Does it matter who baptized you?

drfuss: Tom, you present extreme cases to make your point. Let's go to a more practical, true example.

I became a Christian at the age of 14 and was Baptized by immersion within a year. Over the past 55 years, I have moved quite a few times resulting in belonging to churches of four denominations. Of the four denominations, I don't completely agree with the statement of faith of any of them. As a result of studying the scriptures, I have gradually modified my beliefs in at least the following areas: Divine healing, Gifts of the Spirit, The rapture, and the security of the believer (not affecting my salvation).

Questions:
1. Should I have been rebaptized each time I modified my belief as a result of studying the scriptures?
2. Should I have been rebaptized each time I joined a church of a different denomination?

Different questions:
(3) If I were a 1 Point Calvinist and became a 5 Points Calvinist, should I be rebaptized?
(4) If you became a 1 Point Calvinist from a 5 Point Calvinist, would you be rebaptized?

I became a Christian over 55 years ago and was baptized by immersion as a witness to my conversion and commitment to Christ. IMO, for me to be rebaptized would be, in effect, rejecting my conversion.

 

Over 1000 views looking at the question "Does it matter who baptized you" when it doesn't even matter if you get baptized. I don't know if I should laugh or cry.

Well, I thought about it. :tear:

 

I believe that this is an extreme position.
The practice of baptism is dependent upon the local church, the pastor, his beliefs, and the statement of faith and constitution of the church. Primarily it is the decision of the pastor.

I remember while on deputation as a missionary, the pastor of a church (though I had known him for a long time) refused to allow me to speak in his church. I asked why? He asked who baptized me? (he knew). The person that baptized me was my pastor, the pastor of an IFB church. But he had come out of an Alliance Church, and that is where he was baptized. Thus, because I was not baptized by a baptist who wasn't baptized by a baptist who wasn't baptized by a baptist, etc., I was not allowed to speak or present my mission field in his church. I don't agree with it. But there is soul liberty among Baptists, and as a missionary on deputation I have learned that I have to put up with many odd beliefs.

I was a member of a church who would re-baptize any saved individual that came from a "questionalbe" church, that is one that was not of "like faith and order. This would apply especially to those of Charismatic backgrounds. It would signify both to them and to others that they would be making a clean break with their Charismatic background, even if they were Scripturally baptized in a Pentecostal church. This was more a matter of association. I believe we have a Biblical precedent for a practice like this.

Acts 16:1 Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which was a Jewess, and believed; but his father was a Greek:

Acts 16:3 Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that his father was a Greek.

Paul was goint to take Timothy with him, disciple him. Timothy would go in grace, eventually become a pastor, and a man mightily used of God. So why circumcise him? Circumcision has nothing to do with salvation? It has nothing to do with discipleship. It has nothing to do with Christianity whatsoever. Paul circumcised Timothy for the reason of association. His mother was a Jew but his father was a Greek, an unsaved individual. To make a clean break from his heathen background, and associate himself with his Christian mother, and Jewish heritage he had Timothy circumcised (though it was not necssary). He also would be of more value to Paul who often preached in the synagogues, and sometimes went in the Temple.

Different churches have different views on re-baptism. It is a matter of soul liberty. The local church cannot be condemned for its stand and belief on the matter. If an individual thinking of joining that church is repulsed by the practice, then they don't have to join it. They can go elsewhere. A church is a voluntary association of baptized believers. No local church would want a member who is being forced against their will to be a member not agreeing with the statement of faith.

 

Jesus commanded baptism in the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19,20).
You are saying that the words of Jesus are irrelevant?
Sad!

 

DHK,

I said...

And you said...

Your question would probably be irrelavent.

If the person just got born again at a Billy Graham meeting, he would surely be given some excellant literature about the true gospel and the true Church...the christian church. And it would probably come up during counseling at the Crusade that he was Mormon, and some of the brothers or sisters would help him with that problem. And if he is part of a family that is Mormon, it wont be long before this new born child of God would begin to see the difference, and he would end up being baptized by a christian.

If he were to go back and quickly want to get water baptized by a mormon they probably would not do it until they get him to renounce the encounter at the Graham meeting.

If he WERE to get water baptized by a mormon, in due time he would surely get rebaptized by a christian after God pulls him out of the LDS.

So...regarding your question, if he were to go and get water baptized by a mormon it would mean nothing. The proper baptism would be the christian one he would eventually recieve.


:godisgood:

 

Trustiti,

Well, you are correct in the sense that water baptism has nothing to do with being born again. We are Spirit baptized at the moment of saving faith in Christ. That non water baptism secures our eternal destiny.

But new born believers should be water baptized. It is a symbolic act that Christ clearly instituted, as a beautiful picture of the death of the old man (down into the water), and the birth of the new man, that has come into being. (up FROM the water)


:godisgood:

 

Yes, my examples were extreme. They were deliberately listed to test the view that the individual determines whether his baptism is valid, and that the beliefs of the administrator of baptism are of little or no consequence.

I can't comment on your examples because they don't provide me with enough information. Such as, in what church were you originally baptized? What were the denominations you later joined? What was their theology regarding baptism (subject, mode, design, administrator)? There is room for differences regarding eschatology and Calvinism.

Perhaps you could fill in the blanks. And while you're at it, wanna answer my extreme question?

 

You think that is irrelevant. Do you know what happens at B.Graham crusades?
Apparently not, or are very naive. When a Catholic gets "saved" at one of these crusades, Graham's counsellors gives him some literature and then advises him to go back to his Catholic church where he will never hear the gospel again. What good is that? Go to an apostate church where the gospel is never preached; a church born in apostasy? a church filled with heretical teachings entirely against what the Bible says? Go back and get filled with the teachings of Satan? Go there?? God forbid! Billy Graham does more harm than good for any new believer. Concerning the Catholic Church I stand by what I testify. I was a Catholic for twenty years. I never once heard the gospel in all the time I spent in the Catholic Church. It preaches a message of works; not of grace. Yet, that is where Billy Graham sends them. He does more harm then good.

I would have no doubt that the same might even happen to a Mormon. There is not much depth to a Billy Graham message.

There is no guarantee that "an encounter at a Graham meeting" provided such an individual with a new birth.

Billy Graham can't save anyone. If people get saved there, it is inspite of Billy Graham not because of him. Being baptized by a decieved person is being decieved in and of itself.

 

HP: This is an interesting and thought provoking statement. When one is deceived one thinks they are something that they are not. They honestly believe a lie.

What might be some of the warning signs that a deceived person might see and wake up to the reality of their deception?

 

It takes the Holy Ghost baptism to save you, not the water baptism. The only reason you would have to be baptized over, is to be a part of the New Church, you want to become a part of. It does not save you, but it gets you membership in that body that is here on earth. It does nothing to change your conversion, if it happened earlier.
If you want to be a part of a family and they require that you be baptized by them, then I say to go ahead. It will not change anything about you being saved. We would never question your Holy Ghost baptism, for that was between you and the Lord Himself. We nor anyone else had a part in that, except the Lord.

The only way you can get in to our church is to be baptized by one of us. We do not challenge your conversion at all, nor do we ask you about it. We just ask if you believe that Jesus has forgiven you of your sins, and you now want a home with us. If you agree and are willing to be baptized, then we accept you. If you refuse to be baptized by us, then we do not accept anyone else's baptism. We believe to do so, we would be condoning their doctrine.

If someone believed the water baptism is what saved him, I guess I would not blame him for not wanting another baptism. If you believe it is what got you membership in a body here on earth, then what ever body you join with, most are going to require you be baptized.

BBob,

 

The "deceived person" may never wake up so to speak.
For example, the Church of Christ pastor believes in baptismal regeneration--baptism is necessary for salvation. No matter what you say he will not budge on that position. We may say that he is indoctrinated or deliberately decieved.
Thus the question is, What happens when a new believer is baptized by such a person. Is his baptism Scriptural? I say no. The new believer needs to wake up and see that in error he was baptized by a religious person tenaciously clinging to false doctrine that he will not let go. Pray that he may not be indoctrinated into such a way, but rather see the truth and get involved in a Biblical church and be discipled Biblically while his mind is still open to the Bible.

 

DHK,

Well, I agree with you about the Catholic Church. I believe it is filled with idolatry, paganism, goddess worship, heresy, etc. They proclaim a false gospel.

And I also agree with you in that it is sad that Brother Graham has gone from his 1950's correct understanding regarding Catholicsms great errors, and actually done an about face regarding its heresies.

But I think THESE statements of yours...

and...

...are pretty reckless imo, and quite extreme. Much too harsh.

I was at a Graham meeting several years ago. He had touble walking, and was completely grey at that point. It was after he softened his stance regarding Catholicism.

In spite of that, he articulated the gospel clearly, articulating faith in Christ alone as the only requirement for salvation, and their was a very discernable and very strong annointing of God on the entire place all during the message.


:godisgood:

 

I didn't quite finish my thought when I posted that.
They get saved in spite of him because he, like any other person, cannot save anyone. It is Christ that saves. Whether his message is clear or not, It is not Billy that saves; it is Christ.

 

DHK,

Oh, OK. I took it the wrong way. I agree with that completly.


:godisgood:

 

No, what is sad is that you are all talking about who gets you wet. If you look with open eyes you will see that your chapter and verse does not mention water. Until you all see that baptism is not a word necessarily connected with water you will all keep debating these foolish issues until Christ Himself returns, and in the process alienating many from the very one they are to be baptized into.

 

And, may I assume, get baptized by somebody like...

 

Philip was following the Great Commission when he led the Ethiopian Eunuch to the Lord:

Acts 8:38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.

And you still claim that it wasn't water they were baptized into?
Where is your Scriptural proof for that?

 

"The only way you can get in to our church is to be baptized by one of us"? :tear:

 

Aren't your heels getting tired?

 

You may not agree with it. You don't have to join therir church. It is a matter of soul liberty--one of the very Baptist distinctives that we as Baptists have laid down our lives for throughout the centuries. We can believe what we believe is Scripturally correct, and at the same time agree to disagree.