Rebaptized?

[ByTheSpirit]

So I was baptized when I was much younger (20 yrs ago or so, age: 15) and had a falling away of sorts recently. I do not believe a person needs to be rebaptized necessarily for having a "wilderness" period of sorts. But rather my question circles around this: My theology and denomination have changed since that day. I was baptized under a Baptist minister but now am Charismatic. Does a shift in theology warrant a rebaptism? I am trying to figure out if the feelings I have on the subject are just my own or the Lord leading me to do so. I feel like I should, but conceivably I have seen prayers answered, felt God's presence, heard his voice, etc. So why would God allow me such an intimate relationship if I needed to be rebaptized but haven't done so?

*Just for clarification, I do not want to debate the importance of baptism nor am I interested in such talk. If you want to do so, start another thread on the subject. I am interested only in the opinions of those who want to help me better understand

 

[Albion]

In short, a re-baptism (even if theologically possible) is not warranted. A modest change in doctrine such as you're describing is routine. I say modest because if the original church had been some strange cult, there might be a question about the baptizer or the faith, but that doesn't apply to your situation.

People switch from Episcopalian to Methodist or Lutheran to Presbyterian, and there is no rebaptizing. If a baptized person falls away and then returns to the faith, what is called for is repentance and a new commitment. You could, perhaps, have some sort of reaffirmation of your baptism if your current church does that, but not a rebaptism.

 

[zippy2006]

So I was baptized when I was much younger (20 yrs ago or so) and had a falling away of sorts recently. I do not believe a person needs to be rebaptized necessarily for having a "wilderness" period of sorts. But rather my question circles around this: My theology and denomination have changed since that day. I was baptized under a Baptist minister but now am Charismatic. Does a shift in theology warrant a rebaptism? I am trying to figure out if the feelings I have on the subject are just my own or the Lord leading me to do so. I feel like I should, but conceivably I have seen prayers answered, felt God's presence, heard his voice, etc. So why would God allow me such an intimate relationship if I needed to be rebaptized but haven't done so?

*Just for clarification, I do not want to debate the importance of baptism nor am I interested in such talk. If you want to do so, start another thread on the subject. I am interested only in the opinions of those who want to help me better understand

As long as your original baptism was valid, you don't need to be rebaptized. You should just ask your Charismatic pastor whether your Baptist baptism is taken to be valid/legitimate. He can tell you whether you need to be rebaptized.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Thank you both

 

[rockytopva]

As my dad was Catholic I may have been baptized as an infant. I was baptized in a baptistry in a Baptist church and in a river in a Pentecostal Holiness church. I have not regrets on being Baptized many times. But, if I ever change church, I have no intentions of being baptized yet another time.

 

[Ken Rank]

So I was baptized when I was much younger (20 yrs ago or so) and had a falling away of sorts recently. I do not believe a person needs to be rebaptized necessarily for having a "wilderness" period of sorts. But rather my question circles around this: My theology and denomination have changed since that day. I was baptized under a Baptist minister but now am Charismatic. Does a shift in theology warrant a rebaptism? I am trying to figure out if the feelings I have on the subject are just my own or the Lord leading me to do so. I feel like I should, but conceivably I have seen prayers answered, felt God's presence, heard his voice, etc. So why would God allow me such an intimate relationship if I needed to be rebaptized but haven't done so?

*Just for clarification, I do not want to debate the importance of baptism nor am I interested in such talk. If you want to do so, start another thread on the subject. I am interested only in the opinions of those who want to help me better understand

You were not baptized into a denomination, you were baptized into Christ. So, whether done as a Baptist or Charismatic, the immersion was into HIM and not THEM. As far as rebaptizing in general... I am for it. Baptism itself represents a clean beginning and if you fell away then what would be wrong with having another clean beginning? This doesn't invalidate or even override the first entry into the water... it just reaffirms it, gives YOU the sense of a new start.

 

[Heaven's Refuge]

As for your baptism 20 years ago....I just wanted to argue against it and encourage you to consider re-baptism after dedicating your life to Christ as an adult.

There are a few denominations who baptize at birth or within a week or so of birth. The Bible says that baptism is an expression of the faith. How can an infant (or not of age of accountability) know to express anything? That said, we can conclude that an infant's baptism is nothing more than a useless ceremony. An infant cannot place his or her faith in Christ. An infant cannot make a conscious decision to obey Christ. He/she doesn't know right from wrong. An infant cannot understand what water baptism symbolizes. The Bible doesn't even record any infants being baptized. None!!

We often see Infant baptism performed as sprinkling. There is no mention of sprinkling baptism in the Bible. With this in view, infant baptism is not a Biblical practice. It is a hollow ceremony. Baptism does not save, it is for believers, not infants.

It is unwise and unsafe to dunk an infant under water. How does pouring or sprinkling illustrate the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ?..........

Emerging from the water symbolizes the resurrection with Christ.
Climbing out of the water symbolizes the ascension with Christ.

So.....as a Christian, baptism signifies me being resurrected to live a new life with Him.

The baptism of the Holy Spirit is a second blessing subsequent to salvation. Baptism ceremony is an outward display of our acceptance into the body of Christ.

So in my view, your first baptism was of no value and I strongly believe you should be re-baptized following your expression of faith in Jesus as an adult. Your first baptism was forced without your approval or you knowing what in the world was going on. And to back that up I will use Mark 16:15,16 ......All who are baptized, must first have the gospel preached to them. But what good would be done by preaching to a baby? John 6:44,45 is another powerful proof against the infant or young (not of age of accountability) baptism.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

As for your baptism 20 years ago....I just wanted to argue against it and encourage you to consider re-baptism after dedicating your life to Christ as an adult.

There are a few denominations who baptize at birth or within a week or so of birth. The Bible says that baptism is an expression of the faith. How can an infant (or not of age of accountability) know to express anything? That said, we can conclude that an infant's baptism is nothing more than a useless ceremony. An infant cannot place his or her faith in Christ. An infant cannot make a conscious decision to obey Christ. He/she doesn't know right from wrong. An infant cannot understand what water baptism symbolizes. The Bible doesn't even record any infants being baptized. None!!

We often see Infant baptism performed as sprinkling. There is no mention of sprinkling baptism in the Bible. With this in view, infant baptism is not a Biblical practice. It is a hollow ceremony. Baptism does not save, it is for believers, not infants.

It is unwise and unsafe to dunk an infant under water. How does pouring or sprinkling illustrate the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ?..........

Emerging from the water symbolizes the resurrection with Christ.
Climbing out of the water symbolizes the ascension with Christ.

So.....as a Christian, baptism signifies me being resurrected to live a new life with Him.

The baptism of the Holy Spirit is a second blessing subsequent to salvation. Baptism ceremony is an outward display of our acceptance into the body of Christ.

So in my view, your first baptism was of no value and I strongly believe you should be re-baptized following your expression of faith in Jesus as an adult. Your first baptism was forced without your approval or you knowing what in the world was going on. And to back that up I will use Mark 16:15,16 ......All who are baptized, must first have the gospel preached to them. But what good would be done by preaching to a baby? John 6:44,45 is another powerful proof against the infant or young (not of age of accountability) baptism.

Just to clarify I was not an infant at the time of my referenced baptism. I was 15 years of age.

 

[Saucy]

I had a falling away myself and considered getting re-baptized. The first time was the real thing and it counted, but you can always do it again as a reaffirmation that you're back in the Lord and recommitted. You're just getting dunked and prayed over, so there's nothing wrong with doing it again if YOU feel it's important to you. But you certainly don't have to.

Some churches, like mine, use baptism as a means of church membership. You can be voted in as well, so it's up to you on how you want to do it. I'd speak with your pastor first to see what his thoughts are. They might require a second baptism.

 

[Heaven's Refuge]

Just to clarify I was not an infant at the time of my referenced baptism. I was 15 years of age.

Ok.....sorry. That is why I put the words "or age of accountability" in brackets. 15 is of age. I hope you find the answers you need my friend.

 

[Albion]

Hello again, ByTheSpirit. You didn't ask for a dissertation on baptism--who should be baptized, when, at what age, what it does, and so on. But since you're gotten some views about all of that anyway, let's be sure what we're talking about.

You weren't baptized as a child, so all that infant vs adult stuff is a non-issue in your case.

But your religious beliefs have changed somewhat since then. No, it doesn't require a second baptism. A baptism is forever, even if you fall away from the faith for good. There is no such thing, really, as a rebaptism.

Even given that there are different beliefs concerning the nature of Baptism held by Christians of different denominations, none of that impacts your particular situation. If you have joined a Charismatic church, I assume that you are willing to accept its own view of Baptism, but it would be an error if anyone suggested that your first baptism was invalid (based upon what you told us).

 

[PollyJetix]

Here's the Scriptural foundation for the practice of being rebaptized after a period of walking out of fellowship with the Lord.

Christ said to the church of Ephesus,

Revelation 2:4-5 "...I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love.
Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent."

What are "the first works"?

Hebrew 6:1-3 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. And this will we do, if God permit.

The end of the preceding chapter (Hebrews 5) talks about how spiritual babies have to relearn basic principles over and over. Paul was not prohibiting the process of relearning, if one needed to do so. He was instead urging his listeners to grow up, so they wouldn't need to relearn, and redo, those first things.

When we are born again, we repent, and are baptized. This is the pattern throughout the New Testament. Repentance from sin, faith in Christ, and then baptism.

The first works of a new Christian are repentance, faith, and baptism.

And Jesus said that the Ephesian church needed to repent, and do those first works over again, because they had fallen from a position of grace... because they had stopped loving Jesus as they once had.

I had a period in my own life where I walked in disobedience to God. Serious disobedience. It was more than simply missing the mark. It was wilful transgression and rebellion.

God pulled me back to Himself, and I found a place of repentance, by His grace.
I found great joy in going down to that mountain stream, and reaffirming my faith in Him, starting over with a clean slate, as it were.

There is no prohibition in the Word against doing so.
The one verse that is used to prohibit it, is "One Lord, One faith, One Baptism." (Ephesians 4:5)
But the context of this verse is talking about how all the churches recognize one Lord. All the churches recognize one faith, and they all recognize one baptism.

The church of Corinth didn't have a "Corinthian baptism" that citizens of Ephesus had to go through, in order to be recognized as a Christian. All the churches accepted the baptism a Christian received, wherever they had gotten it done.

But if one has fallen away and come back... the first works aren't done over again, until baptism is done again.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Here's the Scriptural foundation for the practice of being rebaptized after a period of walking out of fellowship with the Lord.

Christ said to the church of Ephesus,

Revelation 2:4-5 "...I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love.
Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent."

What are "the first works"?

Hebrew 6:1-3 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. And this will we do, if God permit.

The end of the preceding chapter (Hebrews 5) talks about how spiritual babies have to relearn basic principles over and over. Paul was not prohibiting the process of relearning, if one needed to do so. He was instead urging his listeners to grow up, so they wouldn't need to relearn, and redo, those first things.

When we are born again, we repent, and are baptized. This is the pattern throughout the New Testament. Repentance from sin, faith in Christ, and then baptism.

The first works of a new Christian are repentance, faith, and baptism.

And Jesus said that the Ephesian church needed to repent, and do those first works over again, because they had fallen from a position of grace... because they had stopped loving Jesus as they once had.

I had a period in my own life where I walked in disobedience to God. Serious disobedience. It was more than simply missing the mark. It was wilful transgression and rebellion.

God pulled me back to Himself, and I found a place of repentance, by His grace.
I found great joy in going down to that mountain stream, and reaffirming my faith in Him, starting over with a clean slate, as it were.

There is no prohibition in the Word against doing so.
The one verse that is used to prohibit it, is "One Lord, One faith, One Baptism." (Ephesians 4:5)
But the context of this verse is talking about how all the churches recognize one Lord. All the churches recognize one faith, and they all recognize one baptism.

The church of Corinth didn't have a "Corinthian baptism" that citizens of Ephesus had to go through, in order to be recognized as a Christian. All the churches accepted the baptism a Christian received, wherever they had gotten it done.

But if one has fallen away and come back... the first works aren't done over again, until baptism is done again.

This is certainly interesting and I do greatly appreciate your point of view on the subject. Allow me to explain a bit more my situation.

So after my last baptism at the age of 15, I joined the Army at age 18 and fell away sharply.

It wasn't until I reached the age of 27 that God intervened in my life and healed me from some pretty nasty stuff. I had a renassaince of sorts, it was during this time I changed from Baptist to Charismatic (largely due to my healing experience), I also experienced the answers to prayer, hearing the voice of God, healings, etc. But I had not been rebaptized. This is actually when I started having thoughts of getting baptized again.

I spoke with my Assemblies of God pastor who said getting baptized again wasn't necessary, only walk with God as the one time was sufficient. So I did not get baptized. Well after a few years I had a couple very personal tragedies and my faith collapsed regrettably, but God has called me back again and now the question has risen again. Should I get rebaptized?

Now I kind of look at myself as thinking baptism will be a cure all of sorts, a way to "make amends" with God over my transgressions, but that is a bit absurd because nothing I can do will ever make amends for that. Jesus already did it.

But, and this is a big point of contrast and perhaps I should have mentioned this earlier, I just didn't to avoid a larger discussion. I view baptism now as more than just a rite of passage/whatever most churches view it as.

I do firmly believe baptism is a necessary component to the salvation experience. Not that baptism in itself saves a person. But as an expression of faith in Christ, a person gets baptized to identify witb their Lord's death, burial, and resurrection. (Rom 6:4-6) It is a spiritual circumcision (Col 2:12) that enables the born again to walk with God.

That also now plays a part in my thinking. With my somewhat significant shift in theology on the topic at hand, should I get rebaptized due to this new doctrine or does my last baptism, no matter what theology or denomination performed under, stand?

Truthfully, I did believe in Jesus as my Lord and Savior then. Granted teachings on salvation and just walking with God in general were different then, but my faith was legit when I got baptized. Sooooo perhaps it is not needed after all.

Again I want to reemphasize, I have no heart for discussing my personal view on baptism, at least in open forum. If you want to know, PM me, but please only do so if you are serious for discussion. I am not interested in being preached too about opposing doctrinal views.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Hello again, ByTheSpirit. You didn't ask for a dissertation on baptism--who should be baptized, when, at what age, what it does, and so on. But since you're gotten some views about all of that anyway, let's be sure what we're talking about.

You weren't baptized as a child, so all that infant vs adult stuff is a non-issue in your case.

But your religious beliefs have changed somewhat since then. No, it doesn't require a second baptism. A baptism is forever, even if you fall away from the faith for good. There is no such thing, really, as a rebaptism.

Even given that there are different beliefs concerning the nature of Baptism held by Christians of different denominations, none of that impacts your particular situation. If you have joined a Charismatic church, I assume that you are willing to accept its own view of Baptism, but it would be an error if anyone suggested that your first baptism was invalid (based upon what you told us).

I believe my previous response to another posted may be adequate to answer

 

[RaymondG]

Nothing wrong with extra dips in the pool.....especially if the water isnt cold. But I dont see any spiritual benefits in it. Jesus washed Peters feet.......And Peter told Him. "Hey, That water feels good! wash my whole body!" But it wasn't necessary.

 

[PollyJetix]

This is certainly interesting and I do greatly appreciate your point of view on the subject. Allow me to explain a bit more my situation.

So after my last baptism at the age of 15, I joined the Army at age 18 and fell away sharply.

It wasn't until I reached the age of 27 that God intervened in my life and healed me from some pretty nasty stuff. I had a renassaince of sorts, it was during this time I changed from Baptist to Charismatic (largely due to my healing experience), I also experienced the answers to prayer, hearing the voice of God, healings, etc. But I had not been rebaptized. This is actually when I started having thoughts of getting baptized again.

I spoke with my Assemblies of God pastor who said getting baptized again wasn't necessary, only walk with God as the one time was sufficient. So I did not get baptized. Well after a few years I had a couple very personal tragedies and my faith collapsed regrettably, but God has called me back again and now the question has risen again. Should I get rebaptized?

Now I kind of look at myself as thinking baptism will be a cure all of sorts, a way to "make amends" with God over my transgressions, but that is a bit absurd because nothing I can do will ever make amends for that. Jesus already did it.

But, and this is a big point of contrast and perhaps I should have mentioned this earlier, I just didn't to avoid a larger discussion. I view baptism now as more than just a rite of passage/whatever most churches view it as.

I do firmly believe baptism is a necessary component to the salvation experience. Not that baptism in itself saves a person. But as an expression of faith in Christ, a person gets baptized to identify witb their Lord's death, burial, and resurrection. (Rom 6:4-6) It is a spiritual circumcision (Col 2:12) that enables the born again to walk with God.

That also now plays a part in my thinking. With my somewhat significant shift in theology on the topic at hand, should I get rebaptized due to this new doctrine or does my last baptism, no matter what theology or denomination performed under, stand?

Truthfully, I did believe in Jesus as my Lord and Savior then. Granted teachings on salvation and just walking with God in general were different then, but my faith was legit when I got baptized. Sooooo perhaps it is not needed after all.

Again I want to reemphasize, I have no heart for discussing my personal view on baptism, at least in open forum. If you want to know, PM me, but please only do so if you are serious for discussion. I am not interested in being preached too about opposing doctrinal views.

It's interesting how your views on baptism has changed.
Mine have too.

I was taught strongly (as most are) that baptism has NO spiritual power whatsoever.
That all baptism is, is a witness to other people of the change that has already happened inside.

Problem is, I can't find that anywhere in Scripture.
Not ONCE is baptism in the Bible for the purpose of witnessing or telling others about our decision to follow Christ. Not once.

If that's what baptism is for, then the Ethiopian Eunuch and the Philippian jailer had it done all wrong. Way out in the desert, or in the dark of night, without a crowd to witness to.

Instead, the Bible speaks of baptism as if it actually did something, on a spiritual level.
Not that the water, by itself, can wash away our sins. Water, apart from faith in Christ, has no power whatsoever. And this is what Peter was saying in 1 Peter 3:21

"The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ"

When we have repented from sin, and turn toward God, we will want to obey him in everything.
And that includes obedience in being baptized. Why would God want us to get dunked in water, even if it's in the dark of night, or in the desert, with no one to see it being done?

Because it is a symbolic act.

Remember all those sacrifices in the OT?
Those were symbolic acts.
In and of itself, animal blood cannot cover sin.
But when animal blood was shed in obedience to God, as an act of faith in His Word,
The blood of that Passover Lamb covered the sins of the people for the entire year.

Think about it.
That's how powerful symbolic acts are, on a spiritual level, when done in faith.

The Word says that when we are baptized in water, by faith, we are actually baptized into His death.
Why? So that just as Christ was raised up by the Father, we can also be raised up to walk in newness of life.

Think on that. Meditate on it.

By shedding the blood of lambs, Israel was able to enter by faith, into forgiveness of sin.
And by baptism, by faith, we enter into the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ.

There is far more in this, than the Church has recognized.

And I think the same symbolic-act-of-faith principle applies to partaking of Communion, also.
We as Protestants established doctrine in reaction against Catholicism's excesses and heresies...

But a reaction is usually off-balance and unbiblical. (Isn't it?)

I'm not saying the wine and bread turns into the physical blood and body of Christ.
I am instead saying we are performing a spiritually powerful symbolic act, when we partake in faith.
It carries power.
At least as much power as those old testament animal sacrifices did.
And actually far, far more!

Think about it.

Both baptism and communion. Powerful symbolic acts, commanded by God.

 

[PollyJetix]

...But I dont see any spiritual benefits in it. Jesus washed Peters feet.......And Peter told Him. "Hey, That water feels good! wash my whole body!" But it wasn't necessary.

You need to read it again.

John 13:6-11

6 Then cometh he to Simon Peter: and Peter saith unto him, Lord, dost thou wash my feet?
7 Jesus answered and said unto him, What I do thou knowest not now; but thou shalt know hereafter.
8 Peter saith unto him, Thou shalt never wash my feet. Jesus answered him, If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me.
9 Simon Peter saith unto him, Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head.
10 Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all.
11 For he knew who should betray him; therefore said he, Ye are not all clean.

A. Peter at first refused Jesus' washing his feet, because he thought it was only a physical act.
B. But Jesus let him know if Peter refused the act, that Peter would have no part with Christ... therefore, this was far more than physical!
C. Then Peter asked for a complete bath, knowing he needed spiritual cleansing!
D. But Jesus reassured him that all Peter needed was his feet washed, to keep him in fellowship.
....(it may be that washing the feet is speaking of a daily cleansing of the soul, from the filth of the world we come in contact with... just as feet get dirty from walking on the earth.)
E. Verse 10 is clearly speaking of spiritual washing. "He who is washed" is one who has come to Christ in faith. But Judas had no faith in Christ; thus, he was not clean.
F. Jesus washed Judas' feet, too. But it did him no good, because he had no faith in Christ.

There's far, far more to this story than Peter saying, "Lord, that water feels good! Wash me all over!"
This was a symbolic act, on Jesus' part. This is proven by what He said in verse 8.
And He was not talking about physical cleanliness. This is proven by what he said about Judas.

 

[PollyJetix]

...I spoke with my Assemblies of God pastor who said getting baptized again wasn't necessary, only walk with God as the one time was sufficient. So I did not get baptized. Well after a few years I had a couple very personal tragedies and my faith collapsed regrettably, but God has called me back again and now the question has risen again. Should I get rebaptized?

Now I kind of look at myself as thinking baptism will be a cure all of sorts, a way to "make amends" with God over my transgressions, but that is a bit absurd because nothing I can do will ever make amends for that. Jesus already did it.

If you want to be rebaptized, and your Assemblies of God pastor doesn't want to do it, I will guarantee you that any Church of God (TN) pastor will do it. And there is no requirement to join their denomination or church, either. This is something the COG(TN) believes strongly.

Help yourself.

 

[RaymondG]

You need to read it again.

John 13:6-11

6 Then cometh he to Simon Peter: and Peter saith unto him, Lord, dost thou wash my feet?
7 Jesus answered and said unto him, What I do thou knowest not now; but thou shalt know hereafter.
8 Peter saith unto him, Thou shalt never wash my feet. Jesus answered him, If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me.
9 Simon Peter saith unto him, Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head.
10 Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all.
11 For he knew who should betray him; therefore said he, Ye are not all clean.

A. Peter at first refused Jesus' washing his feet, because he thought it was only a physical act.
B. But Jesus let him know if Peter refused the act, that Peter would have no part with Christ... therefore, this was far more than physical!
C. Then Peter asked for a complete bath, knowing he needed spiritual cleansing!
D. But Jesus reassured him that all Peter needed was his feet washed, to keep him in fellowship.
....(it may be that washing the feet is speaking of a daily cleansing of the soul, from the filth of the world we come in contact with... just as feet get dirty from walking on the earth.)
E. Verse 10 is clearly speaking of spiritual washing. "He who is washed" is one who has come to Christ in faith. But Judas had no faith in Christ; thus, he was not clean.
F. Jesus washed Judas' feet, too. But it did him no good, because he had no faith in Christ.

There's far, far more to this story than Peter saying, "Lord, that water feels good! Wash me all over!"
This was a symbolic act, on Jesus' part. This is proven by what He said in verse 8.
And He was not talking about physical cleanliness. This is proven by what he said about Judas.

You need to take a few steps down from your pedestal. Had you not been so high up there you would have seen I was making light of the situation. This thread is not about Peter and feet washing. And i dont feel a need to prove how much doctrine I know with every reply.......but you can continue....Im sure you will get a few more "likes"

 

[ByTheSpirit]

If you want to be rebaptized, and your Assemblies of God pastor doesn't want to do it, I will guarantee you that any Church of God (TN) pastor will do it. And there is no requirement to join their denomination or church, either. This is something the COG(TN) believes strongly.

Help yourself.

I looked into that... problem is there are no such churches anywhere near my home. But eh, never know what the future holds. BTW I loved your post on what baptism really is! ❤