Quote:
|
Let me first say that I hate hypothetical situations because people can hypothetically argue their way out doing anything they should probably do based upon hypothetical situations. I personally dont' know very many people who have been rebaptized and I don't push the issue. That being said let's push on.
|
To clarify: The situations I’m thinking of are far from hypothetical, I happen to know NUMEROUS folks and have observed myself rebaptisms. So, I’m NOT coming from a hypothetical at all but REAL situations. I simply take the REAL situations and put them into hypothetical language to analyze that’s all. It’s a habit as a scientist to observe a real phenomena then kind of restate it in a neutral hypothetical way. Sorry about the confusion there!
Quote:
|
I posted this before. Many people do things in the name of the Triune God. Does that make everything authentic that is done in the name of God.
|
Excellent point of order. This is the difference, God commanded it, that is baptism in His name, its not random thing. It’s like this: If you were a king who had authority over a realm, then your name and order given to a thing via other people is the EXACT same thing as you doing it. Another way to look at it in a modern understanding might be this: If the President of the US or the Gov. of your/my state issues that something be given in the name of the Pres. Or Gov., like a pardon, they issue you it through agencies and not directly themselves. But it has the same weight as them doing it. To baptize IN THE NAME of God is the same as giving the authority of God. Doing ‘other things’ in the name of God not so authorized are illegitimate, those would be works of man. This is an excellent question because it gets to the crux of is it God’s work or man’s. God has given His name to baptism, He has NOT given His name to charisma or conversion experiences or other such fairly modern religious (that is to say non-Christian) phenomena. That’s why baptism can be trusted correctly understood, it is the giving of the name, promise and word of God. It answers the question, “How can I know it is for me.” “It” being justification, Christ crucified, the Gospel rather than in general. THIS aids faith and strengthens it rather than destroys or falsifies it because one is trusting NOT in a man’s work unto baptism, but God’s work and promise in baptism and the Word (Gospel).
Compare the following: ALL Christians wonder in the deep struggle within “am I really saved” or some form of that doubt. Doubt is not unbelief but the middle battle ground between belief and unbelief. Unbelief is sin but doubt is not and always ‘co-exists with faith’ in this life due to flesh, the devil and the world that battle us. This is in part our suffering since faith desires to be realized. We suffer that which we hang onto only by promise in the future eschatologicaly. Faith via the Gospel tells us one thing and our experiences tell us another. This is the battle ground of the devil and God and in part the suffering a Christian goes through – in short – “am I really saved”. Now we all “hear” the general Gospel call but EVERYONE asks themselves, ‘is it for me’, especially under strong accusation from the devil, because experience is warring against faith (faith is a tension). So, the Christian desires something “TO THEM” a particular TO THE MAN and specifically TO THEM in order to KNOW THIS IS FOR ME. Those who look to secondary causes, fruits, are doing nothing more than looking for ‘signs’ of “God working in them”. So for persons saying they trust the naked Word alone in reality are not telling the truth. The whole idea of looking for secondary causes, profession by the mouth of faith and “fruits” IS looking to OTHER things and manifestly NOT trusting in the naked Gospel alone. ALL men desire something to give them assurance that Christ is FOR ME specifically. So, they look to “do I really possess saving faith” (this is a kind of faith in faith or assurance in faith, not the gross kind of faith in faith we see in deceivers like Hinn, but an assurance in ‘do I really possess saving faith’ IS a kind of faith in faith) and/or they look to or for “fruits of faith” (the secondary causes). The first problem here is that ALL of these can be faked, even a man can fool himself, so this is no help to real saving faith. The second and more important point is that God has NEVER promised in these things, given authority unto them or given His name to them, nor His body, nor His blood. Now, this is where the sacraments, correctly understood as Gospel come in, particularly I will focus on baptism what we are discussing. While men can fake their faith and fruits of faith fooling even themselves thus thinking they are sincere, and while hypocrites can be baptized, the one thing that CANNOT be faked NOR changed is that God has GIVEN His promise, authority and name to baptism. It is objective and real on those grounds. It “exists” or is “to be” or “comes into being” by this and NOT when faith is really in the one receiving it. If I write you a check for 10,000 dollars and I’m willing and capable of doing that (sorry I really can’t thought!!!), and you receive it but don’t really believe it – its your own folly. But the check is real NOT because you ‘have’ faith but because the signature on it is my name and authority to give what it states. Thus, is baptism. It is real because of the name of God and the authority there unto NOT because of the possession of faith itself. Faith itself is secondary to baptism just like it is secondary to the Gospel because baptism is really the visible Gospel in another form of COMMUNICATION to the senses (means). At the end of the day you must realize that WORDS written or spoken are nothing more than MEANS themselves. They are parts of the creation, ink molecules, air molecules, formed and energized to communicate a message. Baptism is similar to this but needs the words to do this as well. The difference is baptism comes TO THE MAN specifically. It answers that question, “How do I know God’s will and salvation is FOR ME.” Answer: I am (present tense) baptized. Thus, the help to faith.
Quote:
|
Can there be a baptism done in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost that is not from God?
|
No, you are misunderstanding the authority, it does not rely upon the receiver or giver. The giver can be an apostate pastor. The intent must be unto the Gospel.
It boils down to is baptism God’s work or man’s. The answer to that question reveals the true or false understanding of baptism. Secondly, you cannot change the Gospel in the sacraments any more than you can in the Word JUST because men abuse it and men are liars. The Gospel IS for the sheep, in spite of the hypocrites. You are in essence, not you particular but men, are always trying to repair and change the gift of God to HIS people to in essence ‘assure’ that false liars do not falsely be assured. In one sense the answer to that is simple, it does not matter. The gifts are for the children of God and are not to be ‘adjusted’ due to liars, the devil and hypocrites. When you do so you poison the gifts from our Father to us. In a sense our duty is not to protect the hypocrite but the believer. This is how the Gospel gets alter A LOT. People are so afraid the definitive hypothetical hypocrite will be falsely assured they end up preaching another gospel altogether and loose the gospel just the same. In essence this is what happened between Rome and the later Credistics. They correctly recognize the error of Rome but threw out the Gospel in the Sacraments in an over correction, ending up with just as vain a view on baptism as Rome had. Paul actually answers this very charge concerning circumcision and the Word, “What if some did not believe…let God be true though every man a liar.” He didn’t mince words and he did ‘adjust’ the objective realities to ‘protect’ the liar/hypocrites.
Quote:
|
Now let me explain my rebaptism. You may conclude that I have crucified the Son of God afresh as F. N. Lee has accused me of but I know you would be wrong because I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day. I am convinced of Christ's Justifying work for me.
|
I don’t know about FNL, but I like to distinguish between those who did it blatantly and those due to lack of knowledge. The former disdain baptism, the later, like yourself, me in the past and others really desire to know the truth and if any of us did (like my dear wife) it was not unto malicious intent but ignorance. I want to make that clear, because we ALL do things we think scripture says then later learn and repent from it. That’s the reason I say true Gospel repentance, that is joyous and cheerful, not a legal repentance. So, I would not throw or do not intend to throw a flame the way Lee does.
Quote:
|
I believe I was baptized in a heretical way. I was told if I chose to be baptized God would forgive and cleans me from all of my past sin. I also understood that I needed to attend the Lord's Supper for a weekly recleansing from sin. This is Heresy and not biblical Christianity. I partook in this heresy. Baptism and the Lord's supper became a what can I do to keep myself cleansed from sin and acceptable to God pursuit. My faith was in the action of these ordinances themselves. I miserably failed at this and sunk into deeper sin.
|
Then all that was needed was to correct the false teaching to strengthen your faith. Because it’s not YOUR WORK as you explained, baptism or the Lord’s Supper, but God’s. You don’t DO these things to MERIT or EARN forgiveness, rather they are GIVEN TO YOU to assure you that YOU HAVE forgiveness. It goes back to the continuous battle we experience internally for the faith. Because our faith lives in tension with our life’s experiences. Thus, Paul says, “The life that I live in the flesh I LIVE BY faith.” That is against what experience tells me as the flesh, devil and world WAR against faith, the senses, the experiences to the contrary, I LIVE BY continual TRUST in Christ Who gave Himself for me. And baptism and the Lord’s Supper help me to know and remember this, they help assure me it is FOR ME in spite of everything else that says in some way “it is not for me”.
Your story is manifestly admitting you viewed baptism as man’s work and thus rejected it. And your saying, “I believe…”, not I know from the objective teachings of Scripture.
Quote:
(Luk 7:29) (When all the people heard this, and the tax collectors too, they declared God just, having been baptized with the baptism of John,
(Luk 7:30) but the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the purpose of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him.)
The point of this verse is that the Pharisees are rejecting the baptism because it is real objectively in the first place, not because it depends upon them believing it. That’s why they can reject it in unbelief…they DON’T believe it’s objective reality, THAT is what they are rejecting. To put it another way; if I don’t believe and I rejected your first baptism, what would I be rejecting if what you argue is true? Nothing, I would be rejecting a ‘nothing’ and this of course would be non-sense. It’s rather telling, and as a former atheist I can personally say this, that the reason unbelievers reject baptism is because they in a sense detect its objective reality, ironically better than the Baptist. The entire reason I rejected baptism for 32+ years was I knew its objective reality in identity with Christ and the name of God, I DIDN’T want it. I was not rejecting a “nothing” or the concept of faith itself. If baptism is subjectively real, that is only upon the one possessing faith, then it is fleetingly existing. When an unbeliever rejects baptism, he/she is rejecting A THING not a NOTHING. He’s not rejecting the ‘possession of faith’, he’s rejecting the object of faith. And the object of faith is what is seen for the reality of baptism, not faith itself.
Quote:
|
Well, that is kinda why I wanted to be baptized again. I was baptized under a heretical view and wanted to share God's testimony of saving me from sin by His free grace. That was not done in my first baptism. It was more of a confession and pronouncement of God's work on my behalf. I know I was not blaspheming God in any way by being rebaptized. I was declaring salvation is of the LORD and renouncing an heretical view of baptism.
|
I’m certain you sincerely you mean that, and the reality of your final true faith is WONDERFUL, I encourage that, please realize that, NEVER DOUBT THAT. However, the action does not declare that. Because the events must be taken as a whole not isolated packets. You are attaching words, testimonial, that does not match up with the visible testimony or reality. What the visible events say, which you do not really want them to say, is this: The first baptism was false BECAUSE I didn’t have faith, ergo, baptism is based and real based upon the possession of faith. I was baptized a second time to be consistent with this and this too testifies to the reality that baptism is rooted and based upon faith, and in reality “MY” faith. This is the testimony THIS gives. The viewer sees THIS. The viewer is then thrust upon looking to YOUR faith and not the cross, the focus is on YOU and not the Gospel and baptism IS pointing to and testifying to FAITH or “God’s work in you”. BUT, the Gospel, which is what we are to testify to and not us, IS NOT ABOUT US OR GOD’s work IN US. IT is about the Cross of Christ. YOUR faith and God’s work in YOUR life as wonderous as it is TO YOU is of absolutely NO heavenly or earthly good to anyone. They must see the Cross of Christ not “how I’ve been changed or delivered or saved”. The testimony must be singular both in Word and Sacrament. The testimony must NOT be baptism is pointing to faith, but baptism is pointing to Christ, the name of God, the promise of salvation, the assurance of it, the blood and the water, the cleansing of the blood is as CERTAIN as the water that pours over the body, the name of God is SURE salvation, the authority of God is certain unto salvation. That’s the testimony of visible baptism. Baptism is not just FOR the receiver but the viewers as well: It says, “Here is salvation”. NOBODY becomes baptized for ANY OTHER REASON than to be saved. It is nonsense to speak of baptism in any other way. Baptism is not a false testimonial lie, it is truth because it is rooted in the objectivity of the Word of God and the Name.
Blessings always,
Larry
Linear Mode
