Repeat Baptisms Spinoff

[Prufrock]

Bill Brown --

I appreciated your first response post on the "Credobapist and Repeat Baptism" Thread. It's certainly good to know that our the "stereotypes" we have of credos aren't true.

But, the question does hit on a question I've had for quite a while (if it's been discussed here before, I apologize; I must not be typing in the correct keywords in the search engine). How does "rebaptism" relate to church discipline?

In other words: a man professes and is baptized. Two years later he is caught in the midst of a few month affair with another women. He is brought up on discipline and excommunicated. Several months later, he is readmitted to fellowship. Now -- how is it determined whether he is a.) in fact a true believer who has merely "slipped," and thus is only subject to church discipline, subsequent to which he will be restored, or b.) his baptism was invalid because he apparently was not a true believer, and is therefore to be "rebaptized" (sorry, I can't think of what else to call it) when he returns to the church?

I realize this is probably way over simplistic; but I'm honestly inquiring into how you as an elder with credo-baptist beliefs make that distinction. Thanks for your help.

 

[Iconoclast]

Bill Brown --

I appreciated your first response post on the "Credobapist and Repeat Baptism" Thread. It's certainly good to know that our the "stereotypes" we have of credos aren't true.

But, the question does hit on a question I've had for quite a while (if it's been discussed here before, I apologize; I must not be typing in the correct keywords in the search engine). How does "rebaptism" relate to church discipline?

In other words: a man professes and is baptized. Two years later he is caught in the midst of a few month affair with another women. He is brought up on discipline and excommunicated. Several months later, he is readmitted to fellowship. Now -- how is it determined whether he is a.) in fact a true believer who has merely "slipped," and thus is only subject to church discipline, subsequent to which he will be restored, or b.) his baptism was invalid because he apparently was not a true believer, and is therefore to be "rebaptized" (sorry, I can't think of what else to call it) when he returns to the church?

I realize this is probably way over simplistic; but I'm honestly inquiring into how you as an elder with credo-baptist beliefs make that distinction. Thanks for your help.

A] If he is re-admitted to fellowship, that indicates repentance from his sin.

This issue that is being discussed is more about -assurance of salvation- rather than baptism/rebaptism.
A sinning believer is not going to be walking in assurance of faith. Feelings and emotions are erratic and subjective. Salvation is an objective truth and reality in a child of God. God's work and promise is sovereign. All sin is forgiven, past, present, and future sin.
Every sin does not need re-baptism as much as it needs fresh repentance,and confessing and forsaking that sin.
Salvation is of the Lord. All of it. Phil 1:6
Developing godliness and pursuing holiness in every area of life avoids much of this wrangling about how many baptisms and which baptism was effective. The verse in 1Pet 3:21 speaks of the answer of a good conscience. If it is believer's baptism to begin with, the work of the Spirit will be ongoing. If it unbeliever's baptism to begin with, anything is possible

 

[Herald]

Paul, I think your question is answered HERE.

 

[Prufrock]

Thanks, Anthony, but I think I may not have made my question clear enough.

When that previously baptized (whether you decide it had been valid or not) person repents and comes back to the church after his affair, what is the criterion for the baptist to determine whether or not his profession was real the first time or not (i.e., whether his previous baptism had been valid and he now simply needs to be restored to fellowship, or whether he is now making true profession for the first time and so must be baptized)?

-----Added 1/22/2009 at 08:51:35 EST-----

Thanks, Bill. There was some helpful stuff in there.

1.) Is that the typical view?
2.) What are the circumstances, if any, under which you think a person should be baptized "again" who had previously made profession?

 

[Herald]

Thanks, Bill. There was some helpful stuff in there.

1.) Is that the typical view?
2.) What are the circumstances, if any, under which you think a person should be baptized "again" who had previously made profession?

1.) Not among mainline Baptists. I can't answer for the majority of RB's, but I believe my position would be held by more than a few.

2.) I can't think of a valid reason for re-baptism after a profession of faith for the reasons I gave in the linked post.

 

[Iconoclast]

Thanks, Anthony, but I think I may not have made my question clear enough.

When that previously baptized (whether you decide it had been valid or not) person repents and comes back to the church after his affair, what is the criterion for the baptist to determine whether or not his profession was real the first time or not (i.e., whether his previous baptism had been valid and he now simply needs to be restored to fellowship, or whether he is now making true profession for the first time and so must be baptized)?

Paul,
We take people at their profession. Any Christian takes people at their profession. It is not for us to determine whether or not a persons profession was or is real unless open sin becomes the issue .
In Love we might see what we consider weakness, or inconsistency in a persons walk. We might seek to come along side that person to help them.

1Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.

2Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.

3For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.

4But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another.

5For every man shall bear his own burden.

6Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things.

7Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

If someone conceals sin,and we in our judgment of charity admit such a person into the fellowship and he wrongs someone, God will avenge that sin.
If you are around any church long enough you will see such persons come and go. Their sin against other believers, is in reality sin against Christ himself.

19Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses.

20Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.

21I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality.

22Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be partaker of other men's sins: keep thyself pure.

23Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities.

24Some men's sins are open beforehand, going before to judgment; and some men they follow after.

25Likewise also the good works of some are manifest beforehand; and they that are otherwise cannot be hid.

That is how I understand this section of scripture among others.
We obey the commands of scripture as best we can, leaving the results to God.