But it's generally been the case that those churches who let paedobaptists into membership soon have paedobaptist leaders.
Whose fault is that?
Quote
Another issue is having the paedobaptists be baptized as believers by immersion. Someone's conscience is gong to be violated there- either the paedobaptist who is being immersed, or the Baptist church that would allow a paedobaptist into membership without immersing him or her.
One should not violate their conscience and a Baptist Church should not make someone violate their conscience. I personally believe membership to a local Church and baptism are two separate issues. Yes I know many disagree with me, but I have yet to been shown in Scripture where I am wrong.
Ron, I am going to ask this one last time. You keep putting forth an equivocation of the Lords table with Baptism. I have asked you repeatedly to support this from scripture. In fact, I believe this "ideal" is also missing from scripture concerning baptism. You may scream it as often as you like. Until you show me, from scripture the true ideal, I see no reason to discuss what I see as your personal opinion on an ideal I am sure does not exist.
So, to reiterate, I need two things;
1) Scripture that says the requirements prior to partaking of the Lords table are the same as baptism,
averagefellar said: Ron, I am going to ask this one last time. You keep putting forth an equivocation of the Lords table with Baptism. I have asked you repeatedly to support this from scripture. In fact, I believe this "ideal" is also missing from scripture concerning baptism. You may scream it as often as you like. Until you show me, from scripture the true ideal, I see no reason to discuss what I see as your personal opinion on an ideal I am sure does not exist.
So, to reiterate, I need two things;
1) Scripture that says the requirements prior to partaking of the Lords table are the same as baptism,
2) The scriptural ideal for reipients of baptism.
God bless,
william
William,
I am sure you are not grasping my point. Otherwise you would appreciate that you and I agree over what the Scriptures teach regarding baptism and the supper.
Christ died (1) in a general way for all--common grace, and (2) He died specifically and effectually for the elect in both the Old and New Covenant.
Joe, could you please explain what you mean by Christ dying "in a general way for all." I know there is such a thing as common grace, but I did not think that that meant the non-elect somehow shared in Christ's blood. Perhaps I am misunderstanding you...
True godliness is a sincere feeling which loves God as Father as much as it fears and reverences Him as Lord, embraces His righteousness, and dreads offending Him worse than death~ Calvin
Christ died in a general way for all. There are benefits for both believers and non-believers. There is common grace applied to all in the Crucifixion. A good example of this is the preaching of the Word of God (the Gospel, the death, burial, and resurrection) to the unsaved. The mere fact they even hear it is common grace, et. al.....
Ron, just wanted to say I understand perfectly what you've been putting forth- and, as a credobaptist, am quite thankful for the accurate representation. We may disagree strongly, but it's good to see you making sure we're disagreeing over the right things, and being fair to all involved. It's a rare display- so thanks!
Henry said: Ron, just wanted to say I understand perfectly what you've been putting forth- and, as a credobaptist, am quite thankful for the accurate representation. We may disagree strongly, but it's good to see you making sure we're disagreeing over the right things, and being fair to all involved. It's a rare display- so thanks!
Ron, I too am thankful for your posts, and, although we disagree, I appreciate your knowledge of both sides of the issue. I'm glad to see you back on the board!
True godliness is a sincere feeling which loves God as Father as much as it fears and reverences Him as Lord, embraces His righteousness, and dreads offending Him worse than death~ Calvin
