p. 114 | Untitled article by James White

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Third-day, August 6, 1867

RE-BAPTISM.

By James White

This means to be baptized again. That this is right in some cases, we shall undertake to prove. I do not refer to those persons who have been sprinkled or had water poured upon them; for such have never been baptized.

That one immersion is sufficient when administered to and by the proper person at the right time, we fully believe. But many reject the idea of re-baptism, some on the ground that one baptism under any circumstances is sufficient, and others reject the term on the ground that, unless all the circumstances be right, it is no baptism at all, and until they receive a baptism in all its particulars perfectly right, although they may have been dipped in water, they have not been baptized. This is simply a denial of the term, while it is the strongest position possible in favor of re-baptism. I would reject this last position, believing it utterly false.

In the first century there were two baptisms, both from Heaven. Why not two in the nineteenth century? “The baptism of John, whence was it? from Heaven, or of men?” The response from every Christian heart is, from Heaven! John was filled with the Holy Spirit. Said Christ of him, “There is not a greater prophet.” The administrator was right, and came at the right time. And the candidates coming to the baptism of John, confessing their sins, were fit subjects.

Six months later only, there came another leader, whose administration called for another immersion. This was the Son of God. At a later period the question was asked, “Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John’s baptism.” Then “they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.” Neither of those immersions were wrong. The last was re-baptism, unless it can be shown that the baptism of John was not from Heaven. They were both at the right time. Both leaders were owned from Heaven, and the candidates were in a correct and fitting position. And here I would remark that they were immersed both times for the same thing, namely, the resurrection from the dead, first of Christ, and second, of all who shall be Christ’s at his coming. They stood at their first baptism before the resurrection, at their second baptism after his resurrection. One immersion looked forward to it; the other was in the faith of a risen Jesus.

Having established the point that the same persons received two baptisms in the first century, both owned and honored of Heaven, I would inquire, may there not be circumstances which call for re-baptism in the nineteenth century? This may be answered best by comparing the circumstances connected with Seventh-day Adventists in relation to baptism with those in the first century who were twice immersed.

1. Some of us were not prepared. We were buried alive. They were prepared, John being judge of fitness.

2. Unholy hands plunged some of us into the water. Those were men of clean hands and pure hearts.

3. Some of us did not know for what we were being baptized. The minister said we must, and so we obeyed. If he had told us it was the antitype of circumcision, or commemorated the crucifixion, we would have believed. The distinct teachings of the apostles gave the true reason, and they knew why they were baptized.

4. The administrators in the case of some of us were men of intemperance and lust. They were slaves to tobacco, tea, and coffee. John’s life was one of temperance. His meat (food) was locusts and wild honey. In some cases, modern Babylonish administrators have been the husbands of two wives, living in violation of the seventh precept of the moral law, holding the marriage covenant in form only, and that very lightly. John was a temperate, pure, chaste man of God. He lost his head for reproving Herod for unlawfully living with his brother Philip’s wife.

5. Some modern administrators have not only been in error when they performed the solemn ordinance in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but were at that moment at war with such vital truths as Bible purity and the gifts of the church. Their principal message was to justify themselves in the use of tobacco, fight the gifts, and circulate lying reports concerning Seventh-day Adventists. They were then the servants of the Devil, in rebellion against the work of God, and were preparing themselves for his wrath. The baptism of such men is as valueless as if performed by Simon Magus or Jeff Davis.

John stood complete in all the truth, filled with the Spirit, and in harmony with the work of God. Was re-baptism in the first century right? Then in the cases to which I have referred it is doubly called for.

Mark this. Those stood in clear light at the time of both immersions. They only advanced from light to still greater light. In our case most of us were in darkness, wrapped about with Babylonish garments, or those still more filthy. We were pursuing in a wrong direction. The truth stopped us, turned us about, stripped us, and cleansed us. If two baptisms, while walking on the plane of truth, were required eighteen centuries ago, how much more requisite in the cases described above!

But I have reserved my strongest reason for the close. The pre-requisite for baptism is illustrated by the apostle to the Romans by death, and baptism by burial after death. Some believers in the third message met with a change before they heard it, which may be called a death; but on receiving the message, they were fully slain. They were dead. Were they in a degree dead back there? They were here a hundred fold more. Did they need a burial there? They here need it a hundred fold more.

Should one deny the dead a burial he would be regarded mad. But here are men and women who have by the power of present truth been slain. They have been, by God’s great cleaver, cut completely free from every earthly dependence and hope. They are dead. And who will forbid water that they may not have a burial?

Again, some who now stand firm in the truth, have, since they were baptized, gone back and sinned worse than before. Since their apostasy, they have repented as never before, have believed as never before, and have been—no, have not been baptized. They go back beyond their apostasy, for baptism, and patch it on to repentance and faith under the third message. Did they repent when they first yielded to the claims of the gospel? Then when they heard the third message their cup of repentance was a hundred fold more bitter. Did they back there exercise faith in the Saviour? When the faith and hope of a coming Redeemer to restore all things burst in upon them, and they saw by the light of the heavenly sanctuary and the third message the great work of preparation for that event, their faith grasped tangible things with a clearness and strength a hundred fold more than their former faith. And now what shall be done? tell them they must stop at faith? At their first conversion, the order of events was, repent, believe, and be baptized. At their second conversion the order is repentance, faith, and—

But it may be said that if baptism should follow faith and repentance twice, it may ten times. Why not? But should we be baptized as often as we die? If we sin to that degree that we lose our faith, which apostasy calls for a thorough repentance and a complete resurrection of faith, then we need a baptism, if it be ten times. A sinner is a sinner, though he may a hundred times during his probation, if such a thing be possible, come into favor with God, and then lose that favor. And if a sinner needs faith, repentance, and baptism, at one time, he needs them at another. If all three are required of him when once a sinner, will two-thirds answer when twice or thrice a sinner? To illustrate the subject I will introduce the words of the prophet Ezekiel, which are to the point:

“The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die. All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him; in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live. Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord God, and not that he should return from his ways and live?

“But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned; in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die. Yet ye say, The way of the Lord is not equal. Hear now, O house of Israel; Is not my way equal? are not your ways unequal? When a righteous man turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and dieth in them; for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die. Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive. Because he considereth, and turneth away from all his transgressions that he hath committed, he shall surely live, he shall not die.” Eze. xxiii, 20-28.

The points of interest in the above are,

1. The person that sins is exposed to death. He may stand before Heaven free from sin, then turn to the service of Satan, and have the sentence of death—the soul that sinneth it shall die—upon him. We know not why this may not be acted over a dozen times.

2. The promise of God is sure. “If the wicked will turn from all his sins, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.” Then let no common apostate fear to return. He shall surely live. To remain in sin is sure death; but he who will return shall as surely live. If he returns, all his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him. In his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.

3. But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned. In his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.

The sinner may repent and find pardon; then if he continues a righteous life, his sins will not be mentioned against him. But if he apostatizes he will not only have to answer for the apostasy but for all his sins before pardoned. In fact his apostasy blots out his pardon and acceptance with God, and places him in a condition far worse than the first. He is now as though he had never repented, believed, and been baptized, and worse. His repentance, faith, and baptism are blotted out. He returns; he again drinks of the cup of repentance to the very dregs, and believes with all his heart. And now what shall be done? make his old baptism do? That was blotted out with his other two righteous acts at his apostasy. All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be remembered. His baptism is as though it had not been. And he is virtually an unbaptized soul. And he who forbids water in his case takes the responsibility of shutting up one-third of the pathway to the kingdom of God.

“But,” says one “would you have us baptized every time we sin?” There are degrees of sin. No man living is so free from what may be regarded as sin, but he may with propriety every night pray, “Forgive me, Lord, for the sins I have this day committed.” Yet by no means should he have a daily immersion. But as often as he apostatizes, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, so that all his acts of righteousness are blotted out, and he return to repentance and faith, he should be baptized, if it be his sad yet privileged lot to take these three steps a score of times. If God accepts the first step, and Christ the second, the church should not forbid the third. Amen.

JAMES WHITE.

Greenville, Mich., July 25, 1867.