Log in to check your private messages 
Username: Password:   
  Reformed Theology Institute
  RTI, founded July 2008, is a venue for Reformed theology, education, training, and discussion.
Index  FAQ  Search  Memberlist  Usergroups  Profile Scroll to Bottom  RTI Portal New Posts Since Last Visit
Recent Posts    
    Join! (free)   
 

Log in
   Username:
   Password:
   Log me on automatically each visit
  
Welcome
Guest

IP Address: 54.80.10.30


Useful Resources

RTI Main Menu
Home Page
Forums
How-To FAQs
Membership Central
Photo/Doc Gallery
Private Messages
Smilies
Bible Encyclopedia
Bible Tool

RTI Announcements
Crowdfunding for RTI Web Site Server Administrators
TNARS Degree Study Discussion Forums Closed
Help RTI Grow
Hotmail Email Domain No Longer Supported for Members
Adopt a Smiley $$ Campaign
Welcome New Members!
RTI Standards of Conduct
Before You Post: Review The SoF and Rules of Conduct
RTI Statement of Faith
About RTI

RTI Latest Topics
RTI RTOW: Who has had the greatest impact on my life?
Heaven, the firmament and the waters

RTI Popular Topics
How to refute Landmark Baptists?
Preferences On NA28 or UBS 5th editions
Should we base theology on end of Mark's Gospel?
Greek Grammar In Light of Historical Research
The New Jerusalem and Righteousness
2 Peter 3:9 and word "all"
What book is good for those new to the faith?
Indwelling versus Infilling of the Holy Spirit
What is difference perservation of saints/eternal security?
Puritan Reformed Ministries in India



 
Jump to:  
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Reformed Theology Institute Forum Index » Baptism - Paedo » Grandparents as baptism sponsors
Author Message

Brotherducky


Sustaining Member



Joined: 03 Jun 2009

Posts: 54
Rep Level: 5
Rep Points: 5
Rep Hits: 1


Rep This Post

PostPosted: 08-27-2015 6:03 am
Post Number: 22826
 Reply with quote

Hi all,

I have a hazy recollection of a baptism controversy from the 16th/17th centurys. It had to do with the presentation of grandchildren for baptism when parents were not members of a church.  Ring a bell with anyone else?

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Find all posts by user

orchardman


Invested Member



Joined: 19 Mar 2015

Posts: 166
Rep Level: 5
Rep Points: 20
Rep Hits: 4

Location: Southern California
Rep This Post

PostPosted: 08-28-2015 8:10 pm
Post Number: 22832
Reply with quote

Grandparents cannot go against the will of the parents in this regard.

I have grandchildren who are not yet baptized by water, their parents are of a somewhat baptistic conviction (though not total).  This does not bother me, since I'm a 'broad tent' conservative Presbyterian in confession who can deal with the differences facing many of us on the timing and mode of water baptism.  My advice is to be patient and accept the reality of diversity God has given us for almost 2000 years (and beyond if the Dead Sea Scrolls are to be believed) on this issue.

Orchardman
_________________
Standing for a point of truth is mere flight and disgrace if you ignore the broader truths God is presently launching upon the world.

View user's profile Send private message Find all posts by user

DrWhofan1


RTI Guru



Joined: 20 Oct 2014

Posts: 861
Rep Level: 4
Rep Points: 25
Rep Hits: 7


Rep This Post

PostPosted: 08-31-2015 5:40 am
Post Number: 22843
Reply with quote

That is wise, as we  believe that the Lord does allow for us to have differing views regarding water baptism mode and timing, for we hold that a person needs to believe in Jesus, but also to be of age, which to us is 12.
i
We have many who were batized as as infants, but once they received Jesus as lord/Saviour as Adults, were comviced by the Bible to have that administered unto them...to have water baptism redone to them now as adults, would you be OK with that custom?

View user's profile Send private message Find all posts by user

orchardman


Invested Member



Joined: 19 Mar 2015

Posts: 166
Rep Level: 5
Rep Points: 20
Rep Hits: 4

Location: Southern California
Rep This Post

PostPosted: 09-06-2015 10:50 pm
Post Number: 22875
Reply with quote

Not totally, as I have seen those of this view re-baptized 2, 3, 4, 5 or more times when not convinced they were truly regenerate before each of their prior water baptisms.  We could certainly discuss this further.

Again (in case anyone missed it), I am not a Baptist.

Orchardman
_________________
Standing for a point of truth is mere flight and disgrace if you ignore the broader truths God is presently launching upon the world.

View user's profile Send private message Find all posts by user

orchardman


Invested Member



Joined: 19 Mar 2015

Posts: 166
Rep Level: 5
Rep Points: 20
Rep Hits: 4

Location: Southern California
Rep This Post

PostPosted: 09-07-2015 4:23 pm
Post Number: 22879
Reply with quote

Further comments:

On the issue of whether those baptized as infants should be allowed a new water baptism if later convicted they should do so, there are so many questions to be addressed:

1.  Was the infant baptism administered by a pastor or denomination that has little respect for the fundamentals of the Christian gospel?  If so, I agree the new water baptism is legitimate.  

2.  Is the request for new baptism based solely on the argument of immersionist mode?  If so, I do not agree it is legitimate.  Let's remember that Baptists confidently affirm that all paedobaptists, anabaptists, Mennonites, and anyone else in history not submerged in water (including their own founders for a generation) were and are non-baptized according to their view.  This includes all the non-conformists persecuted before the mid-17th century--none of them were 'baptized' any more than heretics are baptized in their affirmation.

3.  There is a big difference between the fundamentalism of immersion Baptists and the 'big tent' doctrine of some Presbyterian and Reformed churches.  The former makes the mode and subjects a matter of orthodoxy, rejecting all those outside of that view as non-baptized, the latter accomodates those who prefer baptism for confessors only as a matter of conscience/conviction but does not tolerate calling those with a different conviciton and practice 'non baptized'.  This is where I come down.

4.  I personally have no issue with someone previously baptized as an infant asking for adult baptism based on conviction, as long as it is within the context of the 'big tent' acceptance of others holding to paedobaptism.  I do not believe a Reformed pastor should be expected to perform such a baptism if against conviction, someone with leadership credentials ('elder', 'deacon', etc.) who accepts the practice in conscience can perform it, either within or without the particular local church.

Orchardman
_________________
Standing for a point of truth is mere flight and disgrace if you ignore the broader truths God is presently launching upon the world.

View user's profile Send private message Find all posts by user

DrWhofan1


RTI Guru



Joined: 20 Oct 2014

Posts: 861
Rep Level: 4
Rep Points: 25
Rep Hits: 7


Rep This Post

PostPosted: 09-09-2015 4:33 pm
Post Number: 22886
Reply with quote

I would tend to see believers baptism as one who conviction is that the NT scriptures seem to best support that position, and their desire is to be faithful to the Lord and to identify with his death.resurrection by that public declarartion of their faith in Jesus now...

Do NOT see it though that all would have to do that who were baptised as infants. but would see it as needed if they were persuaded and convinced by the Bible that would be for them the proper thing to do!

View user's profile Send private message Find all posts by user

Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Reformed Theology Institute Forum Index » Baptism - Paedo


 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Back to top




Welcome To RTI Guest!