What about Unbelieving Baptism?
The Curious Case of Baptism of Unbelievers
Question
“I
thought I came to Jesus when I was a teenager and then
I was baptized. Years
later, I concluded that I really didn’t commit my life
to Christ in this early experience. I
really didn’t repent of my sins and have a real trust in
Jesus. I then
truly gave myself to the Lord years later but have not
been rebaptized. Why
should I be baptized again if I was baptized once when
I was a teenager?”
Answer
This is a very important question and
issue, much more vital than many of our readers might imagine! Not
only this, but this situation is probably more common than
we would suspect. Let’s
make sure that we understand the issue involved in this problem. This
person thought that he (or she) believed in Christ and was
then baptized. Later,
he reflects on this early experience and concludes that it
was not genuine—he really didn’t believe in Christ and really
didn’t repent of his sins. Now,
what about baptism? Was
his earlier baptism genuine? Or
was it not genuine since it was not really a baptism arising
from saving faith? First,
we need to have a little background.
For centuries the debate has raged: Is
it necessary that one believe in Christ before he
is baptized? From
the third century (and some would say the second century),
churchmen and theologians have argued that faith is not essential
for baptism to be valid—in the case of children. Infant
baptism (or what people claim is
baptism) has been the rule from the time of Augustine. It
became the standard practice in the Catholic and Orthodox
Churches throughout the Middle Ages and to the present time,
and many Protestant Churches have continued the practice.
Against this prevailing practice, the
Anabaptists arose in Switzerland, Germany, and Holland in
the early 1500s, claiming that baptism is not valid unless
one has personal faith in Christ and repents of his sins. Because
of this firm conviction, these sincere people were called “Anabaptists” by
the infant baptizing majority (the Catholics, Lutherans,
and followers of Zwingli and later Calvin). This
term means “rebaptizers” since they thought that this movement
baptized again (or
rebaptized) those people who had already been
baptized as babies. Conversely,
the Anabaptists contended that baby baptism was not baptism
at all; therefore, they were not baptizing again anyone. They
claimed that they were baptizing for the first time people
who had received an invalid and counterfeit religious rite
as infants. We
can understand how this aroused the hatred and anger of the
majority, with the result that multiplied thousands of defenseless
Anabaptists were killed in the most inhuman ways—all in the
name of Christ!
We do not wish to expand our treatment
here to cover the whole question of infant baptism—is it
true or is it invalid? This
must be dealt with in another article. Here,
we will assume that the reader is convinced that one is to
exercise faith in Jesus Christ and His death, that he must
repent of his sins, and that he must then be baptized.
This situation does describe many thousands
of people! One
preacher told me that, as a teenager, he had been baptized
following his assumed belief in Christ. However,
years later, he concluded that there was something critically
lacking in his earlier faith. That
was more of a “second-hand” faith, or maybe a head or mental
belief, and the heart was not really involved. Then
he explained that years later he had come to a true faith
in Christ. However,
he had not been baptized again! While
this preacher was a staunch opponent of infant baptism (since
a baby cannot believe in Christ), he never saw the need to
be baptized as an adult believer! Since
he dismissed his teenage faith as being a saving faith and
looked on his later faith as the genuine experience, it would
logically follow that he has not truly
been baptized with a faith-baptism! He
has not been baptized with “a baptism of repentance” (Mark
1:4; Luke 3:3)! His
own non-faith baptism and non-repentance baptism was of no
more value than the baby baptisms that he strongly opposed!
We must remember that Jesus said, “He
who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved” (Mark
16:16). He didn’t
say, “He who has been baptized and later believes, shall
be saved.” Furthermore,
Peter declared, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the
name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and
you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38). Notice
that we are to repent and then be baptized; we are not to
be baptized and then later repent! Many
other scriptures would show that we must place our faith
in Jesus Christ (and God) and repent of our sins, and then
we are to be baptized into Him. Notice
especially Matthew 28:18-20; Acts 8:12, 35-39; 16:14-15,
30-34; 18:8; Galatians 3:26-27; Colossians 2:11-13; 1 Peter
3:21).
When we look at the scriptures and the
issues involved, it should be very simple for us to see the
truth on this matter. If
one has not believed—truly believed—in Christ Jesus and His
saving death and if one has not repented—truly repented—of
all his sins, then any baptism he may have had was
not really a Scriptural baptism. It
was not true and valid! What
should one do in this situation? Surely
he should examine his faith and repentance and make sure
that this response is true and genuine. Then
he needs to be baptized again—this time into Christ Jesus
is Lord. In reality,
this is not being “baptized again” for
the first baptism was not really a baptism but was only a
water ritual without significance. In
reality, he is not to be “rebaptized” but he is to be baptized
for the first time. If
one has experienced a genuine baptism, there is not place
at all for another baptism. There is “one” baptism (Ephesians
4:5).
The twelve Ephesian disciples had already
been immersed with John’s baptism, but later found the need
to receive a genuine baptism into Christ Jesus at the hands
of Paul the apostle (Acts 19:1-6). This
was a “rebaptism” inasmuch as they had been immersed before. But
it was the first genuine baptism
they had ever received since it was a baptism in the name
of Christ Jesus!
Why is it hard for people to see this
simple point? Although
we cannot know all that is found in people’s hearts, we would
suggest the following points. If
I don’t see the need of rebaptism, it may be because:
- I may think that as long as I have experienced a water
ritual that others considered baptism, then it surely must
be valid.
- The preacher or pastor may think that the early “baptism” was
valid, thus who am I to question this?
- I
truly believe in Jesus Christ right now, so why should
I be baptized again?
- Even
if the early experience was not a baptism as it should
have been done, still it is probably okay.
- If
I were to request another baptism, then my parents or
spouse or friends would consider me unstable or crazy!
- It
would be so embarrassing of me to request to be baptized
again.
- I’ve
never seen a person being baptized again, so I don’t
know how it can be done.
- The
preacher or pastor would refuse to baptize me again.
- To
be baptized again would disappoint or even anger God!
Whatever the reason for one’s reluctance
to be baptized again, we can confidently say that God would
not approve of any delay in this vital matter! Jesus
commanded baptism! The
apostles commanded baptism! The
early Christians practiced baptism! Baptism
was considered to be of utter importance in the early preaching
of the gospel.
If any reader is not clear about the meaning
and purpose of Scriptural baptism, please read some of the
articles on this subject on the True
Discipleship website. Make
sure you understand the significance of baptism, then you
will be able to see your need to receive an authentic and
valid baptism into the Lord Jesus!
Richard
Hollerman
|
