Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Our church will not.
A question for my Baptist brethren. Will your church accept someone for membership that was baptized as an infant without requiring baptism by immersion as a requirement for membership?
My church will accept infant affusion for membership, but not for leadership. I would not recommend this stance under ordinary circumstances. We are located in a small town with no Presbyterian presence for many miles. Our intention is to provide Presbyterians with a local fellowship. We will see how it works.
I do not take exception. Therefore, I only baptize those who do actually profess repentance towards God, faith in, and obedience to, our Lord Jesus Christ. And I only baptize by immersion. If a Presbyterian joins my church, their infants will not be baptized. This is a bridge we have not crossed. Like I said, we will see how it works.
Our constitution reads ( under membership requirements ) " who has been baptized upon profession of his faith".
Our constitution reads ( under membership requirements ) " who has been baptized upon profession of his faith".
Rich, do you think that leads mode open to interpretation?
Sent from my most excellent Galaxy S III
Ken, if I understand correctly then, if an adult who has been previously baptized as an infant (or by other than immersion) applies for membership, it is your current practice to receive them?
Ken, if I understand correctly then, if an adult who has been previously baptized as an infant (or by other than immersion) applies for membership, it is your current practice to receive them?
It would be better to say that, in and of itself, infant baptism is not a hinderance to membership, but it is a hinderance to leadership. Our stance as a church is that if a professor was not the proper subject of, and/or he was the subject of an unduly administered baptism, that fact does not, in and of itself, invalidate the baptism.
Again, this policy has not been tested and we don't recommend it for other churches. We take this position temporarily as an act of charity toward our Presbyterian brothers and sisters who have no local fellowship.
Ken, if I understand correctly then, if an adult who has been previously baptized as an infant (or by other than immersion) applies for membership, it is your current practice to receive them?
It would be better to say that, in and of itself, infant baptism is not a hinderance to membership, but it is a hinderance to leadership. Our stance as a church is that if a professor was not the proper subject of, and/or he was the subject of an unduly administered baptism, that fact does not, in and of itself, invalidate the baptism.
Again, this policy has not been tested and we don't recommend it for other churches. We take this position temporarily as an act of charity toward our Presbyterian brothers and sisters who have no local fellowship.
Ken, I question whether a temporary setting aside a biblical definition of baptism, albeit in the name of compassion, is not a tantamount to pragmatism over principle. If we may go this far why may not our children go farther, showing even more charity to non-baptists?
My apologies Ken. I should not have presumed that your church held to the 1689.
First, it should be noted that we are not a LBC church
First, it should be noted that we are not a LBC church
Does your church hold to any confession?
Our constitution reads ( under membership requirements ) " who has been baptized upon profession of his faith".
Rich, do you think that leads mode open to interpretation?
Sent from my most excellent Galaxy S III
JP Wallace said:Bill our church would not permit such into membership (along similar lines of argumentatuion to Bob above). I would have thought most Baptist and Calvinistic/PArticular/Reformed Baptists would not. An associated question where there may be more variance is whether someone baptised by another mode as a believing adult may be admitted to membership. I know that is not the subject of your OP but in my mind this is a more frequent scruple among us. I would also say to my presbyterian brothers and sisters who may read this, that I, and I trust all of like theological bent, take, or should take, no real satisfaction in denying membership to brethren under such circumstances (even as per OP), but we must go with conscience and biblical principles as we see it, and I am sure and expect that you would of certain principles too.