I was classed as having been 'baptised' as a baby when I was christened. I chose to be baptised as an adult because it was a profession of faith whereas before, I was too young to know or make that choice.
Prezby Brethren would disagree, but Reformed Baptist, really any Baptist (in almost cases), would agree. Regardless, We should not violate Our GOD Given Conscious, rather let I† be Molded by GOD Through HIS Holy Word
@@Chirhopher Yes, this was something between the Lord and me and I needed to follow my own conscience. Other's choices may differ, but I am happy with the choice I made. Sometimes, we as Christians fall out over the silliest of things. We appear to have forgotten what we were made for.
@@CrumbsDM I agree with you my brother, it is into Christ Jesus that we baptized into. Not some church doctrine, it is Jesus Christ who is our authority, not the church.
@Crumbs DM thank you for a voice of reason here. My earnest mother had me "christened" as a baby (1943). When I became born again in 1969 it was so obvious when reading my Bible that now as a believer I needed to be baptized according to the scripture. Interesting that the Calvin promoting speaker in this clip quoted no scripture. He could not, because his argument was based on the ramblings of a mere man.
Being someone who was baptized as an infant, I know that God was with me then just as he is with me now I am saved. God knew me in the spirit before I was born: he knitted me in my mother's womb and was with me all my life. He gave me the gift of his grace of salvation was an adult and I was adopted unto Christ Jesus. One baptism. One God.I trust God, not the logic of the mind of men because I read my bible. We may be conscious of our salvation however we cannot be conscious of the mystery that God is!
About four years ago I was a new Christian and my faith was like the seed planted in the rock. I was excited and got baptized but when I went through some difficult times I fell away hard. I came back about a year ago and my faith is stronger than ever. This question been on my mind, thank you.
Same exact situation with me. To the T. And i’ve been going, hm. Was my baptism legit? I mean at the time i would have said yes but my track record speaks differently. And Last May I feel i was radically converted and now i’m wondering if re-baptism is necessary or better yet pleasing to God
@@Kefalonia31 how are you planning to reconcile it? I decided the baptism is valid. But now I provide meaning to what took place years ago. Figure the situation in the church in Corinth - they excommunicated the guy who was sleeping with his mother in law , and in 2 Corinthians Paul says to welcome him back now that he has repented - but yet makes no mention of him needing to be rebaptized
One affirmation he makes is that "we believe as reformed christians that baptism does not have to occur after faith, in some circumstances is perfectly legitimate to occur before faith". I am curious on what the actual biblical texts this affirmation is based upon.
I believe he said that because baptism does not save us but only faith in Christ. So whether you were baptized as a baby or as an adult it does not make a difference. However this just my opinion. I was baptized as a roman catholic baby. But when I was 30 I got baptized again as a believer.. God bless
If I understood correctly he starts off good by saying that baptism before faith is illegitimate. He concludes the discussion by going backwards and says it’s actually legitimate. Where is the symbolism in new creation in Christ? Baptism is not necessary for salvation but is encouraged for the believer.
At around 0:12 Godfrey speaks about clergy who wish to baptize you "properly" because they don't believe you've been baptized "properly" before. I just want to say this to anyone out there who is joining a different Church (either within Protestantism or from Protestantism to Roman Catholic or Orthodoxy) to NOT question the validity of your baptism if you believe it to have been done "properly." I married into the Oriental Orthodox Church, and my priest gave me the same speech about how my baptism basically didn't count to them because of the aspect of Apostolic succession. I was reluctant, but I very much love my wife as much now as I did then and I saw it as just a hoop to jump, since she was adamant about me joining the Orthodox Church. I wasn't really plugged into any Protestant church at the moment, anyhow. The dilemma is that I was actually previously baptised at around 12yo by my father, an ordained minister in the Pentacostal Assemblies of Canada, who died a few years after my baptism. He wasn't actively pastoring at the church at the time, but had made a special request to the senior pastor at the time. So this was a rather significant experience. Fast-forward to several years into orthodoxy, I started to realize.....I'm really no different than I was before my re-baptism, and re-baptising showed a great disrespect to the memory of my father. As such, I am filled with anguish and regret over agreeing to be baptized "properly." I wish so badly that I had stood my ground. So in sum: if you have been baptised by a legitimate, recognized Protestant organization - do not let anyone tell you that you haven't been baptized "properly." You will not be transformed based on the premise that you're now being baptized by someone in the line of Apostolic succession. The spiritual experience of baptism supercedes all physical/temporal factors. The physical act itself is ritualistic, but it's what's happening in your spirit at the time that matters. If you did it properly once, you don't need to do it properly again.
I am confused! I come from "Reformed tradition", meaning infant baptism. I was 3 months when I was baptised. Knew nothing what was going on. Grew up as a Christian: Sunday school, confirmation, still not having take hold of the faith but went through the motions/traditions of man. At age 22 I came to conversion and struggled for most of my adult life between reformed tradition and Scripture Acts 2:38. I finally had peace and was baptised. Acts 8:15-17 & 19:1-7. An act of obedience. Glory to God!
@@carmensiekierke3579 NO. It was all about following the scriptures for this obedient dear person. "Nevertheless, what saith the scripture..." said the apostle Paul. Ever heard of him?
Janette, You're getting confused because you're listening to confused people trying to convince you of something that isn't biblical. Not once did he use any scripture to back up "his" beliefs. It's a baptism for believers. If you haven't believed yet, how can it be a believers baptism? Do yourself a favor and get away from reformed theology, Just my 2 cents.
@@ronashman8463 Ron, yes, I have heard of the Apostle Paul. First of all, baptism is a secondary issue...not a essential doctrinal issue. There are reasons for the existence of different denominations. We can be brothers and sisters, but we can not attend the same congregations. The Baptist belief that baptism is " a personal testimony" goes along with the Baptist belief the Lord's Supper is only memorial.
I'm glad he accurately acknowledged my argument. I believe, for example, Catholics who were baptized as children, and later come to a true faith in Christ should out of obedience and choice, submit themselves to legitimate baptism. It's not works-based righteousness. It's all about faithful submission.
@@utuberme1 Ask God for his leading. It's not for us to tell you where you should be going, that's a choice for you and the Lord to be making together.
I agree - that is what I did. I made a conscious choice after having consciously accepted Jesus Christ as my saviour after He dramatically intervened in my own life. I consciously made the decision to take the salvation Jesus offered and I consciously went on to decide to be baptised by full emersion as a public act of declaring my faith and belonging to the body of Christ.
@That Lutheran Guy Baptismal regeneration is heretical and if you believe that son then you'll end up in Hell. Baptism is not a means of God giving faith but it is a result of having and being justified by faith alone which all saints should do but salvation is not dependant on being baptised. for somebody called "The Lutheran guy", you really should know better. Martin Luther and the reformers developed the 5 solas, one being "sola fide, faith alone". If you depend on your Baptism to be saved then you are no longer being saved by faith alone, because we are justified by faith (Romans 5:1), when we have faith, not by faith plus the work of Baptism. by adding your Baptism to the finished and perfect blood atonement of the cross, you are trying to merit for yourself something to boast about through Baptism. As Paul said in Galatians, you who rely on works are under a curse (Galatians 3:11) and you have fallen from Grace as it is no good to you, ye who try to be justified by a work like Baptism (Galatians 5:4). For being called "The Lutheran Guy", your beliefs are very, very Roman Catholic. Belief in infant Baptism, and belief that it is needed to be saved, no longer sola fide.
I'm confused then. In preparing the way for Jesus Christ our "Saviour", John the Baptiser would only baptize those who had "fruits of repentance". Repentance is a "choice". Being baptized as an infant is not a choice the infant is cognisant to make. It's a conscious decision on the part of the individual to make [repentance], before the baptism can be taken seriously in my honest opinion.
@Marc Williams You are confusing two different things. Circumcision was the rite of initiation into the People of God of ancient Israel. It was administered to EIGHT DAY OLD INFANT males. Women were admitted into the People of God by virtue of their circumcised fathers, who were considered the covenant heads of their families. I repeat, you were considered a MEMBER of the People of God, of God's household, as an INFANT. That did NOT prevent the necessity of first learning Torah, and then LIVING by it. Repentance from sin was expressed in two ways: offering PUBLIC sacrifice for sin on the high holy days in the Temple of Jerusalem, AND / OR a ritual washing (known as a 'mikveh' bath) to be made ritually clean and eligible to worship publicly with the People of God. For an infant, the overriding element is not repentance, as much as it is regeneration by the Holy Spirit and admittance into the household of God. For converts to the faith, however, obviously, repentance is a major factor. The leaving of a former life behind, and the ritual washing that cleanses and the pressing forward to a newness of life would be in the forefront. In spite of American Baptist and some other Protestant denominations' theological focus being on "choice" / "a personal choice" / "repentance" - that someone has to be of an age to be making a conscious personal choice from a former way of living and to a new way of living, this isn't the sole or even primary focus of baptism.
This video is confusing about baptism. To make it simple only those who born again should be baptized. Suppose if a person was baptized before salvation it will not be counted. (But he have to repent; otherwise that is also sin and he will have to give account to God for cheating and taking baptism without repentance). Let us not be carried away by teaching like this. Baptism should be taken only when a person really accept Jesus Christ as his Lord and personal Saviour.
Luther would say that God the Holy Spirit acts in baptism. The validity of the sacrament come from our obedience of Christ's command; Matt. 28:19, the use of water and the Word of God. See Titus 3:5-8
@@StarlynsAgency hold on now prodigal's big brother. He's trying to figure out what God wants him to do, and that's what he should be doing. Don't mock him.
@@StarlynsAgency you need to make very clear who are you talking about. I sincerely hope you meant the no scripture talking head who spoke in the video.
@ Josh Higdon your question is profound. EVERY person who got baptized in the Bible was a believer. So you find yourself in the same position I found myself in; "ceremonially wetted" by earnest people, but definitely not baptized. Brother, seek the Lord in this. I did, then got baptized by immersion, and have had great peace about the decision for nearly 50 years.
Hawayu Lingoiner Ministries *& Thanks Robert W. Geoffrey 4 Answering This Question 4 I Say That When We're Baptized, Our Faith & Love of Our Great Lord Jesus Christ Will Show Whether Our Faith In Our Lord Jesus Christ Is Strong or Not 4 When Our Great Lord Jesus Christ Was Baptized In Matthew **3:16**-17, It Was 2 Show He Was The One Whom John The Baptist Prophesied About* & May Our Great Lord Jesus Christ Bless Yu Robert W. Geoffrey & Lingoiner Ministries So Very Much.
I attended an SBC church in Western Kentucky that required new members to be baptized into their church, and apparently that was the norm in that area- you have to be rebaptized if you change churches.- H
It's not just a sign, it's a declaration! And without scriptural support...although nice job bringing in Calvin. It's annoying to hear, "reformed christians believe" and give an answer that not all reformed Christians believe.
How would he come up with that idea from Scripture.....? Seems pretty clear - believe and be baptized. Being baptized before exercising faith and experiencing regeneration seems meaningless.
Well I was baptized as a infant in 1958 as a Protestant Christian.I have asked the same question should I be baptized again as a Christian in my 62nd year....My answer is no ,because I wholeheartedly believe in my Saviour Jesus Christ
In the book of acts there were a group of men baptized by John the Baptist they meet Paul and he told them about Christ (which they did not know) and received the Holy Spirit and were baptized again by Paul. I was baptized around 9 years old, was born again at 30 a got baptized again because of this in acts. Am I missing something please let me know, I don't want to lead anyone down a wrong road
However, these men were not baptized according to Christ's command. See Matt. 28.19. Therefore their first 'baptism' was not baptism unto salvation. See Rom. 6.3-4. Only one baptism is necessary regardless who did it as long as it follows Christ's command.
@esccools You should reread the passage from Acts you referenced and compare it to both the synoptic Gospels and St. John's Gospels accounts of John the Baptist's baptism and how it DIFFERED FROM Christ's / the Apostolic baptism ("I came baptizing with water for REPENTANCE", HE (Christ / the Apostle's) will baptize with the HOLY SPIRIT"). In fact, there is THIS verse in St. John's Gospel, "On the last and greatest day of the feast, Jesus stood up and exclaimed, “Let anyone who thirsts come to me and drink. Whoever believes in me, as scripture says: ‘Rivers of living water will flow from within him.'" He said this in reference to THE SPIRIT THAT THOSE WHO CAME TO BELIEVE IN HIM WERE TO RECEIVE. THERE WAS, OF COURSE, NO SPIRIT YET, BECAUSE JESUS HAD NOT YET BEEN GLORIFIED." cf. John 7: 37-39y It wasn't until His death on the cross, that Jesus breathed His last and said, "Father, into your hands I commend My Spirit" and the Spirit could be communicated in baptism to His disciples. All baptisms that took place PRIOR TO Jesus Christ's death on the cross, and His resurrection from the dead, and the communication of His Holy Spirit to the Church on Pentecost (cf. Acts 2: 1-3), were baptism akin to John the Baptist's, a "baptism of repentance" ONLY (an outward, visible sign that one was repenting of their sins). ONLY baptisms performed AFTER Jesus Christ's death, resurrection and ascension (for example, the 3,000 baptisms that occurred on that first Pentecost, cf. Acts 2: 38-41 conferred the gift of the Holy Spirit: "Repent and be baptized every one of you for the forgiveness of sins, AND YOU WILL RECEIVE THE GIFT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT") that the recipient receives the gift of the Holy Spirit. It is OBVIOUS THEN that the incident mentioned at Acts 19: 1-5, involved people who had ONLY received the baptism of John the Baptist. They EVEN ADMIT they ONLY received the baptism of John the Baptist and no one had ever told them about faith in Christ and the gift of the Holy Spirit. Their "baptism" was still part of the Old Testament and therefore was NOT NT baptism. They aren't then RE-baptized. They had repented of sins and received an OT 'mikveh' bath / John the Baptist's baptism. St. Paul then administers New Covenant baptism and confers on them the Holy Spirit through the laying on of hands.
I disagree, it does not hold with Biblical example to be baptized prior to conversion (think of Philip and the Ethiopian Eunuch, think of the believers baptized and added to church day of Peters first sermon because they now believed). I agree that a biblical baptism should only happen once but it wasn’t proper, biblical, or of personal conviction and obedience if prior to conversion. With respect, it does not seem to hold true that a baptism prior to conversion is the same as a baptism after conversion. After all, they are Sacraments of the Church, made up of only born again Christians.
I was baptized as a child and was a half believer. Throughout the years I still believed there was a god but believed in others as well. Now I know there is one true God and am fully with Jesus, do I need to be baptized again? I even remember the date. April 3, 2003
Mark 16:16 English Standard Version 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. And there is more verses talks about believe then baptism . So does the Catholic baptism for babies who cant say a word counts ????
You truly cannot be baptized if you don't have faith why would you and if it did happen as an infant then you must be baptized again when you are awakened. The teachings of Dr Godfrey are surely different than R.C.Sprouls.
Gary, Dr. R. C. Sproul was PCA ( Presbyterian Church in America). Dr. W. Robert Godfrey is an ordained minister in the URC ( United Reformed Church in America). Dr. Godfrey is also president emeritus of Westminster Seminary, CA. The teachings of Dr. Sproul and Dr. Godfrey are identical. Gary, you have never heard of Reformed Covenant Theology?
@@carmensiekierke3579 my friend you don't know what I know and I was commenting on the baptism question and if you think you can be baptized without faith then you are the one who doesn't know scripture it's about knowing Jesus Christ my friend. I don't really care about denomination's I simply said that Mr Godfrey isn't nothing like R.C. Sproul in my opinion.
@@garycornwell2431 Gary, I am not your "friend." In a world where Facebook tells you everyone is your "friend"......don't go there. As for " you don't know what I know"..........you obviously do not know what Dr. Sproul's position on baptism was......because he was a Presbyterian. "I don't really care about denominations".......well, Dude, Dr. Sproul taught Reformed Covenant theology.
@@carmensiekierke3579 that's fine, may God bless you with His presence didn't mean to get into an argument your right I am not Presbyterian. Peace be with you and I don't subscribe to Facebook I was calling you my friend because I thought you were a Christian.
@@garycornwell2431 George Washington ( first president of the United States) said he had many acquaintances, but only two friends. And since I objected to your throwing out "friend" so easily.......that obviously means I am not a Christian. Facepalm. End of conversation.
Just obey Acts 2:38. When I read this with fresh eyes not as someone who grew up “going to a ‘Reformed’ church,” but simple as one wanting to follow Jesus, I knew what I needed to do.
So what if somebody was baptized as a baby? I would definitely want to get baptized when I truly came to faith being i didn't choose it the first time or remember the obedient experience which brings joy.
My parents who are were unbelievers and still are handed me over to a relative of theirs to baptize me. Why would they do this? They treated it like a custom. I don't know what denomination the relative was that baptized me nor are we in contact with him. I was a baby when this happened and I don't remember it. I wonder if my baptism counts.
Had infant baptism, the Bible nowhere portrays baptism as the testimony of the person baptized. Passages that link faith to baptism (such as Acts 8:12; 18:8) simply show that faith, publicly professed, is a necessary condition for baptism. Indeed, it is appropriate to include a statement of faith in the baptismal ceremony. However, a baptism itself (the application of water, with accompanying words) is a statement by God (through the church) to and about the person being baptized, not a statement by that person. The person baptized is the recipient of baptism from a minister of Jesus Christ, acting in his name (Matt. 28:18-20; cf. Acts 2:37-42; 8:16; 35-38). It’s about a new covenant sign, there was a change from circumcision to baptism which is reflected in Acts 8:12, where we read that Samaritans were being baptized, “men and women alike.” There is no reason to point out that people of both genders were now receiving the sign of the covenant, except to contrast it with the old sign of the covenant. Implied in this contrast is the fact that baptism had replaced circumcision. Could write pages on this ) no amount of water at whatever age saves, but no you don’t have to be re- baptised, I was sprinkled at 6weeks, confirmed at 16 and saved at 43 then I attended a Baptist church due to circumstances as I was around mostly anglicans and after two years the pressure came to get in the tub because ????? I couldn’t be saved, they cloaked there belief at the church and truly did believe if I wasn’t dunked I couldn’t be saved, they say it’s about being a part of the church but they veiled there true intent which was they (mostly all the congregation) truly believe they are some sort of hate keepers via the mode of baptism into one’s salvation. To me it’s perverse and evil stuff, now let me be clear this won’t be alllll Baptist churches but it’s many !! They just won’t put it up on the billboard and advise you of it, it’s wicked in my belief, least the Catholics are clear about there intent.
I was baptised in 89 in the church i grew up in an Ind. Baptist Church, it included 4 pre-baptism classes so it was the real deal. For 30 years I've lived a blasphemous life. A year, ago I received a unusually real kick in the soul and was given the Matt7:21-23 ultimatum which has been tearing me apart ever since. The learning has been extremely bitter with just enough sweet to provide an almost non-existant candle flame of hope in an eternal darkness. My baptism was legit but my life pattern fits no biblical profile to my knowledge. Most stories are 'he walked with/not with the Lord', 'hardened hearts', defiance leading to death, shallow seed, choked by weeds, came from us but not remained, false gospel spreaders, apostates, suicides, even just dropping dead. I finally get the surrender of self (which I can't do anyway) which is happening in spite of my own efforts. With such a mercy & grace given to me in the latter stage of life, is there a need to publicly re-declare my death & resurrection in Christ? Or is this Prodigal son to settle for his Father's embrace over re-establishment? Or am I just lying to myself and 'once a tare, always a tare'?
@@Kefalonia31 I'm not sure if this verse helps but in 1 Corinthians 5:5, Paul is grieved over one man's sin in the church of Corinth but is still concerned for his salvation. So he says in his letter "You are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord." Sometimes we fall into temptations and desires which can make us feel totally unwanted and unloved by God. We aren't tares, we're all sinners who Jesus loved enough to die for. While we have breath, we can repent and He is faithful and just to forgive and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. (1 John 1:9) We're all works in progress here. 💕 "If we are faithless, He remains faithful- for He cannot deny Himself." (2 Timothy 2:13) Keep up the good fight. Hope you're both doing well! If you're caught in spinning about unforgiveness, Mark DeJesus on YT might be a good help! God bless you and keep you.
Even if you were baptized in the Mormon church? I’ve heard because of that I need to have it redone. Would it be ok to request to be baptized again just so I know I’m no longer baptized under a heretical church that’s considered a cult?
@@ronashman8463 yes, they were water baptized. So? Is that what you think gives us remission of sins? I was water baptized, I encourage all new believers to be water baptized. But being dunked in water is not required. The Baptism that is required is the Holy Spirit coming on a new believer. That is the proof that they have eternal life. Water baptism is not proof of eternal life. It's not even required. I think we only do it today as a symbolic, public proclamation of our faith. Baptism is something the Holy Spirit does to us when we believe in Christ. We die, are buried, and are risen with Christ. Note: not will be, but have been.
@@randsollie7921 we do agree that baptism is not critical as such. However, surely you would agree that God did not waste his and our time by putting the quite long story of the Ethiopian and his water baptism in Acts for no reason.
@@ronashman8463 Yes, there is always a physical manifestation of faith. But way too many Christians are more concerned with that physical than they are with the spiritual. Rather than focusing on building their faith which would bring those physical manifestations (works), they focus more on the works (for the appearance of faith). Putting the cart before the horse, so to speak. "...Lord, Lord, look at all our wonderful works...."
Acts 8:14-17, we see Simon who had received John’s baptism was not rebaptized by Peter and John, but only had hands laid upon him to receive the Spirit. Rebaptism is demonstrated as unnecessary here very clearly in sacred Scripture.
The order is critical.. A baptised sinner (was it by immersion?) has no heaven to go to except one offered by heretics. It is written; Mark 16:15-16 [15]And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. [16] *(a)* He that believeth and *(b)* is baptized *(c)* shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
And, further, baptism is not limited to one's personal profession as Godfrey indicated. It’s a sign... great as that is, it’s a sign of a spiritual reality. That’s why it can happen before one's conversion - as in children of believing parents. (But that’s another discussion, though very valid)
The Bible tells us about people being baptized along a road when just 2 people were present. It isn't a show and doesn't need an audience. It is an act of obedience.
2:00 Nobody is allowed to be baptized against their will, that's not Orthodox. Anyone who gets baptized wilfully does so with some modicum of faith, or else they would refuse tradition altogether. However catechism and habitual repentance must come before baptism, to prepare the initiate to live the Orthodox spiritual. Baptism without preparation leads to a battle only half won, which leads to spiritual defeat. St John Chrysostom and other fathers wrote that baptism and repentance go together, baptism restores spiritual life and clears the debts of the past, then repentance is the renewal of that clean state. And only the Orthodox Faith has the full and proper scheme of repentance, because it is the one faith of the one Lord (referring to ephesians). Learn more at Orthodox ethos...
Hi, brother or sister.👍🙏 It’s purely authentic, the church as made a big mistake for control and it’s evil to baptise a baby as a baby can’t repent or know what he’s doing. It was a fraud. Now go and do it truly 🙏👍 Your choice this time. Even if it’s in your bath tub is more real than a false baptism in a glorious church building .👍🙏❤️ Big love in Christ
I was Babtized as a baby in the Catholic Church with no knowledge of anything so as I became aware of its meaning as an adult accepting Christ as my Savior, I wanted to share my faith by being babtized Anew. I realize that when we accept. Jesus as Savior, we are covered by His life and His baptism is applyed to us , His law keeping and His righteousness becomes so ours is just Ann
i appreciate this ministry so much. i must say, laying down Holy Scripture rather than Our Reformed Beliefs is what We need. Someone can simply fire off: "he who Believes and is Baptized will be Saved", and they would be 100% correct, as they quote YHWH. What does Holy Scripture as a Whole, Say?
The only valid baptism is the Orthodox Church's baptism. However in today's Orthodox world many many bishops and priests will simply receive people by chrismation only because they are ecumenists, they believe the true sacraments can exist outside the one true Church which is heretical and blasphemous. So many Orthodox today are communing without the right steps taken to prepare them, and usually ecumenists will have a very relaxed or worldly scheme of repentance as well as a heretical sacramentology and ecclesiology. So I'm not elitist at all as a modern times Orthodox Christian. But rather I acknowledge even we have a crisis at hand. But also I would say you're not a real Christian unless you have been catechized, baptized and chrismated by a canonical Orthodox cleric into the Orthodox Church because that's the apostolic tradition since the early Church. If anyone reading this is interested go to the Orthodox ethos channel to learn more.
Thanks for your ministry. I think that the answer to the question is not clear, and not precise, it sounds to much based on a teholigical position and locks a biblical reference. Thank do for making us think and exercise discernment.
While I'm happy he started early on to differentiate between "getting wet" and true baptism, I would LOVE for there to be more discussion of the reason everyone is using in modern times a Koine Greek transliterated word since 1611 ...
@@dahelmang Seeing baptism as a " profession of your personal faith" is a Baptist, evangelical position. The Reformed churches baptize on the basis of the Abrahamic promise.
@@dahelmang Reformed churches hold to the Belgic Confession, Heidelberg Catechism, Canons of Dort, and the Westminster Confession of Faith, along with the Westminster Larger and Shorter Catechism.
I was classed as having been 'baptised' as a baby when I was christened. I chose to be baptised as an adult because it was a profession of faith whereas before, I was too young to know or make that choice.
Prezby Brethren would disagree, but Reformed Baptist, really any Baptist (in almost cases), would agree.
Regardless, We should not violate Our GOD Given Conscious, rather let I† be Molded by GOD Through HIS Holy Word
@@Chirhopher Yes, this was something between the Lord and me and I needed to follow my own conscience. Other's choices may differ, but I am happy with the choice I made. Sometimes, we as Christians fall out over the silliest of things. We appear to have forgotten what we were made for.
@@CrumbsDM I agree with you my brother, it is into Christ Jesus that we baptized into. Not some church doctrine, it is Jesus Christ who is our authority, not the church.
@Crumbs DM thank you for a voice of reason here. My earnest mother had me "christened" as a baby (1943). When I became born again in 1969 it was so obvious when reading my Bible that now as a believer I needed to be baptized according to the scripture. Interesting that the Calvin promoting speaker in this clip quoted no scripture. He could not, because his argument was based on the ramblings of a mere man.
@@mikelittlefield8942 Amen
Being someone who was baptized as an infant, I know that God was with me then just as he is with me now I am saved. God knew me in the spirit before I was born: he knitted me in my mother's womb and was with me all my life. He gave me the gift of his grace of salvation was an adult and I was adopted unto Christ Jesus. One baptism. One God.I trust God, not the logic of the mind of men because I read my bible. We may be conscious of our salvation however we cannot be conscious of the mystery that God is!
Does an infant repent?
@@Psalm119-50 Salvation is a gift of God. Who can know his ways?
Thanks
About four years ago I was a new Christian and my faith was like the seed planted in the rock. I was excited and got baptized but when I went through some difficult times I fell away hard. I came back about a year ago and my faith is stronger than ever. This question been on my mind, thank you.
Same exact situation with me. To the T. And i’ve been going, hm. Was my baptism legit? I mean at the time i would have said yes but my track record speaks differently. And Last May I feel i was radically converted and now i’m wondering if re-baptism is necessary or better yet pleasing to God
@@BillHirsch1417 I have the same story as you
@@Kefalonia31 how are you planning to reconcile it? I decided the baptism is valid. But now I provide meaning to what took place years ago.
Figure the situation in the church in Corinth - they excommunicated the guy who was sleeping with his mother in law , and in 2 Corinthians Paul says to welcome him back now that he has repented - but yet makes no mention of him needing to be rebaptized
I'm struggling to find where being baptized as a baby is in the Bible?
One affirmation he makes is that "we believe as reformed christians that baptism does not have to occur after faith, in some circumstances is perfectly legitimate to occur before faith". I am curious on what the actual biblical texts this affirmation is based upon.
Same
Well Gabi and Tricia as a Bible believer I can answer that. There is no scripture to back the fellow up. That is why he did not produce any.
I believe he said that because baptism does not save us but only faith in Christ. So whether you were baptized as a baby or as an adult it does not make a difference. However this just my opinion.
I was baptized as a roman catholic baby. But when I was 30 I got baptized again as a believer.. God bless
If I understood correctly he starts off good by saying that baptism before faith is illegitimate. He concludes the discussion by going backwards and says it’s actually legitimate. Where is the symbolism in new creation in Christ? Baptism is not necessary for salvation but is encouraged for the believer.
Nor have I ever heard a true baptist preacher preach that.
At around 0:12 Godfrey speaks about clergy who wish to baptize you "properly" because they don't believe you've been baptized "properly" before.
I just want to say this to anyone out there who is joining a different Church (either within Protestantism or from Protestantism to Roman Catholic or Orthodoxy) to NOT question the validity of your baptism if you believe it to have been done "properly."
I married into the Oriental Orthodox Church, and my priest gave me the same speech about how my baptism basically didn't count to them because of the aspect of Apostolic succession.
I was reluctant, but I very much love my wife as much now as I did then and I saw it as just a hoop to jump, since she was adamant about me joining the Orthodox Church. I wasn't really plugged into any Protestant church at the moment, anyhow.
The dilemma is that I was actually previously baptised at around 12yo by my father, an ordained minister in the Pentacostal Assemblies of Canada, who died a few years after my baptism. He wasn't actively pastoring at the church at the time, but had made a special request to the senior pastor at the time. So this was a rather significant experience.
Fast-forward to several years into orthodoxy, I started to realize.....I'm really no different than I was before my re-baptism, and re-baptising showed a great disrespect to the memory of my father. As such, I am filled with anguish and regret over agreeing to be baptized "properly." I wish so badly that I had stood my ground.
So in sum: if you have been baptised by a legitimate, recognized Protestant organization - do not let anyone tell you that you haven't been baptized "properly." You will not be transformed based on the premise that you're now being baptized by someone in the line of Apostolic succession. The spiritual experience of baptism supercedes all physical/temporal factors. The physical act itself is ritualistic, but it's what's happening in your spirit at the time that matters. If you did it properly once, you don't need to do it properly again.
I am confused! I come from "Reformed tradition", meaning infant baptism. I was 3 months when I was baptised. Knew nothing what was going on. Grew up as a Christian: Sunday school, confirmation, still not having take hold of the faith but went through the motions/traditions of man. At age 22 I came to conversion and struggled for most of my adult life between reformed tradition and Scripture Acts 2:38. I finally had peace and was baptised. Acts 8:15-17 & 19:1-7. An act of obedience. Glory to God!
So, Janette..........it's all about you?
@@carmensiekierke3579 NO. It was all about following the scriptures for this obedient dear person. "Nevertheless, what saith the scripture..." said the apostle Paul. Ever heard of him?
Janette, You're getting confused because you're listening to confused people trying to convince you of something that isn't biblical. Not once did he use any scripture to back up "his" beliefs. It's a baptism for believers. If you haven't believed yet, how can it be a believers baptism? Do yourself a favor and get away from reformed theology, Just my 2 cents.
@@ronashman8463 Ron, yes, I have heard of the Apostle Paul.
First of all, baptism is a secondary issue...not a essential doctrinal issue. There are reasons for the existence of different denominations. We can be brothers and sisters, but we can not attend the same congregations.
The Baptist belief that baptism is " a personal testimony" goes along with the Baptist belief the Lord's Supper is only memorial.
Keep on going with scripture. Do what they did get what they got.
I'm glad he accurately acknowledged my argument. I believe, for example, Catholics who were baptized as children, and later come to a true faith in Christ should out of obedience and choice, submit themselves to legitimate baptism. It's not works-based righteousness. It's all about faithful submission.
I'm an ex Catholic but I don't have any Reformed Churches anywhere near me. What should I do?
@@utuberme1 do you go to church?
@@utuberme1 Ask God for his leading. It's not for us to tell you where you should be going, that's a choice for you and the Lord to be making together.
I agree - that is what I did. I made a conscious choice after having consciously accepted Jesus Christ as my saviour after He dramatically intervened in my own life.
I consciously made the decision to take the salvation Jesus offered and I consciously went on to decide to be baptised by full emersion as a public act of declaring my faith and belonging to the body of Christ.
@@discipleaj I can't tell if you're being serious or trolling.
I was baptised in a Presbyterian church as a baby. Saved in 2018 at 17 y/o, baptised by full immersion in a Baptist Church last October
@That Lutheran Guy Baptismal regeneration is heretical and if you believe that son then you'll end up in Hell.
Baptism is not a means of God giving faith but it is a result of having and being justified by faith alone which all saints should do but salvation is not dependant on being baptised.
for somebody called "The Lutheran guy", you really should know better. Martin Luther and the reformers developed the 5 solas, one being "sola fide, faith alone". If you depend on your Baptism to be saved then you are no longer being saved by faith alone, because we are justified by faith (Romans 5:1), when we have faith, not by faith plus the work of Baptism. by adding your Baptism to the finished and perfect blood atonement of the cross, you are trying to merit for yourself something to boast about through Baptism. As Paul said in Galatians, you who rely on works are under a curse (Galatians 3:11) and you have fallen from Grace as it is no good to you, ye who try to be justified by a work like Baptism (Galatians 5:4).
For being called "The Lutheran Guy", your beliefs are very, very Roman Catholic. Belief in infant Baptism, and belief that it is needed to be saved, no longer sola fide.
I'm confused then. In preparing the way for Jesus Christ our "Saviour", John the Baptiser would only baptize those who had "fruits of repentance". Repentance is a "choice". Being baptized as an infant is not a choice the infant is cognisant to make. It's a conscious decision on the part of the individual to make [repentance], before the baptism can be taken seriously in my honest opinion.
@Marc Williams You are confusing two different things. Circumcision was the rite of initiation into the People of God of ancient Israel. It was administered to EIGHT DAY OLD INFANT males. Women were admitted into the People of God by virtue of their circumcised fathers, who were considered the covenant heads of their families. I repeat, you were considered a MEMBER of the People of God, of God's household, as an INFANT. That did NOT prevent the necessity of first learning Torah, and then LIVING by it. Repentance from sin was expressed in two ways: offering PUBLIC sacrifice for sin on the high holy days in the Temple of Jerusalem, AND / OR a ritual washing (known as a 'mikveh' bath) to be made ritually clean and eligible to worship publicly with the People of God.
For an infant, the overriding element is not repentance, as much as it is regeneration by the Holy Spirit and admittance into the household of God. For converts to the faith, however, obviously, repentance is a major factor. The leaving of a former life behind, and the ritual washing that cleanses and the pressing forward to a newness of life would be in the forefront.
In spite of American Baptist and some other Protestant denominations' theological focus being on "choice" / "a personal choice" / "repentance" - that someone has to be of an age to be making a conscious personal choice from a former way of living and to a new way of living, this isn't the sole or even primary focus of baptism.
Indeed is the CONSCIOUNESS OF CHOOSING JESUS TO BE CRUCIAL HERE
This video is confusing about baptism. To make it simple only those who born again should be baptized. Suppose if a person was baptized before salvation it will not be counted. (But he have to repent; otherwise that is also sin and he will have to give account to God for cheating and taking baptism without repentance). Let us not be carried away by teaching like this. Baptism should be taken only when a person really accept Jesus Christ as his Lord and personal Saviour.
Luther would say that God the Holy Spirit acts in baptism. The validity of the sacrament come from our obedience of Christ's command; Matt. 28:19, the use of water and the Word of God. See Titus 3:5-8
Thank you for bringing a Lutheran perspective
I've been thinking about this a lot lately. I was baptized at 15 and wasn't a true convert.
But did you make the choice to be baptized?
he has no idea what he is talking about.
@@StarlynsAgency hold on now prodigal's big brother. He's trying to figure out what God wants him to do, and that's what he should be doing. Don't mock him.
@@StarlynsAgency you need to make very clear who are you talking about. I sincerely hope you meant the no scripture talking head who spoke in the video.
@ Josh Higdon your question is profound. EVERY person who got baptized in the Bible was a believer. So you find yourself in the same position I found myself in; "ceremonially wetted" by earnest people, but definitely not baptized. Brother, seek the Lord in this. I did, then got baptized by immersion, and have had great peace about the decision for nearly 50 years.
Hawayu Lingoiner Ministries *& Thanks Robert W. Geoffrey 4 Answering This Question 4 I Say That When We're Baptized, Our Faith & Love of Our Great Lord Jesus Christ Will Show Whether Our Faith In Our Lord Jesus Christ Is Strong or Not 4 When Our Great Lord Jesus Christ Was Baptized In Matthew **3:16**-17, It Was 2 Show He Was The One Whom John The Baptist Prophesied About* & May Our Great Lord Jesus Christ Bless Yu Robert W. Geoffrey & Lingoiner Ministries So Very Much.
I attended an SBC church in Western Kentucky that required new members to be baptized into their church, and apparently that was the norm in that area- you have to be rebaptized if you change churches.- H
It's not just a sign, it's a declaration! And without scriptural support...although nice job bringing in Calvin.
It's annoying to hear, "reformed christians believe" and give an answer that not all reformed Christians believe.
All Reformed Christians believe this. Particular Baptists, dearly as I love and esteem them, are not Reformed.
How would he come up with that idea from Scripture.....? Seems pretty clear - believe and be baptized. Being baptized before exercising faith and experiencing regeneration seems meaningless.
Well I was baptized as a infant in 1958 as a Protestant Christian.I have asked the same question should I be baptized again as a Christian in my 62nd year....My answer is no ,because I wholeheartedly believe in my Saviour Jesus Christ
In the book of acts there were a group of men baptized by John the Baptist they meet Paul and he told them about Christ (which they did not know) and received the Holy Spirit and were baptized again by Paul. I was baptized around 9 years old, was born again at 30 a got baptized again because of this in acts. Am I missing something please let me know, I don't want to lead anyone down a wrong road
Calvin is not a biblical authority, Paul on the other hand is a biblical authority! Acts 19:1-5 Paul had some men be baptized again.
However, these men were not baptized according to Christ's command. See Matt. 28.19. Therefore their first 'baptism' was not baptism unto salvation. See Rom. 6.3-4. Only one baptism is necessary regardless who did it as long as it follows Christ's command.
@esccools You should reread the passage from Acts you referenced and compare it to both the synoptic Gospels and St. John's Gospels accounts of John the Baptist's baptism and how it DIFFERED FROM Christ's / the Apostolic baptism ("I came baptizing with water for REPENTANCE", HE (Christ / the Apostle's) will baptize with the HOLY SPIRIT"). In fact, there is THIS verse in St. John's Gospel,
"On the last and greatest day of the feast, Jesus stood up and exclaimed, “Let anyone who thirsts come to me and drink. Whoever believes in me, as scripture says:
‘Rivers of living water will flow from within him.'" He said this in reference to THE SPIRIT THAT THOSE WHO CAME TO BELIEVE IN HIM WERE TO RECEIVE. THERE WAS, OF COURSE, NO SPIRIT YET, BECAUSE JESUS HAD NOT YET BEEN GLORIFIED."
cf. John 7: 37-39y
It wasn't until His death on the cross, that Jesus breathed His last and said, "Father, into your hands I commend My Spirit" and the Spirit could be communicated in baptism to His disciples. All baptisms that took place PRIOR TO Jesus Christ's death on the cross, and His resurrection from the dead, and the communication of His Holy Spirit to the Church on Pentecost (cf. Acts 2: 1-3), were baptism akin to John the Baptist's, a "baptism of repentance" ONLY (an outward, visible sign that one was repenting of their sins). ONLY baptisms performed AFTER Jesus Christ's death, resurrection and ascension (for example, the 3,000 baptisms that occurred on that first Pentecost, cf. Acts 2: 38-41 conferred the gift of the Holy Spirit: "Repent and be baptized every one of you for the forgiveness of sins, AND YOU WILL RECEIVE THE GIFT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT") that the recipient receives the gift of the Holy Spirit.
It is OBVIOUS THEN that the incident mentioned at Acts 19: 1-5, involved people who had ONLY received the baptism of John the Baptist. They EVEN ADMIT they ONLY received the baptism of John the Baptist and no one had ever told them about faith in Christ and the gift of the Holy Spirit. Their "baptism" was still part of the Old Testament and therefore was NOT NT baptism. They aren't then RE-baptized. They had repented of sins and received an OT 'mikveh' bath / John the Baptist's baptism. St. Paul then administers New Covenant baptism and confers on them the Holy Spirit through the laying on of hands.
I disagree, it does not hold with Biblical example to be baptized prior to conversion (think of Philip and the Ethiopian Eunuch, think of the believers baptized and added to church day of Peters first sermon because they now believed). I agree that a biblical baptism should only happen once but it wasn’t proper, biblical, or of personal conviction and obedience if prior to conversion. With respect, it does not seem to hold true that a baptism prior to conversion is the same as a baptism after conversion. After all, they are Sacraments of the Church, made up of only born again Christians.
I was baptized as a child and was a half believer. Throughout the years I still believed there was a god but believed in others as well. Now I know there is one true God and am fully with Jesus, do I need to be baptized again? I even remember the date. April 3, 2003
Mark 16:16
English Standard Version
16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.
And there is more verses talks about believe then baptism . So does the Catholic baptism for babies who cant say a word counts ????
ABSOLUTELY!!!!
You truly cannot be baptized if you don't have faith why would you and if it did happen as an infant then you must be baptized again when you are awakened. The teachings of Dr Godfrey are surely different than R.C.Sprouls.
Gary, Dr. R. C. Sproul was PCA ( Presbyterian Church in America).
Dr. W. Robert Godfrey is an ordained minister in the URC ( United Reformed Church in America).
Dr. Godfrey is also president emeritus of Westminster Seminary, CA.
The teachings of Dr. Sproul and Dr. Godfrey are identical.
Gary, you have never heard of Reformed Covenant Theology?
@@carmensiekierke3579 my friend you don't know what I know and I was commenting on the baptism question and if you think you can be baptized without faith then you are the one who doesn't know scripture it's about knowing Jesus Christ my friend. I don't really care about denomination's I simply said that Mr Godfrey isn't nothing like R.C. Sproul in my opinion.
@@garycornwell2431 Gary, I am not your "friend." In a world where Facebook tells you everyone is your "friend"......don't go there.
As for " you don't know what I know"..........you obviously do not know what Dr. Sproul's position on baptism was......because he was a Presbyterian.
"I don't really care about denominations".......well, Dude, Dr. Sproul taught Reformed Covenant theology.
@@carmensiekierke3579 that's fine, may God bless you with His presence didn't mean to get into an argument your right I am not Presbyterian. Peace be with you and I don't subscribe to Facebook I was calling you my friend because I thought you were a Christian.
@@garycornwell2431 George Washington ( first president of the United States) said he had many acquaintances, but only two friends.
And since I objected to your throwing out "friend" so easily.......that obviously means I am not a Christian.
Facepalm.
End of conversation.
What if I got baptized way before I became a true Christian? I got baptized when I was 16-17 but only became a believer this May 2020
This is just like my story. I'm getting baptized again on Sunday
Just obey Acts 2:38. When I read this with fresh eyes not as someone who grew up “going to a ‘Reformed’ church,” but simple as one wanting to follow Jesus, I knew what I needed to do.
Just wondering if you think you need to obey act 2.38 do you also obey act 2.45 i bet you don't.
Do what they did, get what they got.
So what if somebody was baptized as a baby? I would definitely want to get baptized when I truly came to faith being i didn't choose it the first time or remember the obedient experience which brings joy.
Baptism is first of all God’s covenant promise to us and not first our statement of personal faith.
Thank you, thank you, thank you.......
My parents who are were unbelievers and still are handed me over to a relative of theirs to baptize me. Why would they do this? They treated it like a custom. I don't know what denomination the relative was that baptized me nor are we in contact with him. I was a baby when this happened and I don't remember it. I wonder if my baptism counts.
Had infant baptism, the Bible nowhere portrays baptism as the testimony of the person baptized. Passages that link faith to baptism (such as Acts 8:12; 18:8) simply show that faith, publicly professed, is a necessary condition for baptism. Indeed, it is appropriate to include a statement of faith in the baptismal ceremony. However, a baptism itself (the application of water, with accompanying words) is a statement by God (through the church) to and about the person being baptized, not a statement by that person. The person baptized is the recipient of baptism from a minister of Jesus Christ, acting in his name (Matt. 28:18-20; cf. Acts 2:37-42; 8:16; 35-38).
It’s about a new covenant sign, there was a change from circumcision to baptism which is reflected in Acts 8:12, where we read that Samaritans were being baptized, “men and women alike.” There is no reason to point out that people of both genders were now receiving the sign of the covenant, except to contrast it with the old sign of the covenant. Implied in this contrast is the fact that baptism had replaced circumcision.
Could write pages on this ) no amount of water at whatever age saves, but no you don’t have to be re- baptised, I was sprinkled at 6weeks, confirmed at 16 and saved at 43 then I attended a Baptist church due to circumstances as I was around mostly anglicans and after two years the pressure came to get in the tub because ????? I couldn’t be saved, they cloaked there belief at the church and truly did believe if I wasn’t dunked I couldn’t be saved, they say it’s about being a part of the church but they veiled there true intent which was they (mostly all the congregation) truly believe they are some sort of hate keepers via the mode of baptism into one’s salvation.
To me it’s perverse and evil stuff, now let me be clear this won’t be alllll Baptist churches but it’s many !! They just won’t put it up on the billboard and advise you of it, it’s wicked in my belief, least the Catholics are clear about there intent.
I was baptised in 89 in the church i grew up in an Ind. Baptist Church, it included 4 pre-baptism classes so it was the real deal. For 30 years I've lived a blasphemous life. A year, ago I received a unusually real kick in the soul and was given the Matt7:21-23 ultimatum which has been tearing me apart ever since. The learning has been extremely bitter with just enough sweet to provide an almost non-existant candle flame of hope in an eternal darkness. My baptism was legit but my life pattern fits no biblical profile to my knowledge. Most stories are 'he walked with/not with the Lord', 'hardened hearts', defiance leading to death, shallow seed, choked by weeds, came from us but not remained, false gospel spreaders, apostates, suicides, even just dropping dead. I finally get the surrender of self (which I can't do anyway) which is happening in spite of my own efforts. With such a mercy & grace given to me in the latter stage of life, is there a need to publicly re-declare my death & resurrection in Christ? Or is this Prodigal son to settle for his Father's embrace over re-establishment? Or am I just lying to myself and 'once a tare, always a tare'?
How are you know? I’m in the same situation as you.
@@Kefalonia31 I'm not sure if this verse helps but in 1 Corinthians 5:5, Paul is grieved over one man's sin in the church of Corinth but is still concerned for his salvation.
So he says in his letter "You are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord."
Sometimes we fall into temptations and desires which can make us feel totally unwanted and unloved by God. We aren't tares, we're all sinners who Jesus loved enough to die for.
While we have breath, we can repent and He is faithful and just to forgive and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. (1 John 1:9) We're all works in progress here. 💕
"If we are faithless, He remains faithful- for He cannot deny Himself." (2 Timothy 2:13)
Keep up the good fight. Hope you're both doing well! If you're caught in spinning about unforgiveness, Mark DeJesus on YT might be a good help! God bless you and keep you.
@@janetholmes thank you so much for answering. I’m still in the process of learning about God.
@@Kefalonia31 Sure thing! Hey, we all are haha. He's better than we can imagine 🥰 Happy discovery!
Even if you were baptized in the Mormon church? I’ve heard because of that I need to have it redone. Would it be ok to request to be baptized again just so I know I’m no longer baptized under a heretical church that’s considered a cult?
Mormon baptism is not legitimate baptism.
Believe and be baptised simple
Very simple: believing IS BEING baptized with the Holy Spirit. Peter realized that and points it out in Acts 11:16
@@randsollie7921 stay with the subject please. This theme is about water baptism. You know, the one that the Ethiopian went through.
@@ronashman8463 yes, they were water baptized. So? Is that what you think gives us remission of sins? I was water baptized, I encourage all new believers to be water baptized. But being dunked in water is not required. The Baptism that is required is the Holy Spirit coming on a new believer. That is the proof that they have eternal life. Water baptism is not proof of eternal life. It's not even required.
I think we only do it today as a symbolic, public proclamation of our faith. Baptism is something the Holy Spirit does to us when we believe in Christ. We die, are buried, and are risen with Christ. Note: not will be, but have been.
@@randsollie7921 we do agree that baptism is not critical as such. However, surely you would agree that God did not waste his and our time by putting the quite long story of the Ethiopian and his water baptism in Acts for no reason.
@@ronashman8463 Yes, there is always a physical manifestation of faith. But way too many Christians are more concerned with that physical than they are with the spiritual. Rather than focusing on building their faith which would bring those physical manifestations (works), they focus more on the works (for the appearance of faith). Putting the cart before the horse, so to speak. "...Lord, Lord, look at all our wonderful works...."
I had this question plaguing me, I felt ashamed? To ask about it. Thank you and God bless you!
Well Calvin said that, but the Anabaptists said different.
If the baptism marks the beginning of your belief it should be after you are saved right?
Acts 8:14-17, we see Simon who had received John’s baptism was not rebaptized by Peter and John, but only had hands laid upon him to receive the Spirit. Rebaptism is demonstrated as unnecessary here very clearly in sacred Scripture.
The order is critical.. A baptised sinner (was it by immersion?) has no heaven to go to except one offered by heretics.
It is written;
Mark 16:15-16
[15]And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
[16] *(a)* He that believeth and *(b)* is baptized *(c)* shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Well doesn't it depend on how many people saw the baptism the first time? Since baptism is like a public profession of faith.
And, further, baptism is not limited to one's personal profession as Godfrey indicated. It’s a sign... great as that is, it’s a sign of a spiritual reality. That’s why it can happen before one's conversion - as in children of believing parents. (But that’s another discussion, though very valid)
The Bible tells us about people being baptized along a road when just 2 people were present. It isn't a show and doesn't need an audience. It is an act of obedience.
Hhm I don’t agree with this teaching. What are the scriptures to support this man’s point?
What if you were baptised as a baby where you didn't get a say in it?
2:00 Nobody is allowed to be baptized against their will, that's not Orthodox. Anyone who gets baptized wilfully does so with some modicum of faith, or else they would refuse tradition altogether. However catechism and habitual repentance must come before baptism, to prepare the initiate to live the Orthodox spiritual. Baptism without preparation leads to a battle only half won, which leads to spiritual defeat. St John Chrysostom and other fathers wrote that baptism and repentance go together, baptism restores spiritual life and clears the debts of the past, then repentance is the renewal of that clean state. And only the Orthodox Faith has the full and proper scheme of repentance, because it is the one faith of the one Lord (referring to ephesians). Learn more at Orthodox ethos...
I was baptized by the father mother and son not by father son and holy spirit and that bothers the heck out of me.
Rightly so! If that's the case, you should get baptized again.
I asked this Question!
The issue that people have is related to the fact of a forced babtism. The teaching is there but I rather go with a diferencia view.
Which people around the world are true Christians according to the bible ?
All those who have been baptized and profess the truths of the Ecumenical Creeds.
What if i was baptized as a baby? If i changed church would i need to be baptized again?
Hi, brother or sister.👍🙏
It’s purely authentic, the church as made a big mistake for control and it’s evil to baptise a baby as a baby can’t repent or know what he’s doing.
It was a fraud.
Now go and do it truly 🙏👍
Your choice this time.
Even if it’s in your bath tub is more real than a false baptism in a glorious church building .👍🙏❤️
Big love in Christ
I was Babtized as a baby in the Catholic Church with no knowledge of anything so as I became aware of its meaning as an adult accepting Christ as my Savior, I wanted to share my faith by being babtized Anew. I realize that when we accept. Jesus as Savior, we are covered by His life and His baptism is applyed to us , His law keeping and His righteousness becomes so ours is just Ann
A demonstration of our beliefs.
i appreciate this ministry so much. i must say, laying down Holy Scripture rather than Our Reformed Beliefs is what We need. Someone can simply fire off: "he who Believes and is Baptized will be Saved", and they would be 100% correct, as they quote YHWH. What does Holy Scripture as a Whole, Say?
The only valid baptism is the Orthodox Church's baptism. However in today's Orthodox world many many bishops and priests will simply receive people by chrismation only because they are ecumenists, they believe the true sacraments can exist outside the one true Church which is heretical and blasphemous. So many Orthodox today are communing without the right steps taken to prepare them, and usually ecumenists will have a very relaxed or worldly scheme of repentance as well as a heretical sacramentology and ecclesiology. So I'm not elitist at all as a modern times Orthodox Christian. But rather I acknowledge even we have a crisis at hand. But also I would say you're not a real Christian unless you have been catechized, baptized and chrismated by a canonical Orthodox cleric into the Orthodox Church because that's the apostolic tradition since the early Church. If anyone reading this is interested go to the Orthodox ethos channel to learn more.
This make no sense
Of course it doesn't. His first reference was Calvin...not the Bible.
@@JayWC3333 yea, in fact I don't recall ANY Bible authority.
@@ronashman8463 Biblicism....🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
Thanks for your ministry. I think that the answer to the question is not clear, and not precise, it sounds to much based on a teholigical position and locks a biblical reference. Thank do for making us think and exercise discernment.
The difference between Baptist and Protestants
The difference between all Protestants and Catholics.
"What ""we"" believe". Interesting what man can make up in his own mind. "Calvins writings"? Who cares? Twist, twist,twist, shameful.
We care, as Calvinists. Deal with it Biblicist.
Would that mean catholics who get baptised at birth don’t have to get baptised again if they convert to Calvinism?
Amen! That's exactly what it means. Roman Catholic baptism is 100% valid.
No blood baptism has nothing to do with being dunked in water
You don’t need water Baptism at all please watch the video Baptism the whole truth
While I'm happy he started early on to differentiate between "getting wet" and true baptism, I would LOVE for there to be more discussion of the reason everyone is using in modern times a Koine Greek transliterated word since 1611 ...
I wish you had proven your talk with scripture. Without that its mans imagination
you lied in your first few seconds, read acts and see how those baptized with johns baptism were rebaptized
It wont make you a better Christian
Only a wetter one
Merely symbolic it doesn't wash away sin
Only the blood of christ will do that
what a crock...the word says to believe and be baptized....twisting of the word of God will land you in hot water...
No, only one baptism is allowed. You don't need to be baptized again.
But if you were baptized as a baby, it doesn't mean anything right? It's not connected with your faith in any way.
@@dahelmang Right.
@@dahelmang Seeing baptism as a " profession of your personal faith" is a Baptist, evangelical position.
The Reformed churches baptize on the basis of the Abrahamic promise.
@@carmensiekierke3579 I don't know what you mean by "Reformed Churches".
@@dahelmang Reformed churches hold to the Belgic Confession, Heidelberg Catechism, Canons of Dort, and the Westminster Confession of Faith, along with the Westminster Larger and Shorter Catechism.
👍👍