In 1991 Jimmy Allen wrote the book Re-Baptism? to address an issue that had become both a significant and persistent point of dispute among those of the Restoration Movement. The issue revolves around what an individual must understand prior to their baptism; and further, what level of understanding about the reasons for their baptism must those coming to the Church from a denomination have before acceptance into the Church. If there are any two keystone verses that recur during the work they would have to be Mark 16:16 & Acts 2:38. Mathew’s record of the Great Commission, Paul’s recounting of his conversion in Acts 22, and the Gospel accounts of the baptism of Jesus also emerge frequently for consideration. Strong opinions continue to remain, and the subject of rebaptism – when and why – can quickly become a hotly debated and divisive topic among the brethren.

Allen beings the work with a series of preliminary remarks that introduces the topic at hand and a brief background of the questions regarding rebaptism. Under consideration is one side’s insistence that at the time of their immersion an individual must have an understanding that baptism is “for the remission of sins;” further, if that understanding is not present when a person comes to the Church from a denomination, then rebaptism is indicated. Allen makes note that he is writing this consideration of rebaptism from a viewpoint that is against the position noted above. Although Allen presents some arguments that favor rebaptism under the first position throughout the work, those arguments are “not explained and developed” (3) – sadly. Early in the book one is encouraged to read a sermon included as an Appendix. One eagerly admits that the included sermon, “Into What Were You Baptized?” is a well-done consideration of Romans 6:1-7 – as expected from brother Allen’s pen.

If there is a heart to the book, it can be summed up by Allen’s opening comments to Chapter 3 which is entitled “Obedience Is the Key.”

"It is my belief that the New Testament teaches when a penitent believer in the crucified and risen Savior is immersed in water to fulfill righteousness or obey God, the Lord forgives his past or alien sins (although he may not know that sins are remitted or that the Holy Spirit is given at the time)." (39)

As Allen notes, if this thesis is correct then obedience becomes the key to the command to be baptized. Allen continues to point out, after a quote by David Lipscomb for context, that regarding Acts 2:38, “repent” and “be baptized” are commands while “the forgiveness of sins” and “the gift of the Holy Spirit” are promises. The point being, the individual can obey and complete the commands to repent and be baptized, but the individual cannot obey and complete a promise that is a result of a command; God is faithful and able to enact the results of his promise regardless of the individual’s ability to understand or perceive those results. This becomes the foundation from which the rest of the work proceeds.

Since obedience is presented as the key for Scriptural baptism, the baptism of Jesus becomes a crux for the arguments that follow. First, the baptism of John is noted to be a “baptism for the remission of sins” (Mark 1:4), but one understands that Jesus – although tempted – never sinned (Heb. 4:15). This means that the reason that Jesus was baptized had nothing to do with remission of sins. Second, the reason that Jesus states for being baptized – “to fulfill all righteousness” (Matt. 3:15) – must be a valid reason for baptism. Jesus, by obedience, is fulfilling a righteous command from a prophet of God to be baptized (Mark 1:4). Therefore, when Jesus was baptized he was acknowledging that God’s way was the correct way. Had Jesus refused to be baptized, “he would have placed himself into the same category” as those Jewish religious elitists that “rejected God’s purpose for themselves” (47). There are certainly other peripheral ideas presented, but the obedience that is shown by Jesus becomes the mirror in which all believer’s baptism is reflected as adequate.

Those men that Allen quotes in the "What Others Have Said" section, and the answers he gives to the questions at the end of the book all eventually fall into two categories of reasoning. First, “remission of sins” is a promise and is God’s response to the penitent believer’s immersion but understanding that promise is not necessary for that promise to be given (as with all spiritual blessing that result from baptism). Second, since the sinless Christ was primarily baptized as an act of obedience, that same motivation for baptism can be claimed by any penitent believer regardless of any deeper understanding for the purposes of baptism. The penitent believer that is baptized in order to obey the command of God as presented in the Scripture is scripturally baptized.

In the section regarding those twelve from Ephesus that Paul “rebaptized,” Allen makes two interesting points. When attempting to discover why those men in Acts 19 were baptized a second time the idea is presented that they had an “inadequate faith” (53). This seems somewhat misguided. Those men, presumably under the guidance of Apollos, were baptized in response to an obedient faith. The problem was not necessarily that they had “inadequate faith” but that they had their faith built upon the wrong foundation. Even though those men were taught the truth, they were taught a truth that had been supplanted by the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. Allen also brings up a very salient point in that even though those men were already baptized, they were not “rebaptized.” The truth is those men “had never been baptized at all” (55) since there is only one baptism (Eph. 4:5). We often use the word “rebaptism” but in truth this is done only accommodatively since an individual can only be baptized once.

This was certainly a thought provoking work with several interesting points mentioned in passing, but the primary thought sheds an interesting light upon the reason for a person to be baptized, not just “rebaptized.” Further, if one accepts the line of reasoning that is presented, there are significant implications for those of us that interact with individuals from a denominational background and are seeking to become associated with a congregation of the Lord’s people; obedience takes precedence over understanding. Brother Allen’s thoughts on this subject and the words of others that he presents form quite a convincing argument, but one realizes that what is presented is obviously (and admittedly by Allen himself) from a specific point of view. Further, even though that point of view is in accord with many Restoration Leaders, those leaders are not an infallible guide, and one is convinced that those same leaders would encourage heartfelt seekers to examine the Scriptural evidence for themselves.

Quotes from the work:

“As I read the Book, I began to see that commands are for us to obey and benefits are granted by God following our obedience” (19).

(a quote from Alexander Campbell) “Baptism is no where proposed as an expiatory rite. He that regards it as such – he who goes to the water as a Jew to the altar, and is baptized merely to obtain the remission of sins, mistakes the whole matter” (76).

(a quote from Alexander Campbell) “Everyone who receives Jesus as the Saviour sent from God, and who is immersed into his name, in like manner cannot a second time be immersed for any special benefit. If immersed again, it must be in the full sense; that is, for all the purposes for which the institution exists” (81).

“I believe there is one motive that must be the ruling, controlling, ever-present motive in all service to God, without which no service is acceptable to him. That is, we must do the service in the name of Jesus, the Lord” (104).

“Baptism is not immersion alone – it is immersion in obedience to the Lord Jesus Christ. Any immersion, therefore, from which intentional obedience to the Lord is absent does not amount to baptism” (136).

“It is agreed that anyone baptized simply to join a denomination or to become a member of a sect is not in God’s kingdom because this is not a Bible reason for immersion. However, one may be baptized to obey God and think it puts him into a sect (this also characterizes some whom we have baptized). He is right about the former and wrong about the latter. It is my judgment that the ‘rightness’ takes precedence over the ‘wrongness’” (170).

“Objection: Anyone baptized in ignorance of or denying that immersion is in order to obtain remission of sins does not believe the Bible and as an unbeliever is still in need of Bible baptism. Response: 2. This objection is based on the premise that one must know and believe all the Bible says about water baptism before he can be biblically baptized. Since none of us at the time of his baptism knew and believed all that Scripture says about baptism, it follows that there are no Christians. There are probably very few, if any, among us now who know everything the Bible teaches about Baptism” (198).

“The concept of baptism as a condition of salvation did not originate with Alexander Campbell in the nineteenth century but with Jesus and the apostle in the first century” (241). ( )