Can a Christian who refuses to be baptized be a Christian?

[JB Horn]

I think the Bible is clear that Christ was baptized. In who's name was Christ baptized?

In the Great Commission Jesus commanded the Apostles to baptize. Did He command then to be baptized for salvation?

I think it is also clear that Christians in the early church were baptized. As they are today.

I think the Bible would council us in many places to baptized as well. It also council us not to sin, to take of the Lords supper, to do good works and to fellowship with other Christians.

I also believe that someone who takes the time to read the Bible, can't walk away from it with an understanding that they should not be baptized. Most new Christians have never read the Bible.

Not being baptized does not mean one has refused.

A woman lives in a small town with two churches. She came to Christ with the help of her visiting relatives and the calling of John 6. After a while of reading and long distance counseling she decided to be baptized. Both churches refused to baptize her unless she joined their church but she does not like the leaders of either church and refuses to join. Is she s Christian?

JB

Edited September 20, 2008 by JB Horn

[Mudcat]

Not being baptized does not mean one has refused.

A woman lives in a small town with two churches. She came to Christ with the help of her visiting relatives and the calling of John 6. After a while of reading and long distance counseling she decided to be baptized. Both churches refused to baptize her unless she joined their church but she does not like the leaders of either church and refuses to join. Is she s Christian?

JB

Hey JB,

Yes, she is.

I find the fact, that neither church would baptize her, a little preposterous and not Christ centered.

Should we encourage her to travel out of town to find a church.

Should she ask if her relatives could arrange a baptism in their church, when she visits.

Or should we pat her on the back and say "That's Ok, baptism isn't a requirement of Salvation?"

I think the Bible is clear that Christ was baptized. In who's name was Christ baptized?

As to who's name Jesus was baptized in, or if he was baptized in the name of any is not spelled out in scripture.

In the Great Commission Jesus commanded the Apostles to baptize. Did He command then to be baptized for salvation?

He commanded them to teach and to baptize. I have already stated that its not a requirement for salvation. The underlying question is that if a person is aware that they should be baptized and chooses not to....Will Christ accept them, or is their commitment disingenuous?

I think it is also clear that Christians in the early church were baptized. As they are today.

I agree at least in part. With the various verbal baptismal formulas as well as differing physical modes...(sprinkling, pouring, immersion).

I think we would be making a stretch to say there is some consistent format. 'Sort of like they are today' might make more sense.

I think the Bible would council us in many places to baptized as well. It also council us not to sin, to take of the Lords supper, to do good works and to fellowship with other Christians.

Agreed.

I also believe that someone who takes the time to read the Bible, can't walk away from it with an understanding that they should not be baptized. Most new Christians have never read the Bible.

I know a lot of old Christians that don't either, I suppose ignorance can be a cop out as long as people want to remain ignorant. But what does that speak to their commitment to Christ?

Thanks for your thoughts.

Respectfully,

Mudcat

[Guest Butero]

I don't believe baptism itself saves anyone, but I have a problem with the idea of "refusing" to be baptised, since we are commanded to do so. As such, I voted no to the first question. I would have to question the heart of someone who refused to obey God and yet stated they were a Christian. If the question were simply asking if baptism saves us, I would have voted differen't. I don't think it matters who does the baptizing or if it is with the words, "Father, Son and Holy Ghost," or "in the name of Jesus Christ." At the same time, I do believe it should be one of those two methods. I personally prefer it be "in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost," in recognition of the Holy trinity.

[JB Horn]

Mudcat

Actually it is a common practice in many of todays churches not baptize non-members. For fun do some research in your community by simply calling your local churches and see what kind of answer you get from them.

What you tell the lady is that there is no requirement that baptism be done in a church or by a cleric, new christians do not understand this.

My point in my last post was that you tried to explain your definition of refuse with this:

I think the Bible is clear that Christ was baptized.

In the Great Commission Jesus commanded the Apostles to baptize.

I think it is also clear that Christians in the early church were baptized.

I think the Bible would council us in many places to baptized as well.

I also believe that someone who takes the time to read the Bible, can't walk away from it with an understanding that they should not be baptized.

Refuse to me means to reject. For a Christian to reject baptism is a denial of Christ request and teaching. I would even say that rejecting baptism is in a way denial of Christ. This is not an act of a Christian.

There are Christians who do not reject baptism but do not seek it either. And there are unchurched Christians who have never taken communion as there are Christians who carry rabbits foots for luck.

Someone who takes the time to read the Bible, can't walk away from it with an understanding that they should take communion and not worship rabbits foots.

JB

[ayin jade]

Can a Christian who refuses to be baptized be a Christian?

I'm more interested in knowing why a Christian would refuse to be baptised?

What if they had a water allergy?

Since the human body is greater than 50% water, that is not possible.

Look it up.

Not a true allergy. Interestingly what I could find on this was mostly anecdotal at best. Someone is allergic to showers but not pool water. Uh huh. Its not the water that is causing the problem. Water has a lot of things in it. Check out the water quality reports from your local water provider. The best info I found is from a doctor here. He is quite clear that while it is a real and very rare problem, it is also not a true allergy.

[ColleenLovesMischief]

I see one of the poll questions as quite redundant. Father is a title not a name, Son is a title not a name, and Holy Spirit is also a title. Jesus is the only name given. So being baptised in the name (note.....singular) of the Father Son and Holy Spirit is being baptised in Jesus name. There is no difference between the two.

[Mudcat]

I see one of the poll questions as quite redundant. Father is a title not a name, Son is a title not a name, and Holy Spirit is also a title. Jesus is the only name given. So being baptised in the name (note.....singular) of the Father Son and Holy Spirit is being baptised in Jesus name. There is no difference between the two.

Thanks for your thoughts.

I suppose I have wondered why Jesus didn't just tell the apostles to baptize in "Jesus" name instead of going to the trouble of making it a rather confusing issue for a lot of Christians?

What do you think?

Edited September 20, 2008 by Mudcat

[mrs]

Can a Christian who refuses to be baptized be a Christian?

I'm more interested in knowing why a Christian would refuse to be baptised?

Because, it has been devalued to the point of worthlessness, at least by the evangelical community.

And that is strictly my opinion.

Sure it is a 'requirement' for church (little c) membership. But obviously not for Church (big C) membership.

But I can't honestly recall the last timed I heard a serious sermon of any significance of baptism.

The best I have heard is a minute or two's discussion, before the ordinance is performed, but I don't think I have ever heard a pastor devote a full sermon to it.

However, I have heard quite a few sermons in regards to why we wiffle down a slight piece of bread and drink a tiny glass of juice.

Am I crazy, or am I the only one who sees something wrong with what is going on?

Hmm I never thought about it that way before.

[mrs]

I see one of the poll questions as quite redundant. Father is a title not a name, Son is a title not a name, and Holy Spirit is also a title. Jesus is the only name given. So being baptised in the name (note.....singular) of the Father Son and Holy Spirit is being baptised in Jesus name. There is no difference between the two.

The Trinity debate is in the other thread. But one thing that clearly stands out in Scripture is that Holy Spirit is a name not just a title.

[Mudcat]

I see one of the poll questions as quite redundant. Father is a title not a name, Son is a title not a name, and Holy Spirit is also a title. Jesus is the only name given. So being baptised in the name (note.....singular) of the Father Son and Holy Spirit is being baptised in Jesus name. There is no difference between the two.

The Trinity debate is in the other thread. But one thing that clearly stands out in Scripture is that Holy Spirit is a name not just a title.

3 funnies for you Smiles.

edit add....

and with that post, I have become a Junior Member

Yes.......now I am a dangerous man. I suppose you folks will have to take me a bit more seriously now.

Me being a Junior Member and all.

BTW, Do I get pick which color my decoder ring will be?

Edited September 20, 2008 by Mudcat