Baptism question...

  • Thread starter Thread starter josephback
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

josephback

Guest
Hi. So I’m early in the process of joining the Catholic Church. The Catechism says that only those who have not been baptized may be baptized. I was baptized twice. Once as an infant in the Missouri Synod Lutherans, and once by choice in the Assemblies of God(I.e. believer’s baptism). I also had Roman Catholic foster parents and have sent my foster mother a message asking if THEY had me baptized. Assuming the answer though is no, would either of the other two baptisms be considered valid by the Church? It was a Trinitarian formula. It pretty much mocks baptism that I had it done twice, but I was poorly taught you might say. It seems to me it would mock it more to happen three times. Anyway, what’s the answer? Thanks in advance.
 
Baptism in the Lutheran church is valid. The AOG church is not, as they do not have an adequate understanding of sacraments and therefore cannot intend to do what the church does.
 
Baptism in the Lutheran church is valid. The AOG church is not, as they do not have an adequate understanding of sacraments and therefore cannot intend to do what the church does.
The Church does not reject Assembly of God baptism. They have a Trinitarian baptism.
 
The Church does not reject Assembly of God baptism. They have a Trinitarian baptism.
I don’t think that’s always the case. I knew an AOG whose church baptized “in the name of the Lord Jesus.” That would be a defect in form.

But the OP is surely Baptized by virtue of his first event. The AOG ceremony, whether validly performed or not, would have had no effect.
 
I don’t think that’s always the case. I knew an AOG whose church baptized “in the name of the Lord Jesus.” That would be a defect in form.

But the OP is surely Baptized by virtue of his first event. The AOG ceremony, whether validly performed or not, would have had no effect.
Well, yes, it is correct that *individual *baptisms need to be investigated (even some mainstream Protestant ecclesial communities have started with Creator, Redeemer, Sanctifier and such that also invalidate baptism) and in some cases conditional baptism performed.

My statement was simply that there is no official Church statement on AoG as a denomination having invalid baptism per se, whereas the Church does have such an official statement on, for example, Mormon baptism.
 
Is Baptism Necessary for Salvation?
No. Let’s examine what the Scriptures teach on this issue:
First, it is quite clear from such passages as Acts 15 and Romans 4 that no external act is necessary for salvation. Salvation is by divine grace through faith alone (Romans 3:22, 24, 25, 26, 28, 30; 4:5; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:8-9; Philippians 3:9, etc.).
If water baptism were necessary for salvation, we would expect to find it stressed whenever the gospel is presented in Scripture. That is not the case, however. Peter mentioned baptism in his sermon on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:38). However, in his sermon from Solomon’s portico in the Temple (Acts 3:12-26), Peter makes no reference to baptism, but links forgiveness of sin to repentance (3:19). If baptism is necessary for the forgiveness of sin, why didn’t Peter say so in Acts 3?
Paul never made water baptism any part of his gospel presentations. In 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, Paul gives a concise summary of the gospel message he preached. There is no mention of baptism. In 1 Corinthians 1:17, Paul states that “Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel,” thus clearly differentiating the gospel from baptism.
Those passages are difficult to understand if water baptism is necessary for salvation. If baptism were part of the gospel itself, necessary for salvation, what good would it have done Paul to preach the gospel, but not baptize? No one would have been saved. Paul clearly understood water baptism to be separate from the gospel, and hence in no way efficacious for salvation.
Perhaps the most convincing refutation of the view that baptism is necessary for salvation are those who were saved apart from baptism. The penitent woman (Luke 7:37-50), the paralytic man (Matthew 9:2), the publican (Luke 18:13-14), and the thief on the cross (Luke 23:39-43) all experienced forgiveness of sins apart from baptism. For that matter, we have no record of the apostles’ being baptized, yet Jesus pronounced them clean of their sins (John 15:3–note that the Word of God, not baptism, is what cleansed them).
The Bible also gives us an example of people who were saved before being baptized. In Acts 10:44-48, Cornelius and those with him were converted through Peter’s message. That they were saved before being baptized is evident from their reception of the Holy Spirit (v. 44) and the gifts of the Spirit (v. 46) before their baptism. Indeed, it is the fact that they had received the Holy Spirit (and hence were saved) that led Peter to baptize them (cf. v. 47).
One of the basic principles of biblical interpretation is the analogia scriptura, the analogy of Scripture–we must compare Scripture with Scripture in order to understand its full and proper sense. Since the Bible doesn’t contradict itself, any interpretation of a specific passage that contradicts the general teaching of the Bible is to be rejected.
Since the general teaching of the Bible is, as we have seen, that baptism and other forms of ritual are not necessary for salvation, no individual passage could teach otherwise. Thus we must look for interpretations of those passages that will be in harmony with the general teaching of Scripture.
With that in mind, let’s look briefly at some passages that appear to teach that baptism is required for salvation.
In Acts 2:38, Peter appears to link forgiveness of sins to baptism. But there are several plausible interpretations of this verse that do not connect forgiveness of sin with baptism. It is possible to translate the Greek preposition eis–“because of,” or “on the basis of,” instead of “for.” It is used in that sense in Matthew 3:11; 12:41; and Luke 11:32.
It is also possible to take the clause “and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ” as parenthetical. Support for that interpretation comes from that fact that “repent” and “your” are plural, while “be baptized” is singular, thus setting it off from the rest of the sentence. If that interpretation is correct, the verse would read “Repent (and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ) for the forgiveness of your sins.” Forgiveness is thus connected with repentance, not baptism, in keeping with the consistent teaching of the New Testament (cf. Luke 24:47; John 3:18; Acts 5:31; 10:43; 13:38; 26:18; Ephesians 5:26).
A third possibility exists, as Wallace explains in Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics:
It is possible that to a first-century Jewish audience (as well as to Peter), the idea of baptism might incorporate both the spiritual reality and the physical symbol. In other words, when one spoke of baptism, he usually meant both ideas–the reality and the ritual. Peter is shown to make the strong connection between these two in chapters 10 and 11. In 11:15-16 he recounts the conversion of Cornelius and friends, pointing out that at the point of their conversion they were baptized by the Holy Spirit. After he had seen this, he declared, “Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit…” (10:47).
 
The point seems to be that if they have had the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit via spiritual baptism, there ought to be a public testimony/acknowledgment via water baptism as well. This may not only explain Acts 2:38 (viz., that Peter spoke of both reality and picture, though only the reality removes sins), but also why the NT speaks of only baptized believers (as far as we can tell): Water baptism is not a cause of salvation, but a picture; and as such it serves both as a public acknowledgment (by those present) and a public confession (by the convert) that one has been Spirit-baptized.
Mark 16:16, a verse often quoted to prove baptism is necessary for salvation, is actually a proof of the opposite. Notice that the basis for condemnation in that verse is not the failure to be baptized, but only the failure to believe. Baptism is mentioned in the first part of the verse because it was the outward symbol that always accompanied the inward belief.
I might also mention that many textual scholars think it unlikely that vv. 9-20 are an authentic part of Mark’s gospel. We can’t discuss here all the textual evidence that has caused many New Testament scholars to reject the passage. But you can find a thorough discussion in Bruce Metzger, et al., A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, pp. 122-128, and William Hendriksen, The Gospel of Mark, pp. 682-687.
Water baptism does not seem to be what Peter has in view in 1 Peter 3:21. The English word “baptism” is simply a transliteration of the Greek word baptizo, which means “to immerse.” Baptizo does not always refer to water baptism in the New Testament (cf. Matthew 3:11; Mark 1:8; 7:4; 10:38-39; Luke 3:16; 11:38; 12:50; John 1:33; Acts 1:5; 11:16; 1 Corinthians 10:2; 12:13).
So Peter is not talking about immersion in water, as the phrase “not the removal of dirt from the flesh” indicates. He is referring to immersion in Christ’s death and resurrection through “an appeal to God for a good conscience,” or repentance. Again, it is not the outward act that saves, but the internal reality of the Spirit’s regenerating work (cf. Titus 3:4-8).
I also do not believe water baptism is in view in Romans 6 or Galatians 3. I see in those passages a reference to the baptism in the Holy Spirit (cf. 1 Corinthians 12:13). For a detailed exposition of those passages, I refer you to my commentaries on Galatians and Romans, or the transcripts my sermons on Galatians 3 and Romans 6.
In Acts 22:16, Paul recounts the words of Ananias to him following his experience on the Damascus road: “Arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name.” It is best to connect the phrase “wash away your sins” with “calling on His name.” If we connect it with “be baptized,” the Greek participle epikalesamenos (“calling”) would have no antecedent. Paul’s sins were washed away not by baptism, but by calling on His name.
Water baptism is certainly important, and required of every believer. However, the New Testament does not teach that baptism is necessary for salvation
 
1.Acts 1:5
For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.”

2.Acts 1:22
beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.”

3.Acts 2:38
Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

4.Acts 2:41
Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.

5.Acts 8:12
But when they believed Philip as he proclaimed the good news of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.

6.Acts 8:13
Simon himself believed and was baptized. And he followed Philip everywhere, astonished by the great signs and miracles he saw.

7.Acts 8:16
because the Holy Spirit had not yet come on any of them; they had simply been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.

8.Acts 8:36
As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, “Look, here is water. What can stand in the way of my being baptized?”

9.Acts 8:38
And he gave orders to stop the chariot. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him.

10.Acts 9:18
Immediately, something like scales fell from Saul’s eyes, and he could see again. He got up and was baptized,

11.Acts 10:37
You know what has happened throughout the province of Judea, beginning in Galilee after the baptism that John preached—

12.Acts 10:47
“Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized with water. They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.”

13.Acts 10:48
So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked Peter to stay with them for a few days.

14.Acts 11:16
Then I remembered what the Lord had said: ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’

15.Acts 13:24
Before the coming of Jesus, John preached repentance and baptism to all the people of Israel.

16.Acts 16:15
When she and the members of her household were baptized, she invited us to her home. “If you consider me a believer in the Lord,” she said, “come and stay at my house.” And she persuaded us.

17.Acts 16:33
At that hour of the night the jailer took them and washed their wounds; then immediately he and all his household were baptized.

18.Acts 18:8
Crispus, the synagogue leader, and his entire household believed in the Lord; and many of the Corinthians who heard Paul believed and were baptized.

19.Acts 18:25
He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor and taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the baptism of John.

20.Acts 19:3
So Paul asked, “Then what baptism did you receive?” “John’s baptism,” they replied.

21.Acts 19:4
Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.”

22.Acts 19:5
On hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.

23.Acts 22:16
And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.’

24.Romans 6:3
Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?

25.Romans 6:4
We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

**26.1 Corinthians 1:13
Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized into the name of Paul?

27.1 Corinthians 1:14
I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius,

28.1 Corinthians 1:15
so no one can say that you were baptized into my name.

29.1 Corinthians 1:16
(Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.)

30.1 Corinthians 1:17
For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.**

31.1 Corinthians 10:2
They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.

32.1 Corinthians 12:13
For we were all baptized by one Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.

33.1 Corinthians 15:29
Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them?

34.Galatians 3:27
for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.

35.Ephesians 4:5
one Lord, one faith, one baptism;

36.Colossians 2:12
having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.

37.1 Peter 3:21
and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ,
 
you should read all these great verse in context not just copy and past them b/c the have the word baptized in them.

context means the parts of a written or spoken statement that precede or follow a specific word or passage, usually influencing its meaning or effect: You have misinterpreted my remark because you took it out of context.

thanks now go back over them and see what you come up with
 
Hi 🙂
The Lutheran baptism is valid. You won’t be baptized again. Your second baptism would be deemed invalid simply because you had a valid first baptism. (Maybe it’d be invalid for other reasons too, but I wouldn’t know). The point is the Catholic church will not baptize you once they know you’ve been validly baptized before (Lutheran is valid).
 
you should read all these great verse in context not just copy and past them b/c the have the word baptized in them.

context means the parts of a written or spoken statement that precede or follow a specific word or passage, usually influencing its meaning or effect: You have misinterpreted my remark because you took it out of context.

thanks now go back over them and see what you come up with
You’re the one who said that Baptism doesn’t save. Peter called it plain. Also, as a Catholic, I do not do that personal interpretation of the bible. 👍
 
The Church might not say AOG baptism is invalid per se, but they would virturally always require a conditional baptism, for the reason I gave above.
 
Nice post George. I don"t think I can add any Scripture to it, so let me try an analogy. When people talk about baptism beign a work and we aren’t saved by works I ask them, what about marriage. Suppose your child goes off to college and comes home at Christmas break saying they have found “the one.” Bubbling with talk of marriage and a future with their spouse. I don’t think any of us would say “Whoa, hold on. Marriage is nice, certainly I don’t have anything against it, but love is what makes a marraige, not some ceremony. You don’t need to get married, just love each other. In fact, I’ll help you move in together after break.” Being baptized is part of the process, an essential part. When Paul talks about coming to preach the Gospel and not to baptize he is addressing factions within congregations; people were dividing between their favorite ministers. What no one mentions is how many men were needed to keep up with the baptisms. The passage in Acts about Cornelius’ family was to show Peter that Gentiles could be saved as well as Jews. If you remember, Peter had just had a vision of a sheet from heaven descending and God commanding him to kill and eat the unclean animals inside. Peter refuses and God says don’t call unclean what I have made clean. Displaying the gifts of the Spirit was undenialble proof to Peter that God approved of these Gentiles coming to Christ. Jesus said we must be born of water and the Spirit (John 3:5) And He commanded his disciples to make disciples of all nations baptizing them in the name of rhe Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.
 
“Fr. Michael, what say you about what I posted about Baptism?”

An extensive list of scriptures :). The Church has always been clear that baptism is indeed necessary for salvation (in the normal case). Those who knowingly and deliberately reject it cannot be saved.

Jesus himself says in John’s Gospel, unless you are born of water and the Holy Spirit, you have no life. His great command was to baptize all nations.

Scripture and tradition is clear. Any verses quoted (by others), out of context, are just that, … out of context.
 
I studied this and my studies led to the following article for my blog.
Baptism~ Necessary or Not?
“Fr. Michael, what say you about what I posted about Baptism?”

An extensive list of scriptures :). The Church has always been clear that baptism is indeed necessary for salvation (in the normal case). Those who knowingly and deliberately reject it cannot be saved.

Jesus himself says in John’s Gospel, unless you are born of water and the Holy Spirit, you have no life. His great command was to baptize all nations.

Scripture and tradition is clear. Any verses quoted (by others), out of context, are just that, … out of context.
👍
 
The Church might not say AOG baptism is invalid per se, but they would virturally always require a conditional baptism, for the reason I gave above.
Thanks everyone for your answers. About the above quote though, just what is a “conditional baptism”? I’ve heard of it and figured that would probably be the case but don’t know what it is. I also should mention I don’t have the certificates for either baptism, all I have is the word of my mother on the Lutheran one and personal memory on the AoG one. Are certificates required?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top