Category: Jesus name baptism | Page 3

Focus on Church or Jesus?

We often speak of the difference between following religion and having a relationship with God. Many of us, while in the United Pentecostal Church or similar churches, ended up getting caught up in religion and our focus shifted.

Below is a quote from an article written in The Reporter News (a local weekly paper near the Houston area) on March 15, 2006. A minister by the name of Casey Jones is the author.

…if I had tried to convince some*one to become a Christian, it would have been a matter of my trying to get them to agree with me, rather than wishing for them to meet and experience God.

The above quote says a great deal. Think about it for a bit. How many focus on getting people to their church or at least their organization? How many focus on getting the person into the baptismal tank or to have them speak in tongues?

Compare these things with wanting the person to learn of and have a personal relationship with God. See the enormous difference? Perhaps you have been guilty of the same? I know I have.

Some other believers could go door knocking or send out invitations to their church, but would have been happy if, as a result of their efforts, someone went to another church in the area. While they would have welcomed the person at their church, it wasn’t just about filling up their pews or hurrying up to drag them to their water baptism. For them it was about the people coming to know Jesus.

Do you see the difference?

This brings another thought to mind, and that is how some are in such a hurry to drag people into the baptismal tank and get them to speak in tongues. They will gather around and stay with the new people until both happen and then move on to the next ‘unsaved’ believer. It is all about getting two acts completed so a person is ‘saved’ and often there is little focus on helping them develop their relationship with God.

Something to think about….

Baptism and Re-Baptism Part 4

Continued from Part 3

I’m happy. I was concerned that I would have nightmares, that I would be so nervous I’d make myself sick, that I’d have last minute doubts… that I’d get food poisoning and wouldn’t be able to go. LOL

None of that happened. For me, getting re-baptized was the best thing I could have done at this point. I wanted it to be a faith thing, and it very much was. I didn’t want it to be a denial of anything I’d already experienced. There was only one person who didn’t understand who said anything. I didn’t try to correct her–I met her in a Bible study a few weeks ago and knew she had very little understanding of a whole lot of things. My decision would have confused her, so I stayed quiet.

Baptism was a very important thing to me. I stayed in Oneness churches, miserable, for nearly ten years simply because they baptized in Jesus’ name and no one else did. Standards played a very small roll, and worship styles and “moves of the Holy Ghost” played probably an even smaller one for most of those years. But baptism to me was huge.

I do have to say that the pastor was great today. I’m not sure how I would have reacted if he hadn’t said some of the things he did last week and this. He was careful both last Sunday when I joined and this Sunday when I was baptized to explain that I had been a Christian for “awhile.” Today he mentioned (without letting anyone know who had asked) that he’d been asked several questions about baptism recently. He then restated the answers he’d given to those (my) questions. Remembering those questions and answers at that moment was encouraging and reassuring to me. He also restated the meaning of baptism as signifying the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus, which holds a whole lot of meaning for me. Though those may all be common practice for him, the significance for me was very meaningful.

Also, the words he said as he baptized us–and maybe he always does, I don’t know–was something like, “by the authority of Jesus Christ, upon your confession of faith and trust in Him, I now baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.” That was really terrific. Any last minute concerns I might have had were gone after the first person he baptized that way. (hee hee I’d wondered if I might get there and in my mind be saying “in the name of Jesus, in the name of Jesus” but I didn’t!)

For me, it feels like things have come full circle. When I joined the United Pentecostal Church, I was told that I hadn’t really been a Christian before. But I was, and I couldn’t deny that. It put me on shaky ground. They told me one thing, I believed another, yet I believed what they preached about baptism and the Holy Ghost–the same things they used to say that I hadn’t been a Christian before I started attending their church. Things just felt out of kilter.

Over the last year and a half, there have been several times that it seemed like another piece fell into place and I regained a bit more balance. A few months after leaving, for instance, during an invitational at the church I then attended, they led “whosoever will” in a “sinner’s prayer.” At my pew that day, I modified that prayer to a re-commitment to Jesus, asking His forgiveness for my lack of understanding (through the years of trying to follow a church, organization or man, and trying to please people rather than Him), and asking His direction from that point. That was a wonderful day. It felt like the pieces reconnected somehow, that I could finally accept what had made a huge impact in my life as a child–accepting Jesus as my Savior. (Something strongly taught against in the Oneness churches I’ve been in.)

There have been several other times that it seemed like a piece would fall into place–talking to a pastor and questioning him without being rebuked, leaving one church for another and still being accepted at both, learning what others truly believe and finding out that I agree… and etc.

That really has little to do with baptism in itself. Someone else will find that balance and that feeling of fitting or of all the pieces falling in place another way. No matter where or how that balance is found, I hope we all find it. But for me, there was huge significance in that simple act today.

For me it was just a very, very good experience.

Baptism and Re-Baptism Part 1
Baptism and Re-Baptism Part 2

Baptism and Re-Baptism Part 3

Continued from Part 2

Would being re-baptized help further the gospel in any way?

Probably not in the short term, at least. There are plenty of churches I could join and be a part of without being re-baptized.

Would it be meaningful to me personally? (if so, how?)
What are my reasons and motives? Would this be a reaction against the church I left, or a response to God?

Yes. I’m not sure all are good reasons to be re-baptized, but there are many ways it would be meaningful to me. I won’t go into the reasons here right now, though I thought about it. Everyone is different in this area though, and would have to honestly answer for themselves based on prayerful consideration, not anything I’d write.

Would it be a positive experience for me, or would I have doubts/would being re-baptized go against conscience?

Yes, it would be a positive experience for me, I’m fairly certain. No, being re-baptized wouldn’t go against my conscience.

I will be re-baptized this coming Sunday. I was concerned I might be nervous or doubtful, that I might even have nightmares about it. That hasn’t been the case. Most of that, I suspect, is because the pastor of my new church has handled the situation well. He did not simply announce that I would be getting baptized, but explained, very simply, that I’d been a Christian for quite awhile but had requested to be baptized [at this church]. He didn’t in any way deny what God has already done or make it sound like I was trying to “start over.” He also left the decision completely to me.

Also, I’ve come to view baptism very differently than I was brought up to view it or as I saw it in Pentecost. I no longer think baptism is saving in itself, and one off-shoot of a new understanding of baptism was the realization that if baptism itself doesn’t save me, neither will being re-baptized UNsave me.

Above that, I can’t view God as being displeased with either choice, as long as my decision is based in faith rather than fear and is done in good conscience.

I haven’t been nervous all week–except about what to wear since they don’t have baptismal robes. Not one nightmare… which surprised me. It kind of hit me harder today how final this is, at least in the view of my former church. According to them if someone leaves and gets re-baptized in the titles, they probably can’t be saved. IF (huge if) they would have ever accepted me back, they more than likely wouldn’t after Sunday. It’s not something that bothers me, but it has given this a significance I’d prefer in a way it didn’t have. I’m not doing this to deny anything that God’s done, but rather to testify to what He’s been doing and to reaffirm and attest to my faith in Jesus. Words wouldn’t have carried the same weight as this act, and there would have remained doubt in my mind about the whole issue. So this is very much a statement and act of faith.

I’m a little excited, but at peace enough that I’ll actually be turning off the computer before midnight!

Baptism and Re-Baptism Part 1

Baptism and Re-Baptism Part 2

Continued from Part 1

Up to this point in my questions, I leaned toward not being re-baptized. Then a few nights ago I came across something interesting that added some depth to my questions and stirred them again.

In Acts 16, Paul had Timothy circumcised. Not for salvation, not because he believed in circumcision, but so that he and Timothy could be more effective witnesses, so that the gospel could be furthered. They were going on a journey and would first teach in the synagogues to unbelieving Jews. Had Timothy gone along and not been circumcised, the Jews would have quite likely rejected Paul’s message. However, with Timothy circumcised, this wouldn’t be a problem, and Timothy could help not only teach the Jews but also reach the Greeks on the journey. (Later when Christian Jews wanted Titus circumcised for their own beliefs, Paul withstood them [Gal 2]).

There is something to this for me. Yes, the ones who’ve recommended re-baptism are already Christians. But there’s something else I haven’t put my finger on yet in regard to this, that keeps nibbling at the back of my mind. It would be a strong witness, a testimony, a symbolism of unity and of my beliefs, an act of commitment beyond words on my part, and to me that’s worth considering.

*****

Several months ago, I asked the pastor of the church I was attending, and was told that I’d already been baptized and that was enough. Then I started going to another church, and am told re-baptism would probably be a good idea.

(It seems to me that most of the churches in this area that I feel comfortable in, regardless of doctrine, want me to be re-baptized if they know I went to my former church and know anything about what the church teaches. The one that said I wouldn’t need to be re-baptized knew neither. The church I now attend would prefer that I be re-baptized if I want to be a member. And I think I do.)

Anyway, here is his response in part:

If you were baptized as a believer, following the commandment from Jesus to be baptized (scriptural baptism- baptism is an example of our faith not a requirement for it) then that was all that was needed.

I personally believe baptism is following the commandment of Jesus Christ, a public profession, not becoming a member. However, to be a voting member I believe that one should be baptized. If we are a Christian we will want to follow thru with what Jesus did.

…I don’t know if people know you from when you were at [my former church]. Some might. Therefore, I like what you said about considering being baptized as a testimony. Saying “I believe what the Bible teaches me, and because I do, I want to show the church that I am a believer.” This is what baptism is to me; It is the public profession that you are a Christian. I believe this is an outstanding idea.

I don’t think he’d necessarily require re-baptism, based on this. And yes, I’ve thought about running him through the mill on it, asking about membership without re-baptism, just to see what he would say. But that wouldn’t be a very nice thing to do, would it?

So I submitted the question to an online group called the Bereans. I was curious what their response might be. (They don’t often answer questions, supposedly, but I got an answer within 12 hours.) Here’s their response:

We don’t believe there is any Scripture forbidding a re-baptism in order to satisfy the requirements of the group you mention. On the other hand, we would also believe that your initial baptism was sufficient and that the re-baptism adds nothing that has not already been demonstrated.

Matthew 28:19 has the Lord Jesus giving the Great Commission to His disciples and specifically commanding them to baptize those who become converts. He was giving this task to believers. Further, those who believed were baptized (Acts 2:41; 8:12; 8:36-38; 9:17-18; 10:44-48; 16:32-33; 19:1-5; 1 Corinthians 1:14-17, etc.). Matthew 28:19-20 specifically commands that the disciples are to be taught “all things whatsoever I have commanded you…” (Matthew 28:19). Jesus had just commanded them to make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, etc. Therefore we conclude that He desired them to be baptized.

Baptism does not save, yet we see converts throughout the book of Acts submitting to water baptism. Jesus Himself was baptized, stating “thus it becometh us to fufill all righteousness” (Matthew 3:15). According to 1 Peter 3:21, “baptism also doth also now save us…” This “saving” is not salvation, because the scripture continues by explaining that it is “not the putting away of the filth of the flesh…” What does it then do?

Jesus was baptized by John just prior to beginning His public ministry. It was a point of separation between His former life and that which culminated in the Cross. 1 Peter 3:20-21 gives us the example of Noah. It explains that Noah’s very real experience has an application for us. Just as the judgement that fell on the world in the form of the deluge separated Noah from the wicked world that surrounded him, our baptism is a point of separation for us as well. It is “…the answer of a good conscience toward God…” (1 Peter 3:21).

Consequently, if it furnishes a “good conscience” we see no problem with you being re-baptized.

So I still have questions:

Would being re-baptized help further the gospel in any way?
Would it be meaningful to me personally? (if so, how?)
What are my reasons and motives? Would this be a reaction against the church I left, or a response to God?
Would it be a positive experience for me, or would I have doubts/would being re-baptized go against conscience?

To be continued…

Baptism and Re-Baptism Part 1

This is probably going to end up being an ongoing debate between me, myself and I.

For a long time after I left my former church, I believed that baptism in Jesus’ name was right. Then I thought it was better. Then a Oneness Pentecostal argued with me about baptism in Jesus’ name, thinking I was Trinity. And I realized how wrong some of their arguments were. Reading back through some of my blogs tonight, I realized just how much my thinking had shifted even since then- in a good way.

Now, I’m considering getting re-baptized, and think I may keep notes of some of what I’m studying and some of what I’ve learned here.

OK, for starters, I’ve considered re-baptism for a number of reasons since leaving, some good and some not so good. One of the first reasons I considered was making a clean break from the Oneness movement. That was not a very good reason for me. For starters, baptism isn’t meant to be used as a way to take a stand against a group of believers. Also, a “clean break” is really not possible when you still live among the group you’re breaking from. They wouldn’t even know I’d gotten re-baptized–any “break” would only be in my own mind.

Separating myself from them eventually came in the form of wearing pants and short sleeves even when they might see me. Curiously, most of them have been more accepting of me since I changed the way I dressed. Even just tonight, riding my bike, one drove by, smiled, waved and called my name. No disgust–he actually looked happy for me! (Which makes me wonder how many of them truly believe what they’re living… but that’s another blog for another time.)

*****

Again, I considered it simply because there’s so much division caused as a result of the debate (of baptism in the name of Jesus). Yet getting re-baptized won’t stop the debate, and I’ve already shown whose side I’m on by where I attend church, how I live my life, and so forth. Yet it might be done for unity’s sake. That one I need to think about more.

****

Re-baptism can definitely be a public testimony and witness. But of what? If my testimony is “I’m not one of THEM,” indicating another group of believers, that’s not a good enough reason for me, personally. However, if my testimony is an answer of a good conscience toward God, a way to say, “yes, I truly believe,” then it might be right. Motive is the key in that case.

****

I also have to consider historically and Biblically if re-baptism is acceptable or right. I don’t find anything in the Bible that says people were re-baptized, except in the case of the disciples of John in Acts 19. My personal feeling is that these disciples, not “having heard whether there be any Holy Ghost” probably were not familiar with Jesus’ death, burial and resurrection. They had been baptized to repentance but not baptized into the body of Christ, or as believers in Jesus. When they were re-baptized, it was to signify their belief in Jesus, whereas before it had not.

Historically, from what I can tell, believers were baptized once, except in the case of those who, like Anabaptists, were christened as children and re-baptized as adults due to a change in beliefs.

I find nothing for or against re-baptism either historically or Biblically. Research in these areas leaves me with no answers, and if anything possibly a few more questions. How do I fit into either of the groups in the paragraphs above, if I do? My beliefs have changed drastically even over the last few months. My understanding of Jesus and His sacrifice has expanded. But is that, in my case- since I believed in Jesus when I was first baptized- something I should be re-baptized to signify? I don’t think so, at least for me. Each person is different, though. If I’d ONLY been baptized once, in Jesus name, I think I’d feel much differently about my answer.

*****

By the same reasoning, I can conclude that it doesn’t matter if we believe baptism is salvational or not–the main thing is that we are believe and are baptized, not exactly what we believe about baptism.

These being the case, my baptism is as acceptable as anyone else’s. Also, to be re-baptized to join A church rather than THE body of Christ is a little beyond my means right now. That concept seems more than a little small-minded or limited in concept to me. And maybe even a bit divisive. It’s also slightly stuck-up, for lack of a better description. How could a church say, “Yes, you are a Christian, a Heaven-bound member of the body of Christ, but you would have to be re-baptized to be part of this local church?” (This church hasn’t said I’d HAVE to, but still…)

****

Regarding baptism as a means of becoming part of the body of Christ rather than a local church, though I didn’t understand it at the time, when I was baptized in Jesus’ name I was also (unwittingly) baptized into a set group of believers. And THAT group later said I wasn’t even a Christian until I’d been baptized their way. So the above is an almost laughable concern in some ways.

****

Apparently, no one is asking me this time to deny my first baptism. No one is driving me to join their church or telling me that there’s only one right way to be baptized. It would bother me if I were told that I had to deny my whole Christian walk up til this point, which is what happened after I was baptized in Jesus’ name. No, no one said that verbally, but it was indicated in many smaller ways. As far as the United Pentecostal Church was concerned, I started living for God after I got re-baptized in Jesus’ name and spoke in tongues. And that was NOT the case. I had to deny or ignore some wonderful things God had done earlier in my life to accept that. It wasn’t until I left the UPC that I finally understood how conflicted that had made me.

*****

I also consider what I’ve been taught through the years: that baptism was necessary for salvation, that getting re-baptized was completely wrong for any reason (due to a severe twisting of Heb 6:4-6), and, finally, that if I’d been baptized in Jesus name and then was re-baptized using the traditional Trinitarian formula I’d be hell-bound. I’ve wondered if I’d make myself sick or face residuals either before or after getting re-baptized because of these harsh teachings, and I’ve wondered if there were any truth in them. (I don’t think there is, but…) Would I make a public commitment and then not be able to follow through, end up explaining that I’d been taught these things and that they were giving me nightmares? Or are those things far enough behind me that getting re-baptized could be the joyous commitment that it’s supposed to be?

In other words, I think I believe a certain way, I say I believe a certain thing, but if faced with acting on the beliefs I claim, would I?

****

I’m also more than a little nervous about making a public commitment of any sort to church again. Even a good church that I really enjoy. Will I stick with it? Will I want to be there in a year? In three? Will they change after I join and become like others I’ve experienced?

To be continued….