OK for a woman to baptize?

[rbell]

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

And you as well.

 

[HankD]

There is a greater point alluded to in my previous post.

The usurping of the authority over men.

1 Titus 2

11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

Scripture is the Word of God even if it offends our sensiblity.

Ladies why would you want to take upon yourself the role of men in the Church anyway?

James 3:1 My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation.

Why would you want this burden of dealing with the carnality and problems within the Church? You have enough to do with the care of your family.

In the final analysis I suspect that women will have been moved by the Holy Spirit to led more souls to Christ through the teaching of the Scriptures to their children than men.

Also, churches are public places in our culture.
The world needs to know the order that God has established.
In and of itself there it is probably permissable as far as God is concerned if women baptize.

However, it could and probably would be interpreted by this world as a kind of act of rebellion or defiance.

Can't you envision the local blurbs "WOMAN PREACHER BAPTISES MEN AT PODUNK BAPTIST CHURCH!"

My apologies to their citizens if their is a Podunk USA.


HankD​

 

[TaterTot]

Ladies why would you want to take upon yourself the role of men in the Church anyway?

Why would you want this burden of dealing with the carnality and problems within the Church? You have enough to do with the care of your family.

In the final analysis I suspect that women will have been moved by the Holy Spirit to led more souls to Christ through the teaching of the Scriptures to their children than men.

Also, churches are public places in our culture.
The world needs to know the order that God has established.
In and of itself there it is probably permissable as far as God is concerned if women baptize.

However, it could and probably would be interpreted by this world as a kind of act of rebellion or defiance.


HankD[/LEFT]

I dont want the men's responsibilities at church, lol. My husband is a pastor and I don t envy him nor want his job in the least. I just want folks to admit (which you kinda did) that the Bible does NOT indeed say a woman cannot baptize. I dont really care how the world interprets it, as long as its not against God's will.

Also, what about Godly women who dont have kids? Not all are called to marry and parent.

 

[Brother Bob]

I never saw anyone by scripture say it was ok for women to baptize. I still do not believe it is ok. I never have read where women were sent to baptize or that a woman did baptize, not even close, except the heretics back in 3AD.

The very women of these heretics, how wanton they are! For they are bold enough to teach, to dispute, to enact exorcisms, to undertake cures - it may be even to baptize. I am not trying to tell any other church what to do for they will do as they see fit anyway.

TT; you may not want to but there are plenty who do. It probably will split the SBC before its over.

But thats me!

 

[DeeJay]

Since I believe baptisem is a symbol and not a sacriment. I would think it is importent what is in the heart of the person being baptized and would not matter who does the baptizing. Just my opinion.

Question, I just thought of. Who baptized John the Baptist? Was he baptized? Thats probably a dumb question but, just wondering. :type:

 

[av1611jim]

I have a few questions.
1. Is this thread a spin off from the woman pastor thing?
2. Doesn't this 'gender' strife? (sorry 'bout the pun)
3. Why would someone even ask such a question?
4. How does this serve to edify the saints of God?

I would like to see if this "woman in authority" subject was EVER discussed/debated in the context of the church before the sufferage movement of the late 1900's.

It is my opinion that this KIND of subject was never an issue before then, but am willing to amend my opinion if it can be shown to have been a subject of theological discourse before the women's sufferage movement. I think, perhaps, one could point to the various heretical cults of the time and say it was discussed back then and maybe before that. (i.e. Ellen White, Mary Baker Eddy, et al) but they really do not apply here since they were obviously unscriptural from the start of their "ministries".

Anyone care to take a stab at this?

 

[rbell]

1. Is this thread a spin off from the woman pastor thing?
2. Doesn't this 'gender' strife? (sorry 'bout the pun)
3. Why would someone even ask such a question?
4. How does this serve to edify the saints of God?

I would like to see if this "woman in authority" subject was EVER discussed/debated in the context of the church before the sufferage movement of the late 1900's.

It is my opinion that this KIND of subject was never an issue before then, but am willing to amend my opinion if it can be shown to have been a subject of theological discourse before the women's sufferage movement. I think, perhaps, one could point to the various heretical cults of the time and say it was discussed back then and maybe before that. (i.e. Ellen White, Mary Baker Eddy, et al) but they really do not apply here since they were obviously unscriptural from the start of their "ministries".

Anyone care to take a stab at this?

I have a few questions.

And I have a few answers...let's see if they match! :laugh:

1. Is this thread a spin off from the woman pastor thing?

Nope. The woman pastor IMO is fairly well handled scripturally. It's not allowed...and that's fairly clear IMO from Scripture. This isn't addressed at all.

2. Doesn't this 'gender' strife? (sorry 'bout the pun)

Only for those who can't maturely discuss it.

3. Why would someone even ask such a question?

Because since the Bible doesn't address it, I'm curious as to how we decided that women couldn't baptize. It opens up discussion regarding tradition, how we view Baptism, and examining if we do something based on Scripture, or just "because we've always done it that way." I think those are great reasons to start a thread. Don't you?

4. How does this serve to edify the saints of God?

It makes us examine this area of our theology, methodology, and a couple of other ologies.

I would like to see if this "woman in authority" subject was EVER discussed/debated in the context of the church before the sufferage movement of the late 1900's.

So baptizing someone means you're in authority? Not trying to 'gender' strife...just asking. I think that with a couple of exceptions, this has been a good and productive debate. Only a couple of grenade lobbings noticed.

I've seen "heresy" thrown out there once or twice. I tend to reserve "heresy" for more direct violations of Scripture. Since the Scriptural argument seems to be one from silence, I'm not using a "heretic" label for this.

But your mileage may vary.

 

[av1611jim]

rbell;
Thanks.
Yes, this subject of a woman baptizing IS a subject of authority.
When Christ sent the disciples to go and teach and baptize, He prefaced it with this;
Matthew 28:18-19 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

We have to ask what the "therefore" is there for.

Jesus said that since all power (indicating also authority) is His, He is sending men out in that same authority.

Yes. This IS an authority issue.

 

[HankD]

I dont want the men's responsibilities at church, lol. My husband is a pastor and I don t envy him nor want his job in the least. I just want folks to admit (which you kinda did) that the Bible does NOT indeed say a woman cannot baptize. I dont really care how the world interprets it, as long as its not against God's will.

1 Corinthians 10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:​

Also, what about Godly women who dont have kids? Not all are called to marry and parent.

The 1 Timothy 2 passage is concerning women in general.

As far as God is concerned your standing in Christ is identical to a man.

Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.​

But while you are here and married be in subjection to your husband.
Things will no doubt be different in the eternal state.​

For now, women have enough to contend with caring for their husband and in the raising of their children.​

Men are the protectors of their women, they are the "weaker vessels".
I believe the spirit of the scripture is for a woman to stay with her parents until she marries. In this day that is certainly not practiced very much and in most cases not even practical. For these women, they should exercise their spiritual gifts working with children in a local church. Pray, give and so many other things that they can do for the poor, the missionaries, etc.​

It's best to follow the scripture, soon enough this life will be over or He will come and things will be different.

James 5

7 Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold, the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for it, until he receive the early and latter rain.
8 Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.​

HankD

 

[DeeJay]

rbell;
Thanks.
Yes, this subject of a woman baptizing IS a subject of authority.
When Christ sent the disciples to go and teach and baptize, He prefaced it with this;
Matthew 28:18-19 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

We have to ask what the "therefore" is there for.

Jesus said that since all power (indicating also authority) is His, He is sending men out in that same authority.

Yes. This IS an authority issue.

Would this mean that a woman can not pray for a man. Since they do it in the authority of Christ.

 

[Helen]

Would this mean that a woman can not pray for a man. Since they do it in the authority of Christ.

I don't think that prayers are done in 'authority', but rather, in the character of...."In Jesus' name" does not mean His authority, but rather His character. If someone says "DeeJay has a good name in our town" it does not mean you have authority, but, rather, that you can be trusted and you are respected. When we pray in Christ's name, we are praying as His followers, in accord with His character (which the Holy Spirit is transforming us to be an image of).

As far as baptism goes, it is simply a public profession of faith. I do not see that there is any authority involved. It is instead a matter of obedience to our Authority, Jesus Christ.

 

[DeeJay]

I don't think that prayers are done in 'authority', but rather, in the character of...."In Jesus' name" does not mean His authority, but rather His character. If someone says "DeeJay has a good name in our town" it does not mean you have authority, but, rather, that you can be trusted and you are respected. When we pray in Christ's name, we are praying as His followers, in accord with His character (which the Holy Spirit is transforming us to be an image of).

Helen

I dont think I agree with that. In the Old Testiment it was the priests that were given authority to interact with God, in the temple, on his peoples behalf. After Christs death we were made priests (men and women) and our bodies made temples. We were given authority to interact with God directly. Being a priest means we are given authority to pray to God personaly for ourselfs and others.

<H5>Hebrews 5:1-4

Qualifications for High Priesthood

1 For every high priest taken from among men is appointed for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins. 2 He can have compassion on those who are ignorant and going astray, since he himself is also subject to weakness. 3 Because of this he is required as for the people, so also for himself, to offer sacrifices for sins. 4 And no man takes this honor to himself, but he who is called by God, just as Aaron was.

</H5>

But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light;
1Peter 2:9

We are able to personaly interact with God because we were appointed/chosen/give authority by God as believers.

 

[DeeJay]

I don't think that prayers are done in 'authority', but rather, in the character of...."In Jesus' name" does not mean His authority, but rather His character. If someone says "DeeJay has a good name in our town" it does not mean you have authority, but, rather, that you can be trusted and you are respected. When we pray in Christ's name, we are praying as His followers, in accord with His character (which the Holy Spirit is transforming us to be an image of).

One more thing on this. Are un-believers given the privlege of being able to have their prayers heard by God. Can an un-beliver pray on the good name of Christ for his sick friend and have his prayers heard by God.

Or is this reserved for believers?

If an un-believers prayer is not heard and a believers prayer is heard then there must be authority given to believers and not to un-believers. After all Christs good name is the same, the only thing different is the pray-er.

 

[Helen]

answered prayer is not a matter of authority, but rather a matter of God honoring obedience. And He certainly has the perogative of answering "No". That in itself should show exactly where the authority lies!

 

[Brother Bob]

Mat 18:18Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

 

[EdSutton]

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

Please do send them preachinjesus' way, and not mine, if you don't mind.
>
>
>
>
>
I wouldn't wanna' accidentally, and suddenly find one of them thar' 'gifts' with a bad attitude, from the snake handlers, crawlin' out of the pocket of that 'baptized' one!

:laugh:

Ed

 

[EdSutton]

So the Great Commission only applies to men?

The logic (not to mention the lack of Scripture) would be the same. I agree with you here, Pastor SBC1303..

Ed

 

[Brother Bob]

I somehow knew it. Please don't just say that, give scripture where Jesus sent the women out to preach and baptize, or the Apostles who were to ordain and teach others and send them forth. it would help so much. I love the Sisters and without them we would not have much of a congregation or a "complete" Church. They have their job in the Church and there is but a few who want to move into the authority of the church, but always that few. None of us set up the Church, Jesus told Peter, "upon this Rock (Himself), I will build my church.

The SBC will have their hands full the next few years and probably will eventually split over the very issue of Women in Authority positions and the ordaining of homosexuals. Don't say its not coming for it has already started.

 

[EdSutton]

I am saying if we were a part of the SBC, then we would accept any baptism preformed by a church in SBC, for they would be of our same faith and order.

Well, I am a member of a So. Baptist church, but I really wonder if all SBC churches can really be considered of "like faith and order", a phrase I grew up hearing. I strongly suspect some non- SBC baptist churches, are far closer to being of "like faith and order" than some SBC churches. And I, as well as my home church are very Biblically conservative, doctrinally, if not traditionally, as to practices that are extra-Bibilical, at best.

And some churches that do not even identify themselves as "Baptist" are far closer to this than some SBC churches. Let's not go overboard in 'identifying' by the name on the church sign. It may, too often, not be enough of a tell-all description.

Ed

 

[EdSutton]

We been around for a long time. We are The Old Regular Baptist.

We are very much like "Primitive" baptist in many ways of how we worship, except we believe in Salvation to all that will believe.

Does the length of time some body has "been around' have anything to do with whether or not it is teaching "Biblical doctrines", vs. "the commandments of men"? Just wonderin'.

BTW, if 'age' is a criterion, I would suggest that my own church long predates both the Old Regulars which assumed a distinctiveness from the New Salem Association for the largest numbers, and the North District Associations in KY, for many of the rest. And Forks of Dix River Baptist church, my home church, and the third oldest extant Baptist Church in KY, was around before either of those existed, as one of the 'charter' member of KY Baptists, being organized in 1782. So we would 'trump', in age, the Old Regulars by some years, and also predate the SBC by 65 years, FTR.

(BTW, my lovely and talented bride was reared in an Old Regular Baptist Church, as a youth, and attended one until she went to college, where there happened to be none around very close.)

Ed