Do 'bible' or independent churches believe in/have the Body and Blood of Christ? Baptism?

[ccmcmg]

I was so blessed this weekend to be able to visit with my cousin, who just started going to church again as well. She is attending a church that was formerly a ‘bible’ church, but now is " Interdependent Christian Fellowship" (from their website).

She insisted to me that their communion is the actual Body and Blood of Jesus Christ; it is not a ‘symbol’. I’ve never heard of that in a ‘bible’ or ‘Christian’ church.

They also re-baptized her and her husband. My cousin was baptized as a baby; she told me that babies don’t have sin and don’t need baptized. I thought that other religions recognized our baptisms as valid, whether as babies or older.

I’m not going to argue the points with her, but am just curious. She is so much happier and more at peace since returning to God! I know that there are many points we agree on.

C

 

[cajunhillbilly]

Do you have a link to their web site?

 

[ConstantineTG]

If they want to believe they have the Eucharist, who are we to say otherwise? That is their belief and so if they say that is what they believe, then that is what they believe. I don’t think you can paint all these “Bible-only communities” in the same color. They have variations in their beliefs and it is not far off that one of them will want to believe that they have the Eucharist.

 

[jediliz]

no other christian denoms do not recognize Catholic baptisms…why would they? You know what church was the original…and it wasn’t one founded in the 1800s or the 1900s or by a king that wanted to divorce his wife (Church of England)

Obviously this church does not believe in original sin - we are ALL born with this due to the sins of our first parents. So, babies don’t have sin? I suppose they have special ceremonies to welcome babies, but it is not baptism?

They probably DO NOT have legitimate communion because they do not have valid Holy Orders -** that is REQUIRED for the bread and wine to actually BECOME the Body and Blood of Jesus! **

 

[FabiusMaximus]

I was so blessed this weekend to be able to visit with my cousin, who just started going to church again as well. She is attending a church that was formerly a ‘bible’ church, but now is " Interdependent Christian Fellowship" (from their website).

She insisted to me that their communion is the actual Body and Blood of Jesus Christ; it is not a ‘symbol’. I’ve never heard of that in a ‘bible’ or ‘Christian’ church.

They also re-baptized her and her husband. My cousin was baptized as a baby; she told me that babies don’t have sin and don’t need baptized. I thought that other religions recognized our baptisms as valid, whether as babies or older.

I’m not going to argue the points with her, but am just curious. She is so much happier and more at peace since returning to God! I know that there are many points we agree on.

C

Well it probably depends on the individual church. If her church isn’t associated with any particular denomination, then the head of that church (the pastor), can presumably profess whatever he would like on behalf of the church.

I don’t see why he couldn’t interpret the biblical text as meaning that there is a real presence. I haven’t seen that before, though.

 

[PaulfromIowa]

Many so-called independent churches have Anabaptist views on baptism, i.e. adult-only.

 

[ricofall]

My Baptist friend told me they also believe that it is the body and blood. I argued with him on that for a bit. He said that about 4 times a year, the pastor does the ‘Lord’s Supper’ and says the biblical words (John’s Gospel I guess) to make the cracker and grape juice the flesh and blood. I was going to say that the bible was not intended to be a magic ritual book, but it would not have matter. He was determined to see it that way. It is hard to argue with certain mindsets when they have their own personal interpretation of the bible.

He even once argued with me using a quote from Saint Augustine. I told him that St. Augustine was a Catholic Bishop. Quoting him is like me quoting Stalin to defend Capitalism.

 

[FabiusMaximus]

They also re-baptized her and her husband. My cousin was baptized as a baby; she told me that babies don’t have sin and don’t need baptized. I thought that other religions recognized our baptisms as valid, whether as babies or older.

I’m not going to argue the points with her, but am just curious. She is so much happier and more at peace since returning to God! I know that there are many points we agree on.

C

It should be noted that the reason Evangelicals believe in rebaptism is because they do not see baptism as regenerative. Baptism is more seen as a public profession of faith, and can only be done once the person in question has affirmed their belief in Jesus Christ. Your cousin’s baptism is considered “invalid” because she was an infant when baptized, and therefore not old enough to make a personal decision.

There is a ceremony among Evangelicals that is similar to infant baptism, however. It is called baby dedication. The infant is presented in front of the congregation, blessed by the pastor, who prays for the baby and for the parents who promise to raise them in the Christian faith. The baby is then usually anointed with oil. It’s a beautiful tradition, and not unlike the Catholic infant baptism. So in that sense, you are similar as well.

 

[JonNC]

=jediliz;10804022]no other christian denoms do not recognize Catholic baptisms…why would they? You know what church was the original…and it wasn’t one founded in the 1800s or the 1900s or by a king that wanted to divorce his wife (Church of England)

Of course many do recognize Catholic Baptism. Lutherans do, and I am sure Anglicans do (since you mentioned them). Any communion that confesses the Apostles and Nicene Creeds acknowledge “one Baptism for the remission of sins”. Done in the Trinitarian form, Catholic Baptisms are Baptisms.

Obviously this church does not believe in original sin - we are ALL born with this due to the sins of our first parents. So, babies don’t have sin? I suppose they have special ceremonies to welcome babies, but it is not baptism?

The Catholic Church does recognize a Baptism done in the Trinitarian form.

They probably DO NOT have legitimate communion because they do not have valid Holy Orders -** that is REQUIRED for the bread and wine to actually BECOME the Body and Blood of Jesus! **

That, of course, is the Catholic view.

Jon

 

[ccmcmg]

I did just remember she said that the church used to be associated with the Baptists.

Thanks for your thoughts. I wasn’t going to argue with her, just knew some of you out there would have more information or thoughts. She used to be Catholic, but I don’t think her family was church-going. There are plenty of other things we agree on.

C