Re-baptism / Scriptural Baptism

I am not aware of any Scriptural reasons for re-baptism other than that the person simply wasn't born again. Too often someone will say something like, "Well, I may have been sincere, but I didn't understand it all back then, so I don't think my baptism was valid." This reasoning will eventually disqualify almost any Christian who grows in understanding, and may in fact lead to second or third baptisms.

I don't believe that re-baptizing is necessarily always wrong, but it is often misused to get what I call a "spiritual high."

I think the only clear instance that a previous "baptism" is not valid is when a baptism is said to take place before repentance. One clear example is with infant baptism.

The only instance of re-baptism in the New Testament is in Acts 19 where some were baptized with the baptism of repentance by John the baptist, and then they were baptized with Christian baptism and received the Holy Spirit:

"And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples, He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.

Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. And all the men were about twelve." Acts 19:1-7

Thank you, Joshua and Jeremy for your replies.

Taking Paul as the very first Anabaptist (re-baptizer) - recorded in Acts 19:1-7, this perhaps is another biblical reason for scriptural baptism/rebaptism.

The question: Why did he rebaptize the 12 'disciples' at Ephesus who were already earlier baptized (by Apollos perhaps?)? These 12 'disciples' were already baptized but when Paul asked them if they had received the Holy Spirit since they were already baptized, they were all ignorant, even of the existence of the Holy Spirit (19:2). Paul's question to them: "INTO what were they baptized?" Their reply: "INTO John (the Baptist's) baptism.

Verse 4 tells us what was missing in their understanding of baptism. Had they understood John's preaching correctly, they would know that there was a need for repentance before baptism (Mat 3:1-10). Also, Mark 1:1-4 specifically tells us that John preached the 'baptism of repentance INTO the remission (forgiveness) of sins'.

A repentant person who surrenders to be baptized by the authority of a church will be added to the church, the body of Christ, the temple of the Holy Spirit, and will partake of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit as he joins that assembly. This was what happened in Acts 2:38-42***. He also enters into the covenant relationship IN CHRIST (Galatians 3:26-29).

It makes sense now that this properly baptized person who enters into the IN CHRIST relationship (John 15:1-5) receives the remission (forgiveness) of sins being now in that blessed covenant relationship IN CHRIST (Rom 3:24; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14).

Apart from a person having faith and repentance, I see that it also takes a 'scriptural church' to perform scriptural baptism. A scriptural church that has the promised indwelling Holy Spirit into which a repentant person who has trusted Jesus to be his/her only Savior for their sins is baptized into, will partake (receive the gift) of the Holy Spirit upon baptism (Acts 2:38) as he/she is added to the scriptural local body of Christ.

Paul then rebaptized the 12 disciples at Ephesus by the authority of the Antioch church from which he and Barnabas were sent out (Acts 13:1-4). The church at Antioch must have been established from the Jerusalem church as a result of the scattering due to persecution by Saul (**Acts 8:1-4; 11:19-23) thus fulfilling Acts 1:8 - the uttermost part of the earth.

The 12 disciples at Ephesus in Acts 19 perhaps were ignorant of Christ and had an inaccurate understanding of baptism but were immersed anyway by someone (Apollos or ? - read the preceding chapter 18 of Acts) but without the proper authority to baptize. John truly had heavenly authority being sent from God/heaven (John 1:6,33; Mal 3:1-3). Even Jesus recognized John's heavenly authority and submitted to be baptized by him and the Holy Spirit came upon Him.

Later, Jesus even defended the authority of John's baptism (Mat 21:23-27). After John passed on, the only other entity we see that was granted authority was the Jerusalem church (at the beginning made up of disciples already baptized by John the Baptist). Jesus must certainly have organized these disciples into the first church (Christ Himself being now their first pastor and founder - Mat 16:18).

The authority given to the 1st church to baptize is mentioned in the Great Commission (Mat 28:18-20) - here Jesus conferred authority to His church to make, baptize and teach the 'church' disciples. Disciples - the members of the Lord's church.

The word 'disciple' is so loosely used today. But it truly connotes those who have been discipled and baptized by the authority of a church (in order to be added to the church). Perhaps Acts 11:26 (the church at Antioch) would enlighten us with this - that the members of the assembly (the 'disciples') were first called 'Christian' or Christ's ones. Similarly, today 'Christian' is also too loosely/broadly used.

Not until Constantine established his hierarchical universal (catholic) church founded upon his (man's - not God's/heavenly) own authority following which were the daughters of Rome - protestant churches that split from Rome to establish churches by their own (again man's - not God's/heavenly) authority. Question: Will such churches have the promised indwelling Holy Spirit? If not, would whoever is baptized to be added to such churches receive the indwelling Spirit as per Acts 2:38?

Wouldn't this be a valid reason for Anabaptists to rebaptize such persons? Supposing this concept is correct/biblical, where/who are the scriptural churches today? Do they still exist at all on earth? Would Mat 28:20 might shed a clue? Jesus promised a 'group' of people that He would be with them until the end of this age (aion) - till He comes again, that is. Some define this group of people as the 11 apostles.

If this is true, then the Great Commission and the promise of His presence with them (the 11) unto the end of the age makes no sense at all because this promise lasted only as long as the 11 apostles are alive. But they have all passed on to be with the Lord. Does this mean that Mat 28:18-20 already no more applies today?

What if in the context of Mat 28, the Lord's commission was given/authorized specifically and principally to His first church through the 11 apostles (the leaders of the church - 1Cor 12:28), and the great commission in essence is the church planting mandate given to all churches beginning from the 1st church at Jerusalem and to all other churches established by this scriptural pattern up till the end of this age?

If this is so, then true churches must still exist on earth in not only form but especially possessing heavenly authority - from one true church with heavenly/scriptural authority planting another/other assemblies with heavenly/scriptural authority and so on. Only a true church can plant a true church. Mat 28:20 - "Lo, I am with you, even unto the end of the age," now makes perfect sense. Jesus would never have made an empty/lame promise.

With heavenly authority, there is the receipt of the promised Holy Spirit to the entity that the promise was originally made to (John 14:16,17,26; 16:7; Luk 24:49; Acts 1:4; 2:33). To these assemblies, there is power (of the Holy Spirit) to be witnesses for Christ on the earth - Acts 1:8.

If we can believe the words of our Lord in Mat 28:20, then we have to believe that there must be true churches on earth today that espouse such a biblical pattern of church planting which promises a continuity of such churches till the Lord comes again. Coming back to the original question, would this present another biblical reason for Anabaptists to rebaptize?