[stephanos]

This is a personal question, but because it is also a doctrinal issue I thought this would be the place to post the question.

When I was 'baptised' years ago, I was sprinkled in a presbyterian church (as an adult). Now I know that baptism doesn't save us, but I've also heard people mention that our soul is separated from the flesh in baptism etc. My question is this; if you were me, would you want to be rebaptised by immersion? Perhaps I'm making a deal about it, but it's been on my mind a lot lately and I really need to find some rest from the concerns I have.

Much Love in Christ Jesus,
Stephen

[Luke]

Yes, I would be biblically baptised again, but your soul isn't seperated from your flesh at baptism. That happens the moment you believe (Col 2:11). Baptism is nothing but an outward display of what has already happened inwardly.

Yeah what he said...

[kittn1]

to the duplicate members from Baptist1611 - hi, I'm here too.

to the rest of the fine folks on av1611 - by way of introduction, my name is Laura and while I've been a member here since June, I've only posted once. But, I've lately been spending my share of time here, reading.

Now to answer you, Stephen - yes, you should be Scripturally baptized. Every time water baptism is mentioned in the Bible, it's by immersion. "Baptizo" - the Greek word we get "baptism" from - actually means "to dip" or "to immerse."

The fact that it's been on your mind lately makes me wonder if it's not the Holy Spirit pointing out that you're not yet quite in line with God's Word on the matter. I say that from experience - before I was married (unsaved at the time), I was "baptized" by the minister who did the wedding, by sprinkling. After I was saved and in a Bible teaching church, it was on my mind a lot too, that I wasn't properly baptized. So I talked to the Pastor and on November 9, 1999 was baptized by immersion, two years after I was saved.

As Luke said, baptism is an outward sign of what's already happened inwardly. It's also one of the first steps of obedience to Christ that a Christian makes, and I've agree with the suggestion that to not follow Christ in believer's baptism might just limit a Christian's usefulness. The Lord won't entrust us with greater responsibility if we're not willing to obey Him in the first step.

[kittn1]

I should also add, baptism by immersion paints a more accurate picture of Christ's death, burial and resurrection than does sprinkling or pouring, for example.

"buried in the likeness of His death" when we go under the water; "raised in the likeness of His resurrection" when we come back up.

[Brother Tim]

Stephen, I agree with the above.

By the way, belated welcome, Laura (sorry ). Well said.

[Forrest]

Hi Brother Stephen. (By the way, my middle name is Stephan. )

Yes, you should follow the Lord in scriptural baptism by full immersion. Remember, baptism is a public acknowledgment that declares you believe Jesus Christ has died for your sins, was buried, and rose again on the third day. It publicly "marks" you as a follower of Jesus Christ. Since you reside in the U.S., you probably won't be slain as others have for publicly identifying with Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection!

[stephanos]

Thank you all for the responses. I think the choice I need to make is clear. I will talk to the pastor of the church I attend about this.

Much Love in Christ,
Stephen

[Here Am I]

Originally Posted by stephanos

This is a personal question, but because it is also a doctrinal issue I thought this would be the place to post the question.

When I was 'baptised' years ago, I was sprinkled in a presbyterian church (as an adult). Now I know that baptism doesn't save us, but I've also heard people mention that our soul is separated from the flesh in baptism etc. My question is this; if you were me, would you want to be rebaptised by immersion? Perhaps I'm making a deal about it, but it's been on my mind a lot lately and I really need to find some rest from the concerns I have.

Much Love in Christ Jesus,
Stephen

Stephen:

When I got saved in 2000, I started attending a Presbyterian church. After I'd attended it for a while, I decided to join, and asked about getting baptized. They refused to do so, because I'd been 'sprinkled' as a nine year old child. I explained to the pastor that I'd just been born again, and that the 'sprinkling' I got at that time meant nothing to me, but he told me that they just couldn't rebaptize me, as I'd had it done once already.

Less than a year later, I started looking for a Bible-believing church, because I was under conviction about the NIV bibles used in the church, and because I really felt, believed, that I needed to be Scripturally baptized, immersed. I found a nice Independent Baptist church, and within a week or so, went forward to be baptized!

So, I understand what may be going on...because something similar happened to me!

[Traditional Anglican]

The Infant Baptism is rather interesting, it began early in Europe, it started because of the VERY high infant mortality rate at that time. It was so bad that in parts of Germany, parents would carve a name for the child on a piece of wood and often it would be kept in the Church it was "given" to the child after their first year, some were found not long ago near Stuttgart, in any event, the Church had to make a difficult judgement call, in light of these dire outlooks, what was decided was this (in a nutshell):Infants have no personal sins, they are however born with "original" sin. Thus to Baptize in the Trinitarian formula. Life was hard brutal and short in many areas where the faith was spreading, if the Plague did not get you one year a famine might the next. Frankly , I try not to be too hard on the Church when they decided to Baptize babies of Christian families, put yourself in their shoes, it was not an easy call, in order to maintain proper orthodox teaching of the faith, Confirmation was created, this was where the Pastor taught those old enough to grasp the basics, the Christian Faith, they would then, in Church, in the eyes of God and men confess Christ as Lord and Saviour. I am in a Branch of our Lord's Holy Church where this pattern was kept. Hence my sympathy for Infant Baptism followed by instruction and Confirmation. I feel both sides hold merit! For me, the issue is Christ, is he your Lord and Saviour? Do you put your faith in Him? Well, if so, by Faith you are saved. In summation I DEEPLY love my Brethren in the Lord on both sides of this issue, I never make it a point of division. I have seen people on both sides get UGLY on this one. To be honest I shout "It is all about faith in Christ Jesus the Lord!" Then I run away. Blessings.