Home Topics Index Download
Transcript 357A — Do I Need to be Rebaptised?
HC: Good evening. Welcome to Open Forum.
CALLER: Yes. I was wondering. I'm a born again Christian. And since I became a Christian, I haven't been baptized. But now I understand that you said that if you've ever been baptized. When I was about eighteen or nineteen I was baptized, and I thought I was a Christian, but I wasn't. And so now I don't know if I should bet baptized, since I have become a Christian. Anyway, I would like you to comment on this, and I'll take my answer over the air.
HC: All right. Fine. Thank you.
The question is, if I was baptized in water at some time in the past, and now later on I discover that I was not a child of God at that time, but now I've seen the light, I've surrendered my heart to Christ and I am born again, should I be baptized in water again?
Let me give you two illustrations. In Acts 8 the Samaritans were baptized by Phillip. They were not saved. The internal evidence of Acts 8 indicates they were not saved at the time, but they were properly baptized in water, in the Name of Christ. Phillip had just misjudged their true condition. But the Bible indicates that they had not received the Holy Spirit. And if we do not have the Holy Spirit, we are not saved, according to what salvation is.
When Peter and John came there, they did become born again, the Bible indicates. They were not re-baptized, because they had already been baptized in water, anticipating their salvation, actually. In Acts 19 we have the account of the approximately 12 Ephesians. The evangelist Apollos apparently was the one who preached to them, and he was not as well versed in the scriptures as he might have been. So he preached to them more or less from an Old Testament vantage point. And when he thought they had been saved, he baptized them with John the Baptist's baptism.
Later on, when Paul came there to examine the situation, Paul discovered they were not saved. They did become born again, and they were re-baptized in the Name of Christ, that is, with New Testament baptism. Now what was the difference?
The difference is that the baptism of John was Old Testament ritualistic ceremonial baptism. It was anticipating the cross. It had a different meaning to it because it was still looking for the coming of the Messiah. The New Testament water baptism looked back on the cross as an accomplished fact, and this is the baptism that the New Testament believers were to be baptized with.
How can we bring this then to bear on a modern day situation? If the baptism we were baptized with in water was legitimate, Biblical baptism, that is, those who baptized us had a proper view of the Scriptures, insofar as water baptism is concerned, even though we were not saved at the time, it would still stand as a valid baptism. On the other hand, if we were baptized by a church or congregation or denomination, at a time when we were not saved, and it was not a valid Biblical baptism, that is, it had connotations or meanings that were contrary to the Word of God, then it would seem to me that you would want to be baptized again, now that you have become saved, as the experience of the twelve Ephesians in Acts 19 would indicate.
If we did not know, in other words, we may have been an infant or a child when we were baptized, and we have no idea what the church we went to taught concerning infant baptism, we had no recollection, no suspicion even that it was a superstitious kind of a thing, or whatever, then it would be far better to be baptized again.
I hope this answers the question.