This is a new twist on COG ministers dealing with "troublesome" women in their congregations. Just rebaptize them! By doing this they place them under submission to the ministry and under their control. The threat of losing salvation due to improper baptism is the ultimate control. Even though it's not required for any salvational activity and is not a part of the gospel message.
January 14, 2022
I found out that Andrew Hessong moved to Ohio to be right where his idol, Brian Davis is. I don’t think some people understand that everythingHessong did was actually done by Brian Davis, through him. These men under Brian Davis can’t wipe their noses without first running it by Brian. I think it’s funny that Hessong got fired when Cal Culpepper moved over the Western region.
Also, I thought you might be interested in knowing that when it comes to women, Brian Davis is a serial re-baptizer! That is his MO when he comes across a woman who either isn’t swooning over him or is giving him the slightest trouble in getting them completely under control. I personally know of 4 but know there have been more! It is a way of humiliating them thus gaining control and bringing them into submission to him. (His attitude towards women is text book narcissistic sociopath, which I am 100% sure he is one) –Former PCG member [name withheld] Exit and Support Network
22 comments:
"The threat of losing salvation due to improper baptism is the ultimate control. Even though it's not required for any salvational activity and is not a part of the gospel message."
Therefore go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things, whatever I commanded you. And, behold, I am with you all the days until the end of the world. (Matthew 28:19-20, MKJV)
The BIBLE is a BOOK about GOVERNMENT
Maybe these PCG ministers should be rebaptized...
By staying under the water for more than 10 minutes!
3:40
If water baptism were necessary for salvation, we would expect to find it stressed whenever the gospel is presented in Scripture. That is not the case, however. Peter mentioned baptism in his sermon on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:38). However, in his sermon from Solomon's portico in the Temple (Acts 3:12-26), Peter makes no reference to baptism, but links forgiveness of sin to repentance (3:19). If baptism is necessary for the forgiveness of sin, why didn't Peter say so in Acts 3?
Paul never made water baptism any part of his gospel presentations. In 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, Paul gives a concise summary of the gospel message he preached. There is no mention of baptism. In 1 Corinthians 1:17, Paul states that "Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel," thus clearly differentiating the gospel from baptism.
Those passages are difficult to understand if water baptism is necessary for salvation. If baptism were part of the gospel itself, necessary for salvation, what good would it have done Paul to preach the gospel, but not baptize? No one would have been saved. Paul clearly understood water baptism to be separate from the gospel, and hence in no way efficacious for salvation.
Perhaps the most convincing refutation of the view that baptism is necessary for salvation are those who were saved apart from baptism. The penitent woman (Luke 7:37-50), the paralytic man (Matthew 9:2), the publican (Luke 18:13-14), and the thief on the cross (Luke 23:39-43) all experienced forgiveness of sins apart from baptism. For that matter, we have no record of the apostles' being baptized, yet Jesus pronounced them clean of their sins (John 15:3--note that the Word of God, not baptism, is what cleansed them).
The Bible also gives us an example of people who were saved before being baptized. In Acts 10:44-48, Cornelius and those with him were converted through Peter's message. That they were saved before being baptized is evident from their reception of the Holy Spirit (v. 44) and the gifts of the Spirit (v. 46) before their baptism. Indeed, it is the fact that they had received the Holy Spirit (and hence were saved) that led Peter to baptize them (cf. v. 47).
The belief that baptism is necessary for salvation is also known as "baptismal regeneration." It is our contention that baptism is an important step of obedience for a Christian, but we adamantly reject baptism as being required for salvation. We strongly believe that each and every Christian should be water baptized by immersion. Baptism illustrates a believer’s identification with Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection. Romans 6:3-4 declares, “Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.” The action of being immersed in the water illustrates dying and being buried with Christ. The action of coming out of the water pictures Christ’s resurrection.
Requiring anything in addition to faith in Jesus Christ for salvation is a works-based salvation. To add anything to the gospel is to say that Jesus’ death on the cross was not sufficient to purchase our salvation. To say that baptism is necessary for salvation is to say we must add our own good works and obedience to Christ’s death in order to make it sufficient for salvation. Jesus’ death alone paid for our sins (Romans 5:8; 2 Corinthians 5:21). Jesus’ payment for our sins is appropriated to our “account” by faith alone (John 3:16; Acts 16:31; Ephesians 2:8-9). Therefore, baptism is an important step of obedience after salvation but cannot be a requirement for salvation.
Yes, there are some verses that seem to indicate baptism as a requirement for salvation. However, since the Bible so clearly tells us that salvation is received by faith alone (John 3:16; Ephesians 2:8-9; Titus 3:5), there must be a different interpretation of those verses. Scripture does not contradict Scripture. In Bible times, a person who converted from one religion to another was often baptized to identify conversion. Baptism was the means of making a decision public. Those who refused to be baptized were saying they did not truly believe. So, in the minds of the apostles and early disciples, the idea of an un-baptized believer was unheard of. When a person claimed to believe in Christ, yet was ashamed to proclaim his faith in public, it indicated that he did not have true faith.
Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness.
There is no record that Abraham, Issac or Jacob were baptised, or for that matter David or the prophets of old.
God calls the things that are not as through they are…………….
We are saved by grace and that through faith……it is a gift of God.
One can look at the examples within Armstrongism and see the appalling documented behaviour of many within the ‘ministry’ to question the validity of baptism as a pointer to salvation and certainly ‘Godly’ behaviour.
Baptism for many is an entry into the full ‘rites and rituals’ of church.
But it does of itself not save, only what Jesus did at Calvary does. As John 3:16 says, he that believes shall be saved.
The pic - yuk.
I read on some blog that a top Armstrong minister was caught in bed with another ministers wife. When a elder found out about it and complained to headquarters, he was humiliated by being forced to get baptised again. A major unstated rule in abusive churches is to protect those in power. Their crimes and sins are expected to be covered up. Catholic priests sex crimes are a good example of this.
3:55, the Bible is a book of books containing myth, legend, and folklore.
6:00 Anonymous Anonymous said...
The pic - yuk.
LOL! You Armstrongites always love to focus upon the insignificant things instead of the abuse in the church.
6.58 PM
It's you who's nit picking. Try reading several articles and associated comments on this blog.
My underestanding is that Acts 2:38 reads, "be baptized FOR the forgiveness of sin." Matt. 3:10 John the baptist baptized FOR repentance.
How are we to understand the meaning of the wordk "for"? The word "for" means "because" not "in order to. John the Baptist was not waterboarding people until they repented. People were baptized BECAUSE their sins were forgiven, not in order to have them forgiven.
We do good works because we are saved, not in order to be saved.
š¤£
Contracts 101. For a contract to be legally binding, there needs to be an outward expression of consent. This can be a signature, hand shake, or removing a shoe as in the OT, etc.
Hence water baptism is a legal contract one has entered into with God. With no outward sign, there is no contract. And there is no need for re-baptism. Re-baptism is ministers playing games with both man and God.
Btw, Christ gave the example of having John baptised Him.
Re-baptising a woman ALREADY baptised by a Church of God church is badly WRONG. I've never heard of such rubbish. It is neither biblical nor even what Radio Church of God then Worldwide did to women.
I've heard of men and women from other baptising backgrounds being baptised by ACOG because they never had the hands laid on them aspect of baptisim, but this PCG latest news is dark, very dark indeed.
Anon 6:22
If this is true then more fool the elder who allowed such unscriptual lunacy to happen to him. Gotta have some backbone in life and stand your ground against illiterate domineering types.
What should raise questions amongst Armstrongites is that the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit which were described in the gospels and epistles seemed to disappear sometime during the early church era. Jesus manifested them, His Apostles had them, and then, they were gone.
There have been many explanations of this. Some have said that once Christianity was on its way, (going viral in the parlance of our current times), they were no longer needed. Others claim to have them, but are clearly faking them. LCG used to recognize that they did not have them, at least on a par with the examples we read of Jesus and the Apostles, and LCG under Rod Meredith had an annual day of fasting and prayer that they would receive these in order to complete "the work".
At best, compared to the power and gifts of the past, Christians today appear to receive if anything at baptism, a diet version of the Holy Spirit. I've known for years that there is little or no understanding of the Holy Spirit within Armstrongism. If there were, all of the historic authoritarianism within the Armstrong movement would be recognized as completely unnecessary. That's their bogus replacement for the power which the Holy Spirit is supposed to have in transforming the lives of human Christians. So, it is hardly surprising that someone within their ranks would advance the idea that if someone did not obey them they needed to be rebaptized.
Spiritual abuse. I’ve seen what it does to those women. Very sad
Well Tonto, that would certainly make them the dead in Christ!
Sooo... you're saying that Jesus was just spouting off nonsense?
How so?
When I was in a meeting with a minister over some stuff, the FIRST thing they asked me was if they thought my baptism was valid. Yes, I am a woman. Yes, it was humiliating. I tried to explain to them that yes, I thought it was valid. But, it was so hard sitting there, they kept slandering my character, and in essence trying to manipulate me into admitting that my baptism wasn’t valid. Its all the ministers that do this.
Post a Comment