It was not done by immersion. I bent over the baptismal font and the Roman Catholic priest poured water over my head as he pronounced the Trinitarian formula.
Do I then need to be rebaptized by immersion?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Does Baptism have to be by immersion?
- Thread starter MichaelNZ
- Start date
It was not done by immersion. I bent over the baptismal font and the Roman Catholic priest poured water over my head as he pronounced the Trinitarian formula.
Do I then need to be rebaptized by immersion?
For what purpose? Remember you are asking this question on a Baptist forum. Of course they will say you do. They don't even recognize the Catholic Church you received your baptism from as a Christian Church or believe anything but immersion is valid. If you were to ask on an Anglican, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Methodist, Reformed, Orthodox, Catholic board they will tell you that your baptism was valid.
Michael, were you born again before you were baptized?
BTW, I know of Baptists that have been re-baptised multiple times because they felt 'they only got wet' in their previous baptisms because 'they really didn't mean it' when they responded to the altar call and placed their faith in Christ. Maybe they hadn't, I don't know. But I always had questions because it seemed to be going on in my Baptist church everytime people returned from an evangelistic event like Promise Keepers and also because it seemed like too many people simply went through a time when their faith was not particularly strong and so they doubted they had truly been regenerated in the first place.
Also, there are Baptist churches that will not accept baptisms from churches other than other Baptist churches affiliated with their particular convention or fellowship. Some require baptism in their church in order to become a member of that particular church. Baptists churches vary greatly in regard to whose baptisms are accepted and whose are not. I doubt Westboro Baptist would accept the baptism of anyone coming from any other church on the planet other than Wesboro.
Also, there are Baptist churches that will not accept baptisms from churches other than other Baptist churches affiliated with their particular convention or fellowship. Some require baptism in their church in order to become a member of that particular church. Baptists churches vary greatly in regard to whose baptisms are accepted and whose are not. I doubt Westboro Baptist would accept the baptism of anyone coming from any other church on the planet other than Wesboro.
Last edited by a moderator:
No. It is another example of the root fallacy. The word in Luke 11:38 is ebaptisthe. In Mark 7:3-4 the first instance is baptisontai and the second is baptismous.
Thanks! It was the first time I had read anything like that.
What makes you think that only the Apostles did the baptizing? Remember, Christ ordained and sent out 70 preachers in the pre-Pentecostal church at Jerusalem in its limited commission to Israel.
Secondly, the Holy Spirit was poured out in the upper room where they were sitting in so much the whole room was filled with the Spirit. If you were sitting in a room that water was "poured out" in so much the room was filled where you were sitting would that be an immersion in water??
His article has already been quoted on the first page and already been answered in post #5
When they washed up they did so in a bowl of water - they dipped their hands into the water - submerging their hands.
There is no question that the Biblical way is immersion only. Like circumcision, baptism is a "sign" and the significance of a sign is its FORM or PATTERN God provided. God sent John to baptize and John's baptism is "the counsel of God" (Lk. 7:29-30). Signs are designed to provide a PATTERN or FORM that conveys an intended truth. If the FORM or PATTERN is not followed then the truth they are designed to convey is also distorted and perverted.
Paul says we are "BURIED" with Christ in baptism. Baptism is a public "sign" of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Any ordinance that claims to be baptism which does not provide the "sign" of burial cannot identify you with Christ's death, burial and resurrection and thus you simply "got wet" and still need to be baptized.
Furthermore, note where baptism is placed in the Great Commission (Mt. 28:19-20) and in the first application of the Great Commission in Acts 2:40-41.
It follows repentance and faith in the gospel - "as many as received the word were baptized."
Second, note who has authority to administer baptism in the Great Commission. Only those who are like faith and order with Christ ("disciples") in the same gospel, same baptism and same faith and order. Christ did not want anyone to publicly identify with any administrator who preached "another gospel" or taught another faith and order. The authorized administrator is one who was commissioned to "go" preach the same gospel Jesus preached, administer the same baptism Jesus administered and teach them to observe the same things Jesus taught - like faith and order with Christ. That is the essential meaning of the term "disciple."
So find a church that preaches the true gospel of Jesus Christ rather than the sacramental gospel of Rome and its daughters. Find a church that administer's the "ordinances" after the pattern that identifies you with the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Find you a church that teaches the word of God in keeping with the gospel and ordinances and the basics of Biblical doctrine.
The BB ought to have a "LIKE" button!
water baptism is commanded to be given unto new believers in yeshua, who have already been saved by the Grace of God...
So in that, would that be just immersion, as do any baptise adults by sprinkling?
And to the question of "like minded faith" question of baptism...
Wouldn't it be seen as being "legit' if done by someone authorized to perform that, as long as they teach the Gospel, and are trintarian, that it would not really matter if was done in a Baptist church or another one?
I have no idea why you want to call "Jesus" by the Hebrew instead of the Greek? God gave us the Greek New Testament not a hebrew New Testament.
Sprinkling is no better than pouring and neither one can be properly considered to be baptism. Both pervert the gospel of Jesus Christ.
The one authorized to administer baptism ("ye") are those who are also authorized and able to teach them to "observe all things whatsoever I have commanded." That command is impossible apart from membership in a New Testament congregation. He is speaking to the apostles in their capacity as ordained representatives and members of his church at Jerusalem. Baptism is not merely designed to identify you with the right gospel, right God but the right church and the right church is characterized by "the faith once delivered."
Wouldn't yeshua be his actual name though, as jesus would be a Greek form of yeshua/Joshua coming in from the hebrew?
And is n't the Gospel and the faith delivered to the saints taught in more than baptist churches?
No! and it is not even taught in some churches called "Baptist." When you mix and confuse soteriology with ecclesiology another gospel is the product. True New Testament churches teach that spiritual union with Christ has nothing to do with the church but with regeneration and regeneration is spiritual union in contrast to spiritual death which is spiritual separation from God.
There can be no salvation before or after the cross apart from regeneration because what is "born of flesh is flesh" and flesh cannot inherit the kingdom of God.
To teach that spiritual union with Christ is a Post-cross reality is a complete denial of the salvation of all previous to the cross.
They are confusing the kingdom of God with the church of God and the two are not one and the same. That confusion is the historical basis for the Universal VISIBLE Catholic Church heresy as well as the Universal INVISIBLE Catholic church heresy.
Michael Wrenn
New Member
Yes, of course.
The new Covenant though DID usher in a new relationship between God and man, as before under the Old one, the sins of the beklievers were remitted, but theyu were not seal and indwelt as we are today, for the saints NOW have immediate access to the throne of grace, AND have the Holy Spirit inside of them!
And the Body of Christ is the Brisde is the Church, ALL sinners saved by grace of god since time of Christ...
THAT view not heresy, as held by a majority of even baptists...
And we DO NOT hold the Universal Church as the RCC does, we have it from the writings of the NT!
The new Covenant though DID usher in a new relationship between God and man
No, it did not! There are only two possible states and relationship between God and man:
1. Lost or saved
2. In the flesh or in the Spirit
3. Unregenerated or regenerated
4. His children or Satan's children
5. His kingdom or Satan's kingdom
6. Redeemed or unredeemed
but theyu were not seal and indwelt as we are today, for the saints NOW have immediate access to the throne of grace, AND have the Holy Spirit inside of them!
According to who? Not according to Paul - Rom. 8:8-9! Not according to David (Psa. 89). You don't believe that Abel, Noah or Abraham had immediate access to throne of grace? Who did they go through?????
And the Body of Christ is the Brisde is the Church, ALL sinners saved by grace of god since time of Christ...
Pure unadulterated hogwash! Revelation 18:4 and 21:24 prove that all believers since Christ are not in the bride. Your ecclesiology is based upon eisgesis and complete perversion of Biblical context. You are in reality teaching "another gospel" and perverting the gospel of Jesus Christ just as much as sacramental theology perverts the gospel of Jesus Christ just as much as sprinkling and pouring pervert the gospel of Jesus Christ - not a whit of difference!
we have it from the writings of the New Testament
No you do not! You must pervert the Word of God to teach that Catholic doctrine. Find the words "universal" or "invisible" in the New Testament description of the church? Find any metaphor used of the church that infers universality or invisiblity? Find where only saints from Pentecost forward are only "in Christ" (Eph. 1:4)????? Find anywhere in scripture where more than two classifications of mankind are ever listed???
No, it did not! There are only two possible states and relationship between God and man:
1. Lost or saved
2. In the flesh or in the Spirit
3. Unregenerated or regenerated
4. His children or Satan's children
5. His kingdom or Satan's kingdom
6. Redeemed or unredeemed
but theyu were not seal and indwelt as we are today, for the saints NOW have immediate access to the throne of grace, AND have the Holy Spirit inside of them!
According to who? Not according to Paul - Rom. 8:8-9! Not according to David (Psa. 89). You don't believe that Abel, Noah or Abraham had immediate access to throne of grace? Who did they go through?????
And the Body of Christ is the Brisde is the Church, ALL sinners saved by grace of god since time of Christ...
Pure unadulterated hogwash! Revelation 18:4 and 21:24 prove that all believers since Christ are not in the bride. Your ecclesiology is based upon eisgesis and complete perversion of Biblical context. You are in reality teaching "another gospel" and perverting the gospel of Jesus Christ just as much as sacramental theology perverts the gospel of Jesus Christ just as much as sprinkling and pouring pervert the gospel of Jesus Christ - not a whit of difference!
we have it from the writings of the New Testament
No you do not! You must pervert the Word of God to teach that Catholic doctrine. Find the words "universal" or "invisible" in the New Testament description of the church? Find any metaphor used of the church that infers universality or invisiblity? Find where only saints from Pentecost forward are only "in Christ" (Eph. 1:4)????? Find anywhere in scripture where more than two classifications of mankind are ever listed???
Last edited by a moderator:
WestminsterMan
New Member
No. If you look at the earliest recording of Baptism (outside of Scripture) in the Early Church (The Didache) you will see that sprinkling is just fine.
" But concerning baptism, thus shall ye baptize.
7:2 Having first recited all these things, baptize {in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit} in living (running) water.
7:3 But if thou hast not living water, then baptize in other water;
7:4 and if thou art not able in cold, then in warm.
7:5 But if thou hast neither, then pour water on the head thrice in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
7:6 But before the baptism let him that baptizeth and him that is baptized fast, and any others also who are able;
7:7 and thou shalt order him that is baptized to fast a day or two before.
8:1 And let not your fastings be with the hypocrites, for they fast on the second and the fifth day of the week;
8:2 but do ye keep your fast on the fourth and on the preparation (the sixth) day.
8:3 Neither pray ye {as the hypocrites,} but as the Lord commanded in His Gospel, {thus pray ye.
8:4 Our Father, which art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name;
8:5 Thy kingdom come;
8:6 Thy will be done, as in heaven, so also on earth;
8:7 give us this day our daily bread;
8:8 and forgive us our debt, as we also forgive our debtors;
8:9 and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one;}
8:10 for Thine is the power and the glory for ever and ever.
8:11 Three times in the day pray ye so."
Here's the link:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/didache-lightfoot.html
Peace!
WM
Last edited by a moderator:
He is right! Trash the scriptures and seek authority from traditions of men and you can justify the false doctrine of sprinkling and pouring as baptism. Indeed, you can justify anything your heart desires!