Do We Rebaptise?

Acts 19:1-7

Do We Rebaptise?

Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples and asked them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?”

They answered, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.”

So Paul asked, “Then what baptism did you receive?”

“John's baptism,” they replied.

Paul said, “John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” On hearing this, they were baptised into the name of the Lord Jesus. When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied. There were about twelve men in all.”

A

nabaptists was the derisive name given by religious leaders of the state churches to our forebears in Europe. Our forebears were said to rebaptise, hence the name—ana (again) baptists (baptisers). The charge is appropriate … if the baptism received prior to that which the Anabaptists taught was valid. If, on the other hand, those professing Christians identified with the Great State churches of Europe—Lutherans, Presbyterians, Anglicans and Catholics—did not baptise but only performed a ceremonial rite without biblical authority, their adherents had never been baptised.

In order to explore more thoroughly this controversial though fascinating area of church history, it is necessary that we appeal to the Word of God. It will prove especially helpful for us to focus on an incident in the early history of the churches when some who were presumed to have been already baptised were compelled to be baptised again.

The incident in question occurred when the Apostle Paul arrived in Ephesus. There he encountered some disciples. At least the individuals he encountered appeared superficially to be fellow Christians. Paul queried them on their doctrine. Before moving farther, I must comment on this point. Reading the account at hand, we might draw the conclusion that something in the language or in the life of these disciples caused the Apostle concern. However, it is more likely that we should understand that Paul’s habit upon encountering any claiming to be disciples was to seek to define their beliefs. He did this through questioning their foundational faith.

The apostolic church was commended for test[ing] those who claim[ed] to be apostles but [we]re not, and … for having … found them false [cf. Revelation 2:2]. Apparently, those early saints had learned this from the Apostles. I fear there is far less discernment demonstrated today among the saints of God.

While living in Duncanville, Texas, I was invited by a pastor of a nearby church to exchange pulpits. “Brother Stark,” he said, “my people would love to hear you speak.”

I was hesitant to address his people and I informed him of my reluctance. As politely as possible I declined his invitation to address his people. I was rather forthright in my refusal to permit him to address my people. In conscience I could give no recognition to his message before my own congregation.

Pressed to reconsider, I told him that should I address his congregation I would need to either violate my conscience or I would gravely insult him. He was obviously surprised and asked why I would say such a thing. We were, after all, both evangelicals!

“How do you say that a person is saved?” I inquired of him.

“Well,” he began, “one must believe that Jesus is the Son of God.”

“And…?” I prodded.

“Well, he must be baptised in the Name of Jesus only,” he offered.

“And…? I continued.

“Well,” he stammered, “he must be filled with the Holy Ghost as evidence by speaking in tongues.”

“And…?” I urged him on.

“Well, he must hang on to the end,” he reluctantly offered.

With that final word from him, I explained my position. “My presence with your people would only create hardship for you. I will be glad to address your congregation. However, I have only one message—it is salvation by faith in the Risen Son of God … plus nothing and minus nothing. When I address your congregation, I will point out to them that to add anything to that apostolic message is to nullify grace and to make oneself superior to Christ. Do you still want me to speak at your church?”

Without hesitation he quickly responded, “I don’t think it would be a good idea.”

Dear people, it is not meanness on my part, nor is it mere theological pettiness, when I say that the doctrine which that man espoused is errant. He had given the people eggs of vipers. Whoever eats their eggs will die [cf. Isaiah 59:5]. Consequently, whatever baptism his group performs is not New Testament baptism. There can be no fellowship between error and truth; thus, there could be no fellowship between that man and myself.

I worry about the churches of this day who embrace every religious body in the mistaken belief that we are to demonstrate tolerance. Scant discernment is exercised by the professed people of God in our rush to hail every religious organisation as fellow saints. We are not saved because we are religious. We are responsible to test those who say they are apostolic but are not. We are to ask the hard questions of those who wish to be received as fellow believers together with us.

In a previous church, a woman expressed her displeasure with me, in no small part because I used a particular cult as an example of a group which is conservative but unbiblical. She was upset because she had apparently once been affiliated with that particular cult. If that group wishes to be accepted as Christian, let them renounce their error of the investigative judgement. Let them renounce the teaching of Azazel. Let them renounce the confusion arising from their attempt to mix law and grace. Let them renounce the teaching that worship on Sunday is the mark of the beast. Then perhaps we can begin to discuss whether they are Christian or merely another cult arising from the untaught American frontier. We ought not to shrink from confronting error, probing through questioning until we have established that those who wish to be accepted as Christian can be demonstrated to actually be fellow saints. Our example in this is the Apostle Paul as he questioned the disciples he encountered in Ephesus.

Focus on the text with me so that together we may discover what the Word teaches. The question before us is whether we baptise or whether we rebaptise. The distinction is more important than we dare imagine. If we rebaptise, then we are in error. In that case we Baptists are divisive within the broader Community of Faith and stand opposed to Scripture since there is one Lord, one faith, one baptism [see Ephesians 4:5]. If, on the other hand we baptise, then it is we who hold to Scripture despite popular opinion and we can count ourselves as friends of God who exalt His Word and His will.

Discipleship and Baptism — The people Paul encountered in Ephesus were called disciples [verse one]. The term disciple, though neutral, tells us something of the supposition of the missionary band. The missionaries presumed, posssibly by virtue of the practises of this group, that they had encountered fellow believers. But had they? The missionaries were cautious in extending acceptance to every group. Just as Mormons and Adventists wish to be accepted as Christians in this day, so non-Christian groups in that day sought acceptance as Christian.

Virtually every religious society meets for some form of ceremony associated with their particular sectarian practise. Most will identify their communal activity as worship. That activity may be highly structured, bearing the stamp of antiquity for authority. That activity may be somewhat looser, permitting the participants opportunity to innovate according to the dictates of their heart. What I would caution against is drawing the conclusion that simply because a group is met for religious purposes and because they perform some particular ritual that they are worshipping the Living God.

Ezekiel describes the worship of the leaders of Israel in the eighth chapter of his prophecy. There before me was the glory of the God of Israel, as in the vision I had seen in the plain.

Then he said to me, “Son of man, look toward the north.” So I looked, and in the entrance north of the gate of the altar I saw this idol of jealousy.

And he said to me, “Son of man, do you see what they are doing—the utterly detestable things the house of Israel is doing here, things that will drive me far from my sanctuary? But you will see things that are even more detestable.”

Then he brought me to the entrance to the court. I looked, and I saw a hole in the wall. He said to me, “Son of man, now dig into the wall.” So I dug into the wall and saw a doorway there.

And he said to me, “Go in and see the wicked and detestable things they are doing here.” So I went in and looked, and I saw portrayed all over the walls all kinds of crawling things and detestable animals and all the idols of the house of Israel. In front of them stood seventy elders of the house of Israel, and Jaazaniah son of Shaphan was standing among them. Each had a censer in his hand, and a fragrant cloud of incense was rising.

He said to me, “Son of man, have you seen what the elders of the house of Israel are doing in the darkness, each at the shrine of his own idol? They say, ‘The LORD does not see us; the LORD has forsaken the land.’” Again, he said, “You will see them doing things that are even more detestable.”

Then he brought me to the entrance to the north gate of the house of the LORD, and I saw women sitting there, mourning for Tammuz. He said to me, “Do you see this, son of man? You will see things that are even more detestable than this.”

He then brought me into the inner court of the house of the LORD, and there at the entrance to the temple, between the portico and the altar, were about twenty-five men. With their backs toward the temple of the LORD and their faces toward the east, they were bowing down to the sun in the east.

He said to me, “Have you seen this, son of man? Is it a trivial matter for the house of Judah to do the detestable things they are doing here? Must they also fill the land with violence and continually provoke me to anger? Look at them putting the branch to their nose! Therefore I will deal with them in anger; I will not look on them with pity or spare them. Although they shout in my ears, I will not listen to them” [Ezekiel 8:4-18].

Each activity summarised in this passage—the burning of incense, bowing toward the sun, standing in the presence of idols, mourning for Tamuz—each describes what the participants would have undoubtedly called worship. Each of these individuals would have contended that they were pleasing to the Lord God since their activities were being carried out in His Temple. Nevertheless, it is evident that God was displeased. In fact, God says He is utterly disgusted with their efforts and consequently disgusted with them. Indeed, if we will please God and if our worship will be found to be pleasing in His sight, we shall have no other gods before Him [cf. Exodus 20:3]. This means that neither church nor denomination nor religious practise can be of greater importance than God Himself.

Though disciples will obey the command of God by being baptised, not all that are immersed may be considered disciples. Baptism is the mark of a disciple, as the Word of God clearly teaches. The Great Commission as recorded in Matthew 28:19 instructs that baptising is intimately associated with the discipleship process. A similar emphasis is provided in Mark’s account of the Christian Commission [see Mark 16:16]. Williams’ translation of the New Testament is noted especially for its exceptionally careful treatment of the verbs. His translation of Acts 2:38 reads as follows: You must repent—and, as an expression of it,[1] let every one of you be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ—that you may receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.[2] According to Galatians 3:26, 27 baptism is equated to clothing oneself with Christ as an act of discipleship. Likewise, Paul in Colossians 2:11, 12 describes baptism as the initial step in the process of discipleship.

These so-called disciples failed a critical test—they were unable to articulate a creditable faith. They were unaware of the presence of the Holy Spirit and this ignorance was related to a faulty baptism. Baptism would not confer knowledge of God’s will, but they clearly had not been taught concerning the great themes arising from the coming of the Son of God. They were unsaved when they were baptised and they revealed their lack of relationship to the Risen Christ through their ignorance of the comforter.

My words will likely offend some, but better you should be offended now then condemned because no one warned you. Infants who undergo a rite are not disciples. Otherwise, why would pædobaptist societies insist on introducing a biblically novel rite which has received the name confirmation. This one action on their part is tacit admission that infant baptism has no biblical foundation. Likewise, those individuals, whether adults or infants, who are baptised in order to become disciples, cannot be disciples. Otherwise, why would every group which administers baptism to make disciples teach that a disciple can be suddenly and without warning undiscipled. That teaching, without scriptural foundation, is frank admission that such actions have no foundation.

Disciples may not be equipped to articulate every doctrine of the Word nor will they necessarily be ready to discuss the deep truths of the Faith. They will, however, know that Jesus Christ is God. They will know that He died a sacrificial death—being buried and raised from the dead by the power of the Holy Spirit. They will know that the Son of God has ascended into Heaven from whence He is coming again. They will know that all sin is forgiven by faith in this Risen, Living Son of God. They will know that they are transformed by faith in Him and that the Spirit of God dwells with them. This innate knowledge is nothing less then the declarations of biblical baptism.

In baptism, the disciple confesses his or her faith in Christ as Lord of life. The baptism of the disciple pictures faith in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This is the Good News of salvation which we received. The one being baptised identifies with the Living Son of God—confessing his faith that though he was dead in his sin he has been buried with Him and raised with Him by faith in Him. The disciple confesses that we live because of Him. In baptism, we confess confidence in His promise to come again and to receive us to Himself. Baptism, then, speaks eloquently of all this. Our baptism is a picture of foundational Christian truth. If we are baptised on this basis there is no other baptism. If, however, we participated in a rite without this biblical foundation, we were never baptised. Thus, if we will be obedient to the command of Christ the Lord, we will be baptised at the earliest opportunity.

Errant Belief and Baptism — The disciples whom the missionary band met had been baptised with John’s baptism [verse four]. Some have decided upon reading this account that John’s baptism was defective. You need to remember that each of the Apostles, with the exception of Paul, was baptised by John. You need to understand that there is not one passage in the Gospels which indicates that Jesus considered John’s baptism defective. In the Gospels, no one baptised by John was compelled by Jesus to be baptised again.

When Peter urged the disciples to appoint someone as a successor to Judas, he set conditions which were apparently understood and accepted by all. It is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of His resurrection [Acts 1:21,22]. The one chosen had to have been with the disciples throughout the ministry of Jesus, beginning with His baptism by John and concluding with the Resurrection. Scope in on that other condition which mandated that the one chosen to be one of the twelve had to have witnessed John’s baptism.

Jesus was baptised by John at the initiation of His public ministry. Our Lord said that He was to be baptised by John in order to fulfil all righteousness [cf. Matthew 3:15]. What did Jesus mean by that phrase? The Law included no requirements about baptism, so Jesus could not have had in view anything pertaining to Levitical righteousness. John’s message, however, was a call to repentance, and those submitting to the baptism which he preached were looking forward to a coming Messiah who would be righteous and who would bring in righteousness for those who turned in faith to Him. If the Messiah were to provide righteousness for sinners, He would need to be identified with sinners. It was therefore in the will of God for Jesus to be baptised by John in order to be identified (the significance of the word baptised) with sinners.

Baptism is divinely commanded, and though it is associated with repentance and confession of sin, it also signifies acceptance of the reign of God in the candidate’s life. Baptism signifies acceptance of the will of God. In this, Jesus fulfilled all righteousness. It was fitting that He openly and publicly signify willingness to submit to the rule of the Father. By all accounts, Jesus’ baptism signalled the beginning of His public ministry. What I would have you understand by virtue of the disciple’s reference to that baptism is that there was nothing defective about John’s baptism. It was a baptism of repentance, but so is the baptism of Christ! Only those who repented were to be baptised at Pentecost [Acts 2:38]. The same holds true to this day. Except an individual repents of sin and confesses Christ as Lord (a most personal act), there is no baptism.

Even a casual reading of Paul’s questioning of these Ephesian disciples makes it quite clear that he is in no way rejecting John’s baptism. Rather the Apostle rejects the reduction of baptism to a mere religious rite. These twelve men—without question adhering to a form of godliness—had never believed in the Christ. John’s baptism pointed forward to the Christ who, John himself revealed, was Jesus. The problem with the baptism these disciples had received was not the act but the motive.

Let’s make an application to our day. That individual who submits to a religious rite identified as baptism in order to be saved exhibits improper motives. Consequently, if we will honour God and adhere to His Word, we must reject that action as faulty. That individual who is baptised in order to make himself or herself more acceptable to God has received no baptism at all. That individual who is baptised in order to enter the church is yet unbaptised. It is only as an individual identifies with Jesus, submitting to His reign and accepting His will as Lord of life, that baptism is accomplished. The motive for the ordinance is vital.

What if an individual was baptised by a group which believes baptism is necessary for salvation or which believes baptism makes a person more acceptable before God? If the one baptised believes differently would the baptism then be acceptable? The simple answer is that the baptism would still be unacceptable since the individual submitted to an errant act. That individual would nevertheless need to reject the errant teaching and confess righteousness through submitting to biblical baptism.

Whenever an individual approaches me to request membership in the church, I inquire concerning their baptism. If they come from a pædobaptist background, I am conscience-bound to reject the religious rite previously imposed on them because the motive for their act was lacking. Either they were attempting to be saved by christening, or they were endeavouring to add to grace, or they thought they were made members of the Community of Faith through their action. These are each improper motives. If the individual with whom I speak comes from a cult, they were baptised in order to make them members of that cult. This is the reason I am honour-bound to reject baptism by Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and Seventh Day Adventists as no baptism as all. Theirs is not a submission to the Risen Son of God but identification with the peculiar doctrines of that particular cult.

In other instances, even though individuals will inform me that they were baptised within an evangelical sect, I request that they relate their testimony to me. Why were they baptised and how? Even Baptist churches too often fail to instruct those being baptised and some individuals may have participated in a rite which is essentially meaningless. Remember, for baptism to be biblical the candidate must be saved, the mode must be proper and the motive must be pure. The one baptised must be immersed by the authority of a biblical church, and the one baptised must be submitting to the rule of heaven. They must be confessing faith in the Son of God, identifying with Him in their own salvation and testifying to the hope of the resurrection.

Baptism is more than simply the water which divides us as denominations. Baptism is the picture of our Faith. Baptism must be, in the words of the Apostle Peter, the response of a good conscience toward God [cf. 1 Peter 3:21]. Baptism must be the response to grace and not an effort to secure grace. We are not merely contentious to reject affusion and aspersion as proper modes of baptism since they fail to meet the criterion of picturing one’s faith—however sincere the one receiving the rite may have been.

Corrected Belief and Baptism — Upon learning the doctrine which Christ had taught and required, we read that the disciples of John were baptised into the Name of the Lord Jesus [verse five]. On hearing the proper motive for baptism, these men were baptised. Carefully note that they were not rebaptised! They were baptised. Just so, we do not rebaptise; we do, however, baptise. Those who come to us after participating in a religious rite, should that rite have no biblical grounds, must yet be baptised. Regardless of how dear they may hold former associations, Christ must be dearer still. Among the hard sayings of Jesus is this one: If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be My disciple. And anyone who does not carry his cross and follow Me cannot be My disciple [Luke 14:26, 27]. This hard saying surely finds application here.

A church is not simply a collection of people who have decided that they will tolerate one another for some political purpose. Neither is a church solely a fellowship of like-minded individuals who agree to set aside their opinions for the sake of harmony. A church of the Lord Jesus Christ is an assembly of individuals who have covenanted together to submit to the reign of Christ over their collective and individual lives. They are bound by revealed doctrine to obey His will. Underscore in your mind this essential truth—our doctrine unites us. If there is no doctrinal agreement, we are simply another religious organisation, no better and no worse than any other organisation whether political, social or religious. Without doctrinal agreement there can be no hope of lasting unity and no hope of continuing peace between adherents.

There are issues of theology over which we may disagree and yet determine that we will co-operate as members of the same Body. We do not need to agree on points of eschatology to honour Christ and to walk together in love. We do not need to agree in every issue of ecclesiology in order to be pleasing to the Lord. We can quibble about doctrines of pneumatology, about teachings of anthropology, and perhaps even over issues of hamartiology. We must, however, agree on the great truths concerning Christ the Lord, our salvation, and the rule of the Living God. These truths are nonnegotiable.

Baptism, as is true of the continuing ordinance, reflects our grasp of these great foundational truths. The doctrine of Christ, Christology, speaks of His deity, His sacrificial death and conquest of death, hell and the grave. Baptism points to our faith in Him and in His glorious victory. The doctrine of God, Theology proper, speaks of the sovereign rule of the Living God over His creation. Our submission to Him in baptism is evidence that we submit to His reign over our lives. Soteriology, the doctrine of salvation, properly presented confesses that man can do nothing to either save himself or make himself acceptable to God. Salvation is all of grace. Salvation is free in Christ. Our baptism points to this glorious truth. Whenever an individual is properly taught, they will embrace these essential truths through receiving believers’ baptism.

Is Jesus God? Did He die a sacrificial death? Did He conquer the last enemy—death? Is He risen from the dead? Your baptism, if it is biblical, points to these truths. How did you become a Christian? Was it not by faith in the Risen Son of God? You know that you could do nothing to make yourself acceptable to God. You know that your life is all of grace and that you live by His mercy. Your baptism, if it is biblical, points all who witness it, to that glorious truth. Does God the Father reign supreme in your life? If He is regnant over your life, you will have revealed that rule by submitting to the first call to identify in baptism since you believed.

I cannot see the intents and attitudes to which an individual may hold, but I do see the outward evidence of faith in a person’s life. Those who know their God and who have submitted to Him as God Most High will not hesitate to obey His command. However, the child of God will always have a dark cloud over his life so long as he is knowingly disobedient in first things. The baptism of a saved individual, performed as an act of obedience, is, after all, the response of a good conscience toward God [1 Peter 3:21]. Though their parents may have had a religious rite performed on those individuals when they were mere infants, they will obey Christ when they at last discover the truth of His Word. Though they may have submitted to a rite in order to satisfy admission requirements of a particular religious society or cult, when they are taught the truth of God’s Word they will quickly seek to remedy the error. Those who submitted to a rite which failed to meet biblical criteria through failure to picture their faith, will, when taught, quickly embrace the truth and seek biblical baptism. They will not be rebaptised, but they will be baptised. The heart of a saved individual longs to please the Father.

A church must have a good foundation if it will grow and survive the storms which must come. A church must ensure that a sound foundation has been laid if it will continue strong and prosperous in the spiritual realm throughout generations to come. Perhaps one of the saddest evidences of foundations which are less then sound is the demise of a vibrant Christianity in these last days. Few Christians know what they believe because few pastors are willing to study the Word. Those pastors who do know what they believe are too frequently cowed into silence by illicit demands of people who poll the populace instead of teaching the truth. The churches of this day appear weak and indecisive in the face of pressure to conform to the world about them. The evidence is seen in the fact that many are forsaking the ordinances as taught in the Word in order to please those unwilling to do what is taught. The evidence is revealed in embarrassment of disciples to embrace the offence of the cross.

I recommend that we pledge ourselves to study the Word that we may honour Christ the Lord. I recommend that we insist that those who handle the Word do so truthfully, providing us strong meat instead of foisting spiritual pabulum on us. I recommend that we commit ourselves to biblical practises, beginning with the first ordinance of baptism. Let us insist that those who wish to unite with us commit themselves to sound doctrine: Jesus Christ is God; He died a sacrificial death, being buried and raised from the dead; Jesus Christ has ascended into the heavens; and by faith in Him we are saved. Let those who have received this truth reveal their faith through submission to the command of the Lord to be baptised. Rejecting the finest thoughts of man let those who will identify with Christ come to receive His baptism. Amen.

Williams’ translation of the New Testament is noted especially for its exceptionally careful treatment of the verbs. His translation of Acts 2:38 reads as follows: You must repent—and, as an expression of it,[3] let every one of you be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ—that you may receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

----

[1] These five words implied from context and usage in the Early Church

[3] These five words implied from context and usage in the Early Church