I'm a Wesleyan and didn't know it. (???)

[Davis]

The Nazarene Articles of Faith allow for infant baptism.

So do Free Methodists but like Gee are church dedicates infants but baptizes the people when there ready to make there own confession of Christ. I see nothing wrong with it. Thats what Christ did. Was dedicated by circumsision and than was baptized as an adult.
Either way it doesnt matter to me what churches do what. We are saved by the grace of God, not by how we are baptized. God Bless!!!

 

[geelee]

While I understand what you are saying, at the risk of being out of line with forum rules I would suggest that this interpretation of baptism and the faith of those unable to give their own account is not the traditional Methodist understanding. I accept that this is a common understanding in modern circles but I would encourage anyone interested to re-discover their Methodist roots.

Anyway, I don't want to debate, just encourage study in the faith for all.

I hear and understand what you are saying on the baptism, but the part about forum rules and getting back to my Methodist rules I don't get.

I am new, did I overstep the forum boundaries? I apologize for it.

My roots are not in the Methodist movement at all. They are not even in those of the Nazarenes, even thu I grew up there and still attend. I know Nazies once were Methodists, but my roots are in Christ.

I am only a branch on the one true Vine.

 

[Davis]

I am only a branch on the one true Vine.

I think we should all remember that.
Especially with all the bickering on this board in the General Theology section.

When people ask what I am. I always tell them Christian. I may attend a Free Methodist Church but I don't agree with every little thing. I worship God in the FM church and serve Him through that church. But I when it comes down to it, I'm a servant of the Lord Jesus.

 

[Qyöt27]

I hear and understand what you are saying on the baptism, but the part about forum rules and getting back to my Methodist rules I don't get.

I am new, did I overstep the forum boundaries? I apologize for it.

My roots are not in the Methodist movement at all. They are not even in those of the Nazarenes, even thu I grew up there and still attend. I know Nazies once were Methodists, but my roots are in Christ.

I am only a branch on the one true Vine.

No, you didn't overstep any boundaries, ContraMundum didn't want to overstep boundaries in the response.

To sum up what I think the gist of it was, is that Wesleyan theology (which includes the Church of the Nazarene, all flavors of Methodism, among other various churches) has the understanding of baptism being a sacrament 99% of the time (the remaining 1 percent reserved for non-Trinitarian baptisms if I recall correctly), a means of grace which God imparts, rather than a symbol of the relationship which Man initiates. Having dedications isn't exactly Wesleyan in its origins, it's actually more - if not - Anabaptist, and that's where the overstepping of boundaries would start to rear its head, because it's getting into confusing interdenominational or interdoctrinal territory, and why those churches would want to do it that way, rather than the way it's been traditionally understood.

My conjecture would be that it's more common in areas such as the deep Deep South, where Pentecostalism and Southern Baptist churches have the most hold, but that's disputable, of course.

 

[Davis]

My friend is a pastor of a Weslyn church and they only dedicate infants as well and than baptize when its the persons own choice.

Same with my Free Methodist Church.
These two churchs are just south of Buffalo, NY.

 

[Historicus]

To paraphrase Fredrick Beauchner: whether your sprinkled or immersed makes as much difference as whether you pray kneeling or standing on your head. It's the One you pray to who gives the prayer power. The same with baptism.

 

[ContraMundum]

I hear and understand what you are saying on the baptism, but the part about forum rules and getting back to my Methodist rules I don't get.

I am new, did I overstep the forum boundaries? I apologize for it.

My roots are not in the Methodist movement at all. They are not even in those of the Nazarenes, even thu I grew up there and still attend. I know Nazies once were Methodists, but my roots are in Christ.

I am only a branch on the one true Vine.

No, no my brother, you did not overstep forum rules, as far as I know- I was worried I might so I made that comment primarily about myself.

Bless you friend!

 

[ContraMundum]

My friend is a pastor of a Weslyn church and they only dedicate infants as well and than baptize when its the persons own choice.

Same with my Free Methodist Church.
These two churchs are just south of Buffalo, NY.

I know the Wesleyan Church in the US is heavily influenced by the more modern practices of their neighbours and has opened up to some different ideas about baptism and the end-times but in other countries the Wesleyans still bring their children to Christ by Baptism. I think it's indicative of the prevailing culture of any given area. I personally refuse to sit in judgment over things like that and as long as people are getting Christ I don't have a bad thing to say about it.

Interesting- I had a look at an independant Methodist Church website and in their Articles of Faith they actually made the comment that they believed infant baptism had no scriptural basis but infant dedication did. I was stunned to say the least. Oh well, it's a topic often "flogged to death" over at General Theology and perhaps best discussed there.

 

[geelee]

Personally I find no fault with parents baptising their children. Just because I did not do it myself, does not mean that I am right and those that do are incorrect.

I still feel that a newborn Christian has a better understanding of God after baptism. It is also a covanent between him/herself and the Creater.

Most teens in our congregation that were baptised (from other denominations) feels that they have been robbed.

 

[Birdy_for_Christ]

According to the quiz, I am still a devout Wesleyan.

My top 2 results are...
1) Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan -- 96%
2) Fundamentalist -- 90%

 

[Artos]

We never ask our kids whether they wanted to go to school or not or whether they wanted an education.
In a 'small matter' like education, we make decisions for their lives. Then on a matter of great importance- being a part of the Body of Christ...we say, " let them grow up and decide for themselves...if they want baptism...'.
By the time they do.. it might be already too late for them....

 

[geelee]

Birdy, I think I love you.

You have so much FIRE!

Please ignight someone else close to you with the gospel.

 

[Birdy_for_Christ]

Thank you Geelee! My church is having our youth revival this weekend and I'm all fired up for it. I've invited my friends and family who don't know Christ to come. I want everyone to know about Jesus and come to see Him as their personal lord and savior because it's such a wonderful feeling. God bless you and take care!

 

[geelee]

We never ask our kids whether they wanted to go to school or not or whether they wanted an education.
In a 'small matter' like education, we make decisions for their lives. Then on a matter of great importance- being a part of the Body of Christ...we say, " let them grow up and decide for themselves...if they want baptism...'.
By the time they do.. it might be already too late for them....

Artos,
God does not force anyone to believe in Him. He asks lovingly if you want to follow. It is a personal invitation.
I give my kids the map, but I do not force them to keep on any particular road. As a child I was forced to, and it cost me 17 years in the wilderness, because when I got the first change, I run wild.
I do not want to duplicate the same mistakes. So I call out to my kids from time to time, but I do not decide for them, they have free-will like the rest of human creation.

 

[Artos]

Think of Eli and his kids. Solemn responsibility there.

 

[ContraMundum]

I think we should just keep in mind that we all want to bring our kids to Christ, even as babes. If it were not so, they wouldn't have introduced infant dedication by those who don't baptise their children. The question I always asked myself was where infant dedication was in the NT- for those of us after Pentecost. Couldn't find it. I could, however, find entire households being baptised.

The questions I ask of those who reject infant baptism are simple, and Artos has already pointed to one- is baptism something we do or something God does for us? If it's something we do, then it must be without grace, and therefore it is an empty symbol. I don't recall Christ initiating empty rituals, in fact, He seemed to be against such things. If, on the other hand, it is something God does for us, then it is for our benefit and it must convey graces. I think that is the bottom line for all other considerations in baptism. Does the Bible connect baptism with graces, like being clothed in Christ, being buried and ressurected with Him and so forth, or does it say it is something we do?

 

[geelee]

Not disputing your point, CM.
ALL we recieve, I believe, is from God. So baptism without His presence would just be a very cold bath in front of other people.

Weird, won't you agree, Artros?

 

[Artos]

There will not be baptism 'without His presence'. He instituted it,He will be there. Not helpful for us to confuse our subjective feelings ( "I know it or I feel it") with His objective fact/action. We might not understand everything or feel very sanctified then...but He does His work regardless of our feelings or ability to grasp the full impact of what He is doing.

Nothing is mere 'ritual' that is done as He commanded and... in His Name.

When we do deliverance ministry (exorcism) on people who have been baptised before and yet have given the enemy a foothold in their lives (hence they come under 'oppression', never 'possession')...it is easier to eject the enemy because we tell the enemy: " You do not own the person. You are a squatter. The person has been baptised. God has the full claim on the person's life. We have removed the 'rights' that you have to squat in this person's life as the person has already confessed his sin and repented. Now get lost in the Name of Jesus..."

 

[geelee]

I was speaking about people that get baptizd to look good in front of the congregation, and do not say that these do not take place, Artros.
Not all in the world is as it should be, and there are baptisms were God is not invited to, because it is done for selfsatisfaction and not the right reasons.

It would seem that we keep on misunderstanding each other. So I will make this my last post on the matter.

Peace

Your sister in Christ
Grieta.

 

[ContraMundum]

Regarding whether or not baptism can be abused- Luther said in his Large Catechism that "Gold is gold, even if a harlot should wear it". He was speaking of baptism's efficacy being founded on the promise of Christ and not any factor about our worthiness to recieve it.