Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I think the Reformed Baptists may be fairly close to what you want. The GARBC is pretty much full Calvinist, but the Reform Baptists seem to be somewhat softer.
If you're trying to find peace in your own mind with this issue, you might consider that the Calvinist churches mentioned here pride themselves on defining the matter precisely, whereas the Lutheran approach, which I don't want to describe as equivocal or anything like that, still doesn't approach this teaching with the same fine toothed comb. They are "confessional" but they nevertheless don't go into some Protestant version of "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" like the Scholastics of the Medieval Catholic Church are remembered for.@bbbbbbb Yes, you are certainly correct. And it's not like I am 100% sold on the full Calvinist theology. To be perfectly honest, the Lutheran view of "predestination" (to use the term a little loosely) makes quite a bit of sense to me as well.
If you're trying to find peace in your own mind with this issue, you might consider that the Calvinist churches mentioned here pride themselves on defining the matter precisely, whereas the Lutheran approach, which I don't want to describe as equivocal or anything like that, still doesn't approach this teaching with the same fine toothed comb. They are "confessional" but they nevertheless don't go into some Protestant version of "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" like the Scholastics of the Medieval Catholic Church are remembered for.
For me, that's comfortable, since applying too much logic to a divine mystery is a shaky proposition. We can affirm some ideas without then striving to explain every nuance of how and why God does X or Y.
All right, but we have to remember that the issue brought to us by the OP concerned denominations--and that's the focus of this entire subforum. A person does study the Bible but then wants to know which churches that he might attend either agree or disagree.In general > it is good to read the Bible and see what is better than self-favoring groups and preachers might be saying.
I'm not going to assume every reader does this.A person does study the Bible
I'm not going to assume every reader does this.
I would evaluate how much a group emphasizes what the Bible emphasizes, not mainly compare groups.
Protestants are united by the Solas:What I have indeed found is that although we Protestants DO agree on the very core doctrine of salvation in Christ alone, because of God's grace, through our faith; the similarities seem to stop about there.
Those who practice infant baptism note that@dysert Just wanting to hear some different viewpoints on things. Thanks for your contribution! I have heard that the PCUSA is quite "liberal" in their views on some very important topics. I have also done some reading up on the PCA, which seems to definitely be more "conservative" in nature. On the topic of infant baptism, I'm in the same boat as you my friend. I just don't understand how it is seen as a Biblically grounded practice. But, that's why this thread is here. I'd like to hear from some people who disagree with, or see things differently than, myself.
Those who practice infant baptism note that
- it was practiced long before there was a canon of scripture
- Scripture states that whole households were baptized.
At that hour of the night the jailer took them and washed their wounds; then immediately he and all his household were baptized. Acts 16:33That depends on one's definition as to what constitutes a household. The Philippian jailer's household all believed prior to their baptism, so it could not have included individuals who were incapable of cognitive faith. Never is it said in scripture that any household was baptized which included non-believers.
At that hour of the night the jailer took them and washed their wounds; then immediately he and all his household were baptized. Acts 16:33
It never says only those that believed were baptized. It does say that ALL his household were baptized. You basically made up your stuff.
The head of the household determined what gods the household worshiped. When he converted, his whole household would have changed their beliefs.Well, I certainly did not make up the following verse. It would help you greatly to read the entire passage rather than just one verse.
Acts 16:34 And he brought them into his house and set food before them and rejoiced greatly, having believed in God with his whole household.
The head of the household determined what gods the household worshiped. When he converted, his whole household would have changed their beliefs.
A baby is part of the household, meaning it will be raised in the religion of that household. There would be no reason to withhold baptism.Of course. Can a baby change it's belief?
A baby is part of the household, meaning it will be raised in the religion of that household. There would be no reason to withhold baptism.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?