Baptism, Re-Baptism & Infant Baptism (Part 1)

I was recently confronted with the question of whether adults should seek to be re-baptised if they are not confident about their earlier, perhaps infant, baptism. Here is a preliminary response which I will do in 3 parts.

1. Baptism is not a primary matter in salvation as it has no redemptive benefits, it is rather an outside [visible] sign of inward [invisible] change. I argue that though important Baptism does not save anyone in and of itself. Traditionally [like John's Baptism] it was a public ritual to declare one's denouncement of former ways/philosophy and to take on a new teacher. The Lord Jesus ordained baptism as an external/public marker of his people. Since it is a sign, it must not be confused with the object it signifies. Ref: Romans 4:9-12, 1 Peter 3:21(notice the use of language in 1 Peter)

2. Baptism is an ecclesiastical [to do with church/christian community] function rather than a redemptive function. As argued above, baptism is a sign/identity of the covenant people in the NT. Those who belong [in the covenant community] have therefore been baptized in the Name of the Trinity and hence made public their declaration to follow. [Matthew 28: 19,20] [1 Cor 1:13 -17]

3. Baptism in the NT is patterned after circumcision in the old covenant. Both are outward signs of a complete covenant. Perhaps this is the most controversial bit as many do not see parallels between the two. As circumcision was the sign for covenant people in the old covenant, baptism is the ordained sign in the latter covenant [Colossians 2: 6-15, especially V11]. Some traditions strongly oppose this position and argue that there is no connection between the two.

Now to the question of re-baptism. Unless one is not baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit or they were not saved and they knew it, then re-baptism may not be a good practice to embrace. I do not think it has any salvific consequences [I argued above it is not a redemptive act, though the 1 peter passage might imply so] but I suggest it might cause ecclesiastical confusion. Case in point- whenever one moves from one congregation to another, or when a believer falls in sin - would they need to be baptised afresh? If there is a pattern between OT circumcision and NT baptism, then the former was permanent and irreversible and the latter could be taken as such.

But here we must allow for the liberty of conscience. There are those who were baptised as infants and do not consider that to have been proper baptism. I think one should be free to seek 'proper' baptism if only to satisfy their conscience that they truly belong among God's covenant people through their public, adult, conscientious decision. As I said, it is a matter where Christians could differ.

One last note on the NT treatment of sacraments [Baptism & Holy Communion]. Though they are symbols, it appears they are more than mere symbols [some call them means of grace]. Any abuse of them seems to have consequences [1Cor 11: 27 - 32] and hence the need for caution in dealing with them. Perhaps this is why some are hesitant to dunk people under water without due diligence or to bless that Coke and Cookie in the Cafe as their act of communion.

Freedom in Christ

In the recent past I have been reflecting on the area of liberty in Christian life. My thoughts have stretched to cover such areas as our freedom at home, church and in the workplace. At times, I wonder if we have excessive freedom and whether that is a good thing. I have always understood freedom to be bundled with responsibility/maturity. If one gets freedom before they are ready for the responsibility that comes with it, the results are disastrous, often in a self destructive way. Could this be the reason why rules/regulations are much needed in our Christian formation? And where does that leave Grace?

Drawing an example from parenting, how much freedom can a child cope with? Are they not individuals with every right as adults? The responsible parent will only allow them controlled freedom and this is for their own good. My observation of Christian life and ministry is that it affords us many liberties and particularly so for those in leadership roles. Not only does one have full control of their diary but one is also expected to create their own work. For those who prefer structured work environments, the very idea of going to work without a clear idea of what they will do that day is a huge stress factor. This is made worse by the absence of clear deliverables in most ‘Christian’ work environments. Others thrive in such environments and find structured ‘tasks’ way too limiting. An apprenticeship in ministry can equally have such a feel of freedom that one might wonder if controls exist. Critics of Christian ministry argue that we are lazy, do not have a tight work ethic and are not results oriented.

Indeed there are freedoms afforded in Grace but these liberties can be abused. Pretenders and idlers can have a field day doing absolutely nothing useful from dawn to dusk while zealots can overwork their bodies so much so that their health breaks down for lack of rest. So then brethren, how do we use our liberties so that God is honoured with our use of time and glorified in our service to one another? Galatians 5 points to the right use of our freedom in Christ. Paul is battling with judaisers who were pushing for people to be under the law, especially on the area of circumcision. In Verse 13, Paul gives us a clear statement that we were called to be free but that our freedom is not to be used to indulge the sinful nature but rather to serve one another in love. It seems to me then [as we can find in V16ff] that our freedom in Christ can serve either purpose – to indulge the sinful nature and hence bear the fruit described in v19 – 21 or to use our liberties to live for and serve Christ, bearing the fruit of the Spirit described in V 22 – 23.

And yet, this is an ongoing battle between the desires of the flesh and life by the Spirit. There will still be tensions within us, competing interests that pull us in different directions as we are still ‘in the body’. Paul suggests that those who are in Christ Jesus have crucified their bodies with its passions and desires and hence are free to live by the Spirit. What a high calling? So where is my body – hanging somewhere, subjected to the will of God or all over me subjecting me to its whims and passions?