Children Don't Like Church?

Children in Church

I visited recently with a man in my town that told me that he would not attend a church that had a sign
in the back few pews saying that they were reserved for people with small children, because he believed that children should be sitting closer to the front of the church. I had never really thought about the signs suggesting that they sit there, just that if they wanted to, but he is right. Why have signs at all on the pews in the back? Everyone with small children should be encouraged to sit closer to the front. Children seem to behave much better nearer the front than in the back.

I’ve been learning these things lately about how important it is for children to be in church, where they
receive the same gifts of worship that adults receive. When children are closer to the front, there are
fewer distractions for them. It can’t be fun to look at all the people’s backs and not even be able to see
the pastor. In the front they can see the pastor better, and what he is doing. He is acting in the stead
and by the command of our Lord, Jesus Christ. When he makes the sign of the cross and gives the
absolution of sins, it is for them, too. Children are sinners and need to hear their sins are forgiven just
like the rest of us do. They will receive the comfort that knowing they are forgiven brings to them, just
like it does for us. They are a part of the priesthood of all believers, because they are baptized. .

As things happen during the service, parents can explain to them what is happening in a quiet voice.
They can point out things of interest. When a baptism occurs the children will actually be able to see
how they were made a child of God, too.

Of course, children will become restless at times, because they are children. Parents can be told when
they are encouraged to bring them closer to the front to take them out when they fuss, but to bring
them right back in. Church is for them, too, and they shouldn’t start to look at their acting out as a way
to get rewarded with time to play in the crying room. The crying room should be more for the quick
disciplinary trip, or for an occasional small crying infant, not for toddlers that can and should be taught
how they should behave in church. This is God’s house, and they need to be on their best behavior in
the house of the Lord. It may be a way to teach respect. That is sadly lacking in our world today.

I’ve watched a few families in my church that sit near the front, and this is what they do. I’ve also
listened to Todd Wilken and some of his guests on Issues Etc, and they have had programs about the
importance of kids being at the worship service. Todd said his son was singing the liturgy from his crib
before he could even speak. We know these children are small believers because they were given the
Gift of faith at their baptism. God promises His Word does not return void. Children learn through
repetition. They learn the Christian faith through the liturgy they hear in church. They will learn how
they are being fed by God, to help them live their lives through the rest of the week, and hopefully
realize they need to continue to be fed throughout their lives. I think it’s time to encourage big
Lutherans and little ones to sit in the front of church.

Kari Anderson
Confessional Lutherans for Christ’s Commission (CLCC)
June 24, 2009

Christian Worship: What is This? (By Rev. Bryan Wolfmeuller)

Often times people have ideas for the church in order to get more people in so that they may hear the Gospel. But as some of these ideas run up against the test of time, they are proven as epic failures to serve the Gospel and sometimes end up working against the Gospel.

Among these I include most of the principles of the church growth movement, and most especially “seeker sensitive” worship services. The biggest problem with the idea of changing the worship service so it will be appealing to an unbeliever who walks in the door, is that you must abandon your own heritage and your own identity. What a disappointment it must be for someone who came to see what Christian worship looks like, but instead sees a cleaned up version of worldliness.

There’s an ancient saying in the church, lex orandi lex credendi which literally means, “The rule of prayer is the rule of belief.” This simply says that one prays, worships and practices according to one’s belief. Therefore, if you go into a Jewish synagogue, you will see Jews worshipping according to what they believe. If you go into an Islamic masque, you will see Muslims worshipping according to their belief. Therefore, you would expect Christians to be worshipping according to what they believe. Before people became overly concerned with numbers and growing the church, Christians had a heritage of worship that was maintained for 2000 years in the liturgy. If you wanted to see what Christian worship looked like, that was it. The liturgy of the divine service crosses cultures, generations, and even musical preferences. So when an unbeliever came to a Christian Church to see what Christian worship was all about, they didn’t walk in expecting to see a cleaner version of the world—these are the Christians who believe Jesus was born of a Virgin, that Jesus was fully God and yet fully man and that He died and rose from the dead. The Christians, in the eyes of the world, are already a little weird—so one would expect their worship to be a little weird. If I visit a country that has a culture different than what I’m used to, I don’t expect them to make their culture to match what I am used to just so their tourism will increase. I am going there to see and learn their culture. The divine service is the place where God gives His gifts that are not of this world: life, salvation and forgiveness. So then we should expect the service where these gifts are offered to be other-worldly, not this worldly.

This, I’m afraid, is a concept that is nearly lost in the Christian church as a whole. We’ve gotten to the point in the church today where the young adults, the ones getting married, starting families, settling into jobs, joining communities and now looking for churches, have always grown up with a style of worship that has been more worldly than it has been Christian. The only concept of worship they have ever known is one that has always watered down the uniqueness of Christianity for the sake of being non-offensive to unbelievers. So when this Christian finds himself in a truly Christian worship service, he doesn’t even recognize his faith’s own worship. “This is isn’t Christian, it’s too weird,” he might say. But it’s the worship of his Fathers in the faith and even the worship of his Lord.

I imagine it’s a bit like your children who grew up eating family dinners at the dinning room table. You’ve spent your years of parenthood teaching them good manners and what it means to sit down and have a decent meal at the dinner table with the family. After eighteen years of training you think you have them taught what a good and decent meal is. That is, until they go to college and are eating in the cafeteria or fast food for every meal. Upon returning home, they have forgotten what it means to sit down at the table and have a family meal. Your own children whom you’ve spent eighteen hard years training has forgotten it all. But one day you invite a friend from work to dinner, a friend who never grew up knowing what a family dinner was like. But they are in your house and they are being served by you so they will eat dinner according to your custom.

It’s a sad state that we’re in, that our very own brothers and sisters in Christ who have grown up in the faith don’t recognize their own faith’s worship service. But it is the unbeliever who comes in expectation of something other worldly and finds it in the historic liturgy of the Christian church. As a church, let us stop trying to change how our Lord serves us so that others will be less offended. Instead, let us teach others their need for what the Lord serves us. Namely, that we are all poor miserable sinners in need of God’s grace and forgiveness—grace and forgiveness that is given to us in the Divine Service of the church through His Holy Word. Let us come to this service of our Lord and receive what He gives us and how He gives it to us.

Welcome to the Main Event (GOP Debate)

My Name’s Mollie And I’m A Submissive Wife

August 16th, 2011Post by Mollie

I’ve seen links to this all over facebook and google plus, and thought it might generate some interesting discussion here. One link to it was posted Aug 11th on Ricochet.com. I’ve posted it here under Mollie’s name — Norm

Instead of watching the debate tonight, I had dinner with friends in Littleton. The restaurant had approximately 34 televisions going and all were tuned into the Denver Broncos preseason game. I love Colorado.

So I missed the little brouhaha over Byron York’s question to Michele Bachmann, embedded above. When I think of the top, say, 1,000 questions I’d like to hear Fox News ask GOP presidential contenders, asking Michele Bachmann about her views on submissive wives wouldn’t rank on my list. And you could tell the audience thought it an unconscionably rude or idiotic question.

What I find surprising, though, is how little the culture understands about what the New Testament teaches Christians about marriage. So as a wife in a Christian marriage, allow me to explain. Marriage is my most important vocation. It is the means by which God blesses me and my husband. Ephesians tells us that marriage is an image of Christ and the church.

St. Paul tells spouses to submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. Wives are told to submit to their husbands as to the Lord. Husbands are told to lay down their lives for their wives, sacrificing everything for them out of love.

We serve God by serving our spouses and denying ourselves for their good. As Gene Veith has written:

The husband loves and serves his wife, and the wife loves and serves her husband. The unpopular command for the wife to “submit” and the forgotten command for the husband to “give himself up” for his wife are examples of the self-denial required in every vocation. The husband, emulating Christ, sacrifices himself for his wife, who, emulating the church, receives that sacrifice in submission to him.

Today’s culture gets marriage wrong, in large part, because of our obsession with the self. People assume that marriage is supposed to be about self-fulfillment. Christianity, in contrast, teaches self-denial. The irony is that in a Christian view of marriage, both spouses are fulfilled, not by each of them making selfcentered demands, but through the selfless actions of the other.

I fail at this daily but this is what I aim for in my relationship with my husband. Likewise, he aims for this with me. When we sin, which happens all too often, we confess our sins and receive absolution. This is what our daily life is like and I’m thankful to have this teaching about marriage.

The fact is that the husband’s given role — that of complete sacrifice for his wife — is much more difficult than the wife’s role of submission. But something tells me we won’t be seeing anybody ask the Catholic or Evangelical male candidates whether they can be president while holding a Biblical view of marriage that requires this complete sacrifice for their spouse. On the one hand, that’s a good thing. On the other, it shows just how much that vital role — the one that sustains a Christian marriage — has been neglected and forgotten.

Adoption

ADOPTION —  the giving to any one the name and place and privileges of a son who is not a son by birth.


An act of God’s grace by which he brings men into the number of his redeemed family, and makes them partakers of all the blessings he has provided for them. Adoption represents the new relations into which the believer is introduced by justification, and the privileges connected therewith, viz., an interest in God’s peculiar love (John 17:23; Rom. 5:5–8), a spiritual nature (2 Pet. 1:4; John 1:13), the possession of a spirit becoming children of God (1 Pet. 1:14; 2 John 4; Rom. 8:15–21; Gal. 5:1; Heb. 2:15), present protection, consolation, supplies (Luke 12:27–32; John 14:18; 1 Cor. 3:21–23; 2 Cor. 1:4), fatherly chastisements (Heb. 12:5–11), and a future glorious inheritance (Rom. 8:17,23; James 2:5; Phil. 3:21).

Seven years ago adoption became very clear to me when my wife and I adopted our first son. When you adopt a child you soon find out how wonderful the gift of adoption is.  You also find out how much choice the person being adopted really has.  The adopted child is in the position that they must trust that the person which adopted them will supply all there needs.

When Christ says we are adopted, why do we  believe we are making a decision to give our lives to Christ.  Through the Holy Spirit Christ comes to us and shows us what is keeping us from our Father. This separations is something we are born with. Sin separates us from our Father. Through that sin we tell our Father he is dead to us.  That's right the sin in our life is telling our Father God that we don't need him and we can control our own lives. Yet as the Holy Spirit calls on our heart to show us our sin we ask that same question the prodigal son did,  if I do this I will... The decision we must make is not if we are going to accept Jesus into our heart. The decision we think we must make is not a decision at all, it is a trust issue. On that Cross, Christ did not only give us his inheritance He did everything which was needed to be able to enjoy being part of Gods family.  Just like any family you must trust that your parents will supply your needs in everything you do.  Christ is very clear that we should have a child like faith. This is not say we should be a child but trust that Christ has supply all our need.  This give us the ability to be able to enjoy what God has given us and through this trust we are able to show that love to others.

Thank you Lord for the Gift of adoption, both through your Son Christ and the ability to take care of one of your precious children.  I love you Son.

Many Church what is their take on Baptism

Various other teachings on baptism that you may run across in your ministries, friendships, schools, and workplaces.

Southern Baptist Convention

VII. Baptism and the Lord’s Supper

Christian baptism is the immersion of a believer in water in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It is an act of obedience symbolizing the believer’s faith in a crucified, buried, and risen Saviour, the believer’s death to sin, the burial of the old life, and the resurrection to walk in newness of life in Christ Jesus. It is a testimony to his faith in the final resurrection of the dead. Being a church ordinance, it is prerequisite to the privileges of church membership and to the Lord’s Supper. [1]

United Methodist Church

Article XVII—Of Baptism

Baptism is not only a sign of profession and mark of difference whereby Christians are distinguished from others that are not baptized; but it is also a sign of regeneration or the new birth. The Baptism of young children is to be retained in the Church.[2]

Article VI—The Sacraments

We believe the Sacraments, ordained by Christ, are symbols and pledges of the Christian’s profession and of God’s love toward us. They are means of grace by which God works invisibly in us, quickening, strengthening and confirming our faith in him. Two Sacraments are ordained by Christ our Lord, namely Baptism and the Lord’s Supper.

We believe Baptism signifies entrance into the household of faith, and is a symbol of repentance and inner cleansing from sin, a representation of the new birth in Christ Jesus and a mark of Christian discipleship. We believe children are under the atonement of Christ and as heirs of the Kingdom of God are acceptable subjects for Christian Baptism. Children of believing parents through Baptism become the special responsibility of the Church. They should be nurtured and led to personal acceptance of Christ, and by profession of faith confirm their Baptism.[3]

Presbyterian Church, USA

Book of Confessions CHAPTER XX—Of Holy Baptism (excerpts)

WHAT IT MEANS TO BE BAPTIZED ...Baptism, therefore, calls to mind and renews the great favor God has shown to the race of mortal men. For we are all born in the pollution of sin and are the children of wrath. But God, who is rich in mercy, freely cleanses us from our sins by the blood of his Son, and in him adopts us to be his sons, and by a holy covenant joins us to himself, and enriches us with various gifts, that we might live a new life. All these things are assured by baptism. For inwardly we are regenerated, purified, and renewed by God through the Holy Spirit; and outwardly we receive the assurance of the greatest gifts in the water, by which also those great benefits are represented, and, as it were, set before our eyes to be beheld.

WE ARE BAPTIZED WITH WATER. And therefore we are baptized, that is, washed or sprinkled with visible water. For the water washes dirt away, and cools and refreshes hot and tired bodies. And the grace of God performs these things for souls, and does so invisibly or spiritually.

THE OBLIGATION OF BAPTISM. Moreover, God also separates us from all strange religions and peoples by the symbol of baptism, and consecrates us to himself as his property. We, therefore, confess our faith when we are baptized, and obligate ourselves to God for obedience, mortification of the flesh, and newness of life. Hence, we are enlisted in the holy military service of Christ that all our life long we should fight against the world, Satan, and our own flesh. Moreover, we are baptized into one body of the Church, that with all members of the Church we might beautifully concur in the one religion and in mutual services.

ANABAPTISTS. We condemn the Anabaptists, who deny that newborn infants of the faithful are to be baptized. For according to evangelical teaching, of such is the Kingdom of God, and they are in the covenant of God. Why, then, should the sign of God’s covenant not be given to them? Why should those who belong to God and are in his Church not be, initiated by holy’ baptism? We condemn also the Anabaptists in the rest of their peculiar doctrines which they hold contrary to the Word of God. We therefore are not Anabaptists and have nothing in common with them.[5]

Westminister Confession of Faith

(A Reformed document from 1646, also subscribed to by the Presbyterian Church, USA)

Chapter XXVIII (Of Baptism)

I. Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church; but also to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, of his in-grafting into Christ, of regeneration, of remission of sins, and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in the newness of life. Which sacrament is, by Christ’s own appointment, to be continued in His Church until the end of the world.

II. The outward element to be used in this sacrament is water, wherewith the party is to be baptized, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, by a minister of the Gospel, lawfully called there unto.

III. Dipping of the person into the water is not necessary; but Baptism is rightly administered by pouring, or sprinkling water upon the person.

IV. Not only those that do actually profess faith in and obedience unto Christ, but also the infants of one, or both, believing parents, are to be baptized.

V. Although it is a great sin to contemn or neglect this ordinance, yet grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto if, as that no person can be regenerated, or saved, without it or that all that are baptized are undoubtedly regenerated.

VI. The efficacy of Baptism is not tied to that moment of time wherein it is administered; yet, notwithstanding, by the right use of this ordinance, the grace promised is not only offered, but really exhibited, and conferred, by the Holy Ghost, to such (whether of age or infants) as that grace belongs unto, according to the counsel of God’s own will, in His appointed time.

VII. The sacrament of Baptism is but once to be administered unto any person.[6]

Non-Denominational Church Samples

Pastor Vieths makes mention in his paper that many non-denominational or community or Bible churches have no serious theology of baptism. Since baptism has been a divisive issue among different denominations, and a foundational belief of many of these churches is the ability to disagree, many make no official statement on baptism. I tried to find one from our local community church, Christ Community Church in’ Beatrice, to no avail. Attempts to find a statement on baptism from Lincoln Berean Church, Crossroads Church of Lincoln, and Harvest Community Church in Lincoln left me empty-handed as well. The following three give you a taste of what is out there.

Elmbrook Church

(A major non-denominational church in Brookfield, WI)

We believe water baptism and the Lord’s Supper are ordinances to be observed by the Church during this age. They are, however, not to be regarded as means of salvation or prerequisites for church membership. (This church shall practice believers baptism by immersion.)[7]

New Life Church

(Colorado Springs, CO—a member of the National Association of Evangelicals)

Water Baptism: Following faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, the new convert is commanded by the Word of God to be baptized in water in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit (see Matt. 28:19;

Acts 2:38).[8]

Willow Creek Community Church

(A community church standard in Barrington, IL, led by Pastor Bill Hybels)

Statement on Baptism: While recognizing the right for other churches to practice infant Baptism if it conforms to their theologies, the congregation of Willow Creek Community Church understands Scripture to teach that only professing believers qualify for Baptism.

Scriptural teaching on Baptism may be summarized as follows:

1. Baptism is an act of obedience to the command of Christ, fulfilled by individuals who have submitted themselves to His sovereignty.

2. Baptism symbolizes the spiritual cleansing through divine forgiveness and the newness of life experienced by believers by virtue of their identification with Christ in His death and resurrection.

3. Baptism provides an opportunity for believers to make a formal profession of their faith before the church.

4. As a biblical rite of initiation into the body of Christ, Baptism of believers may be considered a prerequisite for joining the membership of the church.

Although the old covenant practice of infant circumcision is sometimes given as a rationale for infant Baptism, the biblical definition of the functions of circumcision and Baptism shows that those two institutions fulfilled different purposes in their respective covenants. The equation is never made in the Bible between the circumcision of male infants, in the old covenant, and the Baptism of born-again believers, much less of infants, in the new covenant. However, Willow Creek Community Church encourages Christian parents to present their children for the ceremony of dedication, whereby God’s blessing is formally invoked upon the children, and the parents publicly commit themselves to raise the children in accordance with the teachings of Scripture.

Because the symbolism of Baptism requires a more adult level of cognitive and developmental readiness, the Elders require that children be at least 12 years old to be baptized. Proverbs 20:25 issues a significant caution against the danger of making a vow before adequate knowledge, forethought, and reflection have been given. In an effort to prevent young people from making a premature commitment that they may not fully understand, this minimum age has been established.

Baptism recognizes and celebrates the redemptive life change that is continually occurring within our church. The Elders encourage, new believers and believers, that have not yet participated in adult Baptism, the opportunity to be baptized by immersion on stage. The Elders’ position is that Baptism by immersion paints the truest picture of “dying to sin and arising to Christ and new life.” The Elders strongly encourage those choosing to be baptized to participate by immersion. We do recognize, however, that some individuals may request Baptism by sprinkling on the stage because of a strong personal preference, particularly those based on a compelling physical reason or disability. In these cases, the Elders ask that a brief explanation be given on the registration form.

Some lies which surrounds baptism.

Baptism as something man does for God

Who is at work in baptism? Who gets credit for our salvation? The answer to the two questions is one and the same-the Lord. Many, however, see baptism not as an activity of a gracious God but as something that a believer does for God. Baptism is viewed as a sign, a commitment, an outward testimony that one has been filled inwardly by the Holy Spirit. Such a baptism is often called a believer’s baptism.

To understand how such a theology could develop, it’s imperative that we see where false teaching regarding baptism stems from. How can a Lutheran, a Reformed[1] person, an Evangelical, and a Mennonite pick up the same Scriptures and go to the same passages and come up with a completely different theology of baptism? False teaching regarding baptism does not materialize out of thin air. Those who believe baptism is something we do for God come at Scripture with a presupposition that baptism cannot be the work of God, completely and totally.[2]

There are different presuppositions that drive this teaching. And it must be kept in mind that not all who teach that baptism is a work of man hold to all of the following presuppositions. The first is a misunderstanding of original sin.[3] We are conceived in sin. We are born in sin. Not only do we inherit our pug noses and floppy ears from our parents, but we have inherited their sin, the sin which we can trace all the way back to Adam. If you deny original sin, or if you deny that those cute, cuddly babies have the capacity to sin, then all of a sudden baptism does not apply to them. Follow their logic: if baptism is for remission of sins, and babies cannot sin, then they are not to be baptized. Their faulty doctrine of baptism stems from their faulty doctrine of original sin.

A second misunderstanding concerns the will of man.[4] After the fall into sin, mankind is born with an enslaved will. “Not able not to sin” is how the dogmaticians describe man. To put it more simply, the baby coming out of the womb has no interest in God and no use for God. We are born alive by doctor’s standards but dead in matters pertaining to God (cf. Ephesians 2:1). And being dead spiritually we were hostile to God. We were born enemies of God. As we hear after the flood, “every inclination of his [mankind’s] heart is evil from childhood” (Genesis 8:21 b). St. Paul reminds us “the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so” (Romans 8:7). Again, if you are wrong on the will of man, if you do not see man as “dead to God” before conversion, if you see mankind as being able to do his part, then you will get baptism wrong as well. Among those who were wrong on the will of man and as a result were wrong on baptism are a group known as the Anabaptists.[5]

The third misunderstanding is that of the ability of children, infants included, to believe. Many times when you get to the bottom of one’s opposition to infant baptism, you stumble across the false presupposition that adults indeed can believe, but not children. Again, follow their logic. If faith is necessary to receive the blessings of baptism, and infants are incapable of believing, then it follows that infants are not to be baptized. Those who are unable to give evidence of faith are considered as unworthy candidates for baptism.[6] Our response is that faith is neither a moral decision nor a commitment on the part of the believer. Rather, faith is a gift from God. Recalling the ground we have covered already, “My faith does not make Baptism, but receives it.”[7]

The fourth and final misunderstanding is regarding the means of grace. Those who teach that baptism is something that man does for God refuse to believe that God’s Word has the power to do what it says. Hermann Sasse explains:

The Reformed opposition to this Lutheran understanding of Baptism is therefore nothing else than opposition to the Lutheran doctrine of the means of grace as a whole. They are opposing the fact that God does not give His Spirit, and therewith the forgiveness of sin, life and salvation, to anyone apart from the external means of His grace, apart from the external Ward, apart from Baptism, or apart from the Lord’s Supper.[8]

We have addressed how water can do such great things. For those who hold to a believer’s baptism, they do not need to answer this question. The question for them becomes a “who cares?” For them baptism is not about God working through his powerful Word and water but about making a commitment to God, a statement of their belief, a declaration of their intent to follow in the way.

 When baptism is turned into a pitiful work of obedience by mankind, or when baptism is thrown out completely and babies are simply dedicated or blessed (like a house or a dog), how does that adversely affect the true teaching of baptism?

“Is there forgiveness for my daughter or son or not?” If the answer is no, then what is lost is the comfort of all the blessings we covered before. If you deny that baptism works forgiveness of sins, then your attention gets turned away from God’s gracious doing into something man does. How many people are wrongly directed to their “conversion experience” or to their feelings rather than to the objective reality that is their baptism?

Baptism as something God does for man

In the face of lies, confessional Lutheranism continues to sound the clear and scriptural teaching of Holy Baptism. Hermann Sasse said regarding baptism in Luther’s day: “As was often the case, Luther’s way was the lonely way between Rome and the enthusiasts.”[22] Our position is no less lonely today. Keeping in mind what is at stake here, it is worth it to travel the lonely road. We need to be no less clear today than our namesake at the time of the Reformation. In the sacraments, God is actually giving us the very things he has promised to give us. God works in baptism. God does it all in baptism. God does it all in baptism-for you.

So, am I a baptized?[23]

I realize that some who have gathered here today may have been baptized by Father Kurt at Kearney Catholic Church or by Pastor Joe at Broken Bow Baptist Church. After exposing where various denominations and churches go wrong with their theologies of baptism, we at the same time rejoice that baptism does not depend on the preacher or on the name of the church. “Lutheranism, exactly like the Roman Church and the Eastern Church, makes the validity of Baptism independent of the personal qualify of the person who baptizes and recognizes not only baptism performed by the laity but also infant baptism.”[1] The goal in exposing errors is not to plant seeds of doubt whether or not you were really baptized. Lutherans accept more baptisms than anyone because we understand what baptism is.

What makes a valid baptism is not the denomination but whether or not they have the essence of baptism. Churches may err when they deny the various blessings of baptism, but if they do not deny the essence of baptism, they still have a valid baptism. “One deals with what the sacrament is [essence], the other with what the sacrament does [blessings].”[2] The essence of baptism again is water, Word, and action with that water and the Word. More simply, those who confess the Triune God and baptize with water and his name have a valid baptism. And so we joyously confess, “We believe in the Holy Christian Church.”

Excerpt from a essay by Pastor John Bortulin,Truth and Lies about Baptism:An Examination of the First Three Questions

in Dr. Luther’s Small Catechism (With a Cursory Look at Modern Day False Teachings)

[The Pastor-Teacher-Delegate Conference of the Southern Conference of the Nebraska District, St. Paul Evangelical Lutheran Church-Broken Bow, NE, January 28-29, 2008]

Two Good Video which Explain Baptism

The Sacrament of Holy Baptism

IV. The Sacrament of Holy Baptism

As the head of the family should teach it in a simple way to his household.

First.

What is Baptism?--Answer.

Baptism is not simple water only, but it is the water comprehended in God's command and connected with God's Word.

Which is that word of God?--Answer.

Christ, our Lord, says in the last chapter of Matthew: Go ye into all the world and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

Secondly.

What does Baptism give or profit?--Answer.

It works forgiveness of sins, delivers from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare.

Which are such words and promises of God? Answer.

Christ, our Lord, says in the last chapter of Mark: He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Thirdly.

How can water do such great things?--Answer.

It is not the water indeed that does them, but the word of God which is in and with the water, and faith, which trusts such word of God in the water. For without the word of God the water is simple water and no baptism. But with the word of God it is a baptism, that is, a gracious water of life and a washing of regeneration in the Holy Ghost, as St. Paul says, Titus, chapter three: By the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost, which He shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ, our Savior, that, being justified by His grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life. This is a faithful saying.

Fourthly.

What does such baptizing with water signify?--Answer.

It signifies that the old Adam in us should, by daily contrition and repentance, be drowned and die with all sins and evil lusts, and, again, a new man daily come forth and arise; who shall live before God in righteousness and purity forever.

Where is this written?--Answer.

St. Paul says Romans, chapter 6: We are buried with Christ by Baptism into death, that, like as He was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

Baptism week. Enjoy

So far, the two essential parts of baptism are water and Word. There is a third essential part—the action. That is, you can have all the water in the world, and you can have the necessary Word, and the right name, but without the water applied with that Word, you have no baptism. Baptism is a doing. Baptism is God’s doing. Remember who told his disciples to baptize—none other than Jesus! Baptism is not about man’s decision. Baptism is not about Grandma’s pictures. Baptism is not about the pastor. Baptism is about God making a disciple by application of water and his name.

So what is baptism? Water. Word. Action. We run with God’s name and by his command we use it with water. Let this suffice for the first question, What is baptism?

History of Infant Baptism in the Church

Infant Baptism in Early Church History
by Dennis Kastens

From the beginning of New Testament Christianity at the Feast of Pentecost (Acts 2: 38-39) to our time, unbroken and uninterrupted; the church has baptized babies. Entire households (Jewish, proselytes and Gentiles) were baptized by Christ’s original 12 Apostles (I Corinthians 1: 16; Acts 11: 14, 16: 15, 33, 18: 8) and that practice has continued with each generation.

The Early Church

Polycarp (69-155), a disciple of the Apostle John, was baptized as an infant. This enabled him to say at his martyrdom. "Eighty and six years have I served the Lord Christ" (Martyrdom of Polycarp 9: 3). Justin Martyr (100 - 166) of the next generation states about the year 150, "Many, both men and women, who have been Christ’s disciples since childhood, remain pure at the age of sixty or seventy years" (Apology 1: 15). Further, in his Dialog with Trypho the Jew, Justin Martyr states that Baptism is the circumcision of the New Testament.

Irenaeus (130 - 200), some 35 years later in 185, writes in Against Heresies II 22: 4 that Jesus "came to save all through means of Himself - all. I say, who through him are born again to God - infants and children, boys and youth, and old men."

Church Councils and Apologists

Similar expressions are found in succeeding generations by Origen (185 - 254) and Cyprian (215 - 258) who reflect the consensus voiced at the Council of Carthage in 254. The 66 bishops said: "We ought not hinder any person from Baptism and the grace of God..... especially infants. . . those newly born." Preceding this council, Origen wrote in his (Commentary on Romans 5: 9: "For this also it was that the church had from the Apostles a tradition to give baptism even to infants. For they to whom the divine mysteries were committed knew that there is in all persons a natural pollution of sin which must be done away by water and the Spirit."

Elsewhere Origen wrote in his Homily on Luke 14: "Infants are to be baptized for the remission of sins. Cyprian’s reply to a country bishop, Fidus, who wrote him regarding the Baptism of infants, is even more explicit. Should we wait until the eighth day as did the Jews in circumcision? No, the child should be baptized as soon as it is born (To Fidus 1: 2).

To prevent misunderstanding by rural bishops, perhaps not as well-schooled as other or even new to the faith, the Sixteenth Council of Carthage in 418 unequivocally stated: "If any man says that newborn children need not be baptized . . . let him be anathema."

Augustine

Augustine (354 - 430), writing about this time in De Genesi Ad Literam, X: 39, declares, "The custom of our mother church in baptizing infants must not be . . . accounted needless, nor believed to be other than a tradition of the apostles."

He further states, "If you wish to be a Christian, do not believe, nor say, nor teach, that infants who die before baptism can obtain the remission of original sin." And again, "Whoever says that even infants are vivified in Christ when they depart this life without participation in His sacrament (Baptism), both opposes the Apostolic preaching and condemns the whole church which hastens to baptize infants, because it unhesitatingly believes that otherwise the), cannot possibly be vivified in Christ."

Specific directions, with detailed instructions, for the baptizing of infants were given by bishops to pastors and deacons during this era of Christian history. In the year 517, seven bishops met in Gerona, Catelina, and framed 10 rules of discipline for the church in Spain. The fifth rule states that ". . . in case infants ill . . . if they were offered, to baptize them, even though it were the day that then, were born . . . " such was to be done (The History of Baptism by Robert Robinson, [London: Thomas Knott, 1790], p.269.).

The foregoing pattern, practiced in both East and West, remained customary in Christianity through the Dark and Middle Ages until modem times. Generally, the infant was baptized during the first week of life, but in cases of illness this took place on the day of birth. An example of this already comes from about 260 in North Africa in an inscription from Hadrumetum (Inscriptiones Latinae Christianae Veteres II, 4429-A):

Arisus in pace natus bixit supra scriptas VIIII

This Latin inscription indicates that a child who died nine hours after its birth was baptized. Such practice of Baptism within the first days of life. or on the day of birth in an emergency, remained for both Protestants, Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox.

The Witness of the Catacombs

The witness of the literary texts of the early church fathers, councils and apologists for the practice of infant Baptism in the first Christian centuries receives valuable confirmation from the catacombs and cemeteries of the Middle East, Africa and southern Europe, Below are epitaphs from the 200’s of small children who had been baptized. it is interesting to note that there are no Christian epitaphs in existence earlier than 200. As soon as the era of Christian Inscriptions begins, we find evidence for infant Baptism.

In that century there are attributes and symbols in tombstones inscriptions of little children which allows us to clearly infer we are dealing with baptized children. The following is as early as 200 or shortly thereafter:

In the second last line is the phrase Dei Serv(u)s which means slave of God followed by the Chi Rho symbol for Christ. The last line is the Greek ichtheos familiar as the "fish symbol" - an anagram for Jesus Christ God’s Son Savior. These words and symbols mark the one-year, two months, and four-day-old child as a baptized Christian.

From the Lateran Museum, also from the 200’s, is a Greek inscription that gives information about the religious status of the parents. It reads, "I, Zosimus, a believer from believers, lie here having lived 2 years, 1 month, 25 days."

Also from this era are headstones for children who received emergency baptism with ages ranging from 11 months to 12 years. Since the patristic sources of the third century, as those earlier, give us to understand that the children of Christian parents were baptized in infancy, we must conclude that these emergency baptisms were administered to children of non-Christians. The inscriptions themselves confirm this conclusion. In the Roman catacomb of Priscilla is reference to a private emergency baptism that was administered to the one-and-three-quarter-year-old Apronianus and enabled him to die as a believer. The inscription reads:

Dedicated to the departed Florentius made this inscription for his worthy son Apronianus who lived one year and nine months and five days. As he was truly loved by his grandmother and she knew that his death was imminent, she asked the church that he might depart from, the world as a believer.

The fact that it was the grandmother who urged the baptism makes it very probable that the father of the child, Florentius, was a pagan. This is confirmed by the formula in the first line which is pagan and not found on any other Christian epitaphs. We have thus in this inscription evidence for a missionary baptism administered to a dying non-Christian infant.

Sole Opponent - A Heretic

In the 1,500 years from the time of Christ to the Protestant Reformation, the only bonafide opponent to infant Baptism was Tertullian (160 - 215), bishop of Carthage, Africa. His superficial objection was to the unfair ability laid on godparents when the children of pagans joined the church, However, his real opposition was more fundamental. It was his view that sinfulness begins at the "puberty, of the soul,,, that is "about the fourteenth year of life" and "it drives man out of the paradise of innocence" (De Anima 38:2). This rules out the belief in original sin.

Tertullian’s stance, together with other unorthodox views, led him to embrace Montanism in 207. Montanism denied the total corruption and sinfulness of human nature. With its emphasis upon the supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit, it was the precursor to the modern Charismatic Movement.

Except for Tertullian’s heretical views, marking his departure from mainstream Christianity, the only other opposition to infant Baptism came during a brief period in the middle of the fourth century. The issue was the fear of post-Baptismal sin. This heretical view also denied Baptism to adults until their death-bed. It was not in reality a denial of infant baptism in and of itself In fact, the heresy encouraged the Baptism of infants when death seemed imminent, as it also did for adults.

The Anabaptists

Not until the 1520s did the Christian Church experience opposition specifically to infant Baptism. Under the influence of Thomas Muenzer and other fanatics who opposed both civil and religious authority, original sin and human concupiscence was denied until the "age of accountability." Although there is no basis in Scripture for this position. a considerable number of Swiss, German and Dutch embraced the Anabaptist cause. So offensive was this position that Roman Catholics, Lutherans and Reformed alike voiced strong warning and renunciation. It was considered a shameless affront to what had been practiced in each generation since Christ’s command in the Great Commission (Matthew 28: 18-20) to baptize all nations irrespective of age.

Regeneration for All Ages

Who would be so blind as to limit this expression of God’s grace and mercy to adolescents and adults and to exclude infants and children’s. If John the Baptizer could be filled with the Holy Spirit from his mother’s womb (Luke 1: 15), and if Jesus could say (Matt. 18: 6), "Whoever offends one of these little ones (Gk."toddlers") who believe in Me, it were better that he were drowned in the depth of the sea," and if the Apostle Peter could say on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2: 39), "The promise is unto you and to, your children, "what mere mortal dare declare so gracious an invitation to be invalid for infants, or forbid the continuance of the Baptism of infants for coming generations?

If the entire families and households of the Philippian Jailer, Lydia, Cornelius, Crispus and Stephanas of the New Testament were incorporated into the household of faith through Baptism, surely that testimony is immutable and established for all time.

Yes, we baptize babies. Unmistakably Scriptural proof substantiates that doctrine. Christian history, unbroken and uninterrupted. reflects such practice in each generation. Conscientious Christians do not delay but hasten with their children to Baptism that they may received the gift of salvation and regeneration and gratefully embrace the Apostle’s affirmation extended to those of all age groups: "For as many of you as have been baptized have put on Christ" (Galatians 3: 27).

Dennis Kastens is pastor of Peace Lutheran Church in St. Louis, Missouri.

---

Bible References

Acts 2: 38-39
38 Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off--for all whom the Lord our God will call."

1 Corinthians 1: 16
(Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don't remember if I baptized anyone else.)

Acts 11: 14
He will bring you a message through which you and all your household will be saved.'

Acts 16: 15, 33
15 When she and the members of her household were baptized, she invited us to her home. "If you consider me a believer in the Lord," she said, "come and stay at my house." And she persuaded us. 33 At that hour of the night the jailer took them and washed their wounds; then immediately he and all his family were baptized.

Acts 18: 8
Crispus, the synagogue ruler, and his entire household believed in the Lord; and many of the Corinthians who heard him believed and were baptized.

Matthew 28: 18-20
18 Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

Luke 1: 15
for he will be great in the sight of the Lord. He is never to take wine or other fermented drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even from birth.

Matthew 18: 6
But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.

Galatians 3: 27
for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.

Our Witnessing Example (Good Sermon)

“Making Known the Unknown God: Paul at the Areopagus” (A sermon by Pr. Charles Henrickson, on Acts 17)

May 28th, 2011Post by Charles Henrickson

“Making Known the Unknown God: Paul at the Areopagus” (Acts 17:16-31)

“Witness” has been a major theme running through the readings from the Book of Acts that we’ve had this Easter season. We’ve heard the church bearing witness to the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ for the salvation of the world: Peter and the apostles speaking boldly before the Sanhedrin. Peter preaching Law and Gospel on the Day of Pentecost. Stephen bearing witness to Christ and becoming the first martyr of the church in the process. The church giving verbal testimony to the crucified and resurrected Lord Jesus Christ, calling people to repentance and faith in his name–this is what we see in these readings from Acts.

But all of those examples that I just cited involved the early Christians bearing witness to their fellow Jews. We have not yet seen how the church bore witness when speaking to Gentiles, that is, to non-Jews, pagans. Today, we do. It is the story of Paul preaching in Athens, moving from the Jewish synagogue to the Gentile, pluralistic marketplace of ideas. And so this has great relevance for us today, for this is the world we live in. Thus our theme this morning: “Making Known the Unknown God: Paul at the Areopagus.”

So Paul is in Athens, the great intellectual center from Greece’s glorious past. This was the city of the philosophers–Socrates, Plato, Aristotle–great names from the golden age. Athens was Greece’s “University City.” And the Areopagus was the place where the professors and the intellectual avant-garde would gather, always eager to hear the latest thing.

But that’s not where Paul goes first. Our text says that “he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews.” Remember, the Jews had been scattered throughout the Mediterranean world for centuries. In every city of any size, there was a Jewish synagogue. And so the first stop in most any city Paul went to was the synagogue. “To the Jew first and also to the Greek,” that was Paul’s pattern. Why? Because at the synagogue Paul found a ready-made audience for the gospel. They were already familiar with the Scriptures, what we call the Old Testament. What Paul then did was to show how Jesus of Nazareth is the fulfillment of those Scriptures, that Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah promised from long ago.

For example, earlier in Acts 17, Paul was in Thessalonica, where, it says, “there was a synagogue of the Jews. And Paul went in, as was his custom, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving that it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead, and saying, ‘This Jesus, whom I proclaim to you, is the Christ.’ And some of them were persuaded.”

This “Jesus is the Christ, the fulfillment of the Scriptures” approach worked when you’re dealing with a Jewish audience. They knew what you were talking about. That the Messiah had finally come, and that it was Jesus, of all people, whom their leaders had crucified but God had raised from the dead–this was the missing piece of the puzzle. But the basic look of the puzzle was already in place. Now of course, many of the Jews rejected the gospel, even though they were familiar with the Bible and knew something about that guy Jesus. It was the repentance-and-faith part that they resisted, and thus many of the Jews rejected the gospel. Many of them, though, did believe the message that Paul brought to the synagogue.

So here in Athens Paul goes to the Jews first and then to the Gentiles. But notice, Paul takes a different approach when speaking to Gentiles than when he speaks to Jews. He does not use the “Jesus is the fulfillment of Scripture” approach, since his pagan audience would not know the Bible. Now he will get there eventually, but he doesn’t start out that way.

The Jews would take for granted that there is only one true God, the God of Israel, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Not so the Greeks. They were open to there being many gods, many religions. Paul takes note of this, and it troubles him: “his spirit was provoked within him,” it says, “as he saw that the city was full of idols.”

This is the world we live in. The American idols are everywhere, all over the map. Any goofy, nutty religion will do, as long as it is “your truth.” Many roads to God, however you may perceive him–or her, or it. Let’s all get along. Pluralistic, polytheistic, post-modern America, where Jews, Muslims, Christians, Hindus, and Sikhs can hold “interfaith” prayer services, as though such a thing were possible. That’s America in the twenty-first century.

That was Athens in the first century. That was the religiously pluralistic society Paul found himself in. Our text goes on: “Some of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers also conversed with him. And some said, ‘What does this babbler wish to say?’ Others said, ‘He seems to be a preacher of foreign divinities’–because he was preaching Jesus and the resurrection.’”

You see, they perhaps thought this Jesus fellow that Paul was talking about was just another local god from another land, one god among many. And the resurrection, it seems, they thought of as the name of a foreign female deity. The Greek word for “resurrection” is “anastasis,” a word in the feminine gender–we get the girl’s name “Anastasia” from this–which they could have taken as the personification of the concept of resurrection. Many of the Greek gods were like that, an abstract concept personified as a god or goddess. They really don’t get what Paul is talking about.

Continuing: “And they took him and brought him to the Areopagus, saying, ‘May we know what this new teaching is that you are presenting? For you bring some strange things to our ears. We wish to know therefore what these things mean.’ Now all the Athenians and the foreigners who lived there would spend their time in nothing except telling or hearing something new.”

So now Paul has to cut through that fog. How does he go about it? Back to our text: “So Paul, standing in the midst of the Areopagus, said: ‘Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very religious. For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, “To the unknown god.” What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you.’”

The Athenians had many idols around, images of various gods. They even had one dedicated “To the unknown god,” just in case they might be missing one. They wanted to have all their bases covered.

But this is just groping around in the dark. Pagans, all people, really, who do not know the one true God in the person of God’s Son, Jesus Christ–they may know that there must be a God–nature, reason, and conscience will tell you that much–but they don’t know him, really. The natural man, that is, the man without the Holy Spirit, is just stumbling around in the darkness, groping around in the blindness of our fallen human nature. Only when God reveals himself to us–and that only happens through the gospel of Jesus Christ–do our eyes become opened and we begin to see the light. Only in Christ, the one Savior from sin and death for all of mankind, do we know God as he wants to be known. There is no other way.

Here at the Areopagus, Paul is making known the unknown god. It is the one true God who created the heavens and the earth. Paul says: “The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything. And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God, in the hope that they might feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us, for ‘In him we live and move and have our being’; as even some of your own poets have said, ‘For we are indeed his offspring.’ Being then God’s offspring, we ought not to think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of man.”

So here is Paul’s entrée into his preaching of the gospel to pagans. It is the doctrine of Creation: That there is only one true God, the Creator of all. There are not many gods, the creation of our own imagination. Man does not create God in his own image. No, it’s the other way around: God has created man in his image.

Now this preaching is telling these pagans: We blew it. We were kinda stupid. We really don’t know who God is, since we have all these silly idols. Paul is preaching the law here, to convict sinners of their sins, before he reveals to them the answer to their sinful blindness, namely, Jesus Christ, their Savior.

And so this is where Paul takes it. He declares: “The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.”

Paul is saying: “What you people did by worshiping everything but the one true God–that was ignorance. But now I am making known to you the God you missed, the one true God of all mankind. He is now commanding you to repent, before it is too late. Judgment Day is coming. You will be judged. There will be a reckoning. Your only hope is in the one I’m now about to tell you about. The one who will be your Judge, this one is also your Savior. It’s this man Jesus Christ I’ve been telling you about, the one who rose from the dead.” That is where Paul is going with all of this.

Now this is where our reading today stops, but if you look at Acts 17, in the next couple of verses we see the reaction to Paul’s preaching. It says: “Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked. But others said, ‘We will hear you again about this.’ So Paul went out from their midst. But some men joined him and believed, among whom also were Dionysius the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris and others with them.”

So some mocked, but some believed. Gee, that sounds kind of familiar, doesn’t it? That was the same sort of mixed reaction that Paul got from the Jews at the synagogue. Some rejected the message, some believed. And so it goes to this day. Some will respond positively to the preaching of God’s Word, some will not. Whether Jews or Gentiles, some of our hearers will repent and come to faith, and some will not. We shouldn’t be surprised by this.

How about you? Do you know that Judgment Day is coming? You will stand before your Creator, and you will be judged. How will you fare? If you rely on yourself, it will not go well. If you rely on Christ, you will be saved. For this is what Paul did not have a chance to get to, in the brief excerpt we have here from his preaching at the Areopagus: This man Jesus, whom God raised from the dead–the reason he died was to save you from your sins, to save you from the judgment and eternal condemnation. That’s why he died, in your place, as the sacrifice for your sins. He did this for all men, for Jews and Greeks and people from Missouri. Your sins are forgiven, covered, paid for, by the blood of Christ, the Son of God and the Savior of the world. God raised this man Jesus from the dead, on Easter, to show that life is the result of what Christ has done. Baptized and believing in Christ, we share in his mighty victory over death. This is the good news that God has for all people everywhere.

Friends, from the Areopagus of Athens to the Heartland of America, the message is always the same: Christ crucified and risen from the dead, calling you and all people to repent of your sins and trust in him for salvation. To the Jews, our witness may start with the Scriptures. To the Greeks, we may start with the doctrine of Creation. But the goal of our preaching, the destination, does not change. To both Jews and Greeks, to Jerusalem and Athens and Bonne Terre, our message is ultimately the same: We preach Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God, the one hope for all mankind

Altitude with Attitude (Part 4) DEVOTION

The Danger Is Real

Don’t we know how much we need God’s Word? Yes, we know, but the danger is very real that we forget.

That’s one reason why God urges His people to use His Word. “Let the Word of Christ dwell in

you richly,” Paul urged in Colossians 3:16. The use of God’s Word is to be no “hit or miss”

affair, no “now you do it, now you don’t” kind of activity. That Word is to “dwell” in Christians.

It is to live in them, making its home in them. And this it is to do “richly.” The hearts and lives

of God’s people are to be wide open with room for that blessed Word. How is this to happen

except through regular in-depth use of the Word?

What God urges Christians to do, He repeats even more specifically to those He calls into
the ministry. Writing to his student and co-worker, Paul stressed the need for Timothy to be
“brought up in the truths of the faith and of the good teaching that you have followed” (1
Timothy 4:6). Timothy needed to be “brought up,” constantly nourished in God’s Word if he was
going to serve well as a minister. See what Paul was telling him. “To the Word,” he was
stressing, “keep on being fed by It. Don’t ever stop. You need that Word if you are going to
serve.”

We’d like to say that it isn’t so, but the danger is very real that this Book which so richly throughout

speaks to us about our Savior and which is God’s power to create and continue faith in that

Savior can be viewed as something for which we just don’t have the time.

Reviewing the dangers we face to our personal devotional life brings a renewed sense of

urgency to the prayer, “Teach me to love Thy sacred Word.”

The Need Is Real

Reviewing also our need for God’s sacred Word will lend urgency to that prayer. What

greater need can I have then my own salvation? The great Apostle Paul knew how real this need

was for him. “Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners,” he wrote and then confessed, “of

whom I am the worst” (1 Timothy 1:15). Paul was keenly aware of the depths of his sin, and by

the Spirit’s working, even more so of the greater depths of God’s forgiveness in Christ. He

marveled that the Son of God could love him and give Himself for him (Galatians 2:20). He

prayed that God would help Christians measure “the width and length and height and depth of

the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge” (Ephesians 3:18, 19). And he lived in the

Scriptures! Dare we do any less? Can anyone of us claim that he is not the worst of sinners? Can

any close his eyes to his constant need for assurance of God’s forgiveness? The news that “God

was reconciling the world to Himself in Christ, not counting men’s sins against them,” is not just

something the world needs to hear from us (2 Corinthians 5:1 9). It is something that each one of

us desperately and regularly needs to hear for himself.

The Benefits Are Real

When we love and live in that Word, the people whom we serve will benefit. When we live in the Word, religion classes will be more than “Word o’ God” time which is held each day like all the other classes and which like them receives a grade on the report card. Instead, that hour becomes the highlight of the day and adds the necessary flavoring to the rest of the day. When we live in the Word, there will be devotions which live and personal examples which shine. There’ll be food for the people, the only food which can

nourish the soul. We complain about people’s indifference toward God’s Word and neglect of

His work. We criticize parents for not maintaining Christian homes and not exhibiting Christian

attitudes toward us and their children. Surely reasons abound for such indifference and neglect,

but let not us as God’s servants add to those reasons. When God’s servants burn with love in

their hearts for Christ and His precious Word, our people will know it. And the benefits will be

great.

Devotion to God's Word in a constant passion.  However Christ devotion to us help us because he gave the Holy Spirit to help us be devoted to all that Christ ask.