Featured Alien Baptism

Hmm - I would not be able to join that church then since my Baptism was in an ABC when I was a teen. I would refuse to be rebaptized because I do not see anywhere in Scripture that I would need to redo a valid baptism. If the church had that requirement for me to join, I'd find another church that follows Scripture.

 

As Baptism is not a Fundamental, there is a little bit of wiggle room on the topic. So, if I was involved in vetting applicants for membership, I would have no problems accepting

• a person seeking to transfer their membership from your average run of the mill Southern Baptist Church.
• a person seeking to transfer their membership from a baptistic Bible church.
• a person seeking to transfer their membership from a Evangelical Christian-Baptist church.

I would have problems accepting

• a person seeking to transfer their membership from a church which recognizes multiple forms (sprinkling, anointing, poring, or immersion) as valid modes. A situation I understand with the Primitive Methodists.
• a person seeking to transfer their membership from a church which practices triple immersion.

 

If it was a biblical baptism then I would have no problem with accepting it as legitimate regardless of denomination. The problem I would have with re-baptizing someone just because it was under a different denomination is that this diminishes the importance of baptism. It is not baptism into the local assembly, or even into a common theology. It is the capstone of our conversion.

In fact, I do not see how baptizing one who was already baptized (who was saved, baptized by full immersion, into the Body of Christ) could be anything but a false baptism (almost an addition to the gospel message itself as confirmed by the observance of baptism).

 

Copycat.....

 

My husband was baptized at a Creation festival in the late 70s. There certainly wasn't any record keeping so it was just his word. That's worked out fine all these years for the 2 churches he's joined and gone on staff.

 

See, those are the kinds of things we find out as we meet and speak with people who are seeking membership. It's not a "show up once Sunday and BANG you're a member" kind of thing but it's a process at our church. The baptism issue is taught to the prospective new members (what baptism is, it's mode, it's purpose, etc.) and then we listen to what they say. I'd say maybe about 40% of our new members have either not been baptized as an adult or they feel that their baptism occurred before they were truly saved (maybe it was just something they were expected to do and they went along for the ride, so to speak) but now they really want to make a profession of faith publicly. Then they will be baptized in our church (or at the beach if it's the summer) and then they become a member after that.

 

I can’t answer for everyone as there are many views here. When we baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Spirit that is the authority under which one is baptized. We do not know the details of Philip and the Ethiopian, but we do know that Philip did not wait to find a congregation or ponder exactly under whose authority he should be baptizing. The man asked what prevented him from being baptized, and apparently there was nothing.

Likewise, many of our “hero’s” of the faith were baptized apart from the “authority of the church” but under the authority of God (for example, Conrad Grebel baptizing Blaurock). Baptism is an ordinance of the Church, but it is an ordinance of obedience for the one being baptized.

Here are some other interesting questions for those who feel otherwise:

What if the minister that baptized you repents and is saved years after your baptism? Was you baptism legitimate, even if you were baptized by someone “outside” of the Body of Christ? Why or why not?

 

Can I add fuel to the fire?
Would you accept the baptism of a Roman Catholic IF as an adult, he had been immersed?
How about Church of Christ?