Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected
| PentecostalTheology.com
No, not really. There are no scriptural precedents for rebaptizing and, if it’s a sacrament THAT is God’s “sovereign redemption” by grace. I understand why some people want to be rebaptized if they were really spiritually participating for whatever reason and I suppose that’s okay. It is theologically problematic.
Jim Gilles
Only after they are born again.
Brian Roden
Just an anecdote: I was listening to Preston Sprinkle’s interview with R. C. Sproul Jr last night. Sproul was raised Presbyterian (paedobaptist) and of course was baptized as an infant. He currently attends a credo-baptist church. When applying for membership, he went to the church elders and explained that while he personally holds to paedobaptism because of his Reformed theology, and felt his baptism as an infant was valid, if they felt he should be re-baptized before joining the church, he would submit to their decision. I found that to be a very mature attitude toward it.
Isara Mo
Were they ” baptized” in the first place?..
Isara Mo
The baby Jesus was an ” exceptional baby” was not baptized as an infant until he was 30 years old..
Men…can create anything then say “God said it”
Varnel Watson
Joe Absher I am still wondering if Wayne Scott will pop up from somewhere claiming water baptism is work of salvation
Joe Absher
I gonna pray for Wayne Scott again today. Him and Robert Erwine with his “may God strike me dead” remarks.
Varnel Watson
pop country song calls for baptism in holy water and shine – modern day charismatics got plenty of both Alan Smith 🙂
Robert Erwine
The Lord have given me prophetic word and now ” you will pray for me ” oh no watch your step joe!
Joe Absher
God bless you and keep you in Jesus name
Kelly Crites
Both sides of this debate have a great points actually. I go with Believers baptism though.
Varnel Watson
Kelly Crites what about my 3rd side?
Kelly Crites
Troy Day for some reason I can’t see the OP.
Wayne Scott
if you want to be rebaptized DON’T TELL THE CALVINISTS! Back in history the Anabaptist movement was birthed by people rejecting Calvinism and returning to the simplicity of original Christianity. They not only stopped infant baptism but many of them, upon becoming adults, were rebaptized. The Anabaptists were pacifists.
Calvinists stormed their towns and persecuted them. Sometimes they would line them up beside lakes and rivers, chain them with heavy irons, and force them to walk out into the water till it was over their heads. Calvinists laughingly call this “the third baptism.”
Wayne Scott
🙂 Troy Day and Joe Absher. Nope. I’m not against water baptism and do not consider it to be what saves us. It is an outward expression of an inward commitment. The Churches of Christ preachers in town have tried to recruit me but I just don’t fit. 🙂
Kelly Crites
Wayne Scott??
Kelly Crites
Never stops does it?
Wayne Scott
Kelly. I try to be as nice as Jesus was in Matt 23. I.e:
13“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the door of the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to. [14] b
15“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when you have succeeded, you make them twice as much a child of hell as you are.
Kelly Crites
Wayne Scott it’s weird because you don’t come across the way you think you do. You’re extremely divisive and combative.
Wayne Scott
I once preached a sermon entitled “Repent of the Sin of Not Name Calling.” I quoted from Jesus, Paul, and Peter.
Wayne Scott
Kelly. That is what my pastor told me 25 years ago when I began seeing what I’m teaching. He was telling me that he teaches the same but I just must be doing it wrong to have so many people complaining. When I told my friends that he had said this is what he teaches, they laughed.
Nevertheless I labored for about a year under the burden that if I could teach this gospel perfectly then people wouldn’t get mad. Then it occurred to me that when Jesus preached it perfectly, carnal religious people murdered Him.
Acts 7
51“You stiff-necked people! Your hearts and ears are still uncircumcised. You are just like your ancestors: You always resist the Holy Spirit! 52Was there ever a prophet your ancestors did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him…”
And in John 8:30-44 when Jesus told those faith alone believers that they had to live for God to be saved, they tried to kill Him (vs. 37).
Kelly Crites
Wayne Scott but you believe the book that he wrote is flawed. Correct? So he must be flawed right? It also seems that you preach a Salvation that is Grace plus Works. Which is a completely different gospel than Jesus preach. You’ll gather a bunch of scriptures that you have to do eisegetical gymnastics to make it mean what you want it to mean. There is a path before each person that seems right, but it ends in death. Either you believe the scriptures or you don’t. You cannot translate them by your own opinion. You can’t just create your own Doctrine and then when people disagree act like you’re being persecuted the way that Jesus was.
Wayne Scott
Kelly Crites. Jesus taught true salvation by grace through faith. Can you show me where?
Kelly Crites
Wayne Scott The Apostle Paul was chosen by Jesus himself to represent the gospel to us. Paul couldn’t have been any clearer than it is by grace that we have been saved through faith and this is not of our own doing but it is a gift from God so that no one may boast.
Wayne Scott
Your Honor! That was non-responsive!
Wayne Scott
I disagree with Reformers redefining grace and faith to make it look like Paul taught a different gospel than did his Master. The student is not above his Master.
Wayne Scott
I agree with MacArthur saying (1) Jesus came to preach the gospel, (2) His is the only gospel there is, and (3) if we preach another gospel we are accursed (Gal 1).
Kelly Crites
Wayne Scott a Works based salvation is absolute heresy. We are saved by works but they are by Christ’s works. Now I agree that if a person claims to be a believer, but has no good works in his/her life, then he/she likely does not have genuine faith in Christ. But we are not saved by works but we are saved for works. Jesus said you will know them by their fruit. It would be absolutely absurd to claim to be a Christian but produce any fruit. You are saved for works that were prepared for you beforehand.
Wayne Scott
You “liked” my last comment but continue to ignore my question:
//Jesus taught true salvation by grace through faith. Can you show me where?//
Kelly Crites
Wayne Scott do you not believe the Apostle Paul? Did Jesus teach against faith alone? The problem here is you don’t believe in the inerrancy of scripture. If you did then you would believe this. Byyourlogic you would be one of the ones that would have to say along with the world that Jesus didn’t speak out against homosexuality but Paul did but since Jesus never preached against it and it must be okay.
Wayne Scott
…and can you show me salvation by grace through faith in the opening of Romans (1:1-2:16) including the salvation of the 2:12-16 person?
My understanding of salvation by grace through faith allows me to see it in Jesus’ gospel and in the opening of Romans.
Wayne Scott
I’m a Paul fan and have out debated Paul bashers by showing them that their idea that Paul taught a different gospel is based in the Reformed habit of making up definitions for grace and faith.
Wayne Scott
My arguments shut down my friend’s Paul bashing site. Then my friend “unfriended” me. 🙁
Wayne Scott
And he had invited me there to convert me.
Wayne Scott
He “unfriended” me publicly in Pelagian Theology.
Kelly Crites
Wayne Scott Wayne just remember that all scripture is in agreement. It was written perfectly. And all scripture is god-breathed and can be used for correction. All scripture. So what Jesus said and what Paul said. I don’t know what is reformed about simply quoting scripture like we are saved by grace through faith and this is not of our own doing but it is a gift from God so that no man May boast. There’s nothing reformed about that scripture it couldn’t be any more clearer.
Kelly Crites
Wayne Scott by the way Jesus taught in John 3 “Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, so that everyone who believes in him will have eternal life”. Now what can you possibly do to twist that into your favor?
The thief had his hands and feet bound to the cross and he could not perform any good works. He could not get off the cross and get baptized, but what he could do is look to Christ and believe and be saved. And he was.
Wayne Scott
I know Reformers read this as “believe in the Penal Sub theory of atonement but I agree with MacArthur saying that “‘To believe’ means ‘to obey’.”
And the thief on the cross had the change of heart we call repentance as evidence by him defending Jesus with his last words.
Kelly Crites
Wayne Scott yes and then MacArthur will go on to say that he is only able to obey because he has been given a new heart first.
Wayne Scott
And then, in the same book, he argues twice that the Romans 3:10-18 description of vile practicing sinners describes Christians. Even Calvin did not agree with Luther on that one.
And then he goes on to say that all that saves us is that Jesus paid the price for our ongoing sins, which is a gospel Jesus ever taught. And he markets the whole bait-and-switch under the name “The Gospel According to Jesus.”
Kelly Crites
Wayne Scott and yes that is the message repent and believe the gospel. Nothing more nothing less.
Joe Absher
have you ever noticed when you mention Jesus Christ its only to praise yourself?
Wayne Scott
I’m praising myself to say I follow Jesus? “Follower of Christ” used to be the definition of “Christian.”
Wayne Scott
Most of my posts are to say that the only gospel is the one Jesus taught.
Kelly Crites
Wayne Scott then preach the gospel that Jesus taught brother.
Wayne Scott
I do. He and I preach pure repentance salvation.
Wayne Scott
And after the cross this is the gospel He told Paul to preach:
Acts 26
15And I said, ‘Who are you, Lord?’ And the Lord said, ‘I am Jesus whom you are persecuting. 16But rise and stand upon your feet, for I have appeared to you for this purpose, to appoint you as a servant and witness to the things in which you have seen me and to those in which I will appear to you, 17delivering you from your people and from the Gentiles—to whom I am sending you 18to open their eyes, so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.’
19“Therefore, O King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision, 20but declared first to those in Damascus, then in Jerusalem and throughout all the region of Judea, and also to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, performing deeds in keeping with their repentance. 21For this reason the Jews seized me in the temple and tried to kill me.
Wayne Scott
But when you mix that with the Calvinist/Lutheran idea that we cannot obey Jesus, what are you left with?
Kelly Crites
Wayne Scott why do you always quote John MacArthur to defend yourself but you disagree with his theology completely?
Kelly Crites
Wayne Scott I’m going to go ahead and quit this conversation. This went on longer than I wanted it to. Be blessed my brother.
Wayne Scott
He got some things right so I quote those to Reformers. Even a blind hog finds an acorn sometimes. 🙂
Wayne Scott
Blessings, Brother.
Nora Neel-Toney
Yes because an infant doesn’t know or understand the significance of baptism
Louise Cummings
Yes.
Fred Kemp
No ok when they get old enough to no there doing
Varnel Watson
were you baptized as a child Philip Williams
Philip Williams
Troy Day about 14. I have my certificate but I am not sure that I understood what it was all about. So that would be equivalent to pedo-baptism.
We were Pentecostal. My mother contended that her Baptist baptism was sufficient.
I guess if one gets saved every year like the Baptist young people, re-baptism would be in order.
Varnel Watson
We were Pentecostal – a true statement for many today with accent on were…
Steven Pierce
Yes in Jesus name
Varnel Watson
are of the oneness faith indeed?
Penny Moore
I’m sure it is a way to dedicate the children… z a dedication is what we do
William DeArteaga
Very interesting. I have never had a word from the Lord on this, nor felt an inclination to do it.
William DeArteaga
I have never had a word from the Lord on this,nor had a leading to do i t.
Varnel Watson
I say like Jesus – and baptize them ALL
Ray E Horton
An infant cannot but faith in Jesus, so infant baptism is meaningless, other than maybe for dedication. When one is Born Again, they should follow-up with water baptism as an outward sign of what has already happened on the inside.
Anonymous
James Philemon Bowers when you said
No, not really. There are no scriptural precedents for rebaptizing and, if it’s a sacrament THAT is God’s “sovereign redemption” by grace. I understand why some people want to be rebaptized if they were really spiritually participating for whatever reason and I suppose that’s okay. It is theologically problematic.
did you mean the infant baptism for Methodists
or the Catholic one which Philip Williams gets from the pope?
Dale M. Coulter Duane L Burgess Kyle Williams who is reformed may know https://www.facebook.com/groups/640123439376008/search/?q=baptized%20again
Media: https://www.facebook.com/groups/pentecostaltheologygroup/
Anonymous
I really appreciated your second sentence that if one believes that it is a Sacrament then it’s God’s redemption.
Anonymous
well this is what Philip Williams thinks the pope has done for him at times
Anonymous
Troy Day de Pope did not falsely accuse me.
Anonymous
Infants shouldn’t be baptized in the first place. Baptism is for the believer that understands the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. That believer is also baptized as a confession that the old man has died and that they are raised to a newness of life in Christ.
Anonymous
but James Philemon Bowers says it is OK for Philip Williams not to be re-baptized What shall he do since the pope himself dripped waters on him?
Anonymous
Troy Day I just rebaptized a 22 year old man yesterday evening that was baptized as a child. He himself testified that at that age he did not understand the gospel. Before I baptized him he told the onlookers that he now loves the Lord and that he is going to strive to live as close to God as he can. He stated that he was a sinner and the life he now lives he lives by faith in the Son of God that have Himself for him. It wasca very touching testimony before we went into the water
Anonymous
Vernon Dalton to baptized a man on a TU night you must be a baptist
Anonymous
Troy Day
Media: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=24459009657031461&set=p.24459009657031461&type=3
Anonymous
Media: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=24459010640364696&set=p.24459010640364696&type=3
Anonymous
Media: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=24459011010364659&set=p.24459011010364659&type=3
Anonymous
seems like yall were remaking Oh Brother where art thou Link Hudson was a Baptist at one time or another before he became a church hoppper but never specified if he got baptized in the Spirit there or at all
Anonymous
Troy Day no sir. I’ll never in my life identify as a Baptist. I teach a group of young adults on Tuesday nights. We done a baptism instead of class last night
Anonymous
well Link Hudson identify as a Baptist @ one time or another but not Philip Williams he got sprinkled straight from the popish seat
Anonymous
Troy Day if for no other reason, I’d get rebaptized to wash off anything that the pope put on me
Anonymous
Troy Day I said I went to a Baptist international church when I was on Korea for a year and that was the English speaking church in town. My family were the Pentecostals among Baptist relatives though I found out my paternal grandmother who passed away when I was very young was from a Church of God family. My parents started going to an A/G when I was 2.
When did ever identify as Baptist?
Anonymous
What proof have you presented to any of this? Link Hudson
Anonymous
Troy Day Proof that I went to a Baptist church in South Korea? I don’t think those life details are worth proving. I’m not testifying on a witness stand.
Anonymous
Dale M. Coulter James Philemon Bowers But there are two problems: 1) A close examination of the evolution of Irwin’s movement strongly suggests that the Fire-Baptized movement neither spread nor organized that quickly. For example, by the beginning of the Shearer Schoolhouse revival, Irwin had only ministered the fire in Iowa and perhaps Oklahoma. As late as the beginning of 1897, when Irwin was making his first preaching venture into the South, he was still organizing congregations for his Wesleyan Methodist denomination. And he did not organize any state associations (even in Iowa) until the second half of that year, perhaps not until after his revelation that dynamite can follow the fire greatly accelerated opposition to his teachings. If Irwin’s movement did not spread, radicalize, or organize as quickly as hitherto thought, it no longer seems as plausible that the Fire-Baptism movement could have moved into Beniah, Coker Creek, or Camp Creek during 1896 2) But even if the Fire-Baptized revival did somehow spread into the region by 1896, Daniel Awrey was not its apostle. He had left Tennessee for Texas before the movement began and did not return until 1898. Awrey was indeed living and ministering in the area beginning in 1893. https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/two-major-problems-with-spurling-and-the-fire-baptized-revival-of-coker-creek-camp-creek/
Anonymous
This monograph completes Frank Macchia’s fifteen year labor towards con- structing a systematic theology proceeding from the Classical Pentecostal assent on Spirit baptism. I believe this is the first ever full blown Pentecostal ecclesiology; a quest he first proposed in his 2005 “prolegomena”-functioning book, Baptized in the Spirit: A Global Pentecostal Theology; thereafter followed by his Justified in the Spirit (2010) and Jesus the Spirit Baptizer (2018) volumes.
Foundational to Macchia’s theological method are three integrated sources: the New Testament Spirit baptism metaphor; the Acts 2 Pentecost event; and the unique spirituality these themes have historically fostered within Classical Pentecostalism (5, 13). I would say that Macchia’s deeper “point https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/?p=172484
Anonymous
Duane L Burgess Kyle Williams Link Hudson Oscar Valdez Philip Williams 189 Azusa and Other Experience Myths: The Long and Winding Road from to Stated Belief and Back Again Jean-Daniel Plüss* Those must have been marvelous days, when signs and wonders were accompanying the early days of the Pentecostal revival at the beginning of this century. The more Pentecostals search the roots of their movement, the more evidence is found that a charismatic spirituality lies at the heart of the Pentecostal phenomenon that has brought an impulse of renewal to twentieth-century Christianity. I believe that Pentecostals need to learn to appreciate their past metaphorically in order to recover and incorporate that early charismatic spirituality into today’s Christian experience. Spiritual thirst today will not be quenched by mere deductive propositions and statements of doctrine. In order to illustrate my point, I invite you first to look at the concept of “initial evidence” as it has been discussed in the recent book edited by Gary B. McGee.1 In a second step, I will illustrate the difficulties arising from a conceptualization, or should I say objectivization, of such a phenomenon. Then, I will suggest reasons and provide tools that encourage believers of today to find their way back to the roots and the early spirituality of Pentecostalism, without, at the same time, rejecting some of the information and interpretive understandings that Pentecostals have gathered from a critical, analytical approach. It is a journey from the marvelous memories of early Pentecostalism, to hypothetic-deductive procedures, and back to a mythic consciousness of God’s Spirit working among God’s people today. Initial Evidence: > A Doctrine, or the Magic Agent in a Fairy Tale? If a Pentecostal in the United States, in the United Kingdom, in Sweden or in Switzerland were asked, how the Pentecostal Movement started, the most likely answer would be: “Well, it started when they were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in tongues.” Apparently, glossolalia was a remarkable sign or evidence of the new outpouring of the Spirit. It was, as a gift of God’s Spirit, a common denominator that brought people from different places, different colors, and different backgrounds together. As many came from the Holiness Movement, they understood the sign of tongues as a further step *Jean-Daniel Plüss is editor of the EPTA Bulletin, the Journal of the European Pentecostal Theological Association. the 1 garb B. McGee, ed., Initial Evidence: Historical and Biblical Perspectives on Pentecostal Doctrine of Spirit Baptism (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1991). 1 190 towards the restoration of the full Gospel as in the days of the Book of Acts.’ Up to 1907 there was even a consensus that speaking in in tongues, the form of xenoglossa, was a utilitarian necessity for the evangelization of the world.’ It is easy to understand that speaking in tongues as a sign of Spirit baptism became a pivotal point for the new revival. Baptism in the Holy Spirit would bring power for ministry and tongues; healings and miracles would testify to a divine outpouring of grace to the world. So, at the beginning, speaking in tongues was appreciated as a phenomenon of God’s grace. It had not been elevated yet to the status of a doctrine.” It was first and foremost an experience whose form was described in biblical language. Probably the earliest reference to “initial evidence” is found in the “Statement of Fundamental Truths” of the Assemblies of God, written in 1916. Only a few years later the preferential term had become “initial physical evidence.” Later again one could hear the term “indispensable initial physical evidence.,,5 In view of rising controversy and a struggle for identification with, as well as differentiation from, other Christian communities, the perception of a spiritual phenomenon changed to a shibboleth of orthodoxy. It is not the intention of this article to assess the doctrinal value of such statements; on the contrary, I would like to analyze the rationale that led to this conceptualization and suggest an interpretation of its consequences. The rationale that led to this conceptualization has a secular as well as a religious aspect. From a secular point of view the predominant philosophy for the first generation of Pentecostals was influenced by a dualistic positivist objectivism. The performance of the empirical sciences was strong; political and social views were pronounced.6 One did not need to belong to the well-educated classes Book of 2 Gary B. McGee, “Early Pentecostal Hermeneutics:
Anonymous
Yes, Scripture nowhere teaches infant baptism. Baptism is for those who have been born again.
Anonymous
What proof have you presented to any of this? Duane L Burgess
Anonymous
Yes they should…
Anonymous
What proof have you presented to any of this? William Lance Huget
Anonymous
Troy Day Books are written about it. I have not proved anything nor would you accept my proofs.
The Bible does NOT teach infant baptism, so it is invalid.
It does command believer’s baptism (but does not teach baptismal regeneration), so the normative pattern would be to be baptized as a believer vs baby (innocent). The Jews who had Jewish baptisms were rebaptized as Christians. Those who John Baptist baptism were rebaptized as Christians post-resurrection.
That is an argument and proof to me.
Anonymous
Yes
Anonymous
What proof have you presented to any of this? Derek Godfrey
Anonymous
Troy Day infant baptism is not in the Bible or the Didache.
Anonymous
Derek Godfrey says WHO? plenty of examples out there
Anonymous
Troy Day chapter and verse
Anonymous
Troy Day the concept of Baptism is for a believer to make an informed decision about being baptized and what it means. Not to mention infant baptism is not mentioned in the Bible, nor the Didache.
Anonymous
Derek Godfrey what chapter and verse?
Anonymous
Troy Day that you claim mentions infant baptism
Anonymous
Derek Godfrey says who/? I never made no such claim
Anonymous
Troy Day “Derek Godfrey says WHO? plenty of examples out there”
Anonymous
Derek Godfrey give us plenty of examples out there then
Anonymous
Troy Day you said there are plenty of examples, yet have not provided any. My original statement is there are no examples of infant baptism in the Bible.
Anonymous
Derek Godfrey they are ALL the same to me – what proof do you have?
Anonymous
Repentance and faith are prerequisites for baptism. Acts 8:37, Acts 2:38, Mark 16:16. Baptism is for those who have become disciples of Jesus. Matthew 28:19.
Infant baptism is not a legitimate baptism. Therefore baptizing a new believer is a first not a second baptism.