OK for a woman to baptize?

[preachinjesus]

Well, if you accept the work of the Pope then I guess you wouldn't mind who baptized them.

If the Pope baptized someone after they became a Christian and through immersion why wouldn't we accept it.

Next time those baptized by the snake handlers are looking for a church, I will send them your way.

please do, we'll minister to them and let them know they are part of the global body of Christ.

 

[charles_creech78]

Did God say a women can baptize

 

[charles_creech78]

He did not say a women can baptize.So they better not do it.

 

[dan e.]

He did not say a women can baptize.So they better not do it.

Did God say that the internet is a proper forum for debate and discussion?

Did God say that men should ever stop wearing the robes, and start wearing pants?

Did God say that tithes and offerings should be placed in offering "plates"?

DO YOU HONESTLY USE THAT LOGIC TO INTERPRET THE BIBLE?!

 

[rbell]

He did not say a women can baptize.So they better not do it.

The Bible does address women being pastors. That's easy.
The Bible does give women instructions on teaching, etc. Also easy.

The Bible is silent on women...

• taking up offering
• baptizing
• running the sound system
• name it

So your Scriptural argument from silence...does it address these things as well?

 

[dan e.]

I think the quote under rbell's signature is appropriate here.

 

[rbell]

I do worry about a woman's physical strength to properly baptize.

Properly baptize: Hold 'em under 'till they say, "Tithe."

(snicker)

 

[SaggyWoman]

Lucy, you got some 'splainin to do.

ROFLOL! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

 

[SaggyWoman]

At any given time, if I felt the Lord leading me to baptize, I would. I would be more than proud to baptize any of the children I have led to the Lord, and know that God was in it.

 

[TaterTot]

Arguments from silence are a weak way to debate something. It may not be how you wish things would be or how it seems they ought to be, but unless the Bible directly teaches something, we are better off not teaching it.

 

[Tom Butler]

What if Lucy came to your church and said, I have baptized these people and now they want membership at your church? What would you do. Would you have the church administer a baptism by an ordained authority, or would you just accept the work that Lucy had performed. Would Lucy be lording anything over on the church or not? I sure could see a lot of problems developing myself.

Those two men out in the wilderness that baptized each other. What if they showed up at your church and said: "we baptized each other" and now we would like membership, what would you do?

My opinion only. I would ask Lucy which local congregation authorized her to baptze. If it was a congregation of like faith and order, then we'd go through the drill. If she's the Lone Ranger, no dice.

Question two, the answer is no. Baptism is done under the authority of a local church, which must first determine if the candidate gives evidence of salvation.

Somebody refresh my memory. Didn't Roger Williams and Ezekiel Holloman baptize each other back in the 1630s or thereabout?

 

[rbell]

Baptism is done under the authority of a local church, which must first determine if the candidate gives evidence of salvation.

Right-O. I think this is valid and (most importantly) quite biblical.

The "apostolic succession" idea that seems to pop up in this thread...not so much.

 

[charles_creech78]

time to post something other than what you think about women.

sheesh.

This came from the bible .this is Gods comandment .If you read it right it talks about how they will be saved.THEY DON,T HAVE TO TEACH OR PREACH.

 

[TaterTot]

This came from the bible .this is Gods comandment .If you read it right it talks about how they will be saved.THEY DON,T HAVE TO TEACH OR PREACH.

no one has to teach or preach to be saved...or have children. What about our single and/or barren friends?

 

[Brother Bob]

Have a good 4th, all of you. :wavey:

 

[HankD]

Did anyone look at the koine for Matthew 28:19?

The verbs "go" and "baptise" are masculine plural.

HankD

 

[TaterTot]

Did anyone look at the koine for Matthew 28:19?

The verbs "go" and "baptise" are masculine plural.

HankD

Well my dear sweet (egghead prof) husband just lookedat his greek NT and he says that they are not verbs but participles and gender does not change the meaning at all. Its simply a grammatical convention.

 

[HankD]

Yes, I know that participles are verbal nouns, nonetheless they are masculine gendered in the koine but presented as verbs in our English Bibles.

Does this prove that women shouldn't baptize others?

Perhaps not conclusively but it is a point which needed to be brought to our attention IMO.

It is also a scriptural convention that men receive the authority of leadership in the Church. There are exceptions but they are very few.

HankD

 

[rbell]

It is also a scriptural convention that men receive the authority of leadership in the Church. There are exceptions but they are very few.

HankD

OK...then....

no arguments from me, but a question:

Is baptizing someone an act of:
a. "church leadership" or is it
b. simply the carrying out of Christ's command?

If "A" is the answer, then the limitation to "men only" makes sense. If "B" is the answer, I don't see the limitation.

 

[Brother Bob]

Look like someone would come up with one scripture supporting women baptizing, if that is the position they take. I find where the commandment was always given to men and leaders of the church.