Communion should not be an issue but baptism by immersion ( believer's baptism and not infant baptism) is required.
For my basic theology , I am grateful to the Southern Baptists. For my theology of spiritual gifts, I am grateful to the charismatics and Pentecostals and for my understanding of sacraments I am grateful to the Methodists. I hope your new church offers the toxin-free climate you seek and nurtures your family.

The Shank Ag said:

---

Up until recently, my entire life has been spent in the Methodist Church. However, recent events have led to that no longer being an option for my family.

I, along with my two children, were baptized in the Methodist Church as infants. My wife grew up "mainly" Baptist in east Texas, and was baptized as a teenager there.

In the past 2 weeks, I have visited First Baptist Church in Cleburne and felt very much at home. In fact, should this continue another couple weeks and after a lunch the pastor and I have planned for after spring break, we will probably be joining.


My questions, as I was probably fed a lot of incorrect information growing up in the Methodist Church about the Baptist Church from other members and family:

1. Will I and my children need to be rebaptized? I was always told yes growing up, as my infant sprinkling would not be recognized.

2. Will we be able to take communion in the Baptist Church if we have not been baptized there? I was always told no growing up.


Again, I am very excited about the prospects of this change in denominations and churches, just was wondering about the logistics of it all. These would be questions I would field to the pastor when we have lunch, but I am kind of anxious to know now and he is on Spring Break with his family.

---

Depends on the Baptist church. They are all autonomous.

The practice of infant baptism is a strong argument for the necessity of baptism to receive the remission or forgiveness of sins. Infant baptism had its origin in the belief that all humans, including infants, were tainted by the sin of Adam. As a result, all unbaptized infants who died were lost. This doctrine is often referred to as the doctrine of total hereditary depravity. Since this doctrine holds that all, even infants, are totally depraved because of inherited guilt, it was concluded that infants must be baptized, a practice that was then and since Biblical days accepted as the act based upon which and the time at which sins were remitted and forgiveness received. Obviously, baptism was the only requirement related to salvation that could be expected of an infant.

There is no biblical basis for the doctrine. First, there is no biblical basis for the doctrine of total hereditary depravity. Children have no sin. It was of them that Jesus said, "Truly I say to you, unless you are converted and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 18:3. Baptism must be preceded by faith. Mark 16:15-16. Baptism must be preceded by repentance. Acts 2:38. Confession is made unto salvation. Romans10:8-11. Since an infant does not have the mental capacity to believe or repent or the verbal capacity to intelligently confess based upon faith, the infant is not a proper subject of scriptural baptism. Since the infant has no sin it is not lost. Since it is not lost it cannot be "found" or saved. It is in a "safe" condition and, should it die, would enjoy eternal bliss in the presence of God.

Based on this I would desire to be baptized according to scripture. Pray you find a place to grow and increase in faith.

oldarmy1 said:

---

The practice of infant baptism is a strong argument for the necessity of baptism to receive the remission or forgiveness of sins. Infant baptism had its origin in the belief that all humans, including infants, were tainted by the sin of Adam. As a result, all unbaptized infants who died were lost. This doctrine is often referred to as the doctrine of total hereditary depravity. Since this doctrine holds that all, even infants, are totally depraved because of inherited guilt, it was concluded that infants must be baptized, a practice that was then and since Biblical days accepted as the act based upon which and the time at which sins were remitted and forgiveness received. Obviously, baptism was the only requirement related to salvation that could be expected of an infant.

There is no biblical basis for the doctrine. First, there is no biblical basis for the doctrine of total hereditary depravity. Children have no sin. It was of them that Jesus said, "Truly I say to you, unless you are converted and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 18:3. Baptism must be preceded by faith. Mark 16:15-16. Baptism must be preceded by repentance. Acts 2:38. Confession is made unto salvation. Romans10:8-11. Since an infant does not have the mental capacity to believe or repent or the verbal capacity to intelligently confess based upon faith, the infant is not a proper subject of scriptural baptism. Since the infant has no sin it is not lost. Since it is not lost it cannot be "found" or saved. It is in a "safe" condition and, should it die, would enjoy eternal bliss in the presence of God.

Based on this I would desire to be baptized according to scripture. Pray you find a place to grow and increase in faith.

---

There is biblical basis and no one taught differently until the 1500s. Infant baptism replaced circumcision of the old testament. It was also done due to original sin. Christs calls children to him in Luke. Whole households were baptized (not excluding children). Original Sin is also biblical...."Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned" - Luke 5:12
That is unless we believe we are born completely immaculate. Which is not to say that those infants children who are not old enough to discern sin or make a conscious profession of their faith (which is still require late) are not going to heaven through no fault of their own. We are bound by Gods teachings....God is not.

BluHorseShu said:

---

oldarmy1 said:

---

The practice of infant baptism is a strong argument for the necessity of baptism to receive the remission or forgiveness of sins. Infant baptism had its origin in the belief that all humans, including infants, were tainted by the sin of Adam. As a result, all unbaptized infants who died were lost. This doctrine is often referred to as the doctrine of total hereditary depravity. Since this doctrine holds that all, even infants, are totally depraved because of inherited guilt, it was concluded that infants must be baptized, a practice that was then and since Biblical days accepted as the act based upon which and the time at which sins were remitted and forgiveness received. Obviously, baptism was the only requirement related to salvation that could be expected of an infant.

There is no biblical basis for the doctrine. First, there is no biblical basis for the doctrine of total hereditary depravity. Children have no sin. It was of them that Jesus said, "Truly I say to you, unless you are converted and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 18:3. Baptism must be preceded by faith. Mark 16:15-16. Baptism must be preceded by repentance. Acts 2:38. Confession is made unto salvation. Romans10:8-11. Since an infant does not have the mental capacity to believe or repent or the verbal capacity to intelligently confess based upon faith, the infant is not a proper subject of scriptural baptism. Since the infant has no sin it is not lost. Since it is not lost it cannot be "found" or saved. It is in a "safe" condition and, should it die, would enjoy eternal bliss in the presence of God.

Based on this I would desire to be baptized according to scripture. Pray you find a place to grow and increase in faith.

---

There is biblical basis and no one taught differently until the 1500s. Infant baptism replaced circumcision of the old testament. It was also done due to original sin. Christs calls children to him in Luke. Whole households were baptized (not excluding children). Original Sin is also biblical...."Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned" - Luke 5:12
That is unless we believe we are born completely immaculate. Which is not to say that those infants children who are not old enough to discern sin or make a conscious profession of their faith (which is still require late) are not going to heaven through no fault of their own. We are bound by Gods teachings....God is not.

---

I went Southern Baptist to Catholic

In Catechism classes we also learned that infant Baptism was done because so many children died early long ago.

Quote:

---

Which then brings up the "necessity" of baptism, which baptists don't belief in so you wouldn't want to baptize an infant. And round and round we go haha

---

The necessity has nothing to do it in a theological sense and just a rule a local congregation imposes to be a member of there particular church...which has no bearing on one being part of Body of Christ.

Baptist's aren't very liturgical. They see baptism as an act of obedience, and a symbol of salvation. The baptism isn't necessary for salvation, but sometimes the local church will require it for church membership.

Your infant sprinkling is just as good. You are saved by Jesus. Not by getting dunked.

I learned the answer to these questions after a talk with the pastor early last week.

Last Sunday, I had an immersion Baptism early in the service, and my family joined at the end of the service.

It was an amazing day and one I will cherish forever.

The Shank Ag said:

---

I learned the answer to these questions after a talk with the pastor early last week.

Last Sunday, I had an immersion Baptism early in the service, and my family joined at the end of the service.

It was an amazing day and one I will cherish forever.

---

Great stuff!

c-jags said:

---

The Shank Ag said:

---

I learned the answer to these questions after a talk with the pastor early last week.

Last Sunday, I had an immersion Baptism early in the service, and my family joined at the end of the service.

It was an amazing day and one I will cherish forever.

---

Blessings! I don't find baptism in the baptist church to be a salvation issue but I'm glad you did it and it was a good day for you and your family.

I grew up in a SBC church but now am in a non denominational Reformedish Free Evangelical Church (I completely understand the ridiculousness of that word salad.) I consider my upbringing in the SBC to be a blessing and a curse. I was fortunate to have had a moralistic childhood that absolved me of a lot of guilt from a wanton youth, but I also had a way more legalistic background than necessary.

I've never seen any restrictions on communion other than repentance and consumption under a cleansed heart. I did grow up in a Catholic community and I remember not being able to take communion when I attended mass and that always sat poorly with me.

---

We have traveled similar roads. The Southern Baptist church I grew up on was less legalistic than most, but I still remember the offering envelopes where you were awarded different percentages for your "works" with a perfect score being 100.

Works included giving your offering, attending SS and church, reading your Bible, witnessing to a friend, etc.

Not bad in and of themselves but still work based.

I have become convinced I can do nothing to earn my salvation except trust the Lord.

"no creed but the Bible" is a creed in itself