He came from Mt. Athos and so is also Greek Orthodox like my parish priest. They unfortunately differ on the opinion of re-baptism...which is suprising since they are both under the same Patriarchate.
Unfortunately, you're going to find that in the west this isn't incredibly uncommon. There's a lot of popular confusion on this topic, thanks to a relative few people, and our "pluralistic" society (both the presence of so many different Christian groups, and the "spirit of tolerance", often false tolerance, which imbues everything.)
My only desire is to do what is pleasing to God and to be received into our Lord's Church. I don't understand why there is this disagreement. Is there somewhere in the Holy Scriptures that says one cannot be baptised twice??
Well understanding what Baptism is (rebirth - you were born once according to nature from your mother, you're born into eternal life once from the Baptismal font), a genuine
Baptism can only occur once, and cannot be repeated - to attempt to do such is sacreligious.
The controversy here, is there are those who believe with certainty that the baptism practiced by heterodox groups "counts" as this "one Baptism", without qualification. This is incorrect. Even someone as "progressive", "mainstream" and supposedly "liberal" as Bp.Kallistos (Timothy) Ware (well known Orthodox author, scholar, and speaker - he wrote the book "The Orthodox Church" which is a popular introduction to Orthodoxy) has stated quite clearly that the Church does not
accept heterodox baptisms "as is", but only by economia
- meaning by a lenient excercise of Her discretion, She will admit un-canonical administered rites (such as baptisms administered by renegade or heretical clergy of other "Christian confessions"), with the understanding that She is supplying the grace that was lacking previously. This practice began as a means to facilitate mass conversions, or the simple, pious souls who would be unduly scandalized during periods of confusion where it was hardly clear just where the "right" position to be in was (ex. the highly lenient Russian practice, ostensibly adopted by the SCOBA Bishops in North America, began to deal with "Uniatism", or "Eastern Rite Catholicism" - a situation where people were often very confused or outright lied to about just what the "Unia" was and what they were a part of...with many believing the Pope had in fact became an Orthodox Christian, or always was, as they simply and piously understood Orthodoxy.) However, this practice is now kept alive and well here in the west, not so much
out of pastoral discretion, but in service to false-ecumenism; a misguided desire not to offend heterodox (non-Orthodox) denominations (though you'd think such groups would be offended by the simple fact people wanted to become Orthodox at all.)
You're not unique - I've encountered many people who really want to become Orthodox, have no scruples about being received by Baptism, but yet find themselves getting stone walled like this. Or worse yet, I've encountered more than a few people who, after having been received by "economy" (Chrism, or occassionally, simple confession), several years later will develop scruples for not
having been received via full Baptism & Chrismation. Btw. I've yet to run into someone who has stayed Orthodox, who regrets or has scruples about being received via Holy Baptism; not one. If anything, it was a highly profitable experience - since the invisible grace which only becoming a genuine (Orthodox) Christian can guarantee, is only clearly witnessed to and expressed in the full Baptismal rite.
However, for all of these issues, politics, etc. I'd say this to you - talk to your parish Priest about this. Ask him if he thinks heterodox baptism is the same as Orthodox Baptism, if it has the same spiritual content. It's quite possible that he's simply acting out of obedience - since for mixed reasons (some of them not so bad actually, but I think from experience, misguided and underestimating and misevaluating where people coming into Orthodox from the west really are in their lives by the time they're prepared to officially become "Orthodox Christians") most of the "juristictions" here in the Americas have it as a norm that those coming from certain Protestant groups and Roman Catholicism are to be received by Chrismation. And you should know, that such a reception into Orthodoxy is entirely valid and is not in and of itself, a novel innovation. It was practiced in Russia for several centuries (though arguably for my pressing reasons), and there are Saints of our Church (perhaps most famously St.Elizabeth the New Martyr, who was born into a Lutheran family) who had been received into the Church of Christ this way (via Chrismation.) Also a modern struggler, regarded by many (both here and in particular in Russia) as a modern Saint awaiting formal canonization, Fr.Seraphim Rose, was received into Orthodoxy via Chrismation (having been born into a Methodist family, if memory serves me correctly.)
In other words, while I think there are some situations which really do warrant concern (even if it turns out to be unwarranted - like if there are questions about the basic "form" of baptism used by one's previous religion, like those groups that only use single immersion, etc.), in the end I'd say you should try your best to simply go into this with the right intentions, and the correct understanding of just what it is that is going on should you be received by Chrismation - you're receiving the grace of eternal Life, and being given the content which was missing. You've already received the waters - now they'll be made profitable.