Getting Water Baptized Twice?

[shturt678]

If one is just baptized in the Triune God's Personal name, ie, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit then I see no reason to re-baptize even for a renewal of one's faith; however if one is baptized in the Name (Revelation) that the Personal Name of God is based upon and one's revelation changes shifting to a different denomination, and/or etc., then re-baptisms are absolutely necessary. Just ol' old little tiny guilty babies re-baptizer Jack.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Truth is in Anglicanism, that there are few who hold to the 39 Articles, just as there is only a remnant of Lutherans who hold to the unaltered 1580 Book of Concord.

Yes, I know, but as long as there is a remnant there is hope.

 

[Albion]

Yes, I know, but as long as there is a remnant there is hope.

Fortunately, it's not a remnant yet. While many Anglicans exempt themselves from one or more of the Articles, or disagree with the wording in some of them, most are still in the overall spirit of the Articles from what I've observed.

 

[Rev Randy]

You were too young to make all sorts of decisions, which were made for you by your parents. They're responsible for the condition of your soul, too. Also, your parents have the power to speak for you. Therefore, they have the power to have you baptized.

If the Bible is your only authority of your faith, then you are accepting the authority of the Catholic Church to decide which books are in the Bible. Why would you accept their authority in one thing, and not other things regarding faith? Otherwise, why not accept the Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Mary Magdalene, the Gospel of Peter, the Apocalypse of Judas, and so on as Scriptural?

Dr. Spock (the child headshrinker not the Vulcan) disagrees. But his own child committed suicide. So his book on child rearing could be a bit iffy.

I am always dumbfounded when I meet a child of "Christian" parents who have not instructed their child in matters of faith. I meet a lot of those children.

 

[Colleen1]

Dr. Spock (the child headshrinker not the Vulcan) disagrees. But his own child committed suicide. So his book on child rearing could be a bit iffy.

Depression can be a chemical illness and not simply a behavioral / cognitive matter. It can be considered in some ways like other mental illness...not the fault of anyone...just illness. At other times, it can be emotionally based if one has progressed to depression from grieving / trauma etc.

I am always dumbfounded when I meet a child of "Christian" parents who have not instructed their child in matters of faith. I meet a lot of those children.

Yes, that too concerns me...or simply explaining God's character and what a relationship with God is really about / based on. ...but some parents may not know this themselves.

 

[RisingSpirit]

Depression can be a chemical illness and not simply a behavioral / cognitive matter. It can be considered in some ways like other mental illness...not the fault of anyone...just illness. At other times, it can be emotionally based if one has progressed to depression from grieving / trauma etc.

​

People find it hard to believe that emotions are the root case of cancer other than environmental causes. (found here)
Repressed emotions can cause disease. How this disease manifests in each of us is completely individualized. Releasing emotions can heal disease. Even cancer. Even diseases that Western medicine deems incurable. (found here)
----------------------
In the case of what may be termed ‘depression’ in modern society, the causes are often (but not always) attributed to emotional strain and the result of stagnated Qi flow (1). (found here)

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

Traditional Chinese medicine claims that emotions and physical health are closely connected. Seven natural human emotions such as joy, anger, sadness, pensiveness, grief, fear and fright are understood as inner causes of diseases. Emotional activity is a physiological reaction to the environment, but emotional stress breaks the functions of human organs which lead to diseases. It is normal to feel all of these seven emotions, problems occur when a particular emotion is experienced for a long time what leads to imbalance and the balance in TCM – is a key factor. ( found here)

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

Emotions play a big role in TCM. For example, lack of appropriate emotional response or inappropriate or excessive emotional response may lead to disease of the related organ. Weakness in any organ system may lead to emotional weakness or imbalance. Emotional factors can cause functional changes in one or more organs at the same time. (found here)

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

[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]In Chinese medical theory, one of the major internal causes of disease is the Seven Emotions: anger, worry, fear, fright, anxiety, grief, and joy. (found here)[/FONT]

 

[daydreamergurl15]

When the Eunuch and Philip were walking and came near a body of water, the Eunuch asked "What hinders me from being baptized?" Phillip said, "If you believe with all your heart, you may" and the Eunuch goes on and confess Jesus as the Son of God and then is immersed in water. That's the example of our baptism. We see those same examples all throughout the Book of Acts. It is a choice you make and no one can make it on your behalf. The question is asked "Do YOU believe?" It is a confession that only you can make. You believed in Christ and you confessed Christ, if at any point you were baptized and didn't do these things then you didn't do it like the examples we were given. To claim that anything else is valid without Scripture backing it up is a very dangerous thing because we now have to listen to man and I don't know about you, but men's validation scares me when it is not backed up with Scripture.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Fortunately, it's not a remnant yet. While many Anglicans exempt themselves from one or more of the Articles, or disagree with the wording in some of them, most are still in the overall spirit of the Articles from what I've observed.

Worldwide, I think that is quite true. Here in the U.S. I think many are in agreement with the overall spirit of the Articles, but the clergy is definitely having difficulties.

 

[shturt678]

When the Eunuch and Philip were walking and came near a body of water, the Eunuch asked "What hinders me from being baptized?" Phillip said, "If you believe with all your heart, you may" and the Eunuch goes on and confess Jesus as the Son of God and then is immersed in water. That's the example of our baptism. We see those same examples all throughout the Book of Acts. It is a choice you make and no one can make it on your behalf. The question is asked "Do YOU believe?" It is a confession that only you can make. You believed in Christ and you confessed Christ, if at any point you were baptized and didn't do these things then you didn't do it like the examples we were given. To claim that anything else is valid without Scripture backing it up is a very dangerous thing because we now have to listen to man and I don't know about you, but men's validation scares me when it is not backed up with Scripture.

Do both have to under the water at the same time, or the baptizee go under first, or the baptizer go under first, ie, using Acts8:38 as our say 'rule-brick' for now? Keep in mind both were immersed 'under' grammatcially and contextually.

 

[shturt678]

Dr. Spock (the child headshrinker not the Vulcan) disagrees. But his own child committed suicide. So his book on child rearing could be a bit iffy.

I am always dumbfounded when I meet a child of "Christian" parents who have not instructed their child in matters of faith. I meet a lot of those children.

My forgiven alcoholic dad did instruct me with matters of 'faith,' ie, he was a sub. officer that fought in WWII and absolutely believed in God, torpedoed a few times and lived to 'not tell about it,' never discussed; however would come home and beat me and my mother senseless, breaking her bones even. I learned about forgiveness and 'faith' early on, ie, even experienced "faith." btw no pity parties as have a 'different faith' today. Back to splashing those little tiny guilty babies with and and even a few old duds like myself - water even cleanses them.

 

[Albion]

Worldwide, I think that is quite true. Here in the U.S. I think many are in agreement with the overall spirit of the Articles, but the clergy is definitely having difficulties.

It did cross my mind as I was reading your post that you have one or two provinces in mind. There are almost forty of them that belong to the Anglican Communion, plus others that do not, so I guess I'm overly sensitive whenever I read "Anglicans have become" or "The Anglican Church believes...."

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

It did cross my mind as I was reading your post that you have one or two provinces in mind. There are almost forty of them that belong to the Anglican Communion, plus others that do not, so I guess I'm overly sensitive whenever I read "Anglicans have become" or "The Anglican Church believes...."

Just how I feel when some say Lutherans believe... When they are tlaking about the ELCa/ELCIC.

 

[Colleen1]

My forgiven alcoholic dad did instruct me with matters of 'faith,' ie, he was a sub. officer that fought in WWII and absolutely believed in God, torpedoed a few times and lived to 'not tell about it,' never discussed; however would come home and beat me and my mother senseless, breaking her bones even. I learned about forgiveness and 'faith' early on, ie, even experienced "faith." btw no pity parties as have a 'different faith' today.

Back to splashing those little tiny guilty babies with and and even a few old duds like myself - water even cleanses them.

 

[shturt678]

[/QUOTE

Hey, at least I'm not pushing the "1" re-baptism to "2" or "20," I'm not that bad re-splashing water - look at the Premils., rapturist, and etc. having Jesus coming back "3" or "4" times? I only have him coming back "1" more time and I try to stay with just "1" re-baptism, ie, splashing. Again, if nothing else, cleaning those little tiny bald heads a little more - I don't add any soap though?

 

[bbbbbbb]

Just how I feel when some say Lutherans believe... When they are tlaking about the ELCa/ELCIC.

I definitely know that feeling, as well. It is difficult enough to be stereotyped as a Christian, but then to have your particular denomination stereotyped, as well, adds insult to injury.

 

[Andrea411]

When the Eunuch and Philip were walking and came near a body of water, the Eunuch asked "What hinders me from being baptized?" Phillip said, "If you believe with all your heart, you may" and the Eunuch goes on and confess Jesus as the Son of God and then is immersed in water. That's the example of our baptism. We see those same examples all throughout the Book of Acts. It is a choice you make and no one can make it on your behalf. The question is asked "Do YOU believe?" It is a confession that only you can make. You believed in Christ and you confessed Christ, if at any point you were baptized and didn't do these things then you didn't do it like the examples we were given. To claim that anything else is valid without Scripture backing it up is a very dangerous thing because we now have to listen to man and I don't know about you, but men's validation scares me when it is not backed up with Scripture.

hmmmm... its a shame they weren't walking by a pitcher of water.... would make things easier, especially in winter. of course they didn't experience a Siberian winter in Jerusalem... otherwise they might have done it in a completely different way. My thought is when Jesus spoke to the religious leaders of his day he was speaking about just these things... why do you worry about the outside (washing rituals) when the inside is full of dead men's bones.
Holding on to the letter of the law is plain silliness, it distorts the message of the gospel with rigidity and pettiness. The law said Jesus couldn't work on the Sabbath yet he showed them what was important was the heart of the Sabbath not the deeds of the day. God bless, andrea

 

[Albion]

When the Eunuch and Philip were walking and came near a body of water, the Eunuch asked "What hinders me from being baptized?" Phillip said, "If you believe with all your heart, you may" and the Eunuch goes on and confess Jesus as the Son of God and then is immersed in water.

Because you believe that our beliefs should be backed up with Scripture, we need to note that this passage does not say "then is immersed in water." There is nothing in it that indicates immersion.

 

[Colleen1]

Hey, at least I'm not pushing the "1" re-baptism to "2" or "20," I'm not that bad re-splashing water - look at the Premils., rapturist, and etc. having Jesus coming back "3" or "4" times? I only have him coming back "1" more time and I try to stay with just "1" re-baptism, ie, splashing. Again, if nothing else, cleaning those little tiny bald heads a little more - I don't add any soap though?

You're welcome.

lol Funny guy. I need to keep all you fellas on your toes. I'm the only gal in here at times.

 

[Rev Randy]

It did cross my mind as I was reading your post that you have one or two provinces in mind. There are almost forty of them that belong to the Anglican Communion, plus others that do not, so I guess I'm overly sensitive whenever I read "Anglicans have become" or "The Anglican Church believes...."

Yes that is a bit confusing. One can find just about any doctrine when lumping all Anglicans into one pile. I was watching a video some years back that was of a conference in which our former (now retired) Patriarch was explaining what it would take for the Anglicans and EO to be in communion. It was after the Patriarch had finished when the Anglican Archbishop (I believe it was Duncan) asked the gathering, "We are Calvinist are we not?" The spontaneous response was divided by seating and looked just like Parliament. It must make for some interesting conferences.

 

[Albion]

Yes that is a bit confusing. One can find just about any doctrine when lumping all Anglicans into one pile. I was watching a video some years back that was of a conference in which our former (now retired) Patriarch was explaining what it would take for the Anglicans and EO to be in communion. It was after the Patriarch had finished when the Anglican Archbishop (I believe it was Duncan) asked the gathering, "We are Calvinist are we not?" The spontaneous response was divided by seating and looked just like Parliament. It must make for some interesting conferences.

I can't make any sense out of that comment of Abp. Duncan's unless he was being awfully wry, in which case the EO obviously missed the joke. Neither he nor the EOs present were any more Calvinists than they were Buddhists, so I can only imagine that he meant to be provocative for some reason.