Posted on 10/06/2015 10:35:57 AM PDT by envisio
I have read a little and did some research on baptism and if there is a need to get baptized as an adult after being baptized as a child.
I looked for the Church’s standing on it and I looked for scripture written about it. My research left me with the half-baked conclusion, in the eyes of the Lord, one only needs baptized once.
I was baptized as a small child without any realization of what was happening. In the 40 years to follow there were plenty of times I was lost, sinning, doing the devils deeds with the liquor and the drugs and the whores and on all fours in the parkinglot puking only to repeat it again the next day for years in my 20s. I never got into any real trouble; no felonies or violence, just drunken antics of a stupid 20something year old. Of course, as we get older, we settle down and put away our childish behavior to be adults. In no way will my wild youth define my legacy since then.
Recent events have tested my faith and questioned a merciful God. Ultimately those events brought me closer to God, and it was my wife’s wish that I completely give my life to Christ. She did and I am quite sure she is sitting by His side right now, praying that I do the same.
I am a sinner. I have confessed my sins and asked for forgiveness. I have accepted Jesus Christ as my savior. I want to complete it with water. I want to get baptized again, but I don’t want it to be vain. I don’t want to do it for myself as a vain show that’s not necessary just to make me feel better. I want to do it because God wants me to do it.
So, since you folks are far more learned on the teachings of the bible, and FReepdom is unmatched in advice dealing with church and God, my question is… Even if the original baptism was done at a time when I did not know what was happening… Is a second baptism common? Is it vain? Will it make me complete in my transition to being born again? Is it necessary?
The New Testament tells of seven baptisms, and the one you are describing in your example is not water baptism. FYI
Great answer, it is always great to see the Christian doctrine and command of Jesus to baptize to be held up to scorn and derision by referring to it as “ water activities”. The Muslims must be laughing their butts off, good job.
Yet the Holy Spirit thru Paul says there is just one baptism.
OK, when and where in Scripture was Simon bar Jona (Peter) baptized?
No, the Holy Spirit in the New Testament says there are seven. Check the bandwidth of your context.
OLOFOB,
The answer I pointed to was Biblical and excellent and heartfelt.
Let him who has ears to hear, hear.
The mock outrage is cute, but not warranted. Did you actually read what I wrote, or just scan it to find something that offends? 80% of what I wrote was straight from God's Word. But since that did not take root in the spirit, let's try another approach.
Your own screen name says - ONE BAPTISM. If there is only ONE BAPTISM, according to Paul in Ephesians 4, there can only be ONE BAPTISM. So which is it my friend - water or spiritual? Here's a fun exercise, see if you can find ANYTHING about the necessity for WATER baptism in that same letter - Ephesians.
Still unsure? That's why God gave us His Word. There is no shortage of Revelation in God's Living Word.
Matthew 3:11 (KJV)
11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
John the Baptist was the last Old Testament prophet. He baptized people with physical water, preaching the Kingdom of Heaven and repentance to Israel. He recognized that water baptism was just a shadow of what was to come. Note what will be different when the Messiah comes - he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire. So we see a change is coming on the nature of baptism.(Matthew 3:11, Mark 1:7-8, Luke 3:16)
John 4:1-2 (KJV)
1 When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, 2 (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)
Simply note this verse for now, Jesus was not baptizing anyone with water.
Acts 1:4-5 (KJV)
4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. 5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.
In his post resurrection meeting with the disciples, Jesus again refers to a coming change - a spiritual baptism rather than water. Peter quotes this very verse in Acts 11 when, after sharing the Gospel with Cornelius' household, Gentiles, they are all baptized in the Spirit. It should be noted that in Acts 10 Peter did call for them to be baptized in water AFTER they were Baptized by the Spirit. Was that really necessary? I'll save that for another day.
Moving on...
Matthew 28:19 (KJV)
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
In Matthew 28:18-20, Jesus lays out a future formula - teach the nations (Israel was not reckoned among the nations - Numbers 23:9), baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. A careful reading of those passages shows that neither baptism (John's, or the one in Matthew 28) applies to the Body of Christ, who are children of God, and neither Jew or Gentile, nor are they accounted among the nations. (1 Corinthians 10:32)
Note that in every example in Acts, nobody uses the three names instructed in Matthew 28:
Acts 2:38 (KJV)
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Acts 8:16 (KJV)
16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)
Acts 10:48 (KJV)
48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
Three examples should suffice. Did they disobey Jesus, or rightly understand that Matthew 28 applied to a future time of judgment, where Jesus would exercise full authority on the Earth. (Hebrews 2:5-9, esp v 8) This was a slight digression to show that the purpose and type of baptisms can change depending on the age and audience. And we must be careful attempting to apply what belongs to Israel, to the Church, and what belongs to a future dispensation, to the current one. Everything must fall in its proper place and time.
What about the time of Acts? The Kingdom is still being preached to Israel, expecting the immediate return of Jesus. During the 40 years after the resurrection (number of probation), upon Israel's national repentance, Jesus was prepared to return. The Apostles were called to preach to Israel. They kept the Law, went to Temple to worship, and only with divine intervention (Cornelius/Peter) did they preach to Gentiles. They even tried to force the Law on Gentiles. Even Paul, though called to the Gentiles, kept the feasts and went to the Temple throughout the time of Acts. In Acts 28 there is a final declaration against Israel to the Jews in Rome - Acts 28:28 (KJV) 28 Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it. Not too long after this, Rome would destroy Jerusalem and the Temple. The Promised Kingdom would be delayed for a time, although every prophecy to Israel WILL be fulfilled. God had another plan, it was Hidden until revealed to Paul after Israel rejected Jesus. It was a spiritual body with Jesus as the Head. The religious divisions (Jew and Gentile) have no place. You can see this unveiled in the letters written after Acts 28, especially Ephesians and Colossians. The Mystery Paul revealed has nothing to do with religion.
You will find little mention of water baptism in Paul's latter letters. If you look at the letters written during the Acts time, Romans, Galatians, Corinthians, Thessalonians and others, you will see a gradual decline in references to this practice. Why? Because its not needed when you can be spiritually reborn. God cares about your heart. Look at it from God's POV, if the goal is to take spiritually dead people, and make them spiritually alive in Christ, physical water is useless. Our Heavenly Father is lifting Believers up, getting their focus on Spiritual things, not earthly things. You could take the meanest SOB down to the creek and dunk him a hundred times and not change him spiritually one bit. But if you preach God's Word to him, that seed will transform him from the inside out! BUT, this transformation is not done by human hands. We are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus.
I am not holding anything in God's Word up to "scorn and derision". Quite the contrary, I am rightly dividing God's Word, recognizing that not everything is written TO or ABOUT me in God's Word, but everything is FOR me. You can't just pick and choose what you are going to follow - that's religion. If you think water baptism is so critical since the apostles practiced, why don't you keep the Law, or go to Temple? They did. Why don't you minister to the circumcision only? They did the majority of the time. Its this kind of backwards thinking that gave us religion, and not the vibrant, overcoming Body of Christ.
I Pet. 3:21. “And that water is like the baptism which now saves you—not the washing of dirt from the body, but the promise made to God from a good conscience. And this is because Jesus Christ was raised from the dead.”
In the New Testament, baptism was no casual custom, no ho-hum ritual. Baptism was, and is “a pledge made to God from a good conscience” (I Pet. 3:21 TJB).
The Apostle Paul’s high regard for baptism is demonstrated in the fact that he knows all of his readers have been instructed in its importance. “You wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were committed”(Rom. 6:17).
There is only one baptism. For someone to ask the question is it spiritual or water, presupposes there are two baptisms.....one spiritual and one water.
To ask such a question reflects a total lack of understanding concerning baptism. But I am not surprised that someone who refers to it as “water activities” would ask such a question.
Btw, having a post contain 90% quotes from the Bible and then insulting the Christian Faith is still insulting the Christian Faith.
The Scriptures always refer to baptism as baptism........false teachers will use the term water baptism. Here’s a fun exercise, try and find the term water before baptism anywhere in the Scriptures ( don’t limit yourself to Ephesians ).
I would try your fun excercise challenge to me, but since the term water baptism is not in the Bible ( in Ephesians or anywhere else ) I would be wasting my time.
I would point you to Ephesians 5:26 which shows how Christians are regenerated.
I have never heard anyone compare baptism to the law and to say Matthew 28 doesn’t apply to Christians is just bizarre. The reference in Acts to baptizing in the name of Jesus means by the authority of Jesus. Christians have always used the Trinitarian formula contained in Matthew 28.
Once one abandons historical orthodox Christian beliefs, all kind of weird and bizarre interpretations can be invented.
You speak of a vibrant overcoming Body of Christ. Yet if one took your beliefs and tried to find anyone in history that would have agreed with you, it would be the same number as references to water baptism in the Bible. ZERO. So much for vibrant overcoming Body of Christ.
But hey, it’s so much more fun to make of Christianity than it is to actually believe and practice it, right?
Your analogy is false. In Acts the Lord Jesus appeared to Ananias and Saul, telling Saul that he would be told all those things he should do in Damascus, which the scripture clearly shows Ananias did, and which you reject. In Matthew, on the other hand, the Lord Jesus praises and rebukes Peter in the respective passages so that it is clear to the reader which sayings of Peter were approved and which were rejected. Neither Messiah Jesus, nor the Apostle Paul, nor Saint Luke, nor the Holy Spirit rebuke, correct, or object to a word Ananias said through the testimony of Paul. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ. From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day. Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee. But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men. Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
Matthew, Catholic chapter sixteen, Protestant verses fifteen to twenty seven,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James
bold emphasis and color selection my own
“Yet if one took your beliefs and tried to find anyone in history that would have agreed with you, it would be the same number as references to water baptism in the Bible.”
Hmmmm...
“And as they were going along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, “See, here is water! What prevents me from being baptized?” 38 And he commanded the chariot to stop, and they both went down into the water, Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him. 39 And when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord carried Philip away, and the eunuch saw him no more, and went on his way rejoicing.”
It appears the Ethiopian eunuch found that water in baptism that you’ve searched for!
God mentions the water 4 times to help those with hydrophobia be convinced water exists in baptism.
Notice the eunuch said what prevents me from being baptized, not what prevents me from being water baptized.
Again, no one ever refers to water baptism in the Bible, it is always called just baptism.
Why? Because there is only one baptism, not two.
Also, notice Philip didn’t say since you have been spiritually baptized, you can now be water baptized. Philip baptized him, because up to that point, both he and the eunuch realized he had not yet been baptized.
When you let the Scriptures speak, it really isn’t that hard.
“Notice the eunuch said what prevents me from being baptized, not what prevents me from being water baptized.
Again, no one ever refers to water baptism in the Bible, it is always called just baptism.”
Again, even a eunuch wanted to follow Christ in baptism after salvation.
Again, even a eunuch knew it involved water.
Again, God mentioned the water 4 times.
Again, if Scriptures state it, a new believer testifies to it, and a leader of the church performs it - all in water - there is nothing wrong with stating what it is... Baptism in water.
It is the Catholic teaching that confuses baptism with water and baptism by the Holy Spirit. You will have to work through the scriptures, instead of repeating what you were taught.
Best.
PS - as you leave to study the Scriptutes, please turn out the lights here.
Your doctrine is madness. What Protestant devolved faith community taught you this ? Well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
Matthew, Catholic chapter fifteen, Protestant verses seven to nine,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James
Man says the eunuch wanted to follow Christ in baptism AFTER salvation.
The Scriptures say Salvation is the result from baptism.
In all seriousness, what is the purpose of baptism? Why did Jesus command the Church to do it?
What does Paul mean by this verse?
1 Corinthians 12:13 (KJV)
13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
To ask such a question reflects a total lack of understanding concerning baptism...
I may lack understanding, but I do have Wisdom. The former comes from the reasoning of men and the religious, the latter comes from God via His Word.
Christian Faith is still insulting the Christian Faith.
If your "Christian faith" contradicts with God's Truth, it is religion. I will never cease from studying God's Word, BECAUSE most of what is popularly called Christianity is nothing more than religious tradition. I would encourage everyone not to rely on theologians and the reasoning of men. There is no excuse for not knowing God's Truth. You can take people out of religion, but its much harder to get the religion out of the people. Thank God there is an antidote which you kindly mentioned - Ephesians 5:26. Thanks for the segue.
Ephesians 5:25-27 (KJV)
25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; 26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, 27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
Believers are sanctified, or set apart, by the washing of the WORD. Not religion, not ceremonies, not rituals, but by God's Word. Literal water cleans the flesh, but never touches the spirit. How do we KNOW that the water refers to the Word - Water = Word - see (John 3:5, 15:3; Ephesians 5:26, James 1:18, 1 Peter 1:23, and also John 4, 7:37-39, 17:17-19)
Matthew 28 doesn’t apply to Christians is just bizarre.
Its only "bizarre" to those who do not know God's Word, or fail to rightly divide it. I gave a very brief explanation which obviously you ignored. The Apostles NEVER baptized using the three names commanded in the third commission recorded in Matthew 28 in Acts. Centuries later, the religious started doing it. Did the Apostles disobey Jesus? Once you answer that question, you are on your way to understanding why they did not use the three names, and what was the purpose of the 3rd commission.
Once one abandons historical orthodox Christian beliefs, all kind of weird and bizarre interpretations can be invented.
When people fail to rightly divide the Word they get weird and bizarre ideas like replacement theology, that has led to the persecution, torture, and genocide of millions of Jews. Yep, those "historical orthodox Christian beliefs" are something special.
You place more faith in "historical orthodox Christian beliefs" than you do God's Word! The devolution of Christianity was well underway while Paul was still writing his letters. Paul told Timothy to preach the Word, and warned of the coming time when - For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. (2 Timothy 4:3-4) This was happening in both their lifetimes. (2 Timothy 1:15, 4:10) By the end of the 1st century, Paul's revelation of the Mystery was largely abandoned and forgotten. Revelation was replaced by the reasoning of men. Preaching became a profession, instead of answering the Call of God and teaching under His Anointing. Christianity became religion, with all of its associated challenges, traditions, and failures. God's Word became secondary to the reasoning of theologians, who often failed to rightly divide the Word, allowing the enemy to sow confusion, strife, and division into the Body.
What emerged in subsequent centuries was something very different than what the Holy Spirit teaches in Paul's letters to the Body of Christ. Carefully compare even the Didache, Clement, Shepherd of Hermas, Ignatious - to Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians and its night and day. They teach Salvation by works, failing to understand Paul's Revelation and God's Wonderful Grace! It should be no surprise that after putting tradition ahead of God's Word for so long, that Believers who finally received Paul's Revelation and attempted to share the Good news with others, were tortured and murdered by the religious leadership who claimed THEY were the ones who followed Christ! If "historical orthodox Christian beliefs" breeds heresy hunting, simony, torture, genocide, and murder, you can have it. You'll know them by their fruit, right? I'll stick with God's Word and dump every shred of religious nonsense I can. I would advise you to do the same.
You speak of a vibrant overcoming Body of Christ. Yet if one took your beliefs and tried to find anyone in history that would have agreed with you, it would be the same number as references to water baptism in the Bible. ZERO. So much for vibrant overcoming Body of Christ. But hey, it’s so much more fun to make of Christianity than it is to actually believe and practice it, right?
Romans 3:3-4 (KJV)
3 For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? 4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
If it weren't for God's Word and a handful of Believers who kept the Light on through the centuries, some paying the ultimate price for their desire to know the Truth, there would be no Christianity. It would have been long ago dumped on the scrapheap of history the way most pagan religions have been abandoned. The last 2,000 years of Christendom, sure does not in anyway resemble the Body of Christ as Paul taught now does it? Even a casual scanning of history shows something went really catawampus after Jesus was replaced as the Head of the Body by religious monarchs in smart outfits.
Jesus made it so easy for people to be set free, to give spiritual life to folks and place them in the family of God. And then there is the religious among us, who continue to set up barriers, rituals, ceremonies, denominations, doubt, unbelief, and religious bondage to make it harder for someone to enjoy this freedom in Christ. Do you think your "historical orthodox Christian beliefs" make it easier to know Christ, or harder? And, do they ALL agree with His Word when it is rightly divided?
Where is it in the Bible that we’re supposed to “feel” the Spirit?
Wherever someone feels it is ?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.