Posted on 05/17/2010 6:47:38 AM PDT by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
Ping!
The Calvinists in Geneva figured that if the Baptists prefer immersion then they’d deal with the problem by drowning them. They killed over 900 of them, most of them by holding them under the waters of Lake Geneva until they could no longer breathe.
Love those wacky calvinists. Murdering in the name of Jesus,,, and there are still those who admire them posting sometimes.
Ships sunk in battle were said to have been ‘baptized’
and yet, in man's ever holier than thou ignorance, 100’s were killed for practicing baptism as it was done in Jesus’ day...and thousands driven from their homes.
What other churches use the original practice?
My dad recently shared a beautiful story to me. When my grandfather was a young boy and his father was away, a Baptist preacher kind of took him and the family under his wing. A catholic priest came out once a month to their area, and the Baptist minister took care of them on the other three Sundays. Although my family were devout Catholics they had a genuine love and admiration for the Baptist faith, a respect which got passed down to my father. My father in turn, while raising us, NEVER ever spoke unkindly about other faiths and their beliefs, so thankfully, I was raised without any prejudices. Probably explain why my best friend is a devout evangelical.
He is currently writing a book (fiction) about a devout Baptimst minister. It is my dad’s way of saying thank you to this denomination and to show his respect.
You’re right there DesertRhino. Calvinists take NO prisoners.
My understanding was that the early Baptists in England practiced baptism by affusion (basically slinging a bucket of water over someone). I’m not sure why they did that rather than immersion. Maybe to avoid official disproval, maybe a cultural aversion to completely covering the body in water (I believe that was regarded as being very bad for the health at the time).
Interesting...
I like modern-day calvinists... at least they don't drown baptists... they just take over their churches.
Click my screen name and scroll down about 1/2 way. :)
All of the Eastern Churches -- Catholic, Orthodox, and "Oriental Orthodox" (non-Chalcedonian, like the Copts, etc.) -- baptize by immersion.
"On the basis of the evidence provided in the New Testament, it is not possible to prove that the term "baptize" always refers to immersion, nor that the Baptisms mentioned were all done by immersion--implying (in the view of some) that only Baptisms done by immersion can be considered valid. In fact, taken as a whole the evidence suggests otherwise. In some cases the term "baptize" is synonymous with "wash" (Tit. 3:5-6; see also Heb. 9:19; Eph. 5:26, Acts 22:16, and Mark 7:1-4—a passage in which some earlier translators considered the term "baptize" to include the washing of "dining couches"), and it is highly likely that Baptisms were performed in the early church by methods other than immersion. Three thousand were baptized on Pentecost in Jerusalem, where no river exists and no mention is made of other large quantities of water that would or may have been used. In fact, the shortage of water supplies in general in many parts of the ancient world would have precluded Baptism by immersion. As the Supplementary Volume of The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible correctly notes, "It is unlikely that in Jerusalem, Samaria, Damascus, Philippi, Corinth, Rome, or Asia Minor enough water was always available for a full bath" (87).
It should be noted that very early in Christian history methods other than immersion were used and allowed. The Didache requires the administrant of Baptism to "pour water three times on the head" (7:3). No mention is made of immersion. Early Christian art depicts Baptisms of persons standing in shallow pools with water poured on the head (see David Scaer, Baptism, 96-101). (from LCMS)"
I think you are correct. In those days there was a widespread belief that bathing was unhealthy.
You have link for your accusation? I guess Baptists are pro-slavery and segregation because of the Southern Baptist church that split from the Northen Baptist churches 150 years ago. I don’t see how any of this edifies fellow beleivers.
Thats true, they are taking over, and it’s a tragedy. The Baptist church has moved away from it’s roots, and has been under assault from Calvinists and others, who are eager to impose hierarchy and a more strict dogma, on what was a great theology.
They do it by confusing people with the terms “liberal” and “conservative”. They create the illusion in the church that they are conservatives fighting liberals, as in “political conservatives” fighting leftist-democrats. In a sense, they took the name “conservative” in the same cynical manner in which the socialist progressives claimed the title “liberal”.
As a result, many well meaning political conservatives assume the calvinists moving in, are on the right side and then surrender control of universities and organizations. It’s done sad damage to the Southern Baptists.
And anyone who thinks a Texas Baptist church circa 1970’s was somehow “liberal”, is truly delusional.
I'm not up on all the history here, but it may not have been as simple as all that. As Campion said, many of the ancient churches baptize by immersion, and it is certainly theologically no problem.
If said people, though, declared that it was wrong to baptize any other way, that might have got them into trouble.
Which Baptist church? There is no monolithic Baptist Church. Each congregation is a church. Not all Baptist Churches have moved from their roots. But some have.
One thing that jumped out at me was the people being baptized were adults. Although, I was surprised to read Zwingili's criticism. Probably just goes to show that if someone is coming out of one of the state churches some of it stays with them.
I think the better distinction is when someone is baptized not how. In Scripture baptism follows belief and the clearest examples we have are immersion, but if it is done after belief and does not impart grace the method is probably not critical.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.