Historical and Biblical Theology of Reboutism
Introduction
Reboutism is an accepted practice in the Seventh -day Adventist Church (IASD) [Footnoteref: 1], it is generally practiced in favor of the former members who apostated from faith and wish to integrate into the Church again. However, there are church members who also want to repeat this rite for feelings of guilt, hidden sin or for reasons of conscience.
From the first centuries to the present day, the Christian Church has resorted to various practices, to reintegrate its ex -members to its ecclesiastical community, including renaboutism, which has generated debates, accusations, persecutions and death throughout thehistory.
This article presents the historical and biblical theology of renaboutism, in which the beginnings of this practice are shown, as well as its theological implications from the perspective of salvation.
This document concludes by presenting the following main statements: (1) Biblical baptism must be required to every believer;(2) It is recognized as biblical baptism, only that which is done by immersion and which is preceded by repentance and faith in Jesus. (3) The new baptism is not decisive for the salvation of people, but in some cases it is required to belong to a religious entity;(4) The Reboutism of the believer.
Controversy in terms of rebautismo
The Baptist Union of the South of Nueva Wales, Australia, was involved in a controversial debate with its members with the aim of removing the requirements to readmit as new members to people from other Christian denominations whose baptism has been for spraying in their children’s ageor adult.
In the Holy Scriptures there is no strict mandate that teaches the correct way of baptizing, immersion baptism has been considered as the ideal, so that the death and resurrection Jesus better symbolizes, but not necessarily should be practiced in this way. Just as the Lord’s Supper is not practiced with the same accuracy. For them baptism is the external work of the work that God operates in the heart of the believer.
But there are hermeneutical inconsistency problems in the practice of baptism when the Lord’s Supper is taken as consideration. For example: Why is juice taken instead of wine? And why take in several glasses instead of a? And why eat breads individually when Paul talks about the same bread for everyone? (1 Cor. 10-11). If this rite is desired to strictly symbolize, shouldn’t the same be done strictly?
For this reason, some Baptist churches in Nueva Wales have had a partial opening for believers who arrive at their church and who were not baptized by immersion. Which are accepted in their churches but with certain restrictions, they are ordered to make a public confession of their faith to belong to the Church, however they have some limitations such as members such as not being able to vote in the official meetings of the Congregation.
Without a doubt, what has happened in the Baptist churches of Australia is interesting, however, will this be biblical? Do these supporters need or not be renamed?
The persecutions
After the death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus, the Holy Spirit was fully shed on the apostles on the day of the Pentecost (Acts. two). From that moment on, the Gospel began to be proclaimed quickly, at the same time the Roman emperors began to persecute anyone who accepted the good news.
The persecutions made many Christians apostatate their faith, on the other hand other believers began to practice numerous and diverse sins compromising their faith this way.
To which Tertullian (160 – 240 D.C.) and the pastor of Hermas considered that only forgiveness could be found if they committed only one of the seven mortal sins, which were idolatry, blasphemy, homicide, adultery, fornication, false testimony and fraud.
But then there were some modifications, the culprits could still refer for the apostasy and even for sexual sins if they really regret. Church officers and those who had been persecuted and were about to face death because of their faith were the only ones who could grant forgiveness and readmit to sinners.
However, later the Bishop Calixto of Rome (217-222 D.C.) Apparently he had declared that no sin was unforgivable, finding his base in the parables of the lost sheep, the prodigal son and alluding to the church as a field with wheat and tares, which was similar to Noah’s ark with different typesof animals. This attitude on the part of the religious leaders was listed as a lazyness by the most rigorous.
Despite the persecutions, one of the cruelest emperors was shown against the Christians, it was a brunette (249-251 D.C.), whose persecution in his years made many Christians yield and commit their faith.
Notwithstanding many of those Christians, they returned sore and repentant to be readmitted to the Church. At that time the Bishop of Rome Cornelio (251-253 D.C.) I was willing to admit the repentant apostates, but Novaciano (251-258 D.C.), a very competent presbyter theologian of Carthaginian origin with an impeccable orthodoxy was opposed and began to put ethical requirements.
He looked discontent with the benevolent treatment for those who had denied their faith in times of persecution, considered that baptism washed the sins committed before it was administered and after that the person could not sin, the sins committed were of the unforgivable nature.[Footnoteref: 13] Something similar to the thought of the pastor of Hermas who thought that salvation was divided into two parts: what Christ has done cleaning the sins committed before baptism, and what should be done after baptism.For this reason Novaciano began to rename those who wanted to join the Church again.
After much discussion about whether or not to receive repentant sinners, Cipriano Bishop of Carthage (249-254 D.C.), I would resolve that those who had denied faith was necessary.
This decision was later confirmed by a Synod in Rome made in 251 D.C. And then a synod in Carthage in 252 D.C. and then in the council of Nicea determine the readmission conditions for those who had fallen.
Readmission conditions – Nicea 381
None who was penitent on his death bed could be denied communion in the church, but others could be expected of two to ten years. Grades of penance were formulated in determining the degree of sin committed, some were forbidden to be present in public cult, others could be after sermon and reading the Scriptures, some only after prayers and others could stay to witnessThe Eucharist. Restoration and penance was under the direction of the bishop, if sin had been public, it must be recognized publicly.
Especially in the Church of Western Rome, there was a place where the penitent had to be standing until the religious service could be completed, they could be censored not to bathe and fast for a few days.
On the other hand in Oriental Rome, the practice of appointing a priest especially to hear the confessions of those who had sinned and thus set penance and acquittal. However, for the end of the fourth century, that position was abolished in Constantinople and was at the discretion of each person to participate or not in public cult.
Reboutism in reform
The Anabaptist movement, known as the third wing of the reform, criticized the reform movement since it considered it stuck, therefore proposed an alternative model that corresponded more with primitive Christianity.
They rejected child baptism, considering as valid the baptism that was administered to the conscious believers, that was how they achieved their first rename on January 21, 1525 when former priest Jorge Blaurock asked a man named Conrado Grebel to baptize him,Baptism was not due to immersion, because their concern was not the form, but to be aware of the act. All this triggered a death decree by Carlos V in 1528 D.C. And in Spira’s diet in 1529 D.C.
Anabaptists advocated adult baptism and the profession of faith, which changed the paradigm of the Church manifesting dissatisfied with the practice of the dominant church and the world.
Objections to Reboutism
Many are the arguments against the practice of renaboutism throughout history, the main beliefs around it are presented below.
For Agustín de Hipona (354-430 D.C.), "Reboutism was unnecessary, he received the heretics and schismatics, accepted his baptism, and considered that it was only necessary to impose his hands to receive the link of the unity of which they did not enjoy".
Others say that baptism must be preserved, because "it is a gift that cannot be lost and the irrequisiteness of baptism was an added reason to urge fidelity to the unum baptism".
For its part, Michael Green asserts that "rebautism is nonsense, […] baptism is once and does not depend on repentance or faith. Baptism is not a testimony of your faith, none of that, it is a testimony of the grace of God who approaches me, hugs me, unites me with Christ and makes me a member of his kingdom. Repentance and faith are not the gifts that baptism gives, they are the hands with which we grab that gift ”.
Some, says Green, wish to rename because they did not confess their sins in their child or even adult baptism. But for this it was not necessary.
There are those who want to rename because they were not baptized by immersion and it is precisely this form that most vividly represents the death and resurrection of Jesus (Rom. 6: 3), but this is not so evident in writing.
The baptisms mentioned in it seem to be illogical, for example “Where in Jerusalem, a city notoriously scan of water were going to be baptized three thousand people in the Pentecost? How easy was it to immerse Ethiopian in the middle of the desert, where there is only a small spring on the road that descends to Gaza? How easily could the Philip’s jailer have found abundant water and deep in his house to baptize with his family at midnight after an earthquake? Quite possibly they were baptized with the same water with which he had cleaned the wounds of his former prisoners Pablo and Silas ”.
The immersion is not so clear in writing, or in the history of the Church, which shows us that sometimes it was by immersion and others spilling water on the candidates. The above is interviewed in some writings of the Didajé (50-70 D.C.)
“About baptism, baptized in this way: previously said all these things, baptize in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit in living water [current]. If you don’t have living water, baptize with another water;If you can’t do it with cold water, do it with hot. If you have no one or the other*, spill water in the head three times in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Before baptism, help the baptizer and baptize and some others that can. When baptizing, however, you will send you fast one or two days before. (Didaché 7, 1-4).
From the above, the idea that “it is not the amount of water that makes a person is Christian, the image of Baptism Bomber the writings of Paul (Rom. 6;Col 2:12) does not refer to the method, but to its effectiveness. Therefore it cannot be interpreted as immersion, it is not the amount of water that makes a person Christian. Rather, baptism is to take off the clothes of our previous life and put on Christ’s ”.
As consistent “the symbolism itself should not be identified with a situation with which it can be dramatized, although there may be some kind of similarity between symbolism and what symbolizes it. For example, the Lord’s Supper does not resemble what happened in Calvary since there should not necessarily be a likelihood. Green states that immersion can appropriate and powerful but cannot be a requirement ”.
“Rebouting is wrong, baptism is the inclusion in the history of God’s salvation, it is its incorporation into the Church, the body of Christ. And it is his immersion in the passion, death and resurrection of Jesus. Rebouting is as absurd as requesting citizenship when it is already a citizen, seeking adoption when you are already adopted ”.
Baptism must be remembered but never repeated. Baptism is effective, but not unconditionally effective, repentance and faith are needed. When these elements have not been present as the case of child baptism, you do not need baptism again. You need to repent and believe, so the reformers did not rename, they were wise, they talked about improving their baptism and making use of the promises that were already available and only claimed the salvation that baptism symbolized.
A clear example of this is in the example of the baptized Samaritans who only imposed their hands (Act. 8: 14-17). Baptism is not a mark of our understanding, but of the covenant between a kind god and us. It is not to celebrate our faith, but the grace of God, faith can come after.
However, some presbyterian churches in New Zealand have accepted the practice of renaboutism to meet the psychological demands of those who ask for renormalism and have formulated a different statement when renamed believers where they clearly do it by saying: “As they were baptized in theName of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, now I confirm the cleanliness, forgiveness, the new life and the promised gift of the Holy Spirit of God who is in his covenant ”.
The objections presented against renaboutism are abundant and seem to have a consequent and correct logic, however it is necessary to perform the biblical testimony for greater clarity in this aspect.
Scriptural evidence
Reboutism is intimately connected to the rite of baptism, because if there is no baptism, it would be impossible to talk about renaboutism, for this reason the baptism rite will be briefly addressed from a biblical perspective.
The baptism
The Greek verbs used to baptize and baptism come from the Greek root Bapitícõ which means "immerse" and in turn is related to Báptõ which means "to submerge in or below" are used in numerous biblical passages to refer to something totally covered and submerged(Luc. 16: 24;John 13: 26;Apoc. 19: 13).
On the other hand the details of the baptismal stories that clearly indicate the immersion, such as Jesus’ baptism descending in the waters of Jordan (Mt. 3: 16), Felipe’s case with the eunuch on the way to Gaza where both describes themselves to the water
In relation to the practice described in the Apostles Didajé mentioned above to refute the baptism by immersion, it certainly highlights the phrase if you do not have one or the other [Footnoteref: 44]* which clearly indicates that it is not the rule but the exception. Baptism for sprinkling or water spill was applicable in places where there was water shortage or in people who, for health reasons, could not be baptized by immersion.
It is important to highlight that the reference extracted from the Didajé somehow closes the possibility to the baptism of infants, since the appointment closes by saying: "When baptizing, however, you will send you to fast one or two days before", [Footnoteref: 46]This statement cancels any attempt to want to use this passage to justify the baptism of infants, since it is practically impossible for a baby or someone who is not aware of their actions to follow this type of instructions.
Tertutliano (160-220 d.C.), advocated the postponement of infants’ baptism, until they met the Lord for themselves. His statements confirm the form of baptism in his time also. He describes the baptism of adults, immersing them three times and which they were prepared through fasting, much prayer and confession of all their sins.
The biblical evidence regarding the need to believe and regret previously to participate in baptism is numerous (MT. 20: 22;MC. 1: 4;Acts. 2: 27-38;8: 37-38;9: 1-18;22:16), this is something that an infant cannot be participated.
It is important to understand that “the Seventh -day Adventist Church considers“ baptism as the route of entrance to the Church. Fundamentally, it is the commitment to enter the Pact* of Salvation of Christ and must be treated as a solemn and joyful welcome to the family of God ”.
Reboutism in the Bible
The Scriptures mention a single renaboutism, which is registered in the book of the Acts of the Apostles (Act. 19: 1-6) which was held on Paul’s third missionary journey. However, it should not be considered as a renovation of Christian baptism, since it is the baptism of regret of John that was replaced by a greater understanding of what baptism was. So it can hardly be considered as a Christian model of renewal of baptism to justify two or more times the repetition of it.
Reboutism in the IASD
Between 1850 and 1860 there was enough discussion about the need for renaboutism in people who came from other religious denominations. It was established that those who had been baptized in their children
However, there was nothing official regarding those people from other Christian confessions that had been baptized by immersion and that had now accepted the distinctive biblical truths of the IASD. It was up to 1886, when the General Association (AG) took a formal agreement where it was stipulated that it was at the discretion of each person again to take their baptismal votes.
In this regard Elena G. White said:
It has been resolved: that on the issue of renaboutism of those who have been correctly baptized before embracing the message, teaching and practice of our people, based on the Bible, as we believe them, is that they must be received in the bosomof our churches without renamer if they are satisfied with their previous baptism, evenA necessary condition for salvation.
Another reasons why the Adventist Church requests a renewal of baptism is in case of total apostasy. Elena g. White said the following “… When a soul has really become again, it must be baptized again. She renews her covenant with God, and God will renew her covenant with her ..
In summary, the IASD requests: (1) a new baptism to the people who were baptized in their childhood;(2) Leaves the practice of renaboutism in those believers who were baptized by immersion in other Christian denominations;(3) Request renamer from people who have fallen into total apostasy of faith;(4) And although it is not officially stipulated in its manuals, in practice the Reboutism of the believer is acceptance within the Church.
Theological implications
Baptism contains the promise of acceptance by God and his forgiveness. Therefore a renewal of baptism is not theologically justifiable. Since this would mean that God withdraws his given word, also His grace and also takes away from man their quality of children of God.
The above would be in contrast to the character of God, with his faithfulness and his pactual alliance. God is faithful to his covenant despite the infidelity of the human being, a clear example of it is Noah, God made a covenant with him (Gn. 6: 18-19) Before the flood arrived, it had not passed many days later and Noah was drunk and naked in front of their children (Gn. 9: 21), one could say that he sinned, however, God would not cancel his covenant.
Another example is in the covenant that God does with Abraham (Gen 15: 18), however a little later he commits adultery with his servant agar (Gn. 16: 4), and despite the disbelief and error made, God gives a sign of Pact to Abraham through circumcision (Gn. 17: 11), again a little later Abraham doubts God’s protection in Abimelec’s land saying about Sara, who was her sister (Gn. twenty);And that is not why he has to circumcise again to renew his covenant with God.
In the New Testament there is the case of the apostle Peter, who had been baptized and was a disciple of Jesus, however he tried to kill Malco with the sword (Jn 18: 10) and later we see him betting on Jesus by cursing him and explicitly denying him. However, there is no biblical record of a renaboutism, rather Jesus is seen again calling him to his service and Peter making a public statement of commitment to him (Jn 21: 17-23).
Despite human infidelity, God is faithful, the scriptural testimony is extensive (Ps 108; 5; Os 2: 21ss; Rom 3: 3; 2 Tim 2: 13). “For most Christian churches, a renewal of baptism, whatever the circumstances, is excluded, is unthinkable. It is more or less a sacrilege and a betrayal of biblical doctrine, due to the fact that there is "one baptism" (ef. Four. Five). Although after an apostasy of faith, a renewed repentance and the return to the bosom of the churches are totally possible, baptism legitimately administered once is considered as something inalienable and therefore, in principle, not renewable.
Reboutism can have a more acute theological implication when there are church members requesting a new baptism because they feel guilty. Allowing them or even more urge rebautism in these cases, it can contribute to them developing a wrong concept about God, perceiving him as a God who is ready to punish or close his grace for any sin committed, he can degenerate in the member a salvific insecurity, in which today you may feel except and tomorrow not. Which would contribute to living a tense, sad, high and low Christian life when God really wants to give security to his children of his forgiveness through Jesus, “my children, I am writing to you so that you do not sin, but if anysin, lawyer we have for the Father, Jesus Christ the Just.”(1 John 2: 1).
conclusion
Finally after making a historical – biblical tour of the practice of renaboutism and exploring some theological implications, it is important to consider the following.
First, the baptism shown in the Scriptures is by immersion and must be preceded by repentance, the confession of their sins to God and a faith in Jesus;Thus being the baptized, also together with the community of believers, that is, the Church in Jesus ().
Second, biblical baptism must be required to every believer whose baptism has not been according to the scriptural testimony.
Third, renavautism must be optional for the believer baptized according to the biblical model and that comes from another Protestant denomination (Acts. 8: 12-17 CF Acts 19: 1-6).
Fourth, rebautism is not indispensable for the salvation of an apostate believer, because repentance, confession of their sins and faith in Jesus are enough to restore their saving relationship with him (Jn. 8: 11). However, when the believer apostatized his relationship with the community of believers, now to be able to reintegrate, he may be required for renaboutism, but this should not be requested from a salvific perspective, but confessional or ecclesiastical.
Fifth, the believer’s rebautism should not be stimulated, requested, or promoted by laity or ministers, since it most likely encourages a wrong perception of God’s character and a bad conception of his grace and plan of salvation. On the contrary, these people should be instructed about the treatment that God gives to the believing sinner who regrets and does not continue in sin (Jn. 4:18, 25-26, 39-42, 1 Jn. 2: 1;Jn. twenty-one).
However, if after having explained all of the previous one with care, it still persists in being renamed for reasons of consciousness, the rebautism should not be denied and it should be renamed for reasons of their conscience (1 Cor 10: 27-29).
Sixth, to conclude, it is necessary to clarify that the salvation of the human being does not depend on rites, ceremonies, laws or human works, but on the acceptance of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus in your favor (Jn. 17: 3;Acts. 4: 12;EF. 2: 8-10).
First of all remember ..
That there is only "a God, a faith and a baptism" (Ephesians 4: 5)
Leave feedback