Quote
Paul_S said:
I must say that you seem to be advocating what I have long understood to be church order in baptism and discipleship rooted in eg Mt 28:19-20 and subsequent NT practice. It is what I have seen my elders practice as well. If a person comes confessing Christ and requesting baptism they will be charitably received and taken through a short series--I forget, maybe 4 to 6--of sessions on the gospel essentials. <span style="background-color:yellow">Those who find during this phase that their confession differs from the true faith are then answerable to the Lord if they hypocritcally proceed with baptism,</span> and some remove themselves with that understanding, while some undoubtedly slip in falsely. But I cannot see that we have warrant to treat all seedlings in the house of the Lord as potential tares; the epistles just don't read that way.
Paul,

Obviously, I am going to have to disagree with how read the Epistles in regard to how a stranger professing to be a Christian is to be deemed prior to examination. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> But I am especially disturbed by the highlighted section so I need to ask for further clarification to be sure I am understanding the practice in your church. The way it appears to read is that if someone during the course of the "sessions on the gospel essentials" is found to be a variance with those essentials, they are still permitted to be baptized and the onus is upon the individual for submitting to it. Is that a correct understanding of how things are done in your church?

Quote
Paul_S said:
That then leaves the life alteration questions--eg polygamous relationships--to be worked out as they surface--and clearly the big ones like this must be worked out immediately as part of "renouncing the works of the devil"--in the context of the life of discipleship under the care of the church. While the "good confession" will entail a sincere desire to put all things right, who can have put all things right before baptism? I wonder what form of restitution was Saul required to provide for his very recent evil behavior before Ananias welcomed him into the church?
Again, on this issue of a polygamist applying for church membership and baptism, I am just a wee bit unsure of what you are advocating? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/scratch1.gif" alt="" /> Are you equating the apostle Paul's former acts against the Church with a polygamist relationship? Is not all outward sin to be forsaken before one can be received into fellowship? Would you take the same position if a practicing homosexual applied for membership and baptism? i.e., he should be allowed to be baptized and received into full communion in the body of Christ? Surely, if Paul had continued to persecute the Church, he would not have been received into fellowship by the other disciples, no? But he did clearly repent of his former acts and consequently was received . . . but not before.

In His grace,


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]