BAPTISM --- TWICE ??

[BillG]

First of all... It's impossible to baptize a baby- all they do is get wet. Because a decision of a lifetime commitment has to come from them. The Bible says that both men and women were baptized, we have no biblical examples, or commands, to baptize children.

Second of all... Yes! If you realize you were baptized into a false religion, you have to get baptized into Christ's church. The church is the Bride of Christ. Let's say a widower finds a women he wants to marry. But he tells her "I guess there's no need to get married, I've already gotten married." And his fiancé says, "Yeah, but not to me!"

Jacob worked 7 years to marry Rachel, but they tricked him and he married her sister Leah unknowingly. He then had to work another 7 years to marry Rachel. After 14 years he married the right sister. If you realize you got baptized into the wrong body of believers, you have to correct that as soon as you realize.

Third of all... I'm not saying this to hurt anyone's feelings. But according to my study of the scriptures, neither one of those religions match the church Christ established and purchased with His blood. "Study to show yourself approved onto God."

Sorry but I can't get what you are saying here.

I just want to ask you at what age was Jesus baptised?
I think it was when he was 30.
So does that mean if one is baptised as a believer before the age of 30 then it's wrong and not real?

The bible also says in Acts that the whole household was baptised.

Acts 16:31-33


31 So they said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.” 32 Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. 33 And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their stripes. And immediately he and all his family were baptized.

That may have included kids as well.

Also you mention false religions but don't state what they are.
Csn you do so please.
Also you don't state what baptism is in the physical sense.
Can you do so please

 

[eternally-gratefull]

First of all... It's impossible to baptize a baby- all they do is get wet. Because a decision of a lifetime commitment has to come from them. The Bible says that both men and women were baptized, we have no biblical examples, or commands, to baptize children.

Second of all... Yes! If you realize you were baptized into a false religion, you have to get baptized into Christ's church. The church is the Bride of Christ. Let's say a widower finds a women he wants to marry. But he tells her "I guess there's no need to get married, I've already gotten married." And his fiancé says, "Yeah, but not to me!"

Jacob worked 7 years to marry Rachel, but they tricked him and he married her sister Leah unknowingly. He then had to work another 7 years to marry Rachel. After 14 years he married the right sister. If you realize you got baptized into the wrong body of believers, you have to correct that as soon as you realize.

Third of all... I'm not saying this to hurt anyone's feelings. But according to my study of the scriptures, neither one of those religions match the church Christ established and purchased with His blood. "Study to show yourself approved onto God."

Water baptism will never save anyone anyway, if the person place their faith in Christ, god himself baptized the person into Christ, that is what saves,

 

[Angela53510]

I believe baptism is an act of faith and obedience into Christ. It does not save us, nor should it be tied to church membership. I know most Baptist churches will not accept people into membership until they have been immersed in a believer's baptism. Infant sprinkling does not satisfy that requirement. But being adult baptized should satisfy the requirement in any church.

There is a tradition of infant baptism in Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican and Lutheran churches. In the Pentecostal and Baptist churches I have been a member of, we dedicate babies. That means the parents, extended families and the church covenant to raise the child in the ways of God, in community, until the child can make a profession of faith, and be baptized, hopefully at a point where they understand the commitment they are making. My oldest son was water baptized at age 11, and has fallen away from God. I do not believe he is saved, by his own words.

My uncle died last year, and I sang at the memorial. My uncle was infant baptized Catholic, and my aunt is a believing Anglican, so the service was performed in her Anglican Church. My uncle was an avowed atheist. He would tell anyone and everyone he knew there was no God.

At the memorial the Anglican priest said he was going to enter into heaven on the basis of his Catholic infant baptism. That is called recognizing the baptism from another church, and totally misguided. My uncle was a nice man, but he was not saved. No baptism in the world save him, because he did not believe in God.

I was baptized as an adult, 2 years after I was saved. I didn't get church membership, it was separate. But, every evangelical church I have attended recognizes my believers baptism. So, to the OP, I believe your brother needs to work through what he believes about baptism. Is it automatic that he was saved the moment he was baptized Catholic? Or was there a dividing line between when he was not saved, and when he believed? If the latter, he should be baptized properly. Just because that is what Jesus commanded. You need to repent and be baptized, and an infant cannot repent!

"Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." Acts 2:38

 

[FranC]

Acts 8:36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
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.

Can a baby give testimony of faith in Christ?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

So you're saying the first baptism was not valid...

OK.

 

[AllenW]

1. He was already baptized as a baby in the Catholic Church.

That is not valid, God will not be mocked. I liken it as to trying to slip someone under a circus tent.

2. Is that not valid for a Protestant Church?

No it is not.
3 Why would he have to get baptized again?

Because he was never baptised in the first place.

Very critical.
I don't suppose you'd say that to the pope's face?
And what makes protestants so special?

 

[AllenW]

Third time lucky as we say over here.

Must be from Scotland, very superstitious over there.

 

[FranC]

.
I am in agreement - it would trouble me as it seems to diminish my original baptism.

Right now I'm thinking baptism is baptism.

But I'd like to read some more.

WHY do we get baptized?
Jesus did make a point of this...

 

[FranC]

I was probably whizzed around in the baptismal font as a baby, I did get baptized as a professing follower in Fiji a couple of years after become a Christian.

Could I ask why?

Why be baptized twice??

 

[BillG]

Must be from Scotland, very superstitious over there.

Yes from Scotland and not Wales which you use to wind me up.

FREEDOM

 

[FranC]

Infant baptism is not biblical, But some have traditions,

Now saying this, I had my kids baptized (actually sprinkled which is not the same) as kids, but not for their sake but for my own, I was being a witness to my church I would raise them knowing God and his ways. and also making a pubic testimony of this in front of man and God

Both my kids were baptized of their own choosing after they were born again. as a public testimony they that had professed faith in God and received his free gift of eternal life. As they should have been

So you're saying that at the "sprinkling" they weren't really baptized.

I do think a person should be aware of what they're doing when being baptized.
But the CC does have a reason for this...

I think you're very lucky to have born-again children.

 

[FranC]

Baby baptism is okay I guess, since baptism itself does not save.
If they grow up in a church that says it's okay, then why not.
the question is, do they love Jesus?
Not if they've been baptized.

They say it removes original sin---which is not the same as being saved.

So, if they DO believe in Jesus as adults, do they need to get baptized again?

I still am not sure...

 

[AllenW]

Yes from Scotland and not Wales which you use to wind me up.

FREEDOM

What's the difference?

 

[FranC]

I believe that scripture teaches baptism as a conscious choice that a believer makes, when accepting Christ.

Babies have no way of knowing about Jesus and his sacrifice for us.... I don't believe infant baptism is the baptism that is expected of believers.

I would recommend he be immersed in baptism now, since he has previously made the decision to accept the gift of Jesus' salvation.

This is not an onerous thing to do... it should be viewed as a blessing, and done willingly, even eagerly. To refuse to do so would seem to me to be done simply out of stubbornness... "I'm not going to do that because I don't think I need to".....

Jesus was baptized as a grown man, before beginning his ministry...
Paul was baptized immediately upon regaining his sight, after his conversion...
The Ethiopian eunuch was baptized, when he was convinced he should be saved...
The household of Cornelius were baptized immediately upon conversion...
All the thousands at Pentecost were baptized after receiving the command to "repent and be baptized"...
many more scriptures talk about believers being baptized.... there are no scriptures that even hint that babies were baptized... a baby cannot be a "believer", and cannot make the decision to be baptized.

I pray your brother will read the scriptures with an open mind and heart.....

When households were baptized, is it possible there were children in the family?
This, however, would seem to conflict with everything else we know.

For instance, did children get baptized by John in the Jordan?
Would they have needed to have their "sins washed away" if they were not at the age of accountability?

 

[FranC]

There are churches that say you have to be baptized in their church or else it doesn't count.
Lots of people believe lots of different things.
It's a minor issue, based more on following some sort of law than anything else.
What matters is if you love Jesus or not.

This is something that came to mind when the question arose.

What IF he decided to go to a different church in the future.
What if they said the same thing and wanted him to be baptized again?
Wouldn't it get rediculous?
Wouldn't it make baptism of no effect?

 

[FranC]

Without arguing.....the reason the Anabaptists were called that is because they did not believe that the Catholic church had authority in the eyes of God....ana-->again baptize-->immerse

The biblical, Greek definition of "baptize" is immerse or dip.....the Greek word for sprinkle (rantizo) is only used when Jesus speaks of the platters and cups being washed and is not the act of immersion.....

The O.T has two examples that it meant to go UNDER the water (Red Sea) and (Jordan crossing)...............

a. If one has not been truly born again (blood before water) their immersion was invalid
b. If a group with no authority in God's eyes immerses their immersion is invalid

EVEN Acts speaks to John's immersion being invalid after JESUS calls out the disciples of John (saved, immersed believers) and empowers them as a church (called that twice in present tense) from that day forward the authority lies with true new testament churches and or the individuals of said New Testament Churches.....(depending on if one believes the authority is in immersion itself and or the collective authority of a church)

Sprinkling is not baptism which represents being buried...

What about the FORM of baptism:
I batpize you in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

Isn't that just as important as being immersed?

Also, could you please say the verse in Acts that states John's baptism was invalid... I can't remember this.
Are you speaking about baptism in the Holy Spirit??

Regarding your

post a:
In John 3:5, in your opinion, is Jesus speaking about baptism, or about natural Birth.

post b:
What "group" would not have God's authority??

 

[AllenW]

When households were baptized, is it possible there were children in the family?
This, however, would seem to conflict with everything else we know.

For instance, did children get baptized by John in the Jordan?
Would they have needed to have their "sins washed away" if they were not at the age of accountability?

In Acts 16:31 and beyond, salvation was offered to the jailer and his household.
The jailer believed, had his whole household baptized, then they rejoiced because THEY ALL BELIEVED IN GOD!
Therefore, infants could not have been included unless they had the ability to believe.

 

[AllenW]

This is something that came to mind when the question arose.

What IF he decided to go to a different church in the future.
What if they said the same thing and wanted him to be baptized again?
Wouldn't it get rediculous?
Wouldn't it make baptism of no effect?

Of course that is a man made rule.
A good question here is if an adult is baptized as an adult, and wants to join the catholic church, do they accept his baptism as valid.
Or if he has never been baptized, does the catholic church require he be baptized.
If yes, then would they then sprinkle baptize him?

 

[FranC]

Firstly I will that I don't believe baptism saves.
Secondly I would say that to require someone to be baptised to join the community is wrong.
Thirdly I do not believe in baptismal regeneration.

If a child dies before the age of accountability (whatever that age may be) then they are in heaven whether they are baptised or not.

I would say that the Protestant church would discount infant baptism as legitimate. When I was 16 I was sprinkled in the Anglican Church. I made that public confession and was sprinkled.

When I went to a Baptist Church I was told that wasn't baptism as I wasn't fully emersed. I never fully understood that because I had made a public profession of faith in Jesus (I ended up getting fully emersed in the end)

We find in Acts 16:30-34 that the whole household were baptised. Whether that included infants or not I don't know.

Then we find

Acts 2:38-39


38 Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call.”

Did that include infants? I don't know that either.

Given that I do not believe baptism saves I would say to your friend "It is between you and God, ask him, you are saved by faith and not baptism"

If I was pushed to answer the question I would then yes as it's symbolic of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus and is whom your faith is in.

One thing I do know though and it's this promise God made

Deuteronomy 7:9


9 “Therefore know that the Lord your God, He is God, the faithful God who keeps covenant and mercy for a thousand generations with those who love Him and keep His commandments;

To me Gods covenant involves faimly unity (i.e. in this case baptising infants) but it also requires a personal responsibility to come to faith.

I will probably get rebuked for the above but I'm just giving my thoughts.

This is what you said:


Firstly I will that I don't believe baptism saves.
Secondly I would say that to require someone to be baptised to join the community is wrong.
Thirdly I do not believe in baptismal regeneration.


What's the difference between the First and the Third statement?
Isn't it the same concept?

I agree with you that it cannot be known for certain whether or not children were baptized. Just because the bible does NOT say something does not mean it did not happen.

As far as children... The CC does believe that there is an age of accountability and that a child SHOULD BE baptized to remove original sin, but if they are not baptized, it does not teach that the baby is going to "limbo". There's no such teaching in the CC.
It believes in the mercy of god toward the innocent.

Also, the CC does teach that once an adult, the person MUST ACCEPT their baptism. IOW, they must accept their faith and be what we would call born again. Believe it or not, the CC does believe in being born again but they're more lenient with people's expression regarding this.

 

[FranC]

Thank you (someone has repped it, though no I don't post for reps) I am expecting some incoming though, possibly others will not agree.

We could not agree but still be nice to each other.

No "incoming". !!

 

[FranC]

1. He was already baptized as a baby in the Catholic Church.

That is not valid, God will not be mocked. I liken it as to trying to slip someone under a circus tent.

2. Is that not valid for a Protestant Church?

No it is not.
3 Why would he have to get baptized again?

Because he was never baptised in the first place.

How is that mocking God?
God is mocked when you do something you don't believe in.
Either as an individual or as a Church.

If a Church BELIEVES theyì're doing the right procedure, they aren't mocking God.

You could be of the opinion that it doesn't count, but mocking is taking it a bit too far, no?