Is at that place always a justification for existence "re-baptized"? I have questioned my baptism. I was very immature and really did not comprehend the seriousness of what I was doing. I have considered being baptized again, just some say that it would non be right to be baptized a second time.

Your question is a very legitimate one. There are some people, even among religious leaders, who oppose any grade of re-baptism.

For instance, in 1996, the General Briefing of the United Methodist Church at a convention conducted in Denver, Colorado debated the affair of re-baptism. A position paper issued by the conference alleged that Methodists who were baptized as infants should never be baptized again. The document explicitly stated:

"Whether a baptized infant grows up to be a professing Christian or non, that baptism stands valid."

This position is flawed in many particulars, having no scriptural support whatsoever.

New Testament Precedent for Beingness Immersed a Second Time

While on his third missionary campaign, the apostle Paul came to the urban center of Ephesus. There, he encountered twelve men who formerly had been baptized with the type of baptism administered past John the Baptizer.

One might be inclined to conclude, therefore, that the apostle would have accepted these men equally they were and merely organized them into a church building.

But such was not the instance. After questioning them as to the nature of their earlier baptism and determining that their pre-baptism teaching on the previous occasion had been lacking in essential details, Paul immersed these men into Christ (see Acts 19:i-5). A uncomplicated understanding of the text reveals that their first baptism was deficient in some fashion.

And hither is an extremely of import implication of this instance of re-baptism. The case conspicuously demonstrates that in order for one's baptism to exist valid, accurate teaching and agreement must precede the rite. Otherwise, the human action of baptism is a meaningless do and not based on faith (Rom. x:17).

True Baptism — A Quondam Act

Genuine baptism is needed only i time in a person'south life. Once a person has been baptized according to the total complement of scriptural instructions, he or she never has the need to echo this new-birth process (cf. Jn. iii:3-v).

After a person has entered the family of Christ through baptism (one Cor. 12:13; cf. Gal. iii:26-27), he is a part of the church, the household (family unit) of God (1 Tim. 3:15; cf. Eph. 2:19-22). The new Christian has access to all of the spiritual benefits of the in-Christ relationship (Eph. ane:three).

As a son or daughter of God inside that sacred environment, the Christian prays to the heavenly Father for his or her personal needs by means of prayer (see Acts viii:22, 24; cf. Jas. five:16) — including forgiveness for sins as we fail to live perfectly earlier God (cf. ane Jn. i:eight; 2:1).

Qualifications for Baptism

Unfortunately, there are many in today'southward world of Christendom that exercise a form of what they call "baptism."

When we compare what is expert and taught by many with what the Bible teaches, we can come across that a diverseness of doctrinal errors accept developed that are non found in God's word. Those corruptions invalidate a baptism and brand it of none effect.

Therefore, many who accept been administered what was called "baptism" but, in fact is non truthful biblical baptism, need to be baptized once more — this fourth dimension with a more accurate understanding that precedes the event, only like the example in Acts 19:1-5.

Here are some situations in which re-baptism would be warranted.

Baptism without organized religion or understanding

If ane was "baptized" as an infant, thus was lacking personal faith (Mk. 16:16; Acts 11:21), he should repudiate the meaningless earlier rite in which he had no controlling power, even though his parents were sincere in subjecting him to the procedure.

In genuine faith, he should submit to the command in the proper way. Infants have neither the demand nor the power to respond to the gospel of Christ.

The same would be true for young children too young or young to sympathize their accountability to the plan of conservancy.

Information technology is a tender thing to observe immature children who want to delight God. But many times, their desire precedes their understanding and accountability for personal sin.

If an adult concludes that they need to be re-baptized because they were baptized equally an infant or equally a sincere but immature child, we would encourage them to exist immersed in religion and obedience. Thus, they can exist assured of the forgiveness of their sins. Their decision will bring peace of mind and confidence past knowing they are obeying God from the heart with full understanding.

Baptism without immersion

If i was "baptized" in some fashion other than by immersion, and so he needs to exist baptized with the proper grade. The word "baptism" literally translated means immersion, not sprinkling or pouring.

True baptism pictures the burying and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The sinner is buried in h2o and raised from this symbolic grave (cf. Rom. 6:3-iv; Col. two:12) just as the Lord was buried and so raised from the expressionless.

True baptism validates and proclaims ane's faith in the decease and resurrection events. Beingness sprinkled with water or having water poured upon the head is no baptism at all. Such substitutes are without sanction in the New Attestation. They are post-apostolic innovations.

Baptism without repentance

Baptism without truthful repentance is also ineffectual. I once heard about a man who emerged from the baptismal puddle, turned to his wife, and said: "I hope you're satisfied!"

No who is baptized without proper motive (and other prerequisites) can have validity in the divine scheme of things. Even John warned those who came to be baptized for a testify without repentance. Only God's wrath awaited those who were baptized with such false pretenses (Mt. 3:vii).

Baptism without organized religion

If i is "baptized" without a sound organized religion, the ritual would exist of no avail.

1 might feel, for instance, that Jesus was a good homo, perhaps even a "perfect man" — as the "Jehovah's Witnesses" allege. As sincere as these may be, they deny that Christ is the Son of God (i.e., deity).

And yet, for various other reasons, they might desire to be baptized. But baptism grounded on false faith cannot be accounted as 18-carat.

Baptism without purpose

If 1 has yielded to baptism for some purpose other than that which is supplied by God'southward word, he has not obeyed the Lord.

Baptism is never defined as "an outward sign of an inward grace." It is not a mere representation of redemption for those who have already received forgiveness.

The purpose of baptism is "for the remission of sins" (Acts 2:38), to have sins "washed abroad" (Acts 22:16), to put the candidate "into Christ" (Rom. half dozen:3-iv; Gal. three:26-27), or into his "body" (1 Cor. 12:13). At this point, he is "saved" (Mk. sixteen:16; 1 Pet. three:21).

The mutual resistance to the biblical proposition that baptism comes earlier salvation constitutes a assuming rejection of the plainly testimony of Scripture. One cannot exist immersed "for the remission of sins" (Acts 2:38), if he believes his sins have been remitted already.

Your soul is as well valuable, the program is also uncomplicated and the remedy as well easy to access to gamble — hoping that a onetime "baptism" volition be alright in spite of the deficiencies associated therewith.

If you take any question about a previous baptism, I would encourage you to be safe and adapt for your baptism according to your informed knowledge.

If nosotros may assist you in this regard, feel free to contact us for counsel.