|
VALID BAPTISMAL COUNSELING
Mr. Flurry prepared this announcement and has asked that
it be read in all congregations this Sabbath, November 12, PRIOR to playing
the sermon from headquarters.
My son, Stephen, was baptized in the Philadelphia Church of God on January
16, 1990. Prior to his baptism, he had studied Mr. Armstrong's writings and
Malachi's Message.
In my sermon at Edmond last week (November 5),
I pointed to his baptismal date as a cut-off point, after which baptisms
within the Laodiceans churches became invalid.
This, however, is
not true in every case. I should have stated that Stephen's baptismal date
should be used only as an overall guideline for our ministers to
work with in their counseling with God's people and with prospective
PCG
members. In considering this subject further, I am convinced that many,
if not most, people baptized outside the
PCG after
January 16, 1990, and who then came into the
PCG
in the early 1990's, were undoubtedly counseled and baptized properly.
Today, however, it
would be safe to assume that anyone baptized by a Worldwide Church
of God minister would be considered invalidly baptized. In 1990, the Laodicean
era was in its beginning stages. Today, the Laodicean ministry has rejected
all, or most, of God's revealed truth.
The significance
of my son's baptism on January 16, 1990—the
very first baptism within the fledgling Philadelphia Church of God—is that
it gives our ministers an excellent mile marker to work with in evaluating
and counseling prospective members. Anyone baptized after that date
by a Laodicean minister should, at the very least, be questioned
more extensively about their prior baptismal counseling. Who counseled them?
What did they study? Have there been fruits of repentance? And so on.
I do believe that
God used my son's baptismal date to indicate the understanding and/or attitude
needed to be validly baptized into God's Church. My son received the "early
and latter rain," as James described it—revelation
given to Mr. Armstrong and to me (Malachi's Message was the first
shower to occur during the later rain). And he was submissive to God's Word.
So anyone baptized
outside the PCG,
and after January 16, 1990, must have had that same kind of understanding
and/or attitude to have been validly baptized. That doesn't necessarily mean
they had to read Malachi's Message to become converted.
Many may not have known Malachi's message even existed. But did they
deeply dig into the truth revealed during the early rain? If so, and their
attitude was right, and assuming they were baptized according to the specific
instructions set forth in Scripture, then they were probably baptized validly.
On the other hand, if they were baptized in 1991, and they prepared for their
baptismal covenant by studying the WCG's
new teachings, then their baptism is not valid.
Ultimately, each
case must be examined individually by God's ministry. If any of our
members have a question regarding the validity of their baptism in a Laodicean
church, they should contact their local minister.
I do believe that
my son's understanding and attitude was what God wanted the ministry to focus
on in the PCG
when baptizing new members—the
early and latter rains. Prospective members must come to understand and submit
to the revelation given to Mr. Armstrong and what is now being given to the
PCG
through me.
Gerald Flurry
PGR
.
November 12, 2005
. Page 3
|
