What is your thinking†(based on Scripture) on a situation where someone has been baptized in the Christian Church but says they were baptized for the remission of sins and they want to place membership in the church of Christ. Do they need to be baptized again? The argument is that we are placing too much importance on where they were baptized rather than why they were baptized. They argue that if this one had to be rebaptized than what about those people who came out of the liberal churches.† The liberal church being those brethren who have gone beyond the authority of the Scriptures and are no longer abiding in the doctrine of Christ.
I appreciate your web site so much and would greatly appreciate your input in on this.
The last I've checked, the Christian Church has always taught baptism for the remission of sin. They also practice baptism by immersion as taught in the Bible. It is their teachings and practices in regards to worship (they use instrumental music instead of staying with the simple vocal commanded by God), how they finance their work (for example, they use missionary societies instead of each church directly supporting preachers), and how they organize themselves (many copy the "pastor" system from the denominations instead of the organization found in Ephesians 4:11). See Why I Left the Christian Church for more details.
When one is properly baptized, he is added to the Lord's church and not any man-made denomination (Acts 2:47). However, when brethren demand that a person be baptized again, not because their baptism was improperly done, but because it was done by the wrong person, then they are treating the church Christ built as just another denomination.