Looking for a non-denom that practices infant baptism

[jinc1019]

Hello All,

Ok, I know this question is a stretch since believer's baptism is the primary practice for most non-denominational churches, but is there any way to find a non-denominational church that practices infant baptism or at least allows membership without believer's baptism? I'm looking for a church in the Durham-Raleigh area of North Carolina. Any guidance would be very helpful! Thanks!

-Justin

 

[actionsub]

I thought your area, being in the South, might have a number of the neo-Reformed churches in it that tend to be accepting of infant baptism. I looked @ Google and found that not to be the case! The only link that didn't look like some crypto-Baptist church was North Raleigh Community Church. (Disclosure: I've never been to North Carolina and have no connection to this church, so a look at the website will tell you as much as I know!)

Good luck. It's hard.

 

[BryanW92]

I look at the "What we believe" page on their website. If their beliefs are mostly Wesleyan, then they probably don't insist on a "believers baptism". The ones who do insist on it usually state that on the website under "what we believe" or on the "how to become a member" page.

I live in the south too, and a majority of the non-denoms are really just Baptist churches, but there are several who are Wesleyan and few are neo-Reformed.

 

[jinc1019]

I thought your area, being in the South, might have a number of the neo-Reformed churches in it that tend to be accepting of infant baptism. I looked @ Google and found that not to be the case! The only link that didn't look like some crypto-Baptist church was North Raleigh Community Church. (Disclosure: I've never been to North Carolina and have no connection to this church, so a look at the website will tell you as much as I know!)

Good luck. It's hard.

Lol, yes it is. I'll check out the one you suggested. It isn't clear from the website.

 

[RDKirk]

Hello All,

Ok, I know this question is a stretch since believer's baptism is the primary practice for most non-denominational churches, but is there any way to find a non-denominational church that practices infant baptism or at least allows membership without believer's baptism? I'm looking for a church in the Durham-Raleigh area of North Carolina. Any guidance would be very helpful! Thanks!

-Justin

Those are rather incongruous concepts. A congregation that validates infant baptism is even less likely to permit a believer to be unbaptized at all. Infant baptism makes sense only if there is a doctrine requiring baptism for salvation--otherwise it's just an act of superstition.

 

[jinc1019]

Those are rather incongruous concepts. A congregation that validates infant baptism is even less likely to permit a believer to be unbaptized at all. Infant baptism makes sense only if there is a doctrine requiring baptism for salvation--otherwise it's just an act of superstition.

I'm confused by your comments. I do believe in baptism and support it completely. I'm asking about independent churches that practice infant baptism rather than believer's baptism. And your comments about baptismal regeneration are rather unfair. Methodists, Presbyterians, Reformed, and many Anglicans do NOT believe in baptismal regeneration but practice infant baptism.

 

[1watchman]

There is a difference between "infant baptism" and "household baptism" mostly by the practice and interpretation; so, you might find a place that will allow household baptism but not the thought of routinely baptizing any and all infants.

It will depend on what you feel a need to do.

 

[jinc1019]

There is a difference between "infant baptism" and "household baptism" mostly by the practice and interpretation; so, you might find a place that will allow household baptism but not the thought of routinely baptizing any and all infants.

It will depend on what you feel a need to do.

Perhaps that's true...I have never heard of a church making that distinction though when choosing to baptize. Virtually every church that baptized infants requires the parents or guardians to also have faith.

 

[RDKirk]

I'm confused by your comments. I do believe in baptism and support it completely. I'm asking about independent churches that practice infant baptism rather than believer's baptism. And your comments about baptismal regeneration are rather unfair. Methodists, Presbyterians, Reformed, and many Anglicans do NOT believe in baptismal regeneration but practice infant baptism.

I would have to ask what you believe that baptism actually is or does. If one does believe that baptism itself is regenerational, then it would make perfect sense for a high priority to be placed on infant baptism.

If one believes that baptism is the symbolic statement of believer intent, then infant baptism does not make sense. And I was raised Methodist and baptized as an infant. I've read the Methodist catechism regarding the retention of infant baptism, but it just doesn't make sense.

It's essentially only an intention of parents to raise the child in a method that would make the baptism effective at some time the child is ready to believe--at which time he would voluntarily become confirmed. But because there seems to be a belief that baptism sort of does something, the congregation is also supposed to be prepared to take the child away from the parents if it becomes clear the parents are not raising the child properly.

But even that is not a case of a congregation that baptizes infants and yet leaves baptism optional for members.

 

[spiritfilledjm]

isnt that mainly a catholic thing, infant baptism?

 

[jinc1019]

I would have to ask what you believe that baptism actually is or does. If one does believe that baptism itself is regenerational, then it would make perfect sense for a high priority to be placed on infant baptism.

If one believes that baptism is the symbolic statement of believer intent, then infant baptism does not make sense. And I was raised Methodist and baptized as an infant. I've read the Methodist catechism regarding the retention of infant baptism, but it just doesn't make sense.

It's essentially only an intention of parents to raise the child in a method that would make the baptism effective at some time the child is ready to believe--at which time he would voluntarily become confirmed. But because there seems to be a belief that baptism sort of does something, the congregation is also supposed to be prepared to take the child away from the parents if it becomes clear the parents are not raising the child properly.

But even that is not a case of a congregation that baptizes infants and yet leaves baptism optional for members.

I don't disagree the Methodist description is confusing. I don't want to get the thread off-topic, so I'll refrain from going into detail about baptism here. I've had a lot of other threads on that already. I assure you I will take your concerns into consideration.

-J

 

[jinc1019]

isnt that mainly a catholic thing, infant baptism?

Lutherans, Eastern Orthodox, Methodists, Lutherans, and Presbyterians also practice infant baptism, which, by the way, makes up the overwhelming majority of Christians in the world. That's not to say it should be believed on that basis. I am still working it out myself.

-J

 

[spiritfilledjm]

I've never been a big fan of, as I call them, near-catholic denominations. Not that I have anything against Catholicism it's just not for me. I do love the teachings of Wesley (Methodism) but yeah...idk lol

 

[com7fy8]

is there any way to find a non-denominational church that practices infant baptism or at least allows membership without believer's baptism?

As ones are saying, what do you believe is accomplished by infant baptism?

Also, if you get baptized as an adult, this can be part of confessing Jesus before people. Jesus says, "'Therefore, whoever confesses Me before men, him I will also confess before My Father who is in heaven.'" (Matthew 10:32) And John the Baptist said, "that He should be revealed to Israel, therefore I came baptizing with water." (in John 1:31)

So, if baptism is used for promoting a denomination which is self-favoring in their ways and beliefs, this would not be naming and confessing Jesus Himself.

And if baptism has mostly been for revealing a certain group, instead of used to reveal Jesus - - same thing > we need baptism which is about Jesus and people knowing Him. It is not only for getting acceptance in a group or church.

But if you want a church to accept you without believing adult baptism, possibly you find that your own infant baptism was for Jesus and salvation and is all you need.

But I think what we really need, first, is to find a group who is good for us, to help us get more real with God and to learn how to love any and all people, while we learn how to share with one another brothers and sisters in Jesus. Make sure you have people who feed you with their real-life example >

"nor as being lords over those entrusted to you,
but being examples to the flock." (1 Peter 5:3)

Your choice of a church, then, I would say, needs to not be baptism-centered but Christ-centered!!!

There are people who can make a big show of infant or believing baptism and even make this their identity, but they do not give you real-life Christian example, but only or mainly beliefs and practices. So, I would start with evaluating who is a real example for you, to help you and your marriage to become God's way

 

[jinc1019]

As ones are saying, what do you believe is accomplished by infant baptism?

Also, if you get baptized as an adult, this can be part of confessing Jesus before people. Jesus says, "'Therefore, whoever confesses Me before men, him I will also confess before My Father who is in heaven.'" (Matthew 10:32) And John the Baptist said, "that He should be revealed to Israel, therefore I came baptizing with water." (in John 1:31)

So, if baptism is used for promoting a denomination which is self-favoring in their ways and beliefs, this would not be naming and confessing Jesus Himself.

And if baptism has mostly been for revealing a certain group, instead of used to reveal Jesus - - same thing > we need baptism which is about Jesus and people knowing Him. It is not only for getting acceptance in a group or church.

But if you want a church to accept you without believing adult baptism, possibly you find that your own infant baptism was for Jesus and salvation and is all you need.

But I think what we really need, first, is to find a group who is good for us, to help us get more real with God and to learn how to love any and all people, while we learn how to share with one another brothers and sisters in Jesus. Make sure you have people who feed you with their real-life example >

"nor as being lords over those entrusted to you,
but being examples to the flock." (1 Peter 5:3)

Your choice of a church, then, I would say, needs to not be baptism-centered but Christ-centered!!!

There are people who can make a big show of infant or believing baptism and even make this their identity, but they do not give you real-life Christian example, but only or mainly beliefs and practices. So, I would start with evaluating who is a real example for you, to help you and your marriage to become God's way

I don't disagree with much of what you're saying here and I'll consider it carefully. I will not, however, get into a discussion about what I believe about infant baptism. It will simply derail the thread.