Recently I was sent an audio of a very arrogant young man from Sacramento, California where he challenged Brother David Harp because of his rebaptism. The audio was filled with taunts and aggressive belittlement of Brother Harp. The personal insulting remarks made upon Brother Harp were more than I could stomach. After about five minutes of the smart mouth I deleted the mess. I have sent a request for Brother Harp to set up an appointment with this young man. I would also like an appointement to talk with his pastor. This young man had no scripture for his mean and hateful attacking diatribe but Ephesians 4:5:
"One Lord, one faith, one baptism."
It is obvious this young man believed "one baptism" meant a person was to be baptized only one time. But this is a clear perversion of this statement. One baptism does not mean a person needs only to be baptized one time. The one baptism in this text is in reference to the water baptism Jesus sent his apostles to perform upon the faith of a convert. Prior to this, there was John's baptism. The one baptism of this text supersedes the baptism of John the Baptist. In fact, this one baptism superseded the mikveh baptisms of converts to Old Testament Judaism.
Let's back up a little here: in the Jewish religion of the day of Jesus, proselytes to the Jewish religion underwent a baptism called a mikveh. They could not become a "Jew by choice" until they had performed this act of cleansing. Even today, a Gentile convert to Judaism must have their baptismal mikveh. The Jewish practice of spiritual cleansing by means of this mikveh preceded the baptisms of John. The word "baptism" is really a Greek word. There is no Hebrew word for baptism. The word commonly used is mikveh and refers to all ceremonial washings in which a person or object is said to be sanctified, cleansed, and made or returned to a condition of holiness. The baptisms of John the Baptist were convert baptisms also. But in this new baptism mikveh, the candidate was being immersed unto the remission of their sins. Remission of sins is never a part of any ancient Jewish mikveh. Remission or atonement of sins in the Old Testament was always by animal blood and specifically on the day of atonement. The remission of sins of John the Baptist was a prophetic miracle associated with the blood sacrifice of Jesus as the Lamb of God. When the blood of Jesus is associated with water baptism, remission of sins is a gift from Jesus to the convert. It is to be noted, there were thousands of Gentile (strangers) in the days of Jesus who had undergone mikveh baptism and joined the Jewish religion. These non Jew strangers and proselytes are mentioned in Acts 2:10.
Those who claim "one baptism" means baptized only one time are in great error. There is not a single verse of scripture against rebaptisms. Not one.
In Acts 2: 41 there were about 3,000 souls baptized. But what many, including this arrogant young man fail to accept, is that many of these 3,000 were rebaptismal candidates. They had performed the baptismal mikveh washings under the Law. Those Jews who were non observers, who had never been circumcised properly, were required to have their mikveh just as any Gentile convert would have been. These are included among the 3,000. What do we have here? We have 3,000 baptized with the one baptism Jesus sent the Apostles to perform. This is the one baptism of Ephesians 4:5. The reference is to the one instituted by doctrine, not how many times a person is baptized. Anyone who says "one baptism" means the number of times a person can receive baptism, is wrong.
In every case of baptism in the book of Acts where Jewish converts were baptized, it cannot be ruled out that those baptized had not had a previous baptism of some type.
It is true we have only one case of clear actual rebaptisms in Acts 19:1-5. In this text there were twelve men who had been previously baptized by John the Baptist. They were rebaptized. What was the criteria here to qualify the rebaptims? First, they had never heard of water baptism for the of remission of sins to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. This alone qualified them for rebaptism. Then of course, New Testament baptisms were to be performed invoking and pronouncing the name of Jesus Christ over the convert. These had not had this faith baptism. We cannot overlook the fact that in New Testament water baptism, the blood of Jesus is the washing and cleansing that brings holiness and a divine pardon. This was not available under John's baptism or under the Old Testament mikveh washings. The one baptism of the New Testament has to do with faith and obedience in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. Without this faith, this purpose, the baptism is invalid. If the purpose of water baptism is not the reason the person went into the water, the baptism is a sham. It is not according to scriptural precedent. So, these twelve men were rebapized because according to them they "never heard" whether there be any Holy Ghost. Paul rebaptized them showing he believe in his doctrine and in his gospel there were incidents where rebaptisms were not only valid, if a person was not rebaptized they would be lost.
Many Oneness Pastors understand and teach that repentance, water baptism, and receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost are the first three foundational works of faith in a new convert. They are called first works. By works we do not imply works of the Law, but rather the first works of faith. So we teach repentance is by faith, water baptism is by faith, and receiving the Holy Ghost are all acts of faith. Why is it important to understand these simple principles? It is important because those who cry against rebaptisms are not at all that well taught in the scriptures. If they were, they would see repentance, rebaptism, and being filled with the Holy Ghost is strongly mentioned in Revelation 2:5. In this text the Church of Ephesus is commanded to repent. Then to do its first works. What work follows repentance? Anyone who has no reason to pervert the Word of God will confess it means water baptism. So, the whole Ephesus Church is told to go do their first works over. Rebaptism cannot be ruled out of this command.
I have been a Pastor among the Oneness people since 1972. Prior to that I was a member of the United Pentecostal Church since 1949. Over my years associated with the UPC and other Oneness groups I have witnessed thousands of rebaptisms. I do not know of a single UPC pastor who has not rebaptized someone. I will expand that to all Oneness organizations. I do not know of a single Pastor who would refuse to rebaptise a person if they requested it. When I am confronted with slander and hate because I do practice rebaptisms, I always ask the attacker for the phone number of their pastor. And if they will give it to me I will call them on the spot. I will prove to my attacker that his/her own pastor has rebaptized.
Let me bring this a little clearer to those who still have hated against me and others because of rebaptisms. If one baptism means one time, then Oneness have no right to baptize anyone who had a previous baptism in the titles Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. That would be rebaptism. But, they will tell you: the person was not baptized right. They did not have the name of Jesus Christ pronounced over them. And the baptizer was a trinitarian and did not have Apostolic authority to baptize. Now we have two more factors used to validate rebaptisms. First, the name of Jesus Christ must be pronounced, and second, the baptizer must have ministerial authority and live a holy life to perform the baptism.
Can a trinitarian who was never baptized in the name of Jesus Christ baptize a person in the name of Jesus Christ? Some claim it is not the spiritual condition of the baptizer, it is the faith of the baptismal candidate here. One idiot had the audacity to say that even a drunk could baptise in Jesus Christ name and the person's baptism would be valid. The same idiot said the baptism of a homosexual pastor was valid if he did it in the name of Jesus Christ. All of this nonsense is based upon the man made theory that "one baptism" means baptized only one time. I do not know of a single Pastor anywhere in the Oneness ranks who believes the baptisms by a homosexual is valid. And I do not know of a single Pastor in the Oneness ranks who believes a trinitarian who has not been baptized in the name of Jesus Christ has any scriptural authority to baptized a person in the name of Jesus Christ.
Rebaptisms are performed each year by the thousands. Why do people want rebaptized? There are many reasons. At the bottom of all of them is fear their first baptism was invalid due to either the life of the baptizer or themselves. Many are backsliders who went away from God and feel they need to come back and do their first works over just as the Ephesian Church was commanded to do. I have rebaptized many souls because they learned the baptizer was living in adultery, committing adultery, a closet homosexual, or some other gross sins. They want their baptism to be sacred, holy, and one God will accept. It is after all their soul and their faith. I refuse to judge either.
The Oneness Pentecostals must not forget the incident that helped spark a revival of the restored Acts 2:38 baptismal formula.
In 1913 something happened in California. Missionary Frank Ewart who had received the baptism of the Holy Ghost in the Azusa Street revival was converted to the Oneness Doctine and saw the truth of the mighty God in Christ Jesus. He rebaptized supporter Glenn A. Cook according to the Jesus Christ name only formula (Acts 2:38); Cook then rebaptized Ewart. Both were Oneness Ministers and Holy Spirit filled. They claimed the Holy Spirit inspired them to baptize each other. One Oneness minister baptized another Oneness Minister. Prior to this both had been baptized in the titles Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. But they were now Oneness and no longer trinity. The "new message" the "Jesus Only" message was the beginning of the rebaptism of thousands of trinitarian Pentecostals. The Oneness movement was partly established on the doctrine of rebaptisms. It is to be noted that several ministers including Andrew Urshan and Charles Pharham had been and were already baptizing converts in the name of Jesus Christ prior to 1913. As ministers spread throughout America and the world, rebaptisms of trinitarians became a central work of evangelism. Rebaptisms quickly spread through Pentecostal churches, particularly the Assemblies of God. Many thousands were rebaptized. Without rebaptisms there would be be no Oneness groups today.
Contrary to the lies spread about me, I do not believe I am the only person in the world who is qualified to baptise. I accept the baptisms of many hundreds of Pastors and Ministers. I however also reject the baptisms of many hundreds of Pastors and Ministers. But, I am not alone in this conduct, there are many thousands of Oneness Pastors and Ministers who do not accept the baptisms performed by reprobates and other non-ordained and unscriptural ministers. I am not alone in this area of rebaptisms. So who will I rebaptize?
Any person who ask me to rebaptize them because they have lost confidence in the person who baptized them or they believe their first baptism was not right.
Any person who ask me who discovered the minister who baptized them, was at the time of their baptism involved in secret homosexual acts.
Any person who ask me who discovers the minister who baptized them was committing adultery at the time of their baptism.
Any person who ask me who discovers the minister who baptized them said the wrong words over them. For instance one minister while baptizing said these words: "upon the profession of your faith, I now baptize you in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost by the authority of the name of Jesus Christ." This is not a valid baptism. I agreed to rebaptize these souls.
Any person who ask me who was baptized by a woman.
Any person who ask me who was baptized by a William Brannhamite preacher.
Any person who ask me who discovers their baptizer did not believe Jesus was God, but believed he was only a man. I will not hesitate to rebaptize these souls, I do not care if every demon in hell makes a protest through the lips of an arrogant young smart mouth.
Any person who ask me who has lost confidence in the man who baptized them and in their rebaptism wants the words "in the name of Jesus Messieh" instead of the English name of Jesus Christ. Brother David Harp was viciously attacked because he wanted rebaptism in the name of Jesus Messieh. Well that was kind of dumb. Jesus was a Hebrew. And in the Hebrew tongue there is no word Christ. The Hebrew word is Mashiyach from which we have Messiah or Messieh or even Messias. It means the anointed one. It also refers to the son of David who was to rule Israel. This is the reference to the words "son of the blessed." Since Jesus is Christ is is also called Messiah.
See John 4:25--"I know that when Messias cometh, which is called Christ, when he is come, he will tell us all things."
Here in one verse we have Jesus as Messias or Messiah/Messieh and also Christ. Anyone of honesty knows that Christ comes from the Greek Christos (Strongs # 554) and from the Latin Christus. And Strong points us back to Messiah which he calls an epitthet. Actually Christ standing alone is a title. Only when it is attached to the name Jesus does it become an appelative and annexed and becomes part of a name, viz, in the name of Jesus Christ. A person can choose baptism in the name of Jesus Messias, Jesus Messieh, Jesus Christ, and there should be no objection from anyone. To attack a person because they wanted baptism in the name of Jesus Messieh, is mean and without love.
There are many other possible reasons a person may want to be rebaptized. I will honor their faith and I will rebaptize them.
There is now a growing number of rebels who demand people believe in YHWH and in the name of Jesus Christ. These trouble makers are now claiming that unless a person accepts the monk names Jehovah and Yahweh, they cannot be saved by Jesus name alone. I am shocked at these new remonstrances and the attacks against me and other Pastors and Ministers. I will send out this message to the whole world: I with a number of other Ministers and Pastors, and Church members, are lifting up the name of Jesus above all names. If you come against us, if you slander us, if you cause our ministers to be called into district council meetings, and if you sow discord among the Brethren, I will consider all your baptisms invalid and I will send out the message to all your members to be rebaptized.
Yes, I beleive rebaptisms are valid. Even David K. Bernard, the leader of the UPCI has admitted he has rebapized many souls. If this is true, no minister associated with the UPCI should ever be hated, belittled, mocked, scandalized, and or called into question by distict presbyters or national leaders of that organization. Until they will come out against rebaptisms in the Pentecostal Herald, then I will consider all these rants as nothing but hate and persecution against the name of Jesus Christ.
What ever is done in the name of Jesus Christ for a holy and just purpose, people should keep their mouths shut.
Bishop Gary Reckart
In response to a smart mouth
"One Lord, one faith, one baptism."
It is obvious this young man believed "one baptism" meant a person was to be baptized only one time. But this is a clear perversion of this statement. One baptism does not mean a person needs only to be baptized one time. The one baptism in this text is in reference to the water baptism Jesus sent his apostles to perform upon the faith of a convert. Prior to this, there was John's baptism. The one baptism of this text supersedes the baptism of John the Baptist. In fact, this one baptism superseded the mikveh baptisms of converts to Old Testament Judaism.
Let's back up a little here: in the Jewish religion of the day of Jesus, proselytes to the Jewish religion underwent a baptism called a mikveh. They could not become a "Jew by choice" until they had performed this act of cleansing. Even today, a Gentile convert to Judaism must have their baptismal mikveh. The Jewish practice of spiritual cleansing by means of this mikveh preceded the baptisms of John. The word "baptism" is really a Greek word. There is no Hebrew word for baptism. The word commonly used is mikveh and refers to all ceremonial washings in which a person or object is said to be sanctified, cleansed, and made or returned to a condition of holiness. The baptisms of John the Baptist were convert baptisms also. But in this new baptism mikveh, the candidate was being immersed unto the remission of their sins. Remission of sins is never a part of any ancient Jewish mikveh. Remission or atonement of sins in the Old Testament was always by animal blood and specifically on the day of atonement. The remission of sins of John the Baptist was a prophetic miracle associated with the blood sacrifice of Jesus as the Lamb of God. When the blood of Jesus is associated with water baptism, remission of sins is a gift from Jesus to the convert. It is to be noted, there were thousands of Gentile (strangers) in the days of Jesus who had undergone mikveh baptism and joined the Jewish religion. These non Jew strangers and proselytes are mentioned in Acts 2:10.
Those who claim "one baptism" means baptized only one time are in great error. There is not a single verse of scripture against rebaptisms. Not one.
In Acts 2: 41 there were about 3,000 souls baptized. But what many, including this arrogant young man fail to accept, is that many of these 3,000 were rebaptismal candidates. They had performed the baptismal mikveh washings under the Law. Those Jews who were non observers, who had never been circumcised properly, were required to have their mikveh just as any Gentile convert would have been. These are included among the 3,000. What do we have here? We have 3,000 baptized with the one baptism Jesus sent the Apostles to perform. This is the one baptism of Ephesians 4:5. The reference is to the one instituted by doctrine, not how many times a person is baptized. Anyone who says "one baptism" means the number of times a person can receive baptism, is wrong.
In every case of baptism in the book of Acts where Jewish converts were baptized, it cannot be ruled out that those baptized had not had a previous baptism of some type.
It is true we have only one case of clear actual rebaptisms in Acts 19:1-5. In this text there were twelve men who had been previously baptized by John the Baptist. They were rebaptized. What was the criteria here to qualify the rebaptims? First, they had never heard of water baptism for the of remission of sins to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. This alone qualified them for rebaptism. Then of course, New Testament baptisms were to be performed invoking and pronouncing the name of Jesus Christ over the convert. These had not had this faith baptism. We cannot overlook the fact that in New Testament water baptism, the blood of Jesus is the washing and cleansing that brings holiness and a divine pardon. This was not available under John's baptism or under the Old Testament mikveh washings. The one baptism of the New Testament has to do with faith and obedience in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. Without this faith, this purpose, the baptism is invalid. If the purpose of water baptism is not the reason the person went into the water, the baptism is a sham. It is not according to scriptural precedent. So, these twelve men were rebapized because according to them they "never heard" whether there be any Holy Ghost. Paul rebaptized them showing he believe in his doctrine and in his gospel there were incidents where rebaptisms were not only valid, if a person was not rebaptized they would be lost.
Many Oneness Pastors understand and teach that repentance, water baptism, and receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost are the first three foundational works of faith in a new convert. They are called first works. By works we do not imply works of the Law, but rather the first works of faith. So we teach repentance is by faith, water baptism is by faith, and receiving the Holy Ghost are all acts of faith. Why is it important to understand these simple principles? It is important because those who cry against rebaptisms are not at all that well taught in the scriptures. If they were, they would see repentance, rebaptism, and being filled with the Holy Ghost is strongly mentioned in Revelation 2:5. In this text the Church of Ephesus is commanded to repent. Then to do its first works. What work follows repentance? Anyone who has no reason to pervert the Word of God will confess it means water baptism. So, the whole Ephesus Church is told to go do their first works over. Rebaptism cannot be ruled out of this command.
I have been a Pastor among the Oneness people since 1972. Prior to that I was a member of the United Pentecostal Church since 1949. Over my years associated with the UPC and other Oneness groups I have witnessed thousands of rebaptisms. I do not know of a single UPC pastor who has not rebaptized someone. I will expand that to all Oneness organizations. I do not know of a single Pastor who would refuse to rebaptise a person if they requested it. When I am confronted with slander and hate because I do practice rebaptisms, I always ask the attacker for the phone number of their pastor. And if they will give it to me I will call them on the spot. I will prove to my attacker that his/her own pastor has rebaptized.
Let me bring this a little clearer to those who still have hated against me and others because of rebaptisms. If one baptism means one time, then Oneness have no right to baptize anyone who had a previous baptism in the titles Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. That would be rebaptism. But, they will tell you: the person was not baptized right. They did not have the name of Jesus Christ pronounced over them. And the baptizer was a trinitarian and did not have Apostolic authority to baptize. Now we have two more factors used to validate rebaptisms. First, the name of Jesus Christ must be pronounced, and second, the baptizer must have ministerial authority and live a holy life to perform the baptism.
Can a trinitarian who was never baptized in the name of Jesus Christ baptize a person in the name of Jesus Christ? Some claim it is not the spiritual condition of the baptizer, it is the faith of the baptismal candidate here. One idiot had the audacity to say that even a drunk could baptise in Jesus Christ name and the person's baptism would be valid. The same idiot said the baptism of a homosexual pastor was valid if he did it in the name of Jesus Christ. All of this nonsense is based upon the man made theory that "one baptism" means baptized only one time. I do not know of a single Pastor anywhere in the Oneness ranks who believes the baptisms by a homosexual is valid. And I do not know of a single Pastor in the Oneness ranks who believes a trinitarian who has not been baptized in the name of Jesus Christ has any scriptural authority to baptized a person in the name of Jesus Christ.
Rebaptisms are performed each year by the thousands. Why do people want rebaptized? There are many reasons. At the bottom of all of them is fear their first baptism was invalid due to either the life of the baptizer or themselves. Many are backsliders who went away from God and feel they need to come back and do their first works over just as the Ephesian Church was commanded to do. I have rebaptized many souls because they learned the baptizer was living in adultery, committing adultery, a closet homosexual, or some other gross sins. They want their baptism to be sacred, holy, and one God will accept. It is after all their soul and their faith. I refuse to judge either.
The Oneness Pentecostals must not forget the incident that helped spark a revival of the restored Acts 2:38 baptismal formula.
In 1913 something happened in California. Missionary Frank Ewart who had received the baptism of the Holy Ghost in the Azusa Street revival was converted to the Oneness Doctine and saw the truth of the mighty God in Christ Jesus. He rebaptized supporter Glenn A. Cook according to the Jesus Christ name only formula (Acts 2:38); Cook then rebaptized Ewart. Both were Oneness Ministers and Holy Spirit filled. They claimed the Holy Spirit inspired them to baptize each other. One Oneness minister baptized another Oneness Minister. Prior to this both had been baptized in the titles Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. But they were now Oneness and no longer trinity. The "new message" the "Jesus Only" message was the beginning of the rebaptism of thousands of trinitarian Pentecostals. The Oneness movement was partly established on the doctrine of rebaptisms. It is to be noted that several ministers including Andrew Urshan and Charles Pharham had been and were already baptizing converts in the name of Jesus Christ prior to 1913. As ministers spread throughout America and the world, rebaptisms of trinitarians became a central work of evangelism. Rebaptisms quickly spread through Pentecostal churches, particularly the Assemblies of God. Many thousands were rebaptized. Without rebaptisms there would be be no Oneness groups today.
Contrary to the lies spread about me, I do not believe I am the only person in the world who is qualified to baptise. I accept the baptisms of many hundreds of Pastors and Ministers. I however also reject the baptisms of many hundreds of Pastors and Ministers. But, I am not alone in this conduct, there are many thousands of Oneness Pastors and Ministers who do not accept the baptisms performed by reprobates and other non-ordained and unscriptural ministers. I am not alone in this area of rebaptisms. So who will I rebaptize?
Any person who ask me to rebaptize them because they have lost confidence in the person who baptized them or they believe their first baptism was not right.
Any person who ask me who discovered the minister who baptized them, was at the time of their baptism involved in secret homosexual acts.
Any person who ask me who discovers the minister who baptized them was committing adultery at the time of their baptism.
Any person who ask me who discovers the minister who baptized them said the wrong words over them. For instance one minister while baptizing said these words: "upon the profession of your faith, I now baptize you in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost by the authority of the name of Jesus Christ." This is not a valid baptism. I agreed to rebaptize these souls.
Any person who ask me who was baptized by a woman.
Any person who ask me who was baptized by a William Brannhamite preacher.
Any person who ask me who discovers their baptizer did not believe Jesus was God, but believed he was only a man. I will not hesitate to rebaptize these souls, I do not care if every demon in hell makes a protest through the lips of an arrogant young smart mouth.
Any person who ask me who has lost confidence in the man who baptized them and in their rebaptism wants the words "in the name of Jesus Messieh" instead of the English name of Jesus Christ. Brother David Harp was viciously attacked because he wanted rebaptism in the name of Jesus Messieh. Well that was kind of dumb. Jesus was a Hebrew. And in the Hebrew tongue there is no word Christ. The Hebrew word is Mashiyach from which we have Messiah or Messieh or even Messias. It means the anointed one. It also refers to the son of David who was to rule Israel. This is the reference to the words "son of the blessed." Since Jesus is Christ is is also called Messiah.
See John 4:25--"I know that when Messias cometh, which is called Christ, when he is come, he will tell us all things."
Here in one verse we have Jesus as Messias or Messiah/Messieh and also Christ. Anyone of honesty knows that Christ comes from the Greek Christos (Strongs # 554) and from the Latin Christus. And Strong points us back to Messiah which he calls an epitthet. Actually Christ standing alone is a title. Only when it is attached to the name Jesus does it become an appelative and annexed and becomes part of a name, viz, in the name of Jesus Christ. A person can choose baptism in the name of Jesus Messias, Jesus Messieh, Jesus Christ, and there should be no objection from anyone. To attack a person because they wanted baptism in the name of Jesus Messieh, is mean and without love.
There are many other possible reasons a person may want to be rebaptized. I will honor their faith and I will rebaptize them.
There is now a growing number of rebels who demand people believe in YHWH and in the name of Jesus Christ. These trouble makers are now claiming that unless a person accepts the monk names Jehovah and Yahweh, they cannot be saved by Jesus name alone. I am shocked at these new remonstrances and the attacks against me and other Pastors and Ministers. I will send out this message to the whole world: I with a number of other Ministers and Pastors, and Church members, are lifting up the name of Jesus above all names. If you come against us, if you slander us, if you cause our ministers to be called into district council meetings, and if you sow discord among the Brethren, I will consider all your baptisms invalid and I will send out the message to all your members to be rebaptized.
Yes, I beleive rebaptisms are valid. Even David K. Bernard, the leader of the UPCI has admitted he has rebapized many souls. If this is true, no minister associated with the UPCI should ever be hated, belittled, mocked, scandalized, and or called into question by distict presbyters or national leaders of that organization. Until they will come out against rebaptisms in the Pentecostal Herald, then I will consider all these rants as nothing but hate and persecution against the name of Jesus Christ.
What ever is done in the name of Jesus Christ for a holy and just purpose, people should keep their mouths shut.
Bishop Gary Reckart
In response to a smart mouth
No comments:
Post a Comment