Some Questions

[Ezra]

So, Baptism was by immersion but sprinkling was accepted, even in the early church, as the life of the new believers was considered more important then the method of Baptism.

Whatever may be the history of certain practices and the reasons for changes, we should always bear in mind that we have a responsibilty before God to point out Bible truth to others (even though many insist that their "traditions" are as good as Bible truth).  Death, burial and resurrection is the teaching.

 

The spiritual truth of water baptism should be at the forefront.  What does it signify?  The actual New Testament practice should also be at the forefront? What did Christ and the apostles practice? And finally, what is the root meaning of the word itself? Turning to Matthew 28:19, here is the meaning of "baptizing" (Strong's 907):

 

baptizó: to dip, sink

Original Word: βαπτίζω

Part of Speech: Verb

Transliteration: baptizó

Phonetic Spelling: (bap-tid'-zo)

Short Definition: I dip, submerge, baptize

Definition: lit: I dip, submerge, but specifically of ceremonial dipping; I baptize.

HELPS Word-studies

907 baptízō – properly, "submerge" (Souter); hence, baptize, to immerse (literally, "dip under"). 907 (baptízō) implies submersion ("immersion"), in contrast to 472 /antéxomai ("sprinkle").

[Fro]

this is for Q and A

[OneLight]

this is for Q and A

 

Q&A is where someone asks a scriptural question and has the answer, waiting for the first person to answer correctly.  There was more than one question, so it would disqualify for Q&A, and it was open for discussion, not Q&A.

 

Hope that helps.

[firestormx]

We tend to forget that the epistles of Paul were personal letters written to either specific congregations or persons and were meant to address some issues that were germane to that congregation were not meant to be made into doctrine.  Not everything in Paul's letters are meant to be understood as universally applicable to all believers.  

 

1. Would you mind clarifying what you mean by this?

 

2. How are we to know what parts of the epistles apply to everyone and what doesn't?

 

3. So this means, that all of the bible doesn't apply to everyone? Is that what your saying?

[Guest shiloh357]

Hi Firestorm

 

What mean is that we tend to forget that Paul's letters were personal letters.  He isn't writing doctrinal theses.  He is, in part, answering questions that were sent to him by congregations that were struggling with how to live out their faith in relation to their culture and he is giving instructions relative to the specific needs of those congregations.

 

When we read these epistles, we sometimes don't read them like the original audience would have read them.  And so we tend to take statements addressing the personal issues a particular congregation was facing and we treat those issues as if they are doctrines.

 

A good example is Paul's instruction in I Corinthians about men wearing long hair.   In Corinth, long hair on men was an issue because of male prostitution and male prostitutes would wear their hair long and effeminate in order to attract male clients.   Paul instructed them to get their cut and to keep their hair short as was the custom in the Roman empire. In this way, they would not tempt other male members of the congregation.

 

Similarly, there were women, evidently, being saved who were former practitioners of the Oracles of Delphi. The Oracles of Delphi were a few miles from Corinth. These women would shave their heads and serve a the mouthpiece of the "Oracles"   So Paul instructs them to wear a veil over their head, evidently this was to be until their hair had grown back.    Paul wants both men and women to be completely separated from their old ways of life, to look and act differently.

 

Corinth was the most sinful, immoral city in the ancient world.  Paul struggled with this congregation, as they were saved out of some very horrid lifestyles.   Remember how they were getting drunk at the Lord's Supper??   That's because in ancient times, drunkenness and revelry was an part of the worship of pagan gods and they were employing that practice in the worship of God.  In I Cor. 11, Paul deals with, among other things, how Christian men and women should look in light of their previous lifestyles and he is giving instruction on the proper way to take the Lord's Supper.

 

So how do we know which parts of these epistles are meant to be doctrine and which parts are personal instruction?  Direct doctrinal teaching is easily to spot because doctrine is what you see universally dealt with in the epistles:  holiness, righteousness, the various aspects of the fruit of the Spirit, serving, salvation, the return of Jesus, the deity of Jesus, etc.    Those are doctrines.  Those are what form the foundation for practical Christian living.

 

When Paul is giving instruction about settling disputes and he names the people having the dispute, when he tells Timothy to take a little wine for his stomach...   Those are not doctrine.

 

Now I said that not everything Paul said was applicable.  That's true.   But that doesn't mean  that it isn't relevant.   Everything is relevant in that we can glean spiritual truth from them, but not everything is intended for us to necessarily put into daily practice.

 

For example again:   I don't think men have to have short hair like crew cuts as some do, based on I Corinthian 11.   That misses the point if you decide that God is saying all men must have short hair.    What is short?   God doesn't tell us.   To dwell on that misses the point.   The point is not about the length of the hair.   The point is that we need to give up anything from our sinful past that is going to be a stumbling block to new believers or ourselves.  

 

I know a lady who was very promiscuous before she was saved and used to frequent country music honky-tonks years ago.   She got saved and has been saved for over 50 years but tells me that she cannot listen to that old music because it inflames old passions in her and causes her to think thoughts that she should not think.   So she cut it out of her life altogether.   That is what we have to do.  Sometimes, we have to completely remove any and every aspect of our old lives, every last molecule of it from our lives.  Paul was teaching these men and women in Corinth about separation and holiness.  That's the lesson we can learn, too.

 

So, while we are not required to wear our hair a certain way, we can take relevant principles behind Paul's instructions and insert them into our own lives and walk with the Lord.   So when I say they are not applicable, I mean that they are practically applicable, but it they are relevant in that there spiritual principles we can apply spiritually to our lives.

[firestormx]

Hi Firestorm

 

What I mean is that we tend to forget that Paul's letters were personal letters.  He isn't writing doctrinal theses.  He is, in part, answering questions that were sent to him by congregations that were struggling with how to live out their faith in relation to their culture and he is giving instructions relative to the specific needs of those congregations.

 

Now I said that not everything Paul said was applicable.  That's true.   But that doesn't mean  that it isn't relevant.   Everything is relevant in that we can glean spiritual truth from them, but not everything is intended for us to necessarily put into daily practice.

Thank you for taking the time to clarify so that I might better understand what you were saying. Remembering the proper context it was written in and to whom is very important for proper doctrine as I am learning. Lastly, I've seen so many responses when asked for clarity on this board to be almost hateful and rude. Thank you for not only writing the response but making it polite and being so respectful as well. 

 

God Bless