is my infant baptism enough?

Wordkeeper

Newbie
Oct 1, 2013
4,285
477
✟83,580.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Absolutely not. I don't believe baptism is necessary at all for salvation, which is why all of these "my way of baptizing is the one true way of baptizing" arguments are all a bit silly in the first place.

If someone was baptized as an infant, then great. They simply need to declare their faith at some later time when they are old enough. If someone was baptized when they were older, then also great. They can declare their faith at the same time. Both baptisms are valid.



And we also don't know that they weren't. But when talking about household in general, it's everyone...wives, husbands, servants, slaves, children, other family members living there, etc.

I really don't think God is all that picky here to begin with. He's not going out of his way looking for ways to condemn us, whether we be infants or adults. Instead, he attempts to give us every possible opportunity to come to him and build a relationship with him.
Baptism is the way God uses to teach people that He is able to help. This is important because in a believer's life, a time will come when each must act, and act with His help.

It had a particular result when drinking from the Rock, initiated by being baptised into Moses and another when being led by the Holy Spirit into all truth, when baptised into Christ's death.

Hebrews 3:7
Therefore, as the Holy Spirit says: "Today if you hear His voice,

Hebrews 4:7
God again designated a certain day as "Today," when a long time later He spoke through David, as was already stated: "Today, if you hear His voice, do not harden your hearts."
 
Upvote 0

bling

Regular Member
Supporter
Feb 27, 2008
16,163
1,805
✟794,962.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Absolutely not. I don't believe baptism is necessary at all for salvation, which is why all of these "my way of baptizing is the one true way of baptizing" arguments are all a bit silly in the first place.

If someone was baptized as an infant, then great. They simply need to declare their faith at some later time when they are old enough. If someone was baptized when they were older, then also great. They can declare their faith at the same time. Both baptisms are valid.



And we also don't know that they weren't. But when talking about household in general, it's everyone...wives, husbands, servants, slaves, children, other family members living there, etc.

I really don't think God is all that picky here to begin with. He's not going out of his way looking for ways to condemn us, whether we be infants or adults. Instead, he attempts to give us every possible opportunity to come to him and build a relationship with him.

Water baptism is not a “requirement” for salvation since God does the saving, but is something Christians get to do in order to help them.

New Christians may not tap into everything that is available to them to help them experience the transformation:


I know that I needed everything God could provide to assure me of my conversion, both outwardly and mentally. God wants you to physically feel the experience of what is going on Spiritually.

You need to add to your conversion a definite time place and physical experience, which God has provided for you


Christian water baptism as seen in scripture seems to fit the “born again” scenario Christ was talking about since it: Is always adult (there are only two examples that “might include infants” but nothing definite, all the others are adult believers) water immersion to be a physical outward representation of what had or is happening spiritually in the person being baptized. It is mainly to help the individual being baptized to better grasp what is going on, but it can “witness” to others observing the baptism. It has the elements of going down under the water (burying the old man), placing your dependence in another; the person baptizing you (surrendering your life to God), being washed (having your sins washed away), rising out of the water (rising from the old dead body), and stepping forth out onto the earth (a new person). The person is walking out into the hugs of his new family. It is also a sign of your humility, since it is a humbling act anyone can simple allow someone to do it to them (so not a work) and since humility has been shown in the accept of charity (God’s free gift of undeserving forgiveness) it should just support and add to the memory of that acceptance. To refuse Christian water baptism when it is readily available might mean you are not ready to handle other responsibility like having the indwelling Holy Spirit and you are hurting yourself.

Why not be baptized again (there is no rule against this) to experience all you can from being baptized?
 
Upvote 0

HenryM

Well-Known Member
Dec 21, 2016
616
226
ZXC
✟32,716.00
Country
Bangladesh
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Baptism is the way God uses to teach people that He is able to help. This is important because in a believer's life, a time will come when each must act, and act with His help.

One can smell free-will heresy miles away.

When you pray Lord's prayer, if you pray it as Jesus gave it, you don't say "Help me to get my daily bread, help me in my struggle with temptations and help me in my fight against evil." You say "give me my daily bread, don't lead me into temptations and deliver me from evil."
 
Upvote 0

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,452
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
People back than did not have copies of the Bible to see if the "priests" were teaching the truth and anyone teaching something "different' was considered a heretic, so could some of these heretics been bible based Christians?

ETA I misread you at first so this reply may be awkward.

Could those heretics have been Bible-based Christians? No.

First off, there was access to the writings that would become Scripture. (Otherwise we wouldn't HAVE a Bible.)

The Gospels and the Epistles were read in Church so the people would hear them. They were read a LOT.

The Church is the pillar and ground of the Truth. To reject the teaching of the Apostles was to be in heresy. There was plenty of talk, letters, and information going on. It wasn't by accident that it happened.

There was no "Bible" for them to base themselves off of, so the question still doesn't really make sense to me.

The Holy Spirit guides the Church. No human person is its head. Jesus Christ is its head. And He promised they would be led into all truth.

If the Church said Jesus was really God, and really man, and really died on the Cross, and someone chose to disbelieve that and make another story for themselves and teach it - they were denounced as heretics. And if the Church said that Christ was God incarnate, and not just God "possessing" some human man, and someone chose to teach otherwise, they were denounced as heretics. And if the Church said that some other point eventually codified into the Nicene Creed was true, and someone taught otherwise, they were heretics.

Which ones do you suppose were actually Bible-based Christians? You didn't get labeled a heretic for upsetting someone. Heretics were those that opposed important and settled teachings passed down by the Apostles, and set up their own beliefs in opposition to Christianity, and taught them.

That's one reason I hesitate to post old documents. People today might read them and feel attacked, but there were no Baptists, of Methodists, or what-have-you back then. There was the Christian Church, and those who disagreed with Christianity on very important points. The Church actually put up with quite a bit of ... alternative views ... which led to the Schism when Rome's views had diverged too far from those of the rest of the Church.

It really has to be put into context to be understood.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Okay so, I was baptized as an infant by the Catholic church in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. I was wondering if that baptism was valid or if I should get baptized full immersion

What does the Bible say?

How many infants do you see getting baptized in the Bible -- where the reader is not required to "imagine that it happened" instead of a text stating it?
 
Upvote 0

HenryM

Well-Known Member
Dec 21, 2016
616
226
ZXC
✟32,716.00
Country
Bangladesh
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
BobRyan said:
We call it "the Bible".

No quotation marks are needed to reference the Bible. But given that you are reading some wrong conclusions, maybe it fits when you write it. But anyway, predestination is in the Bible. Please provide me a verse that says something along the line: "And then he chose to believe on Jesus."
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
No quotation marks are needed to reference the Bible. But given that you are reading some wrong conclusions, maybe it fits when you write it. But anyway, predestination is in the Bible. Please provide me a verse that says something along the line: "And then he chose to believe on Jesus."

I notice you did not address the choke-point for Calvinism in John 1:11 "He came to His OWN and His OWN received Him not" -- instead you ask for "another one".

Very well.. more..

Romans 10
9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes in Him will not be disappointed.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call on Him; 13 for “Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

more? still more?

2 Cor 5
20 Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making an appeal through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. 21 He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.

That is how the Arminians say it..

Calvinists say it this way

"If God CAUSES YOU to confess with your mouth.. if God CAUSES you to believe with your heart... "

"We BEG GOD to cause you to be reconciled to God.. knowing He will not do it for any other reason that His own sovereign will -- but better to beg GOD to do than to beg YOU --- since you are not sovereign".

--------------

BTW what does this have to do with infant baptism? Is it the idea that no one should bother choosing to be baptized -- no matter the Bible examples to the contrary - since no choice is supposed to be involved in baptism according to one or two flavors of Calvinism??
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

bekkilyn

Contemplative Christian
Supporter
Apr 27, 2017
7,612
8,475
USA
✟677,608.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Others
Water baptism is not a “requirement” for salvation since God does the saving, but is something Christians get to do in order to help them.

New Christians may not tap into everything that is available to them to help them experience the transformation:


I know that I needed everything God could provide to assure me of my conversion, both outwardly and mentally. God wants you to physically feel the experience of what is going on Spiritually.

You need to add to your conversion a definite time place and physical experience, which God has provided for you


Christian water baptism as seen in scripture seems to fit the “born again” scenario Christ was talking about since it: Is always adult (there are only two examples that “might include infants” but nothing definite, all the others are adult believers) water immersion to be a physical outward representation of what had or is happening spiritually in the person being baptized. It is mainly to help the individual being baptized to better grasp what is going on, but it can “witness” to others observing the baptism. It has the elements of going down under the water (burying the old man), placing your dependence in another; the person baptizing you (surrendering your life to God), being washed (having your sins washed away), rising out of the water (rising from the old dead body), and stepping forth out onto the earth (a new person). The person is walking out into the hugs of his new family. It is also a sign of your humility, since it is a humbling act anyone can simple allow someone to do it to them (so not a work) and since humility has been shown in the accept of charity (God’s free gift of undeserving forgiveness) it should just support and add to the memory of that acceptance. To refuse Christian water baptism when it is readily available might mean you are not ready to handle other responsibility like having the indwelling Holy Spirit and you are hurting yourself.

Why not be baptized again (there is no rule against this) to experience all you can from being baptized?

I don't believe anyone in this thread has been arguing to *refuse* baptism altogether. The argument solely applies to *re*-baptism.

Baptism isn't all about us and what *we* can get from it. If that's the reason someone is getting baptized, then that's the wrong reason. Our assurance is guaranteed because God promised it and chose to give it if we place our trust in Jesus, and not because of something we feel inside of us or something we do.

We do not need to *earn* the Holy Spirit by baptism or any other deed on our part. The Holy Spirit is not a responsibility like taking care of a puppy. Ephesians 1:13 states, "In him you also, when you had heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and had believed in him, were marked with the seal of the promised Holy Spirit." We put our trust in Jesus and the Holy Spirit is sent to live within us and guide us. ALL of us, baptism or no baptism.

A Christian will want to be baptized at some point as it is part of our sanctification, but how or when it was done isn't the important point. But once it's done, it's done and we don't need to keep doing it over and over and over again as if it's some sort of magic spell that stopped working after a while.
 
Upvote 0

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,452
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I have no objection to tradition. I only object to whatever obstructs believers getting into the Kingdom of God. Somewhere along the way, Jesus's prioritising the coming of the Holy Spirit, doing what He Himself hesitated to do, because it was too much for his followers to absorb, that prioritisation has slipped through the cracks.

I'm saying no one is alarmed at the lack of the work of the Holy Spirit today. Not so at the time of Paul and Peter. It was the first item on their checklist.

I understand what you mean, I think. I've been part of a number of different kinds of denominations. Early on I was asking myself - why IS no one bothered at the lack of the Holy Spirit at work? Their idea of praying for healing was to ask God to guide the doctor's hands, at most (a fine prayer, but if you dare go no further, I saw it as a problem). So eventually I sought out other kinds of fellowships that always claimed something miraculous had happened here or there, but I never saw it. Getting to know someone behind the scenes of a prominent ministry and several other things punched holes in my being able to tolerate that anymore.

A large part of the reason I am Orthodox is the way we believe in the Holy Spirit, and what happens. There is no show and fanfare. But there is and has always been the expectation of the work of the Holy Spirit, and He has not left us. It is different from what I have seen in every other part of Christianity.

But yes, those that see no indication of the Holy Spirit, and are comfortable with that - even worse, who start to explain away His working in the past because they see no evidence of it today, so that they don't even believe any more what what we read in the Holy Scriptures ... it would be better if they were made UNcomfortable with such mindsets, I think.

Peace to you.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Wordkeeper

Newbie
Oct 1, 2013
4,285
477
✟83,580.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
One can smell free-will heresy miles away.

When you pray Lord's prayer, if you pray it as Jesus gave it, you don't say "Help me to get my daily bread, help me in my struggle with temptations and help me in my fight against evil." You say "give me my daily bread, don't lead me into temptations and deliver me from evil."
After showing Abraham He could and was willing to protect and bless him, God tested him by asking him to risk the life of his son.

After showing Israel He could and would protect and bless them, God tested them by asking them to risk their lives in Canaan.

All drank from the Rock, but with some God was not pleased and swore on His Name that they would never enter His Rest.

Hebrews 3:5-11
5Now Moses was faithful in all His house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken later; 6but Christ was faithful as a Son over His house—whose house we are, if we hold fast our confidence and the boast of our hope firm until the end.

7Therefore, just as the Holy Spirit says,
“TODAY IF YOU HEAR HIS VOICE,

8DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEARTS AS WHEN THEY PROVOKEDME,
AS IN THE DAY OF TRIAL IN THE WILDERNESS,

9WHERE YOUR FATHERS TRIED Me BY TESTING Me,
AND SAW MY WORKS FOR FORTY YEARS.

10“THEREFORE I WAS ANGRY WITH THIS GENERATION,
AND SAID, ‘THEY ALWAYS GO ASTRAY IN THEIR HEART,
AND THEY DID NOT KNOW MY WAYS’;

11AS I SWORE IN MY WRATH,
‘THEY SHALL NOT ENTER MY REST.’”


You want to harden your heart?
 
Upvote 0

Wordkeeper

Newbie
Oct 1, 2013
4,285
477
✟83,580.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I understand what you mean, I think. I've been part of a number of different kinds of denominations. Early on I was asking myself - why IS no one bothered at the lack of the Holy Spirit at work? Their idea of praying for healing was to ask God to guide the doctor's hands, at most (a fine prayer, but if you dare go no further, I saw it as a problem). So eventually I sought out other kinds of fellowships that always claimed something miraculous had happened here or there, but I never saw it. Getting to know someone behind the scenes of a prominent ministry and several other things punched holes in my being able to tolerate that anymore.

A large part of the reason I am Orthodox is the way we believe in the Holy Spirit, and what happens. There is no show and fanfare. But there is and has always been the expectation of the work of the Holy Spirit, and He has not left us. It is different from what I have seen in every other part of Christianity.

But yes, those that see no indication of the Holy Spirit, and are comfortable with that - even worse, who start to explain away His working in the past because they see no evidence of it today, so that they don't even believe any more what what we read in the Holy Scriptures ... it would be better if they were made UNcomfortable with such mindsets, I think.

Peace to you.
So let's consider a hypothetical situation:

If you meet a person baptised by the EOC, how could you tell that his baptism has "worked"?
 
Upvote 0

Strong in Him

Great is thy faithfulness
Supporter
Mar 4, 2005
27,773
7,919
NW England
✟1,041,799.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Baptizing as a ceremonial purification ritual was well known to the Jews.

I was old that it was only for those converting to the Jewish faith, but ok. :)
They still had sacrifices for the forgiveness of sins though. John was a prophet, after a 400 year silence, who was preaching a new message.
 
Upvote 0

HenryM

Well-Known Member
Dec 21, 2016
616
226
ZXC
✟32,716.00
Country
Bangladesh
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
BobRyan said:
I notice you did not address the choke-point for Calvinism in John 1:11 "He came to His OWN and His OWN received Him not" -- instead you ask for "another one".

Because it's no choke-point. His own received Him not because they where blinded by God, so that Christianity can be born.

BobRyan said:
Very well.. more..

Let's not go more by you twisting the Bible. There is no word "choice" in Romans 10. Not to mention that there is no "free-will" there. You are personally interpreting it to your liking, while denying all explicit predestination verses.

BobRyan said:
more? still more?

No please. Not one more. 2 Corinthians 5:20 is about giving out God's message. That's all it is. We are to give God's message. There are no words "decide, chose, choice, free-will etc" in whole 2 Corinthians 5.

You still didn't provide a verse that says something like: "and then he chose to believe on Jesus."

BobRyan said:
BTW what does this have to do with infant baptism?

Not much really, that's true.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

HenryM

Well-Known Member
Dec 21, 2016
616
226
ZXC
✟32,716.00
Country
Bangladesh
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private

Why are you calling yourself Wordkeeper? You deny important part of God's character and reality, and you are doing it publicly, which is not a good thing. So you are not really keeping the Word as a whole.

Hopefully you accept the gospel and some other doctrines, which would make you Somewordkeeper.

But that's ok, since none of us can be so arrogant to believe we get it all. Right? Because Paul says we are looking through glass darkly here.

Or maybe, if you are so zealous to free-will idea, call yourself something like Free-Willer Bubba.

Or you know, drop your nose and use real name.

Anyway, let's see what Somewordkeeper, Free-Willer Bubba has to say.

Somewordkeeper aka Free-Willer Bubba said:
After showing Abraham He could and was willing to protect and bless him, God tested him by asking him to risk the life of his son.

Yes and? Where is the verse that Abraham chose to believe God with his free-will? You are interpreting it in shallow matter, to your private liking, denying explicit predestination verses revealed throughout the Bible.

Somewordkeeper aka Free-Willer Bubba said:
After showing Israel He could and would protect and bless them, God tested them by asking them to risk their lives in Canaan.

Yes and? Where is the verse that people of Israel chose to act on God's commands based on their free-will? As previously, you are interpreting it in shallow matter, to your private liking, denying explicit predestination verses revealed throughout the Bible.

Somewordkeeper aka Free-Willer Bubba said:
All drank from the Rock, but with some God was not pleased and swore on His Name that they would never enter His Rest.

Yes and? Where is the verse that they acted based on their free-will? As previously, you are interpreting it in shallow matter, to your private liking, denying explicit predestination verses revealed throughout the Bible.

By the way, you seem to not understand what Biblical testing is. God doesn't actually test people in a shallow matter you understand it. God provides learning experiences. Damning experiences too, for those "who have not received the love of truth". It has nothing to do with free-will choice whatsoever.

We can get into actual serious discussion about the topic, but you are not seriously reading predestination, so there's no point.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,452
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
So let's consider a hypothetical situation:

If you meet a person baptised by the EOC, how could you tell that his baptism has "worked"?

Baptism and all connected with it is God's work - so it always "works".

If you are asking me to judge any person, we do not do that.

However what I THINK you are asking me has to do with the Holy Spirit acting in a person's life?

The answer to that is that God does not "possess" us apart from our will. Every Christian is given the seal/gift of the Holy Spirit. But a person must also cooperate with the grace of God. Through this cooperation they become more like Christ. And in that process, the Holy Spirit works more and more through them. Consequently, the most active outward working of the Holy Spirit works through those who have cooperated with Him and are very Christlike. It was Peter's shadow and cloth that healed people, not a random Christian who had been baptized a day before. Deep humility is a common trait, and a necessary one. Otherwise spiritual gifts work to the destruction of the one using them.
 
Upvote 0

Wordkeeper

Newbie
Oct 1, 2013
4,285
477
✟83,580.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Baptism and all connected with it is God's work - so it always "works".

If you are asking me to judge any person, we do not do that.

However what I THINK you are asking me has to do with the Holy Spirit acting in a person's life?

The answer to that is that God does not "possess" us apart from our will. Every Christian is given the seal/gift of the Holy Spirit. But a person must also cooperate with the grace of God. Through this cooperation they become more like Christ. And in that process, the Holy Spirit works more and more through them. Consequently, the most active outward working of the Holy Spirit works through those who have cooperated with Him and are very Christlike. It was Peter's shadow and cloth that healed people, not a random Christian who had been baptized a day before. Deep humility is a common trait, and a necessary one. Otherwise spiritual gifts work to the destruction of the one using them.
It seems Paul felt the Ephesians had received a non "working" baptism. How did the second baptism "work"? Does the same thing happen , does it work in the same way, when you baptise someone in the EOC?
 
Upvote 0

Wordkeeper

Newbie
Oct 1, 2013
4,285
477
✟83,580.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Why are you calling yourself Wordkeeper? You deny important part of God's character and reality, and you are doing it publicly, which is not a good thing. So you are not really keeping the Word as a whole.

Hopefully you accept the gospel and some other doctrines, which would make you Somewordkeeper.

But that's ok, since none of us can be so arrogant to believe we get it all. Right? Because Paul says we are looking through glass darkly here.

Or maybe, if you are so zealous to free-will idea, call yourself something like Free-Willer Bubba.

Or you know, drop your nose and use real name.

Anyway, let's see what Somewordkeeper, Free-Willer Bubba has to say.



Yes and? Where is the verse that Abraham chose to believe God with his free-will? You are interpreting it in shallow matter, to your private liking, denying explicit predestination verses revealed throughout the Bible.



Yes and? Where is the verse that people of Israel chose to act on God's commands based on their free-will? As previously, you are interpreting it in shallow matter, to your private liking, denying explicit predestination verses revealed throughout the Bible.



Yes and? Where is the verse that they acted based on their free-will? As previously, you are interpreting it in shallow matter, to your private liking, denying explicit predestination verses revealed throughout the Bible.

By the way, you seem to not understand what Biblical testing is. God doesn't actually test people in a shallow matter you understand it. God provides learning experiences. Damning experiences too, for those "who have not received the love of truth". It has nothing to do with free-will choice whatsoever.

We can get into actual serious discussion about the topic, but you are not seriously reading predestination, so there's no point.
To someone with a hammer, everything seems like a nail!

Who's talking about predestination?

The topic is:"What is the correct baptism to ask for?"

Acts 8:35-39
35Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning from this Scripture he preached Jesus to him.36As they went along the road they came to some water; and the eunuch said, “Look! Water! What prevents me from being baptized?” 37[And Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.” And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”] 38And he ordered the chariot to stop; and they both went down into the water, Philip as well as the eunuch, and he baptized him.39When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away; and the eunuch no longer saw him, but went on his way rejoicing.
 
Upvote 0

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,452
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
It seems Paul felt the Ephesians had received a non "working" baptism. How did the second baptism "work"? Does the same thing happen , does it work in the same way, when you baptise someone in the EOC?
The Ephesians had been baptized into John's baptism of repentance and had never even heard of the Holy Spirit.

Baptism in the EOC depends. If one has never been baptized (and the ones at Ephesus would have been considered unbaptized as far as I can tell), they would be baptized by triple immersion, in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and it is completed (today accompanied by anointing - I'm not sure if Paul carried this with him or not) by the laying on of hands to receive the Holy Spirit - which is exactly what is described in Scripture.


If one is received into the EOC today, it depends if they have previously been baptized and with what words. Anything found to be lacking will be done. If they are received from a Christian denomination that baptized them using a Trinitarian formula (and who properly believes in the Holy Trinity, so not one that denies the full divinity of Christ, for example) ... then they are typically not rebaptized.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Wordkeeper

Newbie
Oct 1, 2013
4,285
477
✟83,580.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The Ephesians had been baptized into John's baptism of repentance and had never even heard of the Holy Spirit.

Baptism in the EOC depends. If one has never been baptized (and the ones at Ephesus would have been considered unbaptized as far as I can tell), they would be baptized by triple immersion, in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and it is completed (today accompanied by anointing - I'm not sure if Paul carried this with him or not) by the laying on of hands to receive the Holy Spirit - which is exactly what is described in Scripture.


If one is received into the EOC today, it depends if they have previously been baptized and with what words. Anything found to be lacking will be done. If they are received from a Christian denomination that baptized them using a Trinitarian formula (and who properly believes in the Holy Trinity, so not one that denies the full divinity of Christ, for example) ... then they are typically not rebaptized.
Is the person baptised by the EOC given the Holy Spirit?

What are the indicators that this has happened?

Acts 8:17-19
17Then they began laying their hands on them, and they were receiving the Holy Spirit. 18Now when Simon saw that the Spirit was bestowed through the laying on of the apostles’ hands, he offered them money, 19saying, “Give this authority to me as well, so that everyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit.”

Acts 19:1-7
1It happened that while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul passed through the upper country and came to Ephesus, and found some disciples. 2He said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said to him, “No, we have not even heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.” 3And he said, “Into what then were you baptized?” And they said, “Into John’s baptism.” 4Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in Him who was coming after him, that is, in Jesus.”5When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.6And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking with tongues and prophesying. 7There were in all about twelve men.
 
Upvote 0