Why do Protestants re-baptize?

[Joykins]

I believe that Anabaptists (which means re-baptizers) only believe in believer's baptism, so would rebaptize anyone who expressed a desire for it who had already been baptized as an unbeliever or infant. They view baptism as an outward profession of faith, not sacramentally.

 

[A New Dawn]

Baptism follows belief. It doesn't preceed it.
[BIBLE]Mark 16:16[/BIBLE]
[BIBLE]Acts 8:12[/BIBLE]
[BIBLE]Acts 18:8[/BIBLE]
Many protestants practice a believers baptism, and feel that if you were not baptized as a believer that you should receive that type of baptism.

 

[Lynn73]

Scripture tells us that there is "one Lord, one faith, one baptism". The Nicene Creed states that there is "one baptism for the forgiveness of sins". Even the Catholic and I believe Orthodox Churches accepts the baptism of Christian's entering their faith as valid. Of course, it must meet the trinitarian formula and the individual's prior faith must have a biblical/historical belief in what the Trinity means. Therefore, Mormon baptism is not accepted.

So why do Protestants routinely re-baptize Christian's when it's contrary to the bible?

Because I wasn't truly saved at my first baptism. When the opportuniy came up many many years later I took advantage of it because I realized that I wasn't really saved before and salvation or believing is supposed to come before baptism.

 

[Celticflower]

I attend a nondenominational church (my theology is Baptist) and it does not rebaptize or do the local nondenoms we often associate with (in an unofficial capacity).

Now if someone felt led to be rebaptized as a beleiver, that is a choice that is allowed, but it is not required for membership in the church.

Must be nice--ALL the non-denoms in my area insist on re-baptizing anyone who was not baptized by immersion before allowing them to be members of the congregation. This is a problem I have been dealing with for a while. As a Methodist I was baptized as an infant and then confirmed that baptism as a teen. The church we attend now, and my husband and son are members of, will not accept my or my daughters baptisms. In her case, one preacher said "We'll just pretend it never happened". There are members in the church we attend now who would like to see me husband elected an elder, but because I am not a member he can't be. I have been under pressure recently to "convert" (from what to what ???) and be baptized "the right way", but something deep within me says it is unneccesary. To me it would be like telling God He screwed up the first baptism and needs to redo it. Sorry--not into ticking Him off if I can help it.

 

[Archangel]

Scripture tells us that there is "one Lord, one faith, one baptism". The Nicene Creed states that there is "one baptism for the forgiveness of sins". Even the Catholic and I believe Orthodox Churches accepts the baptism of Christian's entering their faith as valid. Of course, it must meet the trinitarian formula and the individual's prior faith must have a biblical/historical belief in what the Trinity means. Therefore, Mormon baptism is not accepted.

So why do Protestants routinely re-baptize Christian's when it's contrary to the bible?

#

The dont re baptise people.

They baptise them the way it is in the bible, not some man made nonsense like infant baptisim or the like.

The biblical baptisim is to accept through faith and then to be baptised, fully submerged in water.

 

[KTskater]

The only time I've ever heard of someone getting "re-baptized" is when they were forced to do it when they were younger and didn't believe then, so they didn't feel it was a valid baptism.

 

[linssue55]

Scripture tells us that there is "one Lord, one faith, one baptism". The Nicene Creed states that there is "one baptism for the forgiveness of sins". Even the Catholic and I believe Orthodox Churches accepts the baptism of Christian's entering their faith as valid. Of course, it must meet the trinitarian formula and the individual's prior faith must have a biblical/historical belief in what the Trinity means. Therefore, Mormon baptism is not accepted.

So why do Protestants routinely re-baptize Christian's when it's contrary to the bible?

Because they won't give up their idea of it. At the point of Salavtion we are ALL baptised with God the Holy Spirit. This water baptism means absolutely NOTHING!

 

[Joykins]

Does it work the other way? If I had an adult believer's baptism and I felt called into a church which practices infant baptism, would I need to be rebaptized?

 

[BarbB]

Must be nice--ALL the non-denoms in my area insist on re-baptizing anyone who was not baptized by immersion before allowing them to be members of the congregation. This is a problem I have been dealing with for a while. As a Methodist I was baptized as an infant and then confirmed that baptism as a teen. The church we attend now, and my husband and son are members of, will not accept my or my daughters baptisms. In her case, one preacher said "We'll just pretend it never happened". There are members in the church we attend now who would like to see me husband elected an elder, but because I am not a member he can't be. I have been under pressure recently to "convert" (from what to what ???) and be baptized "the right way", but something deep within me says it is unneccesary. To me it would be like telling God He screwed up the first baptism and needs to redo it. Sorry--not into ticking Him off if I can help it.

I felt that way at first, too, and because of that I missed an opportunity to be baptised in the Jordan River. Silly me! Instead, I was baptised by immersion in April, 2004, and do not regret it one bit. It was before the church of which I am NOW a member. Please pray about this. Do not become stuck on the idea that it negates the idea of an infant baptism but think of it as a believer's baptism.

 

[Veritas]

Where in the bible do find the term, "believers baptism"?

 

[water_ripple]

Where in the bible do find the term, "believers baptism"?

I think post #22 shows scriptural support for a believer's baptisim.

 

[water_ripple]

What choice does an infant have in baptisim? ...Does this not impose on their freewill?

 

[Raydar]

It doesn't matter whether one or 10 sects re-baptize (and I know that most Evangelical so-called "non-denoms" do re-baptize if someone was Catholic), the point is that it is not the biblical way nor was the practice accepted in the early Church. In fact, there were those in the early Church who wanted to have several baptism's since it was for the remission of sins. The Church, however, put an end to it on biblical grounds.

I was once of a "Catholic" denomination and now am no longer. I was baptized as an infant. I do not remember it. The Bible states in a number of places to repent and be baptized. I do not think my first baptism counted because not being aware of the sin I was being cleansed of I could not have repented. After being born again later in life I understood the sin I needed to repent and then felt that I needed to be baptized as a believer in the risen Christ. I feel that the Catholic baptism I went through as a child was just to please my parents, family and the church my parents belonged to.

 

[MikeMcK]

Scripture tells us that there is "one Lord, one faith, one baptism". The Nicene Creed states that there is "one baptism for the forgiveness of sins". Even the Catholic and I believe Orthodox Churches accepts the baptism of Christian's entering their faith as valid. Of course, it must meet the trinitarian formula and the individual's prior faith must have a biblical/historical belief in what the Trinity means. Therefore, Mormon baptism is not accepted.

So why do Protestants routinely re-baptize Christian's when it's contrary to the bible?

I don't see a problem with being re-baptized, so long as the baptizee understands that the baptism, itself, is merely symbolic of the salvation that he's already recieved.

The "one" you're talking about is qualitative, not quantitative.

 

[MikeMcK]

The bible doesn't forbid the asking of the saints in Heaven to pray for us either.

Actually, praying to the dead is condemned in scripture.

 

[cristoiglesia]

Actually, praying to the dead is condemned in scripture.

No, you are making a gross interpretation error if you indeed believe this.

In Christ

 

[MikeMcK]

No, you are making a gross interpretation error if you indeed believe this.

In Christ

Feel free to correct me, if you can, or to show us an example of someone praying to the dead who is not condemned by God.

 

[Veritas]

What choice does an infant have in baptisim? ...Does this not impose on their freewill?

This thread is on re-baptizing people, not the efficacy or nature of baptism itself. However, these issue do have some bearing since most Evangelical's, etc. do not believe that baptism has any infused grace and is therefore, entirely symbolic. Catholicism believes that salvation is by grace alone and requires nothing of the individual. As a result, an infant can be baptized since they can do nothing to earn the initial grace.

I'm coming to understand that most modern Protestants look at baptism as something an individual undergoes as a result of something he has done, ie. a statement of faith. The act of baptism to them is merely a symbol that express something they feel inside. Historical Christianity views baptism very differently. It is seen as the infant (or other grown person's) soul's initiation into the Christian Family and the Kingdom of God. Before that, the soul has no spiritual home. Since a parent wouldn't (and couldn't in the Catholic Church) baptize the infant without the parent's agreement to raise the child in the faith, the child learns and grows in his/her faith. At a later age, they get to make a more conscience and public committment of their belief in the form of the sacrament of Confirmation. This seals them with the gift of the Holy Spirit and further assists them with God's grace. If this grace is really at work as Catholics and Orthodox (and some Protestant denoms) believe, than baptism is based not on what one feels, but on what God has done. It's His FREE gift!

 

[MikeMcK]

Historical Christianity views baptism very differently. It is seen as the infant (or other grown person's) soul's initiation into the Christian Family and the Kingdom of God.

Really? Could you please show us where in scripture we're taught that anyone enters the Kingdom of God by anything other than their own volition?

 

[Celticflower]

I felt that way at first, too, and because of that I missed an opportunity to be baptised in the Jordan River. Silly me! Instead, I was baptised by immersion in April, 2004, and do not regret it one bit. It was before the church of which I am NOW a member. Please pray about this. Do not become stuck on the idea that it negates the idea of an infant baptism but think of it as a believer's baptism.

Believe me, this has been a subject of alot of prayer. At this point in time I have not been lead to be re-baptized. Part of it may have to do with the churches view of baptism. To them it is not symbolic--it is essential to salvation. They believe that salvation comes from being united with Christ and this union ONLY occurs in the waters of full immersion baptism. I do not share this belief. For me to be baptized in this church would be a lie.

(and before anyone suggests going to another church--I would but circumstances dictate I go with the rest of the family)