Anything in particular you want to discuss about this?
I was baptized (immersed) in a congregation of the Wesleyan Church, which is very similar to the Nazarenes. Without going back and reviewing it again, to the best of my recollection it flunks the IMB test on at least two counts.
Like all churches from the Methodist tradition, the Wesleyans accept infant baptism as well as accepting all modes. As I understand it, however, the vast majority in both denoms practice credobaptism and immersion. My pastor at the time told me my sprinkling in the UMC was sufficient. He had to say that as a minister in that denomination. But he did argue for believer's baptism by immersion and I was convinced of the case for it without very much discussion.
Of course it also fails the IMB's test because that denomination does not believe in eternal security. I believed in it at the time, but the IMB guidelines reflect the Landmarkish view that there has to be a valid administrator as well as a valid candidate, valid mode, etc. Thus, according to them, all I did was get wet. But evidently baptism in a liberal SBC church is ok.
Based on the language in the Wesleyan statement of faith, some might wish to argue that their view of baptism is possibly sacramental as well.
I'm open to being shown that my baptism is not scriptural, but I have yet to be fully convinced. If you accept their presuppositions, the deduction necessarily follows. But I've never quite been convinced. And to me, full blown Landmarkism is more coherent than the IMB's policy. Landmarkers don't hesitate to say that paedobaptist churches and perhaps even those who do not demand immersion are not true churches. But those "Baptist Identity" men who defended the IMB guidelines to the hilt often hem and haw around when pressed on that issue.
Can you have a church without baptism? Even many noted non-Landmarkers like Dagg argued that paedobaptist churches were not true churches. IIRC, the Landmark controversy was over the question of whether or not paedobaptist ministers were gospel ministers. Dagg, to my recollection, argues that they are at some length in his Manual of Theology. Other examples could be noted.
IMHO you're also forced to accept some form of Baptist perpetuity as well given those presuppositions.
