News: Baptism of Homosexuals in the Baptist Church

Cabarrus? Concord? Is this in North Carolina? Is the Cabarrus Association SBC? If so, I'm not at all surprised. Sounds like a church that might do well to explore affiliation with the Alliance of Baptists.

Baptizing homosexuals? Next thing you know they'll be baptizing sinners!

Not sure what the topic has to do with the war to liberate the Iraqi people, though.

Haruo
who doesn't know the men and won't therefore comment on their penitence

 

I don't believe homosexuality is a lifestyle per se, and I don't believe it is a sin per se, so this Rev. Randy Wadford's statement leaves me quite unconvinced, but it does look to me as if his statement means that churches can be disfellowshipped for baptizing fat people who are not on (and sticking to) a practically life-threatening slimming regimen, etc., etc. Slippery slope.

Haruo

 

What exactly DO you believe it is, per se???

 

I will move this to News affecting Baptists.
Murph

 

Any thoughts????????

If we stop baptizing sinners, there wouldn't be anyone to baptize.

 

so if I go to the church and say baptize me... but I fully intend to continue in me sin... did Jesus not say, "your sins are forgiven, go and sin no more." I thought that we were to repent of our sins when we are saved. Ummm I left a lot of the obvious ones right then and there. And as the Holy Spirit filled me, He dealt with many more. He is still dealing with sin today in my life. But the obvious sins, which are called out in the Bible ... Homosexuality, lieing, stealing, murder are called out and need to be dealt with I think.

 

I am still hoping to hear your reply, Haruo.

 

Here is the recent BP article-CONCORD, N.C. (BP)--A North Carolina Baptist church may be removed from its association for baptizing two homosexual men.

The Cabarrus Baptist Association will meet April 28 to discuss the possible expulsion of McGill Baptist Church for baptizing two homosexual men in March, The Charlotte Observer reported.

The controversy centers on whether the men were repentant before they were baptized, Cabarrus director of missions Randy Wadford told the Observer.

"It's understood that when a person comes to know Jesus Christ as their personal Savior, a conversion experience occurs, and repentance takes place in the life of the person," he said.

But McGill Baptist Church pastor Steve Ayers said churches should be more inclusive.

"I think salvation is between them and God," he told the newspaper. "I'm not going to exclude anybody from God's Kingdom. Our business is to love and follow [Jesus'] example. That's all."

Wadford wrote the church recently, saying, "It [homosexuality] is a sinful lifestyle. ... The Cabarrus Baptist Association must take a stand against any of our churches supporting or condoning this lifestyle. To allow individuals into the membership of a local church without evidence or testimony of true repentance is to condone the old lifestyle," the Observer reported him as writing.

My question and concern is how much evidence is required and who is named "judge" of the repentance?

Also an audio response is at the church in question's website. http://www.mcgillbaptist.com/sermon/

 

Isn't that supose to be repentant sinners, repent meaning to turn from your past sin? If they are still homosexuals and have no problem with that,a nd are not going to turn away from it, then they shouldn't baptized, they haven't repented. You don't repent, be baptized and see no reason to stop those sins, just keep on sinning the same old sin, on purpose, just becasue, nope thats not repentence.

 

Here's my question: if we choose not to baptize one category of sinners(which we all are), what about others? Should we not baptize those that continue to overeat after their conversion? or continue to lie? or continue to gossip?

I know many people that are saved and members of the church...been baptized...that do these things, I'm guilty of them at times. How can we decide the sins and lifestyles that make it impossible for someone to be saved and those that are not? Isn't that what we are trying to do here?

Just curious.....

 

if we choose not to baptize one category of sinners(which we all are), what about others? Should we not baptize those that continue to overeat after their conversion? or continue to lie? or continue to gossip?

My point exactly. Repentence is between the one being baptized and the Lord. We should leave it there and not play middle man.

 

This is a portion of what I would say; while it doesn't address the issue of the intrinsic sinfulness of homosexuality, it does address the issue of the mediacy of Christ, and the notion that it is ridiculous to demand repentance of someone who has not become convicted of sin in a particular connection. I have no doubt that the same principle applied with respect to certain practices inherent in human slavery as practiced by Southern Baptists 150 years ago.

Personally, I believe that homosexuality per se is morally neutral; that it is generally an orientation that is not "chosen"; that it may be lived out in lifestyles ranging from extreme promiscuous irresponsibility to either celibacy or lifelong reciprocal and exclusive consecrated monogamy ("a rose by any other name..."). I believe that "practicing" homosexuals are just as apt to be born from above and to exhibit the gifts of the Spirit as anybody else (including we who are overweight) is. I've known many such. And I believe the churches mutilate the body of Christ when they exclude such people. Acts 8 & Acts 10 are apposite.

I don't believe (Jude notwithstanding) that the particular sin of Sodom (and Gomorrah?) was homosexuality (homosexuality and homosexual rape are two quite distinct categories; the latter is frequently engaged in by heterosexuals) but rather inhospitality (of which homosexual gang rape is an extreme expression) to strangers and to the marginalized (widows and orphans).

These are my beliefs, prayerfully considered in the light of Scripture and observation/acquaintance.

Haruo

 

I don't believe homosexuality is a lifestyle per se, and I don't believe it is a sin per se, so this Rev. Randy Wadford's statement leaves me quite unconvinced, but it does look to me as if his statement means that churches can be disfellowshipped for baptizing fat people who are not on (and sticking to) a practically life-threatening slimming regimen, etc., etc. Slippery slope.

Haruo </font>[/QUOTE]I don`t know what kind of BIBLE you read,if you read one at all. GODs infallible word (KJV) teaches that homosexuality is very much an abomination.

 

I don't believe the KJV is necessarily any more infallible than any other Bible (but chacun à son propre hérésie as the French say). I read a variety of translations, and occasionally try my hand at the original languages (though not to date the original autographs!); I don't see that the KJV teaches anything appreciably different on this subject than any other version, though its use of the mediæval Catholic misnomer "sodomite" is, unintentionally I think, misleading.

I note your presumably uncritical use of "abomination" here; the question was not abominations but sins. Most fundamentalists (among whom I presume you are to be numbered?) seem to me to confuse the two, or perhaps to assume (on what grounds I'm not sure) that "abomination" is merely "sin, but worse".

I think one of the main problems I have in discussing this sort of thing with you Bible-bound folk is that I see the Bible as teaching among other things the need to go beyond the Bible. This is what I see from Abraham to Moses to Jesus to Peter; that the Spirit of God is constantly exploding the limitations of what had appeared to be set in stone. I say that when God has cleansed a homosexual couple's relationship we ought not say "unclean". I say that based on my understanding of the Bible as it intersects with my understanding of the homosexual Christians I have been blessed to be acquainted with. This understanding of the Bible is derivable as easily from KJV (for those who can follow it) as from any other version.

Haruo
not KJVO, but not anti-KJV either