Should Reformed Baptist accept a persons Baptism?

Collapse
X
Collapse
First Prev Next Last
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #61
    William how do you come to the conclusion that the UNIVERSAL CATHOLIC includes unbelievers? If those who reject Jesus Christ go to Hell how can those be in any church?.

    Comment


    • davidtaylorjr
      davidtaylorjr commented
      Editing a comment
      Quite a few churches I have been a part of do not receive children into membership until they are at least 16 and can make a profession of faith.

    • William
      William commented
      Editing a comment
      Amongst Reformed Presbyterians children are received into membership as "incommunicable" members. When they are able to make a profession of faith they become communicable members of the church, and have access to the Lord's supper.

    • Sue D.
      Sue D. commented
      Editing a comment
      @ William -- yes, in the O.T. the male babies were circumcised eight days after birth. Mainly for hygienic reasons and to set them aside / identify them as Children of Israel. The female babies didn't have that, obviously.

      The way that people Can be known to be 'of faith' is by their fruits in their lives. When a person accepts Jesus Christ as their Savior, immediately the Holy Spirit comes to indwell them. Ephesians 1:13 and 14. There Are fruits of the Spirit / love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, etc. found in Galatians 5:22, 23. So 'by their fruits they Can be known' by others.

      The invisible church is made up of all who have the Holy Spirit indwelling them. Their actions / attitudes will show it. The local group of believers / the more visible group of believers -- are to reach out to others with the Gospel unto salvation.

    #62
    William children may be dedicated in Baptist churches, meaning the parents publicly commit to raising their child in a Christian home. That does not mean that child has the ability to accept or reject Christ, Until that child can make that choice, they are unaccountable, but when they can make that choice and don't they are no longer a child. Age is not the determining factor, but I suppose until they are able to become a follower they could be considered part of the U C. Beyond that no.

    Comment


    • Sue D.
      Sue D. commented
      Editing a comment
      Yes, pastors Do have baby dedications during a church service. The parents bring the baby and any family members who want to join them, do, in the front of the church. They promise to bring the baby / child up in Bible -- teaching them God's Word -- that it is very important for the child / family. But that does Not guarantee anything with that child. Sometimes as children reach puberty, they go in a different direction. Sometimes, in spite of Biblical standards being taught / practiced in the home -- teens will make poor choices and end up in places their parents would never have dreamed they'd end up in.

      Yes, a child / person Does need to be able to understand right from wrong. Realize they Have done something wrong and feel remorse for having done that 'thing'.

    #63
    Originally posted by Just Mike View Post
    William children may be dedicated in Baptist churches, meaning the parents publicly commit to raising their child in a Christian home. That does not mean that child has the ability to accept or reject Christ, Until that child can make that choice, they are unaccountable, but when they can make that choice and don't they are no longer a child. Age is not the determining factor, but I suppose until they are able to become a follower they could be considered part of the U C. Beyond that no.
    Just Mike,

    It might be better to say, "baptist churches your familiar with"

    Not all baptists dedicate children (and some who do make it virtually like a christening) - my practice is to dedicate the parents and the church to for the child, to teach the child, and encourage the child to trust in Jesus Christ

    Not all baptists believe in such a thing as an age of accountability

    And no baptist I have ever met (or read - until now) would claim that a young child is part of the universal church (that is made up only of those who have repented, trusted and following the Lord Jesus Christ)

    just my thoughts

    Comment


    • Just Mike
      Just Mike commented
      Editing a comment
      Thank you for watching over my mistakes, I hope to achieve the lever of expertise to eventually include countries outer than the US. Blessings.

    • reformed baptist
      reformed baptist commented
      Editing a comment
      I guess it concerns me because this is a thread about reformed baptists - your statements are probably preety accurate in regards to many SBC churches I suspect :D

    #64
    Reformed Baptist, I would estimate 75 to 80%+ SBC in the US are reformed. Now I did start the thread so I think my remarks are related to the topic.

    I listened to John MacArthur that week and he was asked his opinion of Arminianism or Calvinism. (John is a Calvinists) He said it did not matter, as its in Gods hands. There are those that don't care one way or the other, some like me who never heard much about Calvinism before coming to this forum, and some like you 100% totally Calvinistic.

    My focus is more like John MacArthur. I have no idea who is "called" I just keep inviting people to come to Jesus Christ. I am teaching our children's class one Bible book at a time to know who God and Jesus Christ are. My wife and I pray they too will come to Jesus, even if their parents did not dedicate them. Until they reach the age of accountability (whatever that is) we hope to nurture them in the WORD. Blessings
    Last edited by Just Mike; 04-06-2018, 07:51 AM. Reason: additional info.

    Comment


    • William
      William commented
      Editing a comment
      "MacArthur calls himself a "leaky dispensationalist"--meaning he rejects any and all "dispensational" soteriological innovations, holding to classic Reformed (i.e., Protestant, not "covenantal") soteriology. MacArthur's "dispensationalism" is eschatological and ecclesiological only. And given the fact that soteriology is central to our whole understanding of Christianity, whereas eschatology and ecclesiology deal primarily with secondary doctrines, it would be my assessment that MacArthur has far less in common with Ryrie than he would have with anyone who believes 1) that God's grace is efficacious for regeneration and sanctification as well as for justification, and 2) that God graciously guarantees the perseverance of all true believers." - Phil Johnson

    • reformed baptist
      reformed baptist commented
      Editing a comment
      which is, of course, written by someone who comes from the exact same school of thought and also wishes to seen as more mainstream :D

    • davidtaylorjr
      davidtaylorjr commented
      Editing a comment
      FWIW I would fall in the MacArthur belief camp and I am Reformed ;)

    #65
    Reformed Baptist. I get the impression that no matter what I say you will contradict it. I don't agree with you about MacArthur. I wonder when man like John (who is fare older that either of us, and studded the Bible enormously more than me, that's for sure) says he is a Calvinists, I sure respect his word and won't argue the point. If you think he is wrong, I ll take his side.

    Comment


    • Just Mike
      Just Mike commented
      Editing a comment
      Reformed Baptist. I like came across as rude, mean, and grouchy. I sincerely and deeply apologize. My old sinful nature popped out. Gosh I hate it when that happens!. I stood my self in the corner for 15 minuets and promised to do so much better. Please forgive me, sometimes I am a jerk.

    • Fastfredy0
      Fastfredy0 commented
      Editing a comment
      Just Mike ... we've read your posts and know you have a good, loving, caring heart.

    • reformed baptist
      reformed baptist commented
      Editing a comment
      Just Mike - no apology necessary, I was not offended at all. I'm a Yorkshire man, so by nature I am a little blunt and direct - i don't mind being told i am too blunt and direct from time to time - it's all part of the sanctification process :D

    #66
    Who let you out of the corner Just Mike?

    Comment


    • Just Mike
      Just Mike commented
      Editing a comment
      Islandrazor, I truly am sorry for my attitude the other day.

    #67
    Just Mike, What?? Your good. We're good. I'm not sure what you're referring to, We're all big boys here and no one seems altogether that insecure. My comment was an attempt at humor. Though, truth be told, my ex wife failed to see any humor in pretty much anything I said. Have a great day friend. God is good.

    In Christ

    Comment


    • Just Mike
      Just Mike commented
      Editing a comment
      Thanks, I tend to take things pretty seriously. Just my internal make up. MY dad said what he meant, and there was no fooling around, not one bit. That is so imprinted in my brain, can't seem get rid of it. Its hard to determine what's just a good nature comment, or something serious.

      Maybe my hearing aids aren't translation things good. LOL

    • Sue D.
      Sue D. commented
      Editing a comment
      It's sad how wives end up being ex-wives. But 'life' does happen.

    • Sue D.
      Sue D. commented
      Editing a comment
      Hmmm -- my husband's hearing aides have that problem, too. :)

    #68
    Originally posted by reformed baptist View Post
    What that Baptism is a public testimony of ones faith?

    Well, firstly lets looks at the idea that baptisms are public (as opposed to private) - can you point to a private baptism in the bible, ie one that is not done in front of witnesses?

    And as for a testimony/ profession of faith - well again I believe the bible is very clear. For example in Acts 2:41; 16:14-15 we don't read of verbal professions of faith, we read of baptisms.
    You are being more generous with your use of scripture to prove a point (that I suggest, you come to scripture with) than you would ever allow anyone else to be in doing the same.

    Comment


      #69
      Originally posted by reformed baptist View Post
      I'm sorry, I don't see the relevance to the point at hand - and I am not sure why you decontextualized my words to make a different point. I was merely using this as an illustration of how when some come to Christ they realize certain deficiencies in what has gone before and they want to set that right as a matter of conscience (call them weaker brethren if you will)
      You said, "however when my father-in-law severed in Africa he did marry many couples who had been 'married' for years, some times it was at their request because they hadn't had a marriage before God"

      Now, if these people were not actually married, they were fornicating; however, if they were married then your father-in-law, in good service to them, should have advised them of such rather than further confuse them.

      Comment


      • Just Mike
        Just Mike commented
        Editing a comment
        ?I don't understand Reformed baptist point and I am not too sure about your either. Help me please.

      • reformed baptist
        reformed baptist commented
        Editing a comment
        thatbrian - I'm sorry but 1 Cor 8-10 would suggest to me that if this is a matter of conscience for the people involved that your approach is the one Paul is denouncing.

      • reformed baptist
        reformed baptist commented
        Editing a comment
        Just Mike - my point was lost a long time ago - and is probably best left buried!
    Working...
    X
    Articles - News - SiteMap