|
Post by pa on Apr 28, 2016 16:23:07 GMT -5
In which bible is this verse and where? I can't recall to have ever read that in any of the translations that I have read.
|
|
|
Post by pa on Apr 28, 2016 16:30:00 GMT -5
Don't worry I found it.
|
|
|
Post by xna on Apr 28, 2016 17:12:58 GMT -5
The story is; god created all things.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2016 20:34:50 GMT -5
i remember asking about this back in 2007 when I got baptized it wasn't entirely satisfactory in the answer but went something like this...
the church needs to make sure someone is committed to Christ before they take the serious step of baptism for after baptism you have to account for everything you do...
Acts 8:36,37 "....And Philip said ,if thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest." What a shame that people think they have the right to interfere in something that is between one self and God ,one should not need to prove to any man that one is sincere. Say the person died while still professing,what then ?I don't know ,the Bible say's we have to be baptized,but I won't judge it's all in God's hands. I don't know if the bible says exactly that we have to be baptized, we have the thief on the cross whom we don't know if he was baptized.
|
|
|
Post by magpie on Apr 29, 2016 7:00:41 GMT -5
A professing christian or ones profession of faith-is common speak amongst all those christian churches in your Town or City.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2016 9:01:14 GMT -5
Acts 8:36,37 "....And Philip said ,if thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest." What a shame that people think they have the right to interfere in something that is between one self and God ,one should not need to prove to any man that one is sincere. Say the person died while still professing,what then ?I don't know ,the Bible say's we have to be baptized,but I won't judge it's all in God's hands. I don't know if the bible says exactly that we have to be baptized, we have the thief on the cross whom we don't know if he was baptized. Actually Jesus say's so in John3:5. But yes there are examples as you have mentioned about the thief on the cross that weren't baptized. God is the judge so we will just leave it in His hands.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 4, 2016 2:15:28 GMT -5
Professing doesn't come from the Bible. In the N.T people who believed in Jesus as their savior was baptized on the spot. No professing was required or a time period before baptism. Lets get back to the simplicity of God's word. Professing certainly does come from the Bible! "Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses.", "Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;)", and elsewhere. Profession was absolutely required before baptism in the Bible. Read and notice the pattern -- believed, and was baptized! Baptism follows a profession of belief. Delayed baptism is another matter altogether and you are correct that the Biblical accounts clearly demonstrate a profession of belief being followed almost immediately by baptism. It would be good for groups who are serious about being Biblical to take heed to this. That said, it should be noted that the question of when to baptize young people who have been taught the gospel from birth is not such a simple matter and is one which due to the nature of those times, the Biblical accounts do not directly address beyond demonstrating that baptism is always to follow belief. This question is probably the greatest factor that has led many serious Christian groups throughout history to start practicing delayed baptism. That and the natural tendency to fall into a pattern, such as baptizing at particular regular times and places.
|
|
|
Post by withlove on May 5, 2016 14:47:00 GMT -5
Professing doesn't come from the Bible. In the N.T people who believed in Jesus as their savior was baptized on the spot. No professing was required or a time period before baptism. Lets get back to the simplicity of God's word. Professing certainly does come from the Bible! "Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses.", "Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;)", and elsewhere. Profession was absolutely required before baptism in the Bible. Read and notice the pattern -- believed, and was baptized! Baptism follows a profession of belief. Delayed baptism is another matter altogether and you are correct that the Biblical accounts clearly demonstrate a profession of belief being followed almost immediately by baptism. It would be good for groups who are serious about being Biblical to take heed to this. That said, it should be noted that the question of when to baptize young people who have been taught the gospel from birth is not such a simple matter and is one which due to the nature of those times, the Biblical accounts do not directly address beyond demonstrating that baptism is always to follow belief. This question is probably the greatest factor that has led many serious Christian groups throughout history to start practicing delayed baptism. That and the natural tendency to fall into a pattern, such as baptizing at particular regular times and places. Usually at conventions, the overseer will announce the time for baptisms and ask that anyone considering the step would speak to the workers from their field. That conversation should be the profession of faith. There is no need for the revival-style testing of the meetings.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 5, 2016 15:07:31 GMT -5
Usually at conventions, the overseer will announce the time for baptisms and ask that anyone considering the step would speak to the workers from their field. That conversation should be the profession of faith. There is no need for the revival-style testing of the meetings. Why should your pattern be followed instead of the way it is done? Can you explain why making a profession of faith in front of a small group of workers would be specifically better than a profession of faith made in front of the whole meeting? The weak point is that those who stand up to make their profession of faith are not spoken to about baptism immediately.
|
|
|
Post by withlove on May 5, 2016 15:50:18 GMT -5
Usually at conventions, the overseer will announce the time for baptisms and ask that anyone considering the step would speak to the workers from their field. That conversation should be the profession of faith. There is no need for the revival-style testing of the meetings. Why should your pattern be followed instead of the way it is done? Can you explain why making a profession of faith in front of a small group of workers would be specifically better than a profession of faith made in front of the whole meeting? The weak point is that those who stand up to make their profession of faith are not spoken to about baptism immediately. What I mean is there is no need for multiple professions. It could be that standing would be the profession, with no need to speak privately with workers. And having a meeting specifically about baptism, but separate from a gospel meeting, is confusing. The current process is problematic. So many people (I would not be surprised if the majority of them) among the friends and workers were confused about baptism. Standing up to "profess" is such a dramatic event. Everyone is present, and acutely aware of who is being preached to. There is anxiety and pressure which people mistake as being of the Spirit rather than a construct of the environment and expectations of people. God works in in the heart, in love and clarity. He is not a high-pressure salesman who only has an hour to spend on convincing you. If he truly has never spoken to you before gospel meeting, but does there, he won't then abandon you immediately after. If you don't stand up, it does not mean that you are not willing. The revival style is not, in my opinion, the best way to win souls. It can be effective in getting members. God speaks to us gently and our decision should be made in a calm frame of mind. So much focus is put on meeting being tested. Everyone thinks about it all convention or series of gospel meeting in their fields. How much expectation, in comparison, is happening regarding baptism? I think the the reason for this imbalance is that getting members is most important. Once the members are recruited, it is assumed that they will want to baptized eventually to fit in with the group and gain emblem privelidges. The original revivalists did not have their own churches. They meant to revive the lost faith in old believers. The people who made a profession in those meetings were free to attend any church afterwards. Joining the friends and workers means professing that one believes he has found the only denomination that is led by God, and intends to be a part of it. It is not a profession that he accepts Christ.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 5, 2016 16:20:01 GMT -5
But of course there's a need for multiple professions! Standing up once, or having one conversation, or giving one testimony, and then walking away and living for ourselves is not the path of a disciple of Christ. We should hold fast that profession and profess whenever we have opportunity.
Maybe standing is an initial profession, but do you really suppose everyone who stands has the same level of understanding and doesn't need growth? Of course there is room for conversations after that, and one aspect of those conversations could reasonably include what precisely the standing person meant to be professing and whether he's truly committed to living life for God.
I'm not sure what you mean by a meeting specifically about baptism being confusing. I don't find it confusing when the ones specifically interested in being baptized are the ones who are asked to come talk about baptism. I'm also not convinced that the anxiety and pressure you tell of are specific to a stand-up profession setting in a way that wouldn't apply also to standing up before a group to be baptized. Someone would say "standing up to be baptized is such a dramatic event". But that doesn't mean Christians shouldn't practice baptism.
We should be looking at this from a Biblical perspective. As recorded in Acts, did people believe, wait several months or a year or longer, then receive baptism, or does it say they believed and were baptized immediately almost immediately? Of course they "professed" because without professing their faith noone would know whether they believed or not. But what followed the profession and is a long intentional delay before baptism appropriate?
So far this relates to new believers. What about those who were believers prior to coming to these meetings? The meeting about baptism is not for them if they had already baptized in faith. The standing-up profession allows them to express to the church group that they have chosen to be part of that they believe in Jesus and want to live for him. Certainly they can express this in other ways, but standing up is a way to make that expression to the entire convention meeting at one time and place.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2016 16:23:47 GMT -5
Professing doesn't come from the Bible. In the N.T people who believed in Jesus as their savior was baptized on the spot. No professing was required or a time period before baptism. Lets get back to the simplicity of God's word. Professing certainly does come from the Bible! "Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses.", "Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;)", and elsewhere. Profession was absolutely required before baptism in the Bible. Read and notice the pattern -- believed, and was baptized! Baptism follows a profession of belief. Delayed baptism is another matter altogether and you are correct that the Biblical accounts clearly demonstrate a profession of belief being followed almost immediately by baptism. It would be good for groups who are serious about being Biblical to take heed to this. That said, it should be noted that the question of when to baptize young people who have been taught the gospel from birth is not such a simple matter and is one which due to the nature of those times, the Biblical accounts do not directly address beyond demonstrating that baptism is always to follow belief. This question is probably the greatest factor that has led many serious Christian groups throughout history to start practicing delayed baptism. That and the natural tendency to fall into a pattern, such as baptizing at particular regular times and places. Thanks for the clarification,yes that is what I meant.
|
|
|
Post by withlove on May 5, 2016 18:11:08 GMT -5
But of course there's a need for multiple professions! Standing up once, or having one conversation, or giving one testimony, and then walking away and living for ourselves is not the path of a disciple of Christ. We should hold fast that profession and profess whenever we have opportunity. Maybe standing is an initial profession, but do you really suppose everyone who stands has the same level of understanding and doesn't need growth? Of course there is room for conversations after that, and one aspect of those conversations could reasonably include what precisely the standing person meant to be professing and whether he's truly committed to living life for God. I'm not sure what you mean by a meeting specifically about baptism being confusing. I don't find it confusing when the ones specifically interested in being baptized are the ones who are asked to come talk about baptism. I'm also not convinced that the anxiety and pressure you tell of are specific to a stand-up profession setting in a way that wouldn't apply also to standing up before a group to be baptized. Someone would say "standing up to be baptized is such a dramatic event". But that doesn't mean Christians shouldn't practice baptism. We should be looking at this from a Biblical perspective. As recorded in Acts, did people believe, wait several months or a year or longer, then receive baptism, or does it say they believed and were baptized immediately almost immediately? Of course they "professed" because without professing their faith noone would know whether they believed or not. But what followed the profession and is a long intentional delay before baptism appropriate? So far this relates to new believers. What about those who were believers prior to coming to these meetings? The meeting about baptism is not for them if they had already baptized in faith. The standing-up profession allows them to express to the church group that they have chosen to be part of that they believe in Jesus and want to live for him. Certainly they can express this in other ways, but standing up is a way to make that expression to the entire convention meeting at one time and place.j Re: multiple professions If there is opportunity for baptism right after a profession, such as at convention, then multiple professions shouldn't be required. Certainly I am not advocating that a new Christian should never speak of his new life again. I am saying that he does not need to prove to anyone that what he has proclaimed by standing or speaking is honest. Unless there is a reasonable doubt that he is insincere or confused. Accepting Christ is a simple and personal step. Why question someone's choice to take it? Of course everyone does not have the same level of growth and understanding. That is also the case throughout life until death. I hope to have more growth and understanding, and am so glad that the only threshold preventing anyone from baptism is belief in Jesus. He did not require people to know Jewish law or how to do anything or where to go. If any person tries to be a gate-keeper between you and participation in the body of Christ, that is something to be concerned about. Re: Baptism confusion When meetings are tested, baptism is rarely mentioned. It is all about the standing up. If you want to know about baptism you have to speak privately with a worker or attend a baptism meeting which may be only yearly and only for the potential baptisees and sometimes their family/close friends. Whereas gospel meetings are common and everyone is expected to attend, no matter how many times they have heard the gospel. Dramatic baptism: People getting baptized have already said that they want to be. It is not a surprise to many. It is not a spur of the moment decision in front of lots of people after the build up of tension in a gospel meeting. Of course there can be anxiety involved. But the Big Event at convention is "professing." Many people don't attend the baptism. The climactic event has already happened on Saturday night. Some will justify this by saying that baptism is just a burial of the old man...that the dying has already occurred, and that is the important part. I think making a profession that is sincere also happens after the "important" bit, which to me is what is said silently between you and God. But "professing" is still made much of. That confused me and lots of other people I know. To avoid the confusion, it would be good to reverse the imbalance. Preach more about baptism, and don't make it an exclusive event. Why wouldn't you want children or anyone else to know what baptism is about? Re: waiting period "What hindereth me?" If there is belief and water, there is no need to wait. Re: prior believers I agree that they need not re-learn about baptism, and likewise, they need not re-profess. Anyone can begin participating in most churches without having to prove that they are Christian...it is just believed and accepted that they are. I don't know why anyone would avoid baptism unless they had some paranoia of water or anxiety.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 5, 2016 19:13:24 GMT -5
Re: multiple professions If there is opportunity for baptism right after a profession, such as at convention, then multiple professions shouldn't be required. Certainly I am not advocating that a new Christian should never speak of his new life again. I am saying that he does not need to prove to anyone that what he has proclaimed by standing or speaking is honest. Unless there is a reasonable doubt that he is insincere or confused. Accepting Christ is a simple and personal step. Why question someone's choice to take it? Of course everyone does not have the same level of growth and understanding. That is also the case throughout life until death. I hope to have more growth and understanding, and am so glad that the only threshold preventing anyone from baptism is belief in Jesus. He did not require people to know Jewish law or how to do anything or where to go. If any person tries to be a gate-keeper between you and participation in the body of Christ, that is something to be concerned about. Re: Baptism confusion When meetings are tested, baptism is rarely mentioned. It is all about the standing up. If you want to know about baptism you have to speak privately with a worker or attend a baptism meeting which may be only yearly and only for the potential baptisees and sometimes their family/close friends. Whereas gospel meetings are common and everyone is expected to attend, no matter how many times they have heard the gospel. Dramatic baptism: People getting baptized have already said that they want to be. It is not a surprise to many. It is not a spur of the moment decision in front of lots of people after the build up of tension in a gospel meeting. Of course there can be anxiety involved. But the Big Event at convention is "professing." Many people don't attend the baptism. The climactic event has already happened on Saturday night. Some will justify this by saying that baptism is just a burial of the old man...that the dying has already occurred, and that is the important part. I think making a profession that is sincere also happens after the "important" bit, which to me is what is said silently between you and God. But "professing" is still made much of. That confused me and lots of other people I know. To avoid the confusion, it would be good to reverse the imbalance. Preach more about baptism, and don't make it an exclusive event. Why wouldn't you want children or anyone else to know what baptism is about? Profession is not a one-time event. Standing up in a particular type of meeting might be done once, but we must continue to profess our faith wherever we go. It's not re-professing, it's continual professing. Yes, so making a profession does not preclude having a conversation with someone afterwards about what it means. That would be one way to grow in faith and knowledge of God. And someone who professes belief but doesn't understand baptism should be taught about baptism and then baptized. Yes, "If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest." and there is no need to wait. To be known as a Christian, one would have to, in some way, let the members of the church know that one is a believer, in other words, one must profess his faith. However, in most churches there isn't really much participation involved in the main meeting. A large body of people sits down in rows, sings, listens to someone speak, and then leaves. Often people don't even know each other's names. So if one is not expected to show that he is a Christian, perhaps it's partly because he's in a situation in which the church is not really actively involved in ministering to one another and most people don't even know one another. Even in the smaller ones in which people generally know each other, it's usually the same pattern, with limited participation.
|
|
|
Post by withlove on May 5, 2016 20:11:19 GMT -5
I agree with continual professing as opposed to re-professing, which it sounds like you said. The workers do encourage re-professing among returning ex-friends and also Christians from other churches, whose profession and baptism they consider invalid.
I don't agree that a conversation about baptism is a blanket requirement, especially if baptism has been explained well. A desire to receive baptism after profession has been made is enough information for a worker. The likelihood of confusion would be greatly reduced if baptism was taught as I mentioned in the previous post. What is a good reason for not?
To be known as a Christian, you can proclaim by lips and/or life...showing up and participating is enough, whether that means speaking, praying, singing, taking the bread and wine, or what have you. Churches have sermons usually followed by the emblems. They also have smaller bible study groups or Sunday schools.
I hear from people of other churches all the time about how involved their ministers are, how available and welcoming of questions they are. I loved my workers, but they were not able to answer my questions about baptism, and they didn't know me. Ours was a small field, I was a regular attendee, friendly to and open with the workers. The mode of opporations did not include baptism teaching in meetings or getting to know everyone in the small group well.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 6, 2016 1:41:31 GMT -5
I don't mean there's anything wrong with a Christian from another church group standing up in a meeting as part of his profession. That's simply one way that a continual profession can be expressed at a particular point in space and time.
I'm not sure where the idea about blanket requirements for baptism came from. I wouldn't make a blanket requirement against conversations about baptism though. It's certainly an important subject to talk about, but I hope what's said would be true.
Different churches are quite varied but the basic pattern is very common for the main meeting. Most churches that have Bible study groups, etc., do so by splitting the large church up into smaller groups and it's sort of a secondary aspect, with the main focus being the main meeting and its center, the sermon. People don't necessarily attend the smaller group meetings and they're not meetings of the whole church. Families are usually split up.
If someone enters a meeting and sits through the meeting without speaking a word except to sing the hymns, he's participating in the meeting just as much as he would participating in many churches who follow the above-mentioned sermon-centered pattern. However, if he's a disciple of Christ, he may well make a profession of his faith in the home meeting by giving a testimony when visiting.
|
|