Beach Day at Church

[fezzik]

My thoughts have not been about the ones that was baptized, praise God for them, but that leader need to lead and show new converts the way. And not water it down untill it wouldn't make good kool-aid.
I really don't mean to hurt anyone, but find it hard to set back and do nothing.

I see that you are quoting the old testament in Genesis to point out that all God's children should be clothed. I grew up going to youth camp where we had to wear long pants at all times. Thank God those rules have been relaxed because it was and still is ridiculous to think that showing some leg is going to cause someone to sin. Like an earlier poster said, if you can't see a woman being baptized in a swim suit and avoid sinning then you have bigger problems. It is likely that you will need to no longer read the paper, you'll have to trash your TV and you will never again be able to pay attention to any entertainment in order to avoid sinning.

I am so glad that the local leader at this beach event did not turn away anyone. If someone wants to be baptized, why should they have to be 'taught' first so we can make sure they're truly saved? Who are we to judge? Is is a sin to baptize a person who isn't really saved? If so, then a lot of folks at youth camps for the last 50 years are going to have to repent, because a lot of those kids just wanted to get in the pool with their buddies. Sorry, it's a fact.

I realize you're going to point out that a baptism should be a holy occasion separate from typical, worldly events. However, I believe that you are adding rules and laws to God's plan and purpose for his children. This denomination has had a history recently of reversing some previous rules that had been taught for generations. Thank God for that. However, it appears to me that the narrow minded view of many things in our culture still abounds.

God give us eyes to see the clear purpose you have for us in the midst of the smog we have created around us.

[Paully_44]

I grew up going to youth camp where we had to wear long pants at all times. Thank God those rules have been relaxed because it was and still is ridiculous to think that showing some leg is going to cause someone to sin.

I thank God that I was raised in a denomination that didn't debate of such trivial things. And I am even more thankful that when we started going to this denom, my parents didnt let church leadership dictate our/my actions or way life.

Rahab, may your church continue the great outreach work.

[Poimen]

I have been traveling and my ability to reply has been delayed.

That said, I am not judging or decrying the conversion of souls, nor their willingness to follow the instruction of Our Lord to be immersed as a sign and affirmation of that commitment. I rejoice in their new found faith and know that the grace of God which brought them salvation will now teach them to deny ungodliness, worldly lusts, and how to live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world.

It is the sacrilegious nature of this particular service to which I object and that is so shameful. And, for those who scoff and ridicule such as judgmental narrow-mindedness, let me remind you that the Apostle Paul warned some in Corinth of eternal damnation simply because they treated communion as an opportunity to quench their hunger. In short, he condemned their sacrilege in observing the ordinance so.

Makes one wonder how strongly Paul would instruct and correct those who partake in and/or permit "bathing suit" baptisms, and in mixed company, aye?

And, for the record, it has not so much to do with if the one seeing those in such an immodest fashion are lusting, tempted, or not. It has to do with such behavior and immodesty in appearance itself and it having naturally the propensity to cause such -- whether it does or not.

Sure, the conscience can be defiled, seared, hardened and no longer bothered by such lascivious behavior and wanton appearance. But that doesn't change the inappropriateness of it -- even if the whole world decides it's okay. In fact, the prophet pronounces a WOE to them that call evil good and good evil.

Think on these things.

[Pastor Gary]

I have been traveling and my ability to reply has been delayed.

That said, I am not judging or decrying the conversion of souls, nor their willingness to follow the instruction of Our Lord to be immersed as a sign and affirmation of that commitment. I rejoice in their new found faith and know that the grace of God which brought them salvation will now teach them to deny ungodliness, worldly lusts, and how to live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world.

It is the sacrilegious nature of this particular service to which I object and that is so shameful. And, for those who scoff and ridicule such as judgmental narrow-mindedness, let me remind you that the Apostle Paul warned some in Corinth of eternal damnation simply because they treated communion as an opportunity to quench their hunger. In short, he condemned their sacrilege in observing the ordinance so.

Makes one wonder how strongly Paul would instruct and correct those who partake in and/or permit "bathing suit" baptisms, and in mixed company, aye?

And, for the record, it has not so much to do with if the one seeing those in such an immodest fashion are lusting, tempted, or not. It has to do with such behavior and immodesty in appearance itself and it having naturally the propensity to cause such -- whether it does or not.

Sure, the conscience can be defiled, seared, hardened and no longer bothered by such lascivious behavior and wanton appearance. But that doesn't change the inappropriateness of it -- even if the whole world decides it's okay. In fact, the prophet pronounces a WOE to them that call evil good and good evil.

Think on these things.

Wow!
!woW

I simply couldn't be further from your understanding on this issue.

[macgulley]

Sure, the conscience can be defiled, seared, hardened and no longer bothered by such lascivious behavior and wanton appearance. But that doesn't change the inappropriateness of it -- even if the whole world decides it's okay. In fact, the prophet pronounces a WOE to them that call evil good and good evil.

Think on these things.

I must have missed the picture of "lascivious behavior and wanton appearance". Now if the preacher had been naked, as Isaiah was for three years, I could see where you'd have a problem.

[EagerBeaver]

I have been traveling and my ability to reply has been delayed.

That said, I am not judging or decrying the conversion of souls, nor their willingness to follow the instruction of Our Lord to be immersed as a sign and affirmation of that commitment. I rejoice in their new found faith and know that the grace of God which brought them salvation will now teach them to deny ungodliness, worldly lusts, and how to live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world.

It is the sacrilegious nature of this particular service to which I object and that is so shameful. And, for those who scoff and ridicule such as judgmental narrow-mindedness, let me remind you that the Apostle Paul warned some in Corinth of eternal damnation simply because they treated communion as an opportunity to quench their hunger. In short, he condemned their sacrilege in observing the ordinance so.

Makes one wonder how strongly Paul would instruct and correct those who partake in and/or permit "bathing suit" baptisms, and in mixed company, aye?

And, for the record, it has not so much to do with if the one seeing those in such an immodest fashion are lusting, tempted, or not. It has to do with such behavior and immodesty in appearance itself and it having naturally the propensity to cause such -- whether it does or not.

Sure, the conscience can be defiled, seared, hardened and no longer bothered by such lascivious behavior and wanton appearance. But that doesn't change the inappropriateness of it -- even if the whole world decides it's okay. In fact, the prophet pronounces a WOE to them that call evil good and good evil.

Think on these things.

1959 called. They want their legalism and judgmentalism back.

[Poimen]

I must have missed the picture of "lascivious behavior and wanton appearance". Now if the preacher had been naked, as Isaiah was for three years, I could see where you'd have a problem.

As far as I am concerned parading around in public in a bathing suit IS virtual nakedness. To hear some of you guys talk it logically follows that pasties and a cloth just barely big enough to cover the bare minimal of the frontal genitals is sufficiently modest (edited for MacGulley. Sorry Brother.)

You don't even know immodesty, lasciviousness, and wantonness when you see it anymore. Like Lott we are growing accustomed to the vileness of Sodom and are (whether we know it or not) vexing our own souls. God help us lest we loose our families and children -- not to mention our souls

[EagerBeaver]

I must have missed the picture of "lascivious behavior and wanton appearance". Now if the preacher had been naked, as Isaiah was for three years, I could see where you'd have a problem.

As far as I am concerned parading around in public in a bathing suit IS virtual nakedness. To hear some of you guys talk it logically follows that pasties and a cloth just barely big enough to cover the landing strip or male package is modest enough.

You don't even know immodesty, lasciviousness, and wantonness when you see it anymore. Like Lott we are growing accustomed to the vileness of Sodom and are (whether we know it or not) vexing our own souls. God help us lest we loose our families and children -- not to mention our souls

Are you drunk? High? Incapacitated somehow?

I have never heard someone continue to trivialize a good move of the Lord in such a manner as you are doing Poimen. Shame on you seriously...I know you're a pastor and all but seriously shame on you for trying to call us all who don't see your viewpoint on this desensitized and sacrilegious.

God bless the Virginia Beach church tenfold for their ministry and the baptism of new saints.

[Poimen]

Are you drunk? High? Incapacitated somehow?

I have never heard someone continue to trivialize a good move of the Lord in such a manner as you are doing Poimen. Shame on you seriously...I know you're a pastor and all but seriously shame on you for trying to call us all who don't see your viewpoint on this desensitized and sacrilegious.

Shame on me ???

I will gladly bear such reproach for the cause of Christ.

[EagerBeaver]

Are you drunk? High? Incapacitated somehow?

I have never heard someone continue to trivialize a good move of the Lord in such a manner as you are doing Poimen. Shame on you seriously...I know you're a pastor and all but seriously shame on you for trying to call us all who don't see your viewpoint on this desensitized and sacrilegious.

Shame on me ???

I will gladly bear such reproach for the cause of Christ.

Yes, shame on you for focusing on outward adornment rather than rejoicing over the REAL cause of Christ here -- people receiving Christ and showing their testimony to the world of their conversion.

Your comparisons of that testimony to nothing more than live-action porn is reprehensible, closed-minded and smacks of a Pharisee attitude.

I am very sad for you.

[TW]

Let me ask this. If we are to follow a strictly Biblical model in baptism, the only one of which is John the Baptist, should it not follow then that the Baptizer must wear a tunic of camel hair, and the one being baptized wear a tunic of wool or unwashed linen?

For me, my choice would to seize the moment and baptize them however they came, clothing has nothing to do with the soul. Our next moment has no guarantee, do you risk that person dying before they can be baptized in "proper and modest attire?" I can't recall anytime that Jesus turned someone away because of what they were wearing. In fact the woman accused of adultery was probably wearing nothing more than a blanket off the bed on which she was caught in the act.

Chris, you know that I love you as a brother, but your views are archaic. They are the product of hundreds of years of puritanical teaching. And that's not a good thing. It is a very distorted, myopic view of God's creation based solely upon Adam's attempt to justify hiding from God. The old "I was naked and ashamed" ploy.


TW

[macgulley]

As far as I am concerned parading around in public in a bathing suit IS virtual nakedness. To hear some of you guys talk it logically follows that pasties and a cloth just barely big enough to cover the....

At the risk of sounding prudish, I'm a bit offended at your the terms you use to describe body parts. Perhaps you used those terms specifically for shock value but I think they are crude.

[Pastor Gary]

I will gladly bear such reproach for the cause of Christ.

Chris, unless you can point to the words of Christ addressing the issue of immodesty in baptism, you really shouldn't blame the reproach on His cause. It is YOUR cause, not His that you are defending.

I think the angels in heaven were throwing a celebration party over those baptized, whether in bikinis or burkhas.

[Poimen]

I will gladly bear such reproach for the cause of Christ.

Chris, unless you can point to the words of Christ addressing the issue of immodesty in baptism, you really shouldn't blame the reproach on His cause. It is YOUR cause, not His that you are defending.

I think the angels in heaven were throwing a celebration party over those baptized, whether in bikinis or burkhas.

And I rejoice with heaven over the redemption of those souls. However, I still see the error in letting a sacred ordinance be so irreverently performed. I rejoice and weep, I am here both hungry and full. I am not opposing any good accomplished, but I will not rejoice in the degradation of the holy either.

[Poimen]

As far as I am concerned parading around in public in a bathing suit IS virtual nakedness. To hear some of you guys talk it logically follows that pasties and a cloth just barely big enough to cover the....

At the risk of sounding prudish, I'm a bit offended at your the terms you use to describe body parts. Perhaps you used those terms specifically for shock value but I think they are crude.

I will gladly remove or edit them. No offense was intended. Nor was it merely for shock value -- though that was part of it, inasmuch as I hoped it would express the deplorability I feel for such loose standards with regard to modesty, and to help convey why I find such irreverent and indecent -- especially for a baptism.

Please let me rephrase...

To hear some of you guys talk it logically follows that pasties and a cloth just barely big enough to cover the bare minimal of the frontal genitals is sufficiently modest.

You don't even know immodesty, lasciviousness, and wantonness when you see it anymore. Like Lott we are growing accustomed to the vileness of Sodom and are (whether we know it or not) vexing our own souls. God help us lest we loose our families and children -- not to mention our souls