[daniel1212]

It is unclear whether you are in fellowship with Pentecostals and Charismatics or not. Church of Christ ? Assemblies of God ? It seems to me quite a doctrinal contradiction with Independent Fundamental Baptists.

What is it with you? How is that relevant and where did i claim I was IFB? That was were you diverted from after my reproof that

"again, your preoccupation with particular churches presumes that i and other evangelicals are promoting a church, or that the one true church is one particular denomination, which is false. Only the body of Christ is 100% constituted by believers, while its varied (and they were in Scripture) visible churches have never been made up of 100% believers for long, nor did they realize comprehensive unity, or could presume to maintain complete freedom from any error.

But God always preserved faith, but not by a perpetual infallible magisterium, though magisterial authority has its place, but God often raised men from without the magisterium to correct it, and or add revelation, and preserver it. And thus the church began and thus has faith been often preserved. "

And that i basically ID as nondenominational is irrelevant as to the issue of paedobaptism, as is your preoccupation with denominations, as it is not I who am preaching a particular church as the OTC, and it is RCs who find fault that we have particular infallible church which we are bound to assent to as supreme as a RC must to Rome.

Thus what you need to establish is that perpetual magisterial infallibility is essential for a church to be true, and to discern and preserve faith, with the historical stewards of Scripture being that magisterium.

And that those who hold most strongly to the most fundamental distinctive of the Reformation, that of Scripture being supreme as the wholly inspired and accurate word of God, are less unified in basic values and beliefs than the fruit of Rome. And that paper unity constitutes what one really believes.

Otherwise what is of God is subject to being established upon the weight of Scriptural substantiation, though that allows for competition, and a harder path to unity than the premise of assured magisterial veracity, and thus implicit assent.

[af_vet_1981]

What is it with you? How is that relevant and where did i claim I was IFB?

1. I look for truth and value before I make a purchase.
2. In post 3246 you wrote "Rest assured i certainly affirm baptism, and I was baptized in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit in a fundamental Baptist church about 6 years after prayerfully leaving Rome, and have been part of about 1,000 services and meetings in Baptist (Ind. and SB) churches alone over the years, including so think i must believe in baptism - even somewhat stronger than most of them do."
3. It is my understanding, although you may know better, that Independent Fundamental Baptist theology holds when you are baptized in one of their churches (after they affirm you are really a believer per their doctrine), as you were, you become a member of that local church. I also thought they did not regard one as being in the body of Christ unless one was baptized into a valid New Testament (almost always Baptist) church.
4. I further thought that if one was a member of an IFB church, one can never leave without somehow shedding the IFB theology, by which one is viewed by the faithful as either never having really been saved, deceived, backslidden, or some combination thereof. It all is very interesting when I compare it with the Catholic Church and those Catholics who can hardly contain themselves from posting against the Catholic Church at every opportunity. It's not like they are trying to get Independent Fundamental Baptists to moderate, or get Pentecostals who don't believe water baptism is a required teaching from the LORD Jesus Christ to the Apostles to accept the truth, or get babblers to learn real languages if they want to say something that can be understood, or ... etc. I could go on for hours.