Changing The Mode Of Baptism?

Brother Glen, since baptism is a question of obedience and not a question of salvation, and given that the tentative candidate is incapacitated physically or medically, baptism is not essential. IN this case, and in this case alone, I would deem the candidate as being obedient.

I did, one one occasion, carry a young lad into the baptistry and dunked him and me at the same time so that he was duly baptized. He was a victim of polio and wheelchair bound.

I have also heard of some churches dunking the candidate with the assistance of two deacons along with the pastor.

I would never consider another mode of baptism, such as sprinkling or pouring.

Cheers,

Jim

 

In the seventh chapter of the Didache (~70 A.D., while some Apostles were still alive) it says, "Concerning baptism, baptize in this manner: Having said all these things beforehand, baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit in living water [that is, in running water, as in a river]. If there is no living water, baptize in other water; and, if you are not able to use cold water, use warm. If you have neither, pour water three times upon the head in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit."

 

Glen, I am in basic agreement with Jim. I can see no authority for changing the mode. I am of the opinion that in cases where a person is truly unable to be baptized - whether physically incapacitated, on their deathbed, or whatever - that the Lord will accept their faith as obedience for the act. I realize that is just opinion, but I can see room here. I cannot see room for me to change the mode of baptism any more than I could see room to change the candidate of baptism.

Brian, I have started a thread on The Didache - maybe you will have some input for us there. If so, thanks. The translator of the copy that I have believes that the reference to pouring and fasting are both later additions.

 

I'm in Ninety-Nine's division on this one--in cases of extreme physical circumstances, and then I will seek out as much help as I possibly could to get that person in the pool with me--

I once baptized a lady--she stood 6'3" tall and weighed a good 240--she was a hefty lady--and I am 5'9" and weighed 190--when she stood beside me in the pool I knew there was going to be a problem--but I did my best--I've baptized a few heavy men in my day--but no one yet physically disabled to the point where they couldn't get in with me--but there may come a day . . . ! So I'll be ready!

Your Southern Baptist preacher buddy,
Blackbird

 

We did that. Some men picked him up out of his chair and carried him up stairs, then down in to the baptistry, he was immersed,a nd thent hey carried him back out and back down the stairs after he had changed to dry clothes.

 

(I am going to be facetious to illustrate a point.) Let's change Jesus's name to Joe because it is easier to say. Let's change the words, "faith cometh by hearing" so the deaf can be saved. Let's change...uh...I know, let's change "the truth of God into a lie" (Rom 1:25). (Facetiousness is over now.) Changing the mode of baptism is not an option we enjoy. Baptism is Baptism, either you do it right or you don't. There is NEVER a reason to change the truth.

[ January 29, 2003, 11:54 PM: Message edited by: Artimaeus ]

 

Let's change Jesus's name to Joe because it is easier to say.

We already did that. Jesus' real name is Joshua, yet we call him Jesus because it's more "generally accepted".

 

It is more likely that we call Him "Jesus" because the New Testament was written in Greek rather than Hebrew, plus the effects of translation, etc., but that's another story.

[ January 30, 2003, 05:21 PM: Message edited by: rlvaughn ]

 

I thought His Name was Yashua/Yeshua/Y'shua (insert 1000 different variations here), and it was translated/transliterated into Greek (insert another 1000 different variations here), then eventually when someone decided to invent the letter J and needed a marketing tool...but that's another story too...

Don'tcha hate it when your train of thought gets derailed?

Oh, no, it's ok, I'm back now. I'm 300+ pound 6 footer, would have no worries giving a bloke a lift if need arised. Hey, I do enough of it at work

Pete

 

I don't know about ya'll; but my Bible says,

"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book;

And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." Revelation 22:18-19

I'm not adding or taking away nothin'!

As far as baptizing by immersion. It was good enough for Jesus and it's good enough for me!


Sue

 

A few posts on this thread have made me wonder: although Baptist churches baptize by immersion, where in scripture does it teach that baptism should be by immersion *only*? Why are some so antagonistic towards other modes of baptism?

 

I think one reason is that baptism is the death, burial, and resurection of Christ, and you can't be burried by have a handful of dirt sprinkled on you. You have to be completely covered.

 

The Holy Spirit knew the differences among "baptizo," "rantizo," and "luo." : Immersing, sprinkling or pouring.

The mode must stay true to the Biblical pattern.

Rufus

 

Baptize=

The word baptize means to be fully wet, whelmed(over whelmed, completely wet). Then the biblical method of baptism is immersion.

Matthew 3:16And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water,

Mark 1:9And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan. 10And straightway coming up out of the water,

Jesus was immersed, the bible says HE came up out of the water after baptism.

Acts 8:38And he commanded the chariot to stand still and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.
They went down into the water to baptize.
Immersion was the N.T. mode of baptism. It is the N.T. baptism, anything else is not.

 

Not necessarily useless, sets the record straight.
Even if it is off topic.

 

At last!!!! A subject on BB that everyone agrees on the original question. Prehaps there is hope of unity after all. Naaaw, that's too much to hope for.