Other pouring or sprinkling credobaptist

Status
Not open for further replies.

Particular Baptist

Puritan Board Freshman
I was just curious if anyone knew of other credobaptists, like Martyn-Lloyd Jones, who believed that other modes of baptism were valid as long as accompanied by a profession of faith. Not saying that I agree with them, I was just wondering if there were any others.
 
I believe full body immersion is the proper mode; however I would not require a person to be immersed if they had already submitted to believers baptism by pouring or sprinkling. While pouring our sprinkling is irregular I do not believe it negates believers baptism.
 
Wasn't The Doctor a Calvinistic Methodist (paedobaptist)?

I believe most CredoBaptists restrict baptism to one definition while most PaedoBaptists accept multiple definitions of baptism

Also, I belive most PaedoBaptists wouldn't baptise any unkown adult that walked into their congregation. I assume they would require a profession of faith from adults.
 
Last edited:
Wasn't The Doctor a Calvinistic Methodist (paedobaptist)?

I believe most CredoBaptists restrict baptism to one definition while most PaedoBaptists accept multiple definitions of baptism

Also, I belive most PaedoBaptists wouldn't baptise any unkown adult that walked into their congregation. I assume they would require a profession of faith from adults.
I realize this is the "wrong" forum for me to be replying; but in point of fact, the Calvinistic Methodist Church in 1874 began to allow either position. Their original Confession of 1823 only allowed for pouring or sprinkling, and maintained paedobaptism.
Article 38. Of Baptism
Baptism is an ordinance which Christ, as King, instituted in his church, to be observed to the end of time, and to be administered only by ministers appointed and sent by Christ himself. It is duly administered by sprinkling or pouring water on the baptised person, in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. It should be administered but once on the same person. All who profess themselves believers, and their infant children, have a scriptural right to this ordinance. It is an emblem of their death unto sin, and of newness of life unto righteousness. This ordinance is not essentially necessary to salvation; yet it is a sin wilfully to neglect it, inasmuch as that would be an act of disobedience to a positive command of Christ. It should be administered publicly in the congregation, except when circumstances require it otherwise.

Addendum (Added in 1874) We also recognize in addition to the form referred to in Article 38 the validity of Believer's Baptism by immersion or effusion, and the dedication of infants. The doctrine of Baptism as an ordinance is something to be decided by each individual believer after studying the Scriptures and seeking guidance from the Holy Spirit.
Dr. Lloyd-Jones clearly maintained exclusive credobaptism in his own writings on the subject (I think especially of "Great Doctrines of the Bible").
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top