to accurately portray what baptism meant, and is supposed to mean today. The symbolism of being dunked in the water and raised clean to that of Christ descending after death to raise from the dead is powerful symbolism, but is no more than symbolism. I will say again, baptism does not make us clean.
Secondly, the church has thrown us off as a community in one other major way. A way that as we read the Bible from a modern American standpoint, seems logical, but I believe to be harmful. The phrase seen in the Bible, "repent and be baptized" and you will be saved, or something like it (believe and be baptized...etc) is used throughout the New Testament. Because of this, many churches place baptism as a necessary part of obedience to attain salvation. This again, is unfortunate. Baptism was never meant to be part of a formula, and will never be helpful to us, or our relationship with God if it is seen as a step we "must" take. I'll try to explain this a couple of ways, and in great detail, which means this post will be long.
In America, and with a modern perspective we tend to do two things. First, we try to get everything we can out of life (the American dream) and second, we read the Bible because it is a book that can give us answers to life questions (modern perspective). The Bible was not written to support either of these notions (The American dream, or as an answer book) but was instead written to show us who God is and how we can come into relationship with Him. It needs to be read with an understanding of the culture it was written in and discernment to find application for our current culture. I'll try to explain baptism in both of these ways.
In America, baptism has become another notch on the spiritual belt. Something that we have been told (by churches or by the Bible as we read it) that we have to do to attain salvation. It has become another tool by which we continue to try to gain the most out of life. In the ancient culture, as I have already discussed, it meant something much different. It was a sign of a life changing movement. Not that we had become closer to achieving the American dream, but that we will no longer be bound by the world, and will find our full association with God. It involved, not just affiliation with God (the notch of the American dream) but the renouncing of all the other things (our selves included). It was a statement that did not say, I want to add God to what I have going here, and use Him to better my life, but instead said, My life is God's and everything in it I give to Him. (I feel like I should be preaching right now, I've got a sermon running through me) Can I get an "amen!"?
Here is a poor, current culture, example that I'll try to make up on the spot. Let's assume this. Life is all about war. Becoming a warrior is the ultimate goal in life. Affiliating yourself with an Army, is the first step, while also being a great achievement, at fulfilling for yourself what life should be like. Let's also assume that long wavy hair is in style. You join the Army. The Army (as it still does to men) gives you a haircut. A short haircut. You agree to and allow this because you desire to be affiliated with the Army, and also because our specific army believes that this is a good decision for functional reasons. Now let's assume it is a couple hundred years from now, and that we are Japanese. Becoming a warrior is still the main goal. It's livelihood started in America in our day. As a Japanese man, becoming a warrior is our desire. However, that state of Japan, culturally has long hair on their warriors. The "top knot" as seen in many movies is a sense of warrior pride to their culture. You are a young Japanese boy, trying to live out the proper life of a warrior. You come across the texts that show that all (read American) warriors immediately got their haircut upon becoming a warrior. Is it important then that you get your haircut to become a warrior? No. What is still, and always would be most important is that you are obedient to the army in which you are becoming a warrior. The act of a haircut, though important culturally to America, would have zero relevance of warriorhood to a Japanese warrior.
What I'm not trying to say here (I told you the analogy would be poor) is that baptism was only important in the ancient middle eastern culture and bears no significance on today. What I am trying to show is that baptism which is seen as a step in a formula, or as a process towards salvation, brings us nowhere.
Baptism is about turning one's life away from one thing and aligning it with another. What's funny is that salvation has the same purpose (turning our life from anything and towards God). Thus the two are commonly linked (rightly so).
Here (after long enough an explanation) is my response to the specific example given in the question. I encourage anyone whose baptism was not (to them or to God) a sign of a life turned away from "other" and affiliated with God, to be baptized. This does not mean, I encourage anyone who has been baptized and since sinned to get "re-baptized" as baptism and sin have no link. If one's initial baptism was part of a formula, at any age, and one has decided since then that they long to make their public statement of renouncing their life, and turning towards God's life, then baptism is the best choice you can make. I have no problem with people getting baptized "multiple times." I don't see anywhere scripturally that would have a problem with it either. I'm sure God would be honored to hear someone affiliate themselves with Him, even again, if that's the case.
On to the second, and much shorter part of your question:
Separate but related, for a different time, when babies are "baptized" in some religions, since it was not made by their will but someone else, does it matter to God?
Does it matter to God? Sure, why not. I have not found any detail of life to be something that does not matter to God. Do I believe that God will look at the individual soul of a baby that has been baptized differently than one that hasn't, I do not.
I agree with baby dedications, which show publicly that a family wishes, and asks support for a baby to be raised with Christian values and ultimately be introduced to Christ. The act of baptizing the baby with water at this point though, seems of little value to me, and my guess is that it is of little value to God. God likely expects more of the parents in those situations, but I'm guessing his mind is not altered on the life of one who was baptized unwillfully.
This is long enough. Any clarifying questions are welcomed by anyone. I did write this at 1:00 in the morning and if my brain thought it would take this much space to answer, I'm sure it didn't come out as clear as I hoped.
Gold Star for anyone who actually read the whole thing.
I pretty much feel like I just wrote a paper for Seminary. I wonder if they knew what I think of baptism (which i believe is Biblical) if they'd still want me.
No comments:
Post a Comment