So many times I have heard preachers say that Paul was basically downplaying the role of baptism in the Church, or showing its insignificance, in 1 Corinthians 1:17 when he says "For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel," putting preaching at a much higher level than the sacrament of baptism. However, a closer look at the context that the verse is placed in paints another picture.
In verses 12-17, Paul is correcting the church at Corinth for their mistaken belief that whoever baptized them, or introduced them to the faith, required their devotion and full allegiance, creating factions of Christians within the church. This is why, in vs. 13, Paul says "Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?" Paul goes on to say "I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name." (vs. 14 & 15).
Paul's words, "I thank God that I baptized none of you", and "were you baptized in the name of Paul?", place a great deal of importance on baptism. The people of Corinth were all baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ. They all belong to Jesus Christ through their baptism in His name.
Paul's relief in not baptizing many of the members of the church of Corinth is caused by his desire to not be a major part of the factions that were being created in the church, not because he placed little or no importance on baptism. Paul writes in many other places about being baptized into Christ, dying in baptism and rising in Christ. Paul simply was not called to baptize them, but to preach to them. This means that there were others who were called to baptize them. Simply because Paul wasn't called to baptize but to preach doesn't mean that baptism isn't important, it just means that wasn't his job! Of course he would do it if he had to, as he mentions that he did baptize a few of them. The very fact that Paul points out that divisions were caused over the people who baptized them shows what a great deal of importance the early church placed on baptism.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Tradition and Reason
I have to admit, I don't like change. I am a sucker for tradition. Tradition is usually a sign of stability, or maybe very slow change. This dislike for change and desire for tradition may be caused by a world that views truth as relative and a church that conforms to the fashions and fads of the day. Actually, I'm sure those reasons have something to do with it.
However, if tradition leads to a dead spiritual life I am against it. I've been in many traditional churches that are still Spirit filled and full of life. I've been in others where the members go to church because they really like the liturgy, or the sound of the organ, or they rant about their choir or they are really in love with the smells and bells, and they seem to lack spiritual life and vitality, and they have little or no concern for those in the world.
Tradition, theology, doctrine and liturgy are all very important; important to me personally. But I can't stand deadness! I don't mean that I need to see people doing back flips in church, waving their hands or speaking in tongues. What I mean is I can tell when I meet a Christian who really loves the Lord and who's life has been transformed by Him, and I can tell the other type; the type that goes to church for social reasons, and that's about it. They may sing ancient and beautiful songs that have beautiful words and melody's, but do they mean or feel what they sing? Of course, there may be people in the congregation that do love God and want to serve Him truly. I've met some.
What is more depressing is that there are hardly ever young people in either group. The church seems to be dying in America. At least the traditional church. To me, this is very sad. It's my opinion that it is NOT the right thing to do to coax them back to church using entertainment. That has nothing to do with conversion. They have to be made disciples, true converts, true seekers of God, and only conviction and the Holy Spirit can do this. I suppose we live in an age where people, especially young people, are completely and totally lost to entertainment. How can a quiet and reverential old traditional church compete? It can't. One has to love God to do anything truly. One must let go of over-entertainment as well. People are so consumed with entertainment that it is saddening. They must be doing something constantly, such as playing video games, chatting, texting, surfing the web, listening to IPod's, downloading music, looking at porn, watching a movie, whatever. Satan wins through these tools.
This post is turning into something I didn't intend it to. What I wanted to say is that tradition is good at making boundaries and passing on the ancient faith. It is not good when tradition becomes the god. There is One God. He is jealous for us and for our time.
Paul
"If anyone thinks that he knows anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know." St. Paul
However, if tradition leads to a dead spiritual life I am against it. I've been in many traditional churches that are still Spirit filled and full of life. I've been in others where the members go to church because they really like the liturgy, or the sound of the organ, or they rant about their choir or they are really in love with the smells and bells, and they seem to lack spiritual life and vitality, and they have little or no concern for those in the world.
Tradition, theology, doctrine and liturgy are all very important; important to me personally. But I can't stand deadness! I don't mean that I need to see people doing back flips in church, waving their hands or speaking in tongues. What I mean is I can tell when I meet a Christian who really loves the Lord and who's life has been transformed by Him, and I can tell the other type; the type that goes to church for social reasons, and that's about it. They may sing ancient and beautiful songs that have beautiful words and melody's, but do they mean or feel what they sing? Of course, there may be people in the congregation that do love God and want to serve Him truly. I've met some.
What is more depressing is that there are hardly ever young people in either group. The church seems to be dying in America. At least the traditional church. To me, this is very sad. It's my opinion that it is NOT the right thing to do to coax them back to church using entertainment. That has nothing to do with conversion. They have to be made disciples, true converts, true seekers of God, and only conviction and the Holy Spirit can do this. I suppose we live in an age where people, especially young people, are completely and totally lost to entertainment. How can a quiet and reverential old traditional church compete? It can't. One has to love God to do anything truly. One must let go of over-entertainment as well. People are so consumed with entertainment that it is saddening. They must be doing something constantly, such as playing video games, chatting, texting, surfing the web, listening to IPod's, downloading music, looking at porn, watching a movie, whatever. Satan wins through these tools.
This post is turning into something I didn't intend it to. What I wanted to say is that tradition is good at making boundaries and passing on the ancient faith. It is not good when tradition becomes the god. There is One God. He is jealous for us and for our time.
Paul
"If anyone thinks that he knows anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know." St. Paul
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
