[Traditional Anglican]

Originally Posted by Vendetta Ride

Here's a Presbyterian joke, which I post simply to give TA a smile:

A Baptist pastor and a Presbyterian pastor were discussing the matter. The Presbyterian said, "Would it be okay if I just went into the water, up to my waist?" The Baptist said, "No, that wouldn't be okay." The Presbyterian said, "Then, could I just go down until the water came up to my eyes?" The Baptist replied, "No, you need to go all the way." The Presbyterian happily responded, "See? I knew that the forehead was the only part that really mattered!"

Here is one of my other favorite jokes. Two old Southern boys were sitting on the porch, talking about various things, when one said, "Say, buddy, do you believe in infant baptism?"

"Believe in it?" replied his friend, "Why, man, I've seen it done!"

Presbyterian Joke told to me by a PCA Pastor: A Presbyterian Pastor was shutting off the Church lights after Sunday Service, in the near darkness he takes a tumble down a flight of stairs, after hitting bottom he dusts himself off looks Heavenward and says "Boy, I am glad thats over."

[Kiwi Christian]

Originally Posted by Vendetta Ride

...since I understood what my baptism represented, it wouldn't be necessary to baptize me again. But, since I was planning to be a Baptist pastor, he strongly suggested that I do it, for appearances' sake. So, Ruckman baptized me by immersion. I think it was the right thing to do...

That's what I was thinking as I read through this thread.

Stephanos, if you understood what your original baptism (sprinkling) represented, and moreover your audience at the time understood it, then I don't think it's imperative that you repeat it by immersion.

If you were to go ahead and get immersed now, you wouldn't be doing it for a public testimony that you are dead, buried, and raised with Christ (for you have already done that), you would be doing it on the technicality that the method (sprinkling) of your original baptism was not correct.

Also, you would be doing it for your own peace of mind, and maybe that's a necessity for you, which is okay.

As far as the soul being separated from the flesh during baptism, I believe that is correct, but it happens immediately when you are baptised into Christ by the Spirit at the point of being saved. So, different baptism altogether.

Colossians 2:11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: 12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

[Forrest]

Originally Posted by Kiwi Christian

That's what I was thinking as I read through this thread.

Stephanos, if you understood what your original baptism (sprinkling) represented, and moreover your audience at the time understood it, then I don't think it's imperative that you repeat it by immersion.

If you were to go ahead and get immersed now, you wouldn't be doing it for a public testimony that you are dead, buried, and raised with Christ (for you have already done that), you would be doing it on the technicality that the method (sprinkling) of your original baptism was not correct.

Also, you would be doing it for your own peace of mind, and maybe that's a necessity for you, which is okay.

Brother Stephen. I think you have already conveyed that you see the importance of "following" the Lord Jesus in scriptural baptism. In my understanding of the word, you are indeed following Jesus, and you are being obedient to scripture when you follow the method of full immersion in water.

Matthew 3:13, 16 Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him. And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:


Mark 1:9-10 And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan. And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens opened, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon him:


Acts 8:36-38 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.

I realize these verses could mean different things to different people. For example, do the words "went up out of the water" and "coming up out of the water" mean He simply walked out of the water on to the dirt embankment? or does it mean Jesus came up out of the water after being fully immersed? Did the Ethiopian eunuch go down into water that was ankle deep? or did he and Philip go down into water that was deep enough for full immersion? Personally, I believe the fact of Jesus "burial" and "resurrection" establishes a pattern that we follow in full submersion.

Ultimately, you need to discern what the Lord is saying to YOU through the many passages of scripture and the various words of counsel and instruction you've received from the brethren. I think, as you and the others on this Forum do, we should carefully discern what the scripture is saying regarding both the "order" and the "method" of water baptism as seen in the Holy Scriptures. I know the Holy Spirit will guide you through the written word.

[stephanos]

I have already decided that I need to be baptised by immersion. I've spoken with the pastor of the church I attend (Bethel Baptist Church in East Wenatchee) and he agrees. I'm going to talk to him again tonight and see what needs to take place to further this process along.

Peace and Love,
Stephen