The truth about scriptual Baptism

[JewishHeart]

Here in Israel messianics do full immersion, but nobody "dunks" them like in the Baptist tradition. They do it "mikveh" style and dunk themselves three times with witnesses.

AN interesting study on the exodus from egypt, the red sea crossing, and the promised land, can be an interesting study on immersion as a believer.

 

[theseed]

The girls do not

 

[Crazy Liz]

Liz-
I think it is very important when a believer is unscriptually baptized that they understand WHY they need to be rebaptized. There are many many churchs that preach that salvation is through baptism. This is unscriptual.

My problem with this, GEL, is that many Christians, even many members of Baptist churches, do not necessarily see things as you do. The example of the brother whose parents wanted to join a Baptist church after being lifelong Methodists is not an unusual example. In their situation, they were being asked to be re-baptized in order to accommodate the requirements of people who believe the way you do. It probably was explained to them that yours is the traditional Baptist belief, and therefore their church requires you do all these things for membership, but you do not have to believe it is necessary. Often, it is simply an act of obedience to show your submission to the wishes of the congregation you are joining. This is why many Baptist churches (and Mennonite Brethren, and I don't know what other denominations) will accept for membership anyone who was baptized as a believer, no matter what the mode, but require their ministers to be re-baptized by immersion if their first baptism was as a believer but not by immersion.

For Mennonites, as I have said before, a large part of the significance of baptism is as a means of initiation into the full responsibilities of church membership. I think this is scriptural. Now, if a person was baptized as a believer with this understanding, to require them to be baptized again is like saying they didn't really make that commitment to God and to the Church when they did it the first time. This causes unnecessary confusion and distress for many people. Others, like ministers who are required to be rebaptized, simply think of it as going through the motions to assure others that they have met the requirements.

What I'm trying to say is that whether a person feels his or her previous baptism was a real baptism will greatly affect his/her attitude toward being required to do it a different way. Some, like George Blaurock and Michael Sattler, believed their infant baptism was no baptism because it was done to them without their consent. (BTW, they baptized each other by pouring, I believe. Definitely not by immersion. Baptism by immersion was introduced into the Anabaptist movement much later.) The individual's attitude toward their current church's requirements and their previous church's requirements, as well as many other factors will have a profound effect on that person's spirituality. I think to re-baptize a person who is reluctant for any reason can do a lot of spiritual harm.

There are "requirements" to be marrried to someone. If one of these requirements are not met, then the couple is not married according to the Law of that state or country. The same is with baptism.

This may be a good analogy, but it doesn't exactly work the way you are thinking. If I get married in one state and move to another, my marriage will be recognized, even though the requirements for marriage are different in the two states. For example, one state may require a blood test and a waiting period and another may not. If a couple marries in a state with less stringent requirements, they will not have to get a license and go through a new marriage ceremony in the new state. I realize this is a very small difference between requirements from one state to another, but there are bigger ones. Of course, right now we have a big political and legal controversy over just how far this recognition will stretch. (Please, lets not get into a discussion of gay marriage here. This is just an analogy.) Another example, though, that I have seen several people ask about here in CF and other Christian forums, has to do with whether God recognizes marriages by a justice of the peace, or only church weddings. Do you see where this analogy can lead?

It should be scriptual and the person who is being baptized should fully understand what is scriptual from unscriptual baptism. I understand that there are also many many church that preach that you have to be a member of that church to get baptized. That is also unscriptual. Baptism should be open to any one any time as long as they are saved just like communion is. It should have nothing to do with membership or the Blood of Christ and everything to do with that person publically confessing that Christ is thier Lord and Saviour.
GEL

Actually, I'm not aware of any church that requires someone to be a member of the church to be baptized. Most require one to be baptized before becoming a church member. However, it is true that most Mennonite churches will not baptize anyone who is not a candidate for church membership. They will immediately upon baptism become members of the church. Their point is that if someone is publicly confessing Christ as their Lord and Savior, the same obedience that leads them to be baptized also leads them to join a body of believers. The two are inseperable. It would be like delivering a baby and waiting for the baby to decide whether or not to be part of the family. This is not a requirement for baptism per se, but if a person claims to be a believer wanting to obey the Lord by being baptized, but does not want to obey the Lord by being part of the church, they still have more to learn about obedience before they are ready to be baptized.

 

[Koey]

You have a very RUDE way of stating that YOU think baptist don't have a complete understanding of Baptism. Are you kidding me? WE are called Baptist for a reason........HMMMMMMMMM it might be because of BAPTISM?!?
Bigoted and ignorant reasons why we don't believe in infant baptism? Are you for real? There is not one single scripture that talks about infants getting baptized OR anyone for that matter getting sprinkled.
I think YOU do not have a complete understanding of Baptism and to label all of us as "baptism police" is just plain discusting.
I could care less what you or any other man or church says, Baptism should be scriptural and there is a differance between scriptural and non scriptual baptism THAT is in the Bible and that is what "we" as Baptist use as our final authority. I also want to point out that your profile does not state that you are a baptist but that you attend an interdenominational church which is very far from being a Baptist. I ask nicely not to speak for Baptist, especially if you are NOT one!
GEL
GEL

Wow. I guess you proved my point about bigotry.

 

[FreeinChrist]

I was trying to point out that we Baptists do not have as complete an understanding of baptism, as we think we do.​

Other than being rude and insulting, you didn't make your point.
You argued a strawman.

Baptists do not believe baptism saves. Baptism is not WHEN the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, who regenerates us, occurs.
So GEL was not claiming we have the right to approve who receives the indwelling of the Spirit as you seemed to think.

Furthur rudesnes to GEL (shown in the last post you made) just shows a lack of Christian charity, Koey. Hopefully they covered that concept in your theology program.

 

[FreeinChrist]

GEL and all,

I found this article to be interesting in regards to Beleivers Baptism ( even if it is Reformed theology ):

http://www.founders.org/library/malone1/malone_text.html


This is toward the end:
"I cannot build my doctrine on an empty string. Therefore, I accept the one priceless pearl of disciples' baptism and wear it upon my hand as a sign of my marriage to Christ. Baptism is the outward sign of entrance into the New Covenant by the inward circumcision of the heart, evidenced by one's confession of faith in Christ. Old Testament children entered the Abrahamic Covenant by the circumcision of the flesh. If they came to faith, it became a seal of the righteousness of faith, as it was to Abraham (Rom. 4). Now our New Covenant children enter the New Covenant by the circumcision of the heart, sealed by the Holy Spirit and signified by the sign of disciples' baptism."

 

[Carrye]

Baptism is not WHEN the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, who regenerates us, occurs.

When does that happen, according to Baptist belief?

 

[FreeinChrist]

When we come to belief in Jesus Christ as the Son of God who died for our sins. There is belief, repentence of sin, asking forgiveness...and we receive forgiveness if it is a true belief in Christ. That is the time we receive the Holy Spirit, who regenerates us, making us new creatures.

 

[Carrye]

When we come to belief in Jesus Christ as the Son of God who died for our sins. There is belief, repentence of sin, asking forgiveness...and we receive forgiveness if it is a true belief in Christ. That is the time we receive the Holy Spirit, who regenerates us, making us new creatures.

Whoa, I had no idea! So you baptize then, because Jesus did it? What is the significance of baptism for you - what does baptism DO/accomplish? Do Baptists have a doctrine of original sin?

 

[FreeinChrist]

Whoa, I had no idea! So you baptize then, because Jesus did it? What is the significance of baptism for you - what does baptism DO/accomplish? Do Baptists have a doctrine of original sin?

Yes, we baptize because Jesus did it. We are identifying with Christ. In the act of full immersion baptism, we are showing the death and burial and resurrection of Christ. Water baptism is the outward sign of an inner Baptism - the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, who regenerates us.
Rom 6:4 Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.Rom 6:5 For if we have become united with {Him} in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall also be {in the likeness} of His resurrection,Rom 6:6 knowing this, that our old self was crucified with {Him,} in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin;Rom 6:7 for he who has died is freed from sin.

I don't beleive this is referring to water baptism but to the baptism of the Holy Spirit. But water baptism symbolizes this.

And yes, we believe we are born in original sin. We are in original sin until our regeneration.

 

[GreenEyedLady]

Here in Israel messianics do full immersion, but nobody "dunks" them like in the Baptist tradition. They do it "mikveh" style and dunk themselves three times with witnesses.

AN interesting study on the exodus from egypt, the red sea crossing, and the promised land, can be an interesting study on immersion as a believer.

I just wanted to point out here that "dunking" is not a Baptist tradition, it is a Biblical tradition. Christ was dunked by John, not 3 times, but one time and Christ was fully immersed. I am wondering why not do it like Christ did? Why are they baptizing themselves? Christ "could have" done that, but he clearly made it a point to use someone to baptize us by using John to baptize him.

 

[Cary.Melvin]

Why do Baptists make such a huge deal of this? If it is not necessary for salvation, what difference does it make? If a person was baptised as a infant and accepts that baptism, why should any church think that they have the right to tell them that they need to be baptised again?

I don't see why either a pastor or board of elders based on their interpretation of the proper mode of baptism should coerse an individual believer who has a differing interpretation.

To do so wouldn't seem very Baptist to me. What happened to the individual rights of the believer to interpret the scriptures?

 

[theseed]

Why do Baptists make such a huge deal of this? If it is not necessary for salvation, what difference does it make? If a person was baptised as a infant and accepts that baptism, why should any church think that they have the right to tell them that they need to be baptised again?

I don't see why either a pastor or board of elders based on their interpretation of the proper mode of baptism should coerse an individual believer who has a differing interpretation.

To do so wouldn't seem very Baptist to me. What happened to the individual rights of the believer to interpret the scriptures?

The Bible also only teaches beleiver's baptism, as link I posted describes, in 47 pages (squeezed down to 20).

 

[FreeinChrist]

Why do Baptists make such a huge deal of this? If it is not necessary for salvation, what difference does it make? If a person was baptised as a infant and accepts that baptism, why should any church think that they have the right to tell them that they need to be baptised again?

The Baptist churches I attended (and the nondenom I attend now) did not require people to be baptized again. They accepted a confession of faith. The decision to be baptized as a beleiver was a personal decision.

 

[HackerCatcher]

Other than being rude and insulting, you didn't make your point.
You argued a strawman.

Baptists do not believe baptism saves. Baptism is not WHEN the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, who regenerates us, occurs.
So GEL was not claiming we have the right to approve who receives the indwelling of the Spirit as you seemed to think.

Furthur rudesnes to GEL (shown in the last post you made) just shows a lack of Christian charity, Koey. Hopefully they covered that concept in your theology program.

I really think YOU are the one being rude. Koey was merely stating his opinion, and you RUDELY shut him down. He made sense too.

 

[FreeinChrist]

I really think YOU are the one being rude. Koey was merely stating his opinion, and you RUDELY shut him down. He made sense too.

I disagee.

 

[God is Great]

...This is RUDE!!!

IF you had a concept of what most Baptists believe, you would understand that we do not equate water baptism with the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and that water baptism is an act of obedience. Saying how we believe baptism should be done is in no way trying to say who the Holy Spirit can indwell!!!

You need to learn before you write.

I didn't think Koey was rude at all, just honest with her feelings. You must be from the south where people don't say what they really think and when people do they are deemed rude. I don't fine Koey's words offensive at all and I certainly would not want to accuse her of being rude. I may not agree with her but to call her rude for being honest would be rude of me.

God is Great.

 

[FreeinChrist]

So did you just join to to express your disagreement?

I disagree with you. That's my opinion.

 

[Frankie]

The Baptist church I attend recognizes all previous water baptisms as valid Christian baptisms except when they were Mormon, JW or Oneness Pentecostal baptisms... if they were baptism by one of these 3 churches, they do not view it as a "real" Christian water baptism and offer these people new baptism. Of course, since water baptism does not save, it is ultimately left up to the person who had the "un official" baptism as to what they want to do.

God bless,
Frankie

 

[Sephania]

I just wanted to point out here that "dunking" is not a Baptist tradition, it is a Biblical tradition. Christ was dunked by John, not 3 times, but one time and Christ was fully immersed. I am wondering why not do it like Christ did? Why are they baptizing themselves? Christ "could have" done that, but he clearly made it a point to use someone to baptize us by using John to baptize him.

Mark 9 And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan.
10 And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens opened, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon him:

john 3:22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.
23 And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized.

NOte: the word "Straightaway" means immediately, which indicates that the person of the action is also performing the action.

It is hard to tell by the words we have what happened but when you compare them to the required immersions done by the laws of G-d then you understand verses like Mark 9:10 where it says that Y-shua came up out of the water. This is describing an action that one is performing themselves without any assistance. John was the one calling them to repentance to prepare the way of the L-RD this repentance would be followed by an immersion, and he stood by as a witness.
Today when one goes to a mikvah there is a witness to be sure that you complete this perscribed ritual in the proper manner, as we cannot fully view ourselves, especially when going under water, a witness is required.

In the above verses in John you can see that John was still witnessing immersions of repentance and Y-shua was also. It does not indicate the amount of times either, mostly because it was already understood during that time.

PG, I am glad that Talmidah cleared that up for you. Also for those of you who don't know, a Bar Mitzvah is only for a boy, it means "son (Bar) of the commandment" a 13 year old girl has a Bat mitzvah, which means Daughter ( Bat - pronounced Baaht ) of the Commandment".