CONNECT people to Christ and POUR into their lives His teaching so they'll OVERFLOW for the glory of God

The Problem of Rebaptism in SBC Churches

I absolutely love a baptism service!  Some might imagine a quiet version of “Holy, Holy, Holy” as the soundtrack to baptism, but I hear rousing, triumphant versions of “How Great Is Our God” or “Crown Him with Many Crowns” in the background.  I get a little excited!  Just ask my church.  They have laughingly said, “Bro. Ben doesn’t immerse.  He body slams people in the water!”  One time I even sloshed water out of the baptistery onto the top choir pew.  I can’t help it.  I’m overcome with enthusiasm by the reality that the person standing in the water with me is announcing to the entire world that Jesus is their new Savior and Lord.  They’ve just been brought from death to life, and they’re unashamedly making their profession public through the ordinance of baptism.  Yeah, we should get excited!

However, there is a troubling baptism trend that has recently come to my attention.  Danny Akin, president of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, has stated here and here that he believes as many as 50% of baptisms in our Southern Baptist churches are rebaptisms.  Although his figures are based on anecdotal evidence and informal polling, even if the rebaptism rate is more like 30% or 40%, rebaptism is a serious problem any way you look at it.  We’re already seeing baptisms declining across our convention, but given the insight from this statistic, the reality is probably even bleaker.

Why are so many rebaptisms happening?  By rebaptisms, we mean the act of being biblically baptized more than once.  A biblical baptism has these three criteria:

  • Baptized by immersion
  • Baptized after a profession of faith in Jesus
  • Baptized as a symbol and not as a requirement of salvation

So, what we’re seeing is people doing this more than once, and we want to know why.  I believe the blame can be laid on these four things:

1)  Landmarkism
Many churches operate under Landmark doctrine and probably don’t realize it.  That’s the way it was when I came to West Main Baptist.  Here’s the test:  does your church make somebody from another denomination get rebaptized in order to join your church, regardless of the nature of their first baptism?  If so, your church is most likely practicing Landmark doctrine.  This idea is to not accept what is called alien immersion (ie, being baptized under a denomination other than Baptist) and stems from the belief that only baptisms done in a Baptist church are valid because the Baptist church is the only valid church.  Therefore, many Baptist churches are rebaptizing people.  They might not realize the theology behind the practice but continue it out of tradition.  Again, this is the way West Main Baptist was when I first arrived, but I have since led them away from this practice.

Landmarkism arose in our Baptist churches here in the South around the 1850s through the leadership of James Robinson Graves, James Madison Pendleton, and Amos Cooper Dayton.  In this time of great spiritual growth and frontier spirit following the Second Great Awakening, there arose a strand of Christianity led by Alexander Campbell that we know as the Church of Christ.  Campbell and his Churches of Christ began to teach that their churches were the only true churches.  In fact, they went as far as to teach that salvation was only possible through the Church of Christ.

Baptists desired to not be outdone, so they developed the Landmark doctrines, one of which is that Baptist churches are the only true churches.  Basically, they told the Campbellites, “Nuh-uh, we’re the only true church!”  To add weight to their claim, Landmarkers began to trace the history of the Baptist church all the way back through the centuries to John the Baptist himself.  This idea, called “Baptist successionism,” has been explained famously in a booklet called “The Trail of Blood” by James Milton Carroll but is pseudo-history at best.  Nevertheless, those who hold these doctrines are convinced of their teaching.  Therefore, they make all who desire to join the Baptist church from another denomination be rebaptized.

The residue of Landmark teaching is still prevalent in Tennessee and Kentucky, probably due to the fact that these two states were ground-zero for the Landmark controversy.  The headquarters of Landmark teaching was Nashville, TN.  Bad habits die hard!  Therefore, many churches in my home state and my current state add to the problem of rebaptism in our convention due to their Landmark practices.

2)  A low view of conversion
People with the right heart have undoubtedly led many to believe that they are saved when in fact they are not, particularly with children.  They use methods based on or similar to Charles Finney’s “new measures,” which sought to manipulate people into making a “decision” for God or to, at least, make it as easy as possible.  Methods like “every head bowed and every eye closed,” “just repeat this prayer and you’re saved,” and “ask Jesus into your heart” invitations are good examples.  Conversion becomes less about repentance and faith and more about praying a prayer and walking an aisle.  Many invitations and evangelistic efforts are prone to false conversion.  I would encourage you to read my blog called 10 Surefire Ways to Fill Your Churches with False Converts for further insight into what I’m talking about.

I recently witnessed a very good example of what I’m talking about at the 2010 Hearts on Fire conference.  The speaker told a heartbreaking story about how he’d been abused and mistreated as a child.  Admittedly, it was a very sad story.  He told us how Jesus had healed his hurts and how Jesus wants to heal our hurts.  He said that Jesus would heal our hurts if we would simply pray a prayer to get saved.  He then led the entire assembly—about 4,000 people in our session—to repeat a prayer of salvation after him and invited all of those who prayed that prayer and meant it to come forward.  Honestly, he never touched the gospel, but many young people left there thinking they had responded to the gospel and had been saved.  I’m not saying that nobody was genuinely saved.  I’m just saying that this moment was pregnant with the opportunity for false conversion.

Undoubtedly, those who prayed that prayer and went forward that evening have been baptized by now in their respective churches.  But I’m guessing that many of them will be baptized again somewhere down the road when they hear the true gospel, and God begins to deal with them.  A low view of conversion, which systematically leads to false conversion, is undoubtedly raising our rebaptism rate in the SBC.

So, what’s the answer?  We cannot deviate from the biblical gospel call.  The gospel calls us to understand that we are sinners.  The gospel doesn’t say, “You’re a victim.  Come to Jesus for healing.”  The gospel says, “You’re a perpetrator.  Come to Jesus for forgiveness.”  In fact, I fully believe that a person cannot be saved unless they understand that they are a sinner deserving Hell.  The gospel calls us to repent of our sin, which means to hate and turn from that sin.  The gospel calls us to place our faith in Christ alone, which means that we set our hope for Heaven only on what Jesus did at the cross.  The gospel must have the cross and the reason for the cross in it!  The gospel calls us to a lifetime of faith evidenced by obedience.  In other words, Jesus is your Savior only if Jesus is your Lord.  We must rid ourselves of a low view of conversion.  Otherwise we will continue to bring into the water those who are not really saved.

3)  Baptizing children at very young ages
It’s clear that we as Baptists are not for the baptism of infants, but in many instances, we’re not too far away from baptizing toddlers.  Many children from godly homes make professions of faith at a very early age, and they follow this profession up with baptism.  However, we are finding that as these children grow older, we are seeing a couple of things happen.  One is that sometimes they desire to be baptized again because they don’t really remember their baptism.  They were so young and didn’t have the fullness of understanding that they now possess.  They desire for the occasion to be memorable and meaningful.  Hence, they seek to enter the water again.

Two is that sometimes as they get older, children who made professions of faith when they were younger come to realize through the preaching of the Word and the conviction of the Holy Spirit that they are not actually saved.  At that younger age, they had no conviction of sin.  They had no moment when they really actively wanted to follow Jesus.  And now the Holy Spirit is dealing with them and calling them to salvation.  After they truly repent and trust Christ, they want to get back into the waters of baptism and rightly so.  This testimony is shared by many Christians I know.

The baptism of young children is always tough for pastors because we know the Scripture teaches that we should baptize only those who are converted, but it’s so hard to discern true conversion in children.  It’s for this reason that some congregations have a policy of putting off baptism of children until they are older.  Perhaps the most famous example of this policy comes from First Baptist Dallas under the leadership of W. A. Criswell, who would not baptize a child under the age of 10.  I have to admit that I’m uncomfortable setting an age but see great wisdom in putting off baptism for young children, especially given our Baptist belief that baptism is not necessary for salvation.  By putting off their baptism until they can further mature will certainly cut down the number who would desire or need to be rebaptized.

4)  Biblical ignorance
Unfortunately, many simply do not understand what baptism is.  Therefore, they get into the water repeatedly.  We especially see rebaptism happening when a person backslides for a period and then repents and returns to the Lord.  Baptist churches usually call this “rededication.”  I personally don’t like that word and simply prefer the biblical word “repentance,” but whatever you call it, people sometimes feel like they need to get into the water again and be rebaptized.  Unfortunately, churches are allowing them to be baptized again, which totally confuses New Testament baptism.

We as Baptists are really good at arguing about the mode of baptism, but we’re poor at teaching what baptism really is.  Baptism is a symbol and proclamation of salvation, and that’s it.  Biblically speaking, baptism is the Christian’s public profession of faith.  Therefore, you should be baptized only as many times as you get saved, which is once.  One salvation equals one baptism.  It’s just not a symbol of ongoing repentance or “rededication” as some try to use it.  If we will properly teach what baptism is, I believe our rates of rebaptism will decrease.

Conclusion
I pray that pastors and churches everywhere will think seriously about the problem of rebaptism.  First, I pray that they would agree that it’s indeed a problem.  Second, I pray that they’ll take steps to be as biblical as possible and thus honor the Lord Jesus Christ in baptism.  May our rebaptism rates rapidly decrease and our true baptism rates explode in increase!

6 Comments

  1. I went to a Baptist church for years and was told I had to be rebaptised to become a member of their church. I felt this is not so. I was saved many years ago and followed up with baptism. Am I right to feel I do not need to be rebaptised?

    • Hi, Lois! Every Baptist church has the right to set whatever standards they see fit for membership, but every Baptist church should try to adhere as closely to the Bible as possible in its requirements. As I said in the article, a biblical baptism has these three criteria:

      -Baptized by immersion
      -Baptized after a profession of faith in Jesus
      -Baptized as a symbol and not as a requirement of salvation

      If your previous baptismal experience met those three requirements, then I wouldn’t recommend for another baptism. I encourage you to meet with your pastor, try to understand their stance, and work it out.

      Blessings!

  2. Hello Ben,
    I to am troubled by my Pastor’s stance that I must be baptised into his church. I gave my life to the Lord Jesus Christ when I was a young man, was baptised both in water and with the Holy Spirit and attended bible college, was ordained a pastor in that church but then had my eyes opened to the improper behaviour of this church and left. I have been accepted into every other church in every other town that I have since lived in (except the catholic church I went to one Christmas Eve). I am now being told not only must I be baptised again to show to the congregation that I am committed to their church (not as a sign of accepting the glory of salvation), but I was refused the opportunity of partaking in the Lord’s supper. Not having been involved in the Baptist Church before, I am stymied by these per-requisites and also the church doctrine that there is only one Bible accepted and that being the King James Version. I have read and taught from the New King James Version for nearly 40 years and can find no fault with a book that has been translated in much the same way as the KJV was back in 1618. In fact, my NKJV disregards the very same interpretations that being the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus,and have also disregarded the edited version by Westcott and Hort but that is getting away from my original question and becoming more of a commentary. I know that rebaptism is In the New Testament as mentioned by the Apostle Paul however, this instance doesn’t follow with biblical doctrine from what I can see.
    Please help me to understand his requirement if I am in the wrong. I love the congregation and I also love his passion but I am concerned that if he is incorrect in his interpretation of this, then how much more of his teaching is incorrect.
    Some things just feel strange to me coming from a Pentecostal church, so please forgive me if this comes from ignorance of the Baptist Church.
    Your brother in Christ.
    Chris Ellis

  3. I disagree with your third criteria (respectfully). But out of curiosity, if a person was baptized, understanding that their baptism was a part of the response to the Gospel and not simply an act followed by one’s conversion, would you encourage them to be rebaptized? Thanks for the article, and your reply!

    • Hi, Will! Sorry for the delayed response. Thanks for the great question and respectful tone.

      As to your question, if a person was “baptized” believing that baptism was essential for their salvation, I would absolutely require them to be biblically baptized, entering into the water trusting in Christ alone. Their first baptism was really no baptism at all since salvation is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. Therefore, a person who believes that the work of baptism merited their salvation is not trusting in Christ alone. They need to repent of all self-righteousness and trust in Christ alone. Being biblical baptized would be the appropriate symbol of this repentance and trust.

      I might even go a step further but wrestle with this in my mind. Let’s say a person is baptized by a church who believes that baptism saves you, but that person says they were trusting in Christ alone for their salvation. In that case, I lean toward asking them to be biblically baptized as well.

      You see, I would argue that baptism is not an individual ordinance. It is an ordinance of the church. Therefore, when a church baptizes you, you are submitting to their understanding of baptism. If the baptizing church’s understanding was that baptism saves you, then that’s the understanding you were baptized under.

      Like I said, I’m still wrestling with that last one, but the first one I would be firm on.

      If I might ask, why do you disagree with that third criterion?

  4. Hey thanks so much for your response Ben! Space unfortunately does not allow me to adequately answer your question, but allow me to respond as succinctly as I can. In short, I disagree with your third criterion because I see baptism as a part of one’s conversion. I agree with you that we are saved by grace through faith, but would be interested to see what you mean by the word “alone.” Obviously the solas from the reformation are staples for any good protestant (in which I would see myself as well), but surely you don’t mean “alone” to mean faith as the only condition upon which we are called to respond to the Gospel? What about repentance? If you believe repentance is necessary for salvation as well (which I would assume you do) then how can we say “faith alone?” in a similar fashion I include baptism as well. Simply because the NT connects baptism with salvific language so clearly to me (e.g. Acts 2:38; 22:16; Romans 6:3-4; Galatians 3:27;Colossians 2:11-12; 1 Peter 3:21). Furthermore, I don’t view baptism as a “work” in the Pauline sense. When Paul says we are saved by grace through faith and not by works, I take that to mean “works of law.” However, many seem to think Paul means “anything we do.” But, surely this is not the case. Faith in itself is something we “do (e.g John 6:28).” Baptism is not a work in the Pauline sense. Baptism is a work of God in the heart of a repentant sinner. Well much more could be said but I’ll leave it here. Again thanks for allowing me to interact here on your blog!

Leave a Reply to Will Jacobs Cancel reply