It might be worth your time to read this short article from Fox News:
Among the many questions which come to mind is the most obvious which is whether it is indeed possible to "de-baptize" someone. Honestly I don't know if this is just a joke or if the person really thinks he can "de-baptize" someone with a hair dryer. Either way, it is just another sick commentary of the times in which we live.
For some, the sacrament of baptism is the single greatest expression of their Christian faith. For others, like myself, baptism took place (as this gentlemen is upset about) as a little child.
Perhaps because I was far too young to remember being baptized I have never felt as strongly about the ritual as many others. Blame it on my Presbyterian upbringing I guess.
Without getting into an endless discussion regarding the specifics of baptism (emersion vs. sprinkling or adult vs. child), the pertinent point is that the idea of being able to use a hair dryer to "de-baptize" is ridiculous. This would be somewhat on par with saying one could un-do marriage vows with a pair of scissors.
Those who refuse to believe in God have that right. They will deeply regret such a decision in the future, but it is their choice because God has given to every person freedom of will. This freedom is far too often forgotten as we seek to cram our faith down the throats of others who many times don't want it. The Christian faith is never to be "crammed" but rather to be held up as the standard of truth and righteousness.
As angry as we get at times at the foolishness of true unbelievers, we must never forget that such people are NOT prominently spoken of in the New Testament. Other than Romans 1 and a few other places, the actions and attitudes of those who do not know or love God is not worth mentioning. Those who refuse to believe in God have made their bed and the day will come very soon when they will get to sleep in it.
God is far more concerned that HIS people not become like those in the world than He is about the state of those who reject Him. See, there is a profound difference between someone who does not know God and someone who adamantly rejects God outright. For the first, all they need is for someone to show and tell them about God. For the second, that is between them and their Creator at the final judgment.
Did not see the fox news thing yet, but I do not believe a hair dryer would undo anything. How does God view all on this topic, is the most important. Personally, it is inconceivable to me how a christian sect can dismiss water baptism. The fact that they baptized with water is more than obvious. The ethiopian eunuch had the Gospel presented to him by Phillip, and afterwards said, 'See, here is water, what doth hinder me from being baptized?' Christ commanded His disciples to baptize, and we can see in Acts, they did. The epistles mention the act of baptism. The examples given are all likened to burying, putting away of the flesh, as in circumcision, and also the flood waters which destroyed the old world then.
If anyone would just study the word 'baptism', or 'baptize', using an exhaustive concordance, it would obviously show that it is commanded, and is important, according to scripture. The carnal nature does not easily accept any call to denial of flesh, and obedience to God. In the end, I personally do not believe it is a matter of doctrine, it is all about obedience. An 'answer of a good conscience'. It will submit to God, for a lifetime. One of the very first acts a follower will submit to, and not rebel against. This is a subject I mentioned in my introductions when I joined, so is very interesting to me. Thanks for bringing it up. God Bless all.
Ah... I see this man's son became a Christian. Interesting.
[quote]The Christian faith is never to be "crammed" but rather to be held up as the standard of truth and righteousness. [/quote]
This is so true. There is only one Savior and that is Jesus Christ. We are called to be witnesses of what God has done in our lives. I've have heard it said that we are often the only Bible some people will read... we are the only reflection of Him which they will see. May our lives be accurate testimonies of the power of God in our lives and may others see Him in us.
Almost strikes me as a sort of desperate attempt to 'blow away' God. Shame for them He's a little too powerful to be repelled by a hairdryer.
Haha I do love that last line though:
[i]Ironically, Kagin's own son became a fundamentalist Christian minister after having "a personal revelation in Jesus Christ."[/i]
Hi B2Y. I read the Fox News story. The following quote in the news article caught my attention:
[quote]Kagin doned a monk's robe and said a few mock-Latin phrases before inviting those wishing to be de-baptized to "come forward now and receive the spirit of hot air that taketh away the stigma and taketh away the remnants of the stain of baptismal water."[/quote]
Interestingly enough I was just reading about the New Atheists today, some of their characteristics and how they differ from old atheists. The new atheists seek to persuade believers to walk away from their faith by conducting such public rituals as this one. Atheists have always wanted to abolish all religions, but the New Atheists target Christianity and the Biblical God specifically. New atheists rely upon the empirical evidence of science to support their reasoning.
However, modern science is not at war with Christianity. Modern science has developed from forces that are largely propelled by Christianity. The early scientists believed in God: Francis Bacon, Johannes Kepler, Blaise Pascal, Robert Boyle, Isaac Newton, and Louis Pasteur. They were motivated as scientists by their belief in God. Many modern scientists are also believers.
So atheists do not have a foot to stand on. The very science that they say proves there is no God is the science that is now saying the scientific method will not prove or disprove things like, Did God make man, because the scientific method won't prove, Did George Washington live? Was Martin Luther King, Jr a civil rights leader? and so forth since there's no way to repeat these events in a controlled situation.
The scientific method won't prove that you even ate lunch today! Why? Because there's no way you could repeat that event in a controlled situation.
However, science is now saying that the legal historical method proves something is a fact beyond a reasonable doubt through oral testimony, written testimony, and exhibits. You can use this method to prove that you did eat lunch today: people saw you at the restaurant; the waiter took your order; you have the receipt. And this method can be used to prove that Jesus did rise from the dead: eye witnesses saw Him; we have the written testimony of those eye witnesses; we have the record of the Holy Bible, and so forth.
So without science to back them up anymore, where will atheists turn now? My hope is that they will turn to Christ.