Should I be rebaptised?

[Jane_Doe22]

Yup - and the "WHY" is spiritual regeneration - even for infants.

This is what Jesus taught (John 3:5), this is what Peter taught (Acts 2:38), this is what Paul taught (Col. 2:11-12). This is what the Early Church taught and has been the constant living teaching of the historic Christian faith for 2000 years. This is what your Protestant Fathers like Luther and Calvin taught.

This ONLY came into question over the last few hundred years.
I wonder why that is??

"Acts 2:38 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."

Who's sins?
And in what order are these things to be done?

Those are the big questions.

From perspective A, the order is: 1) Bob repents of Bob's sins, 2) is baptized for remission of Bob's. And somewhere in there receives the Holy Ghost.

From perspective B, the order is: 1) be baptized for remission of Adam's sin, 2) then Bob later repents of sins. And somewhere in there receives the Holy Ghost.

That's the core of this disagreement here. Everything else is a distraction of less importance.

 

[BreadOfLife]

"Acts 2:38 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."

Who's sins?
And in what order are these things to be done?

Those are the big questions.

From perspective A, the order is: 1) Bob repents of Bob's sins, 2) is baptized for remission of Bob's. And somewhere in there receives the Holy Ghost.

From perspective B, the order is: 1) be baptized for remission of Adam's sin, 2) then Bob later repents of sins. And somewhere in there receives the Holy Ghost.

That's the core of this disagreement here. Everything else is a distraction of less importance.

ALL sin.

Adam's sin has been imputed on us ALL.
ALL of us have a fallen nature due to HIS sin. It's not a sin that WE committed but we are no less innocent of it. Because of our fallen nature, we are imperfect and have the proclivity towards sin. EVERYBODY - from the tiniest baby to the oldest man.

Baptism regenerates us. It gives us rebirth in the Spirit - reconciling us with God (John 3:5, Acts 2:38, Col. 2:11-12, 1 Pet. 3:21). Whether it is our OWN personal sin and/or the stain of Original Sin - that sin is washed away in Baptism.

PS - You never answered why your Protestant Fathers agreed with this position but YOU, their ecclesial descendants don't.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

ALL sin.

Adam's sin has been imputed on us ALL.
ALL of us have a fallen nature due to HIS sin. It's not a sin that WE committed but we are no less innocent of it. Because of our fallen nature, we are imperfect and have the proclivity towards sin. EVERYBODY - from the tiniest baby to the oldest man.

Baptism regenerates us. It gives us rebirth in the Spirit - reconciling us with God (John 3:5, Acts 2:38, Col. 2:11-12, 1 Pet. 3:21). Whether it is our OWN personal sin and/or the stain of Original Sin - that sin is washed away in Baptism.

But whose sin is a person being baptized primarily for? And does it come before or after that person repenting?

I'm not trying to change your perspective, just pointing out what the actual crux of the disagreement is here. I that that, and understanding other people's views, is helpful.

 

[BreadOfLife]

But whose sin is a person being baptized primarily for? And does it come before or after that person repenting?

I'm not trying to change your perspective, just pointing out what the actual crux of the disagreement is here. I that that, and understanding other people's views, is helpful.

Okay - where was the "repenting" of the Ethiopian Eunuch in Acts 8?
NOTHING about his having repented - just hearing the Gospel and being Baptized.

We have to look at the entire CONTEXT of Baptism in Scripture - not just the cherry-picked verses that you want to look at.
In some instances, there is repentance.
In some instances, there is simply hearing the Gospel.
In some instances, ENTIRE HOUSEHOLDS are baptized on the faith of ONE person (Philippian Jailer, Stephanas).
There is never "ONE" sole prescription given - not even a method.

 

[Marymog]

Thanks for clearing that up Mary. I hope you are well.

Mary is always well.....God has truly blessed me.

How are you doing Pearl?

 

[Pearl]

Mary is always well.....God has truly blessed me.

How are you doing Pearl?

I'm doing great thanks Mary. I've just been enjoying the first pics on TV of the new royal baby in his daddy's arms. He is to be called Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor. A big name for a little chap.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Okay - where was the "repenting" of the Ethiopian Eunuch in Acts 8?
NOTHING about his having repented - just hearing the Gospel and being Baptized.

We have to look at the entire CONTEXT of Baptism in Scripture - not just the cherry-picked verses that you want to look at.
In some instances, there is repentance.
In some instances, there is simply hearing the Gospel.
In some instances, ENTIRE HOUSEHOLDS are baptized on the faith of ONE person (Philippian Jailer, Stephanas).
There is never "ONE" sole prescription given - not even a method.

You don't have to prove yourself to me- as I said, I'm not trying to convince you of anything.

I'm just highlighting where the foundational difference comes in: that you do not believe that repentance should proceed baptism. Other people strongly do believe that it should proceed.

 

[Pearl]

You don't have to prove yourself to me- as I said, I'm not trying to convince you of anything.

I'm just highlighting where the foundational difference comes in: that you do not believe that repentance should proceed baptism. Other people strongly do believe that it should proceed.

Acts 2:38
Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized," Repent definitely come first in this passage. What is the point of being baptised whilst we are still in our sin. Baptism will only wash away the sin when we have repented.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Acts 2:38
Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized," Repent definitely come first in this passage. What is the point of being baptised whilst we are still in our sin. Baptism will only wash away the sin when we have repented.

I personally agree. You'll see in post #1024 BOL disagrees.
Hence highlighting where that source of difference is.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You don't have to prove yourself to me- as I said, I'm not trying to convince you of anything.

I'm just highlighting where the foundational difference comes in: that you do not believe that repentance should proceed baptism. Other people strongly do believe that it should proceed.

I never said that.

I believe that repentance SHOULD precede Baptism - for those that are able.
For those that cannot, like babies or the severely retarded - they shouldn't be excluded simply because they are incapable of repenting. The Holy Spirit does not flee from them just because they are incapable. Jesus said about them , ". . . for of such is the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 19:14).

Do you believe that a severely retarded person or a severely autistic person who is incapable of communicating should have Baptism withheld?

 

[Pearl]

I personally agree. You'll see in post #1024 BOL disagrees.
Hence highlighting where that source of difference is.

I can't see his posts as he is on my ignore list.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

I never said that.

I believe that repentance SHOULD precede Baptism - for those that are able.
For those that cannot, like babies or the severely retarded - they shouldn't be excluded simply because they are incapable of repenting. The Holy Spirit does not flee from them just because they are incapable. Jesus said about them , ". . . for of such is the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 19:14).

Do you believe that a severely retarded person or a severely autistic person who is incapable of communicating should have Baptism withheld?

Again, that is your perspective.
Other groups believe extremely strongly that repentance MUST precede baptism. Hence the rejection of babies and baby-mentally baptisms: because they have not repented, and hence should not be baptized. That's the biggest point of disagreement.

The question of "what happens to those which were not able to be baptized (for whatever reason)" is a separate one.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

I can't see his posts as he is on my ignore list.

Ok.

 

[Pearl]

Ok.

 

[BreadOfLife]

I can't see his posts as he is on my ignore list.

Of course I am - because I asked where the Protestant tradition of backwards dunking during Baptism came from.
We can't have fairness now - can we . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Again, that is your perspective.
Other groups believe extremely strongly that repentance MUST precede baptism. Hence the rejection of babies and baby-mentally baptisms: because they have not repented, and hence should not be baptized. That's the biggest point of disagreement.

The question of "what happens to those which were not able to be baptized (for whatever reason)" is a separate one.

Yes, Jane - that is my perspective.
That's the whole point of a discussion.

The problem I've seen on this thread, however, is the total reluctance to explain:
a) Where Protestant traditions originated surrounding Baptism (i.e., backwards dunking).
b) Why the Early Church Baptized infants and professed that it was an Apostolic practice/teaching.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Yes, Jane - that is my perspective.
That's the whole point of a discussion.

Good that you can acknowledge the actual point of disagreement.

The problem I've seen on this thread, however, is the total reluctance to explain:
a) Where Protestant traditions originated surrounding Baptism (i.e., backwards dunking).
b) Why the Early Church Baptized infants and professed that it was an Apostolic practice/teaching.

That's a sidetrack.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Good that you can acknowledge the actual point of disagreement.

That's a sidetrack.

HOW is that a "sidetrack"??
It directly correlates to the topic.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

HOW is that a "sidetrack"??
It directly correlates to the topic.

Because it's a tangent of a tangent of a tangent of a tangent.

The big issue here to discuss is whether or not a non-repentant person can be validly baptized.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Because it's a tangent of a tangent of a tangent of a tangent.

The big issue here to discuss is whether or not a non-repentant person can be validly baptized.

And my questions about the Protestant traditions surrounding Baptism and the Early Church's teachings on Infant Baptism DIRECTLY relete to this topic. It's not a "tangent" of anything.

Yours is simply a continuation of the Protestant deflection here.