|
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
|
