Like I showed, you don’t have a proper understanding of the differences between the Old and New Testament covenant, even incredibly asserting "The old covenant isn’t different from the new covenant, it is only extended beyond Israel"!
Circumcision is forward looking, it looks to Christ. Baptism looks to the work of Christ which has already been done.
Indeed, that is not in contention, but shadows do not have complete correspondence to their fulfillment, and you continue to insist on ignoring them. Again, under the Old circumcision is stipulated for infants, which placed then within an physical nation of lost and saved, and which waged war by physical means, but circumcision was not contingent upon repentance and faith (infants and slaves had no choice), though obedience was required.
Baptism signifies being made by faith part of a spiritual nation only made up of believers, having passed from death to life, being crucified with Christ and raised to walk in newness of life. (Rm. 6) and is never stipulated for infants, but repentance and faith are, with the only baptisms in which the state of the believers are mentioned being those who were morally cognizant and able to fulfill those conditions.
That is the plain teaching of Scripture, in contrast to the eisegesis of paedobaptists, leaving them to extrapolate infant baptisms out of a few simple statements of whole household baptisms, as if the Holy Spirit would not provide a manifest example for infant baptism while providing many examples of believers baptism. Yet which you incredibly must deny is not the plain teaching of scripture, in order to support your tradition.
Your problem is that you view baptism as a meaningless ritual which is why you discount the several occasions when scripture says the entire household or family was baptized.
I do not view baptism as a meaningless ritual any more than the Lord's supper or putting on a ring in a marriage, but as repentance and faith is the stated required condition, and the only examples we have of the morally cognizant condition of the baptized is that they were able to choose Christ, then baptizing infants leaves them wet, and does not signify that they have passed from death to life, being crucified with Christ and raised to walk in newness of life. And instead it can give them a false confidence that they are already children of God.
You get so close when you cite 1 Cor. 7:14 because that passage teaches us that even the children of one believer are blessed. Paul is clearly teaching that even in families where only one parent is a believer, those children are entitled to admission into the covenant via baptism. You’re denying children Christ by denying them admission into God’s covenant.
That is absurd, and is another example of how carelessly or willingly you compel Scripture to support your tradition! For this text neither says or infers baptism, and what it actually shows is that the family is sanctified by God even though they are not believers and baptized! For the unbelieving husband is under that umbrella of sanctification as are the children! Baptism is not here or in their closet.
And are infants are guiltless, which are not be condemned, then they do not need salvation, while as soon as "the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good," (Isaiah 7:16) then he can believe on Christ and be baptized. This needs to be emphasized, while it is those who give souls the false idea that they became part of the family of God via paedobaptism who are fostering their absence from God’s covenant.
Time to move on, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God. (Hebrews 6:1) (Hebrews 6:1-2)
Sorry, my friend, but you may have to rethink your "choice" filter you run everything thru...'Cause it just "ain't" there in the basic Gospels/Scriptures:
The Son's Witness to this:
16 You did NOT choose me, but I chose you and appointed you so that you might go and bear fruit—fruit that will last—and so that whatever you ask in my name the Father will give you. (Jesus, John 15:16)
The Father's Witness to this (thru the Son):
"44 “NO ONE can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day." (John 6:44)
The Spirit's Witness to this thru Paul:
3 Therefore I want you to know that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says, “Jesus be cursed,” and NO ONE one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” EXCEPT by the Holy Spirit. (1 Cor. 12:3)
Before the downtown LA Church of the Open Door closed down in 1985, its pastors had been J. Vernon McGee (21 years) ensued by Michael Cocoris.
Cocoris wrote in one of his books that he regretted preaching in effect "decision theology" -- essentially of making "choices" or "decisions" for Christ. It's actually quite bad theology. We can talk of "responses" to the Holy Spirit's promptings, but even as Cocoris & others have pointed out...the usually one NT passage cited for such "decision" theology is ripped out of context...
It's the passage from Revelation, "behold I stand at the door and knock"...and talks of opening the door to Christ. What people forget or neglect to apply is that this passage was written to one of the seven CHURCHES in Revelation.
(The other OT verse usually cited is Joshua's "choose this day whom you will serve" is likewise geared toward an "in-house" crowd...the 12 tribes...Joshua 24:1, 15)
The early Reformers realized how necessary it was for Jesus Himself to choose us; for the Father to draw us; and for the Holy Spirit to rebirth us, illuminate our minds (1 Cor. 2:10-12) and call Christ Lord because of one simple reality:
Spiritual death of human beings...
"As for you, you were DEAD in your transgressions and sins...GOD, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions... (Eph. 2:1, 4-5)
This is why we read Christ's words in Luke 9 to "let the dead bury the dead." (IoW, let spiritually dead bury the physically dead)
I'm sorry, my friend, but don't try to build any case on Lazarus resurrection in John 11 based upon either his...
...choice to walk out of the grave cave...
...or his "moral cognizance"...
You need to go back to basics re...
...the need to give GOD in Christ & God the Holy Spirit 100% credit & glory for New Life...
...instead of tipping the glory in favor of men & women having (finally) made the "right choice" based upon their acumen & "moral cognizance"...
It's not only NOT Biblical but places New Life & its power as initiating with man when the Bible CLEARLY teaches it's ALWAYS with God Himself!
Daniel, please don't pretend that you are not aware that this doesn't run both ways.
Your comment reflects how we could probably go to a fair # of Midwestern states and see baptized-as-infants living as if they were anything but baptized children of God.
And then I would promptly escort you to many a small town in the South...where perhaps 95% to 100% (well...maybe less these days)...but 25 years ago 95 to 100%...of the townsfolk have "made decisions for Christ" -- many of them perhaps MULTIPLE "decisions for Christ"
And then we could walk all around the bars or perhaps a strip joint on the edge of town that might also cater to truckers...and you'd see plenty of past "decision for Christ" men!
Infant baptism is no special "false confidence" issue -- anymore than what some phrase somebody has mouthed at some point in the past.
It goes both ways...and to somehow pretend it doesn't isn't very forthcoming on this subject.
This is the second time you've referenced in this thread something similar (post #36: Baptism signifies being in the spiritual community...)
There's several things I'm having trouble tracking with this line of thought in light of the actual passages we find early in Romans 6 & elsewhere:
* 3 Or don’t you know that all of us who were
** were baptized into Christ Jesus
***were baptized
****into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.
Those issues include...
This is the same issue I have to constantly deal with the Mormons, & it's troubling to think you're reflecting more Mormon theology here than Biblical theology: And that is the ** phrase in Rom 6:3 above: "baptized into Christ Jesus..."
Do you know how many times on FR I've had to constantly tell Lds we are primarily baptized into Christ Jesus HIMSELF...and not simply into a church, a sect, a church body, a denomination, or an organization?
Yes, I know Paul mentions being "baptized into one body" (1 Cor. 12:13)...
...but this "body" is more a "new ONE flesh" in very similar ways that a marriage is a "new ONE flesh"
...we're not so much baptized into one of XYZ spin-off denominations, but into a PERSON!
...I know we like to "spiritualize" things & talk as if this "body of Christ" is something primarily ethereal ...
...just like to tend to make marriage more about being a "couple" than how Jesus and Genesis describes it ("no longer two, but one (flesh)"...as if we don't know what the phrase "no longer" means...
...yet the PRIMARY NT emphasis is not to place the stress on how you've twice so far stressed being baptized into a "spiritual nation" -- a "spiritual community" -- because, frankly, to way too many evangelicals, baptism is merely a spiritual horizontal act initiated by men who are "choosing" to do so...
Sorry, Daniel. Scriptures such as the above and Galatians 3:27 puts the proper focus in place -- that we are baptized into a PERSON! Jesus Christ Himself!
...for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. (Gal. 3:27; cf. Col. 2:11-12)
The baptistries in Augustine's day were OUTSIDE the church buildings to remind people that one passed thru the waters of baptism into the church...vs. passing thru the church building waters as if we are dunked into some particular denomination.
You know, I think I know a reason why some Evangelicals might want to play that down, and it has to do with the real truly HISTORICAL participation in the death, burial & resurrection of Jesus Christ...and we know no mere "symbolic" tokenness can accomplish something so powerful...just as we know that forgiveness of sins, cleansing of sins, justification, salvation, rescue from judgment, regeneration/new birth, adopted sonship, the Gift of the Holy Spirit, etc. are ALL power narratives of the ACTUAL divine transactions that take place...and guess what? ALL of these are linked directly to baptism in the NT...and I will return to that below in #3...
You know when a Biblical writer repeats the exact same verbiage ... like when Isaiah does (Is. 41:13) about the "right hand"...or when Jesus starts off a key phrase with "verily, verily, I say unto you"...it means indeed "pay close attention":
And Paul carefully arranges the tense twice in Romans 6:3: ...were baptized into"
Why?
Because man is 100% passive when it comes to baptism (yes, I know these baptism verses in the Bible militate versus your apparent unBiblical "choice" theology).
See also:
You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ..." (Gal. 3:26-27) [Not who "chose" baptism]
You see, the very essence of baptism is NOT self-administration! The summon to be baptized -- like in acts 2:38 -- isn't grammatically focused on the word "let" ... but on "be baptized"...Let's not turn what is a clear passivity of reception into some man-generated activity!
And why is to be baptized primarily a passive reception?
a. Because being baptized INTO A PERSON is a profound spiritual DIVINE act...no ONE of us has that power, authority, etc:
12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, HE GAVE THE RIGHT to become children of God— 13 children born NOT of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God. (John 1:12-13)
Did you catch that? Did YOU decide to be born? NO? Oh, but you decided to be REBORN? (Oh. Yeah, good thing Lazarus decided to "signify" his new life by all that power & energy he showed walking out of his grave & having his grave-clothes shed!)
And yet John clearly says that rebirth isn't "of human decision"?
Tell us Daniel...why do you ignore John's clear words from John 1:12-13?
Well, all of this then is VERY CLOSELY tied into my third point...
That you keep using an extra word "signifies" that isn't to be found in all of these baptism verses (just like too many Evangelicals likewise attach the word "ordinance" to baptism -- even though that word isn't found attached to any of the baptism verses, either!)
Paul doesn't say baptism is some mere "horizontal sign" that we wave before the world...as if we were mere placard-holders in what goes on in baptism...
Paul cuts right to it...we were baptized into his death 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death...
This isn't just some flowery language drudged up. We HAVE been buried with Him...as we WERE baptized into His death...This is NOT anything that you or I can carry out!
God did that. We've become a 100% grace-based full-beneficiary recipient & hence receive full benefits of all Christ did for us as a free gift (Col. 2:12-15; Titus 3:4-7; 1 Peter 3:21). And don't go stealing glory of powerful divine things that neither you, nor I, can do...
Is to forgive sins something only God does? (That's what Jesus indicated) [The forgiveness of sins is repeatedly designated thru baptism -- either directly in so many words...like Acts 2:38...or as a washing away of sins (Acts 22:16), or as a cleansing (Eph. 5:26), or as in sprinkling the hearts clean from an evil conscience (Heb. 10:22).]
This cleansing -- as these verses show -- is clearly God's work, God's activity -- and HE has chosen to link baptism to that process:
But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (1 Cor. 6:11)
We "were washed"...we didn't do some self-lice removal and self-flea removal...
Paul, also in Galatians 3, mentions how being "justified by faith" & becoming "sons of God" and being "baptized into Christ" are all interchangeable descriptions of Christian initiation. If baptism is merely some self-generated "inward act" done by mere men, what? Can we "justify" ourselves?
5 he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit... (Titus 3:5) [see also 1 Peter 3:21]
Can we save ourselves, or is it purely an act of God?
Can we initiate adoption proceedings? Or is this an act of God that is linked to baptism? (Gal. 3:26)
Are we self-rescuers from judgment? Or is this something only God can do, and He has chosen to link this thru baptism? (1 Peter 3:20-21)
We are given a new nature. Is this something only God can do, and He has chosen to link this thru baptism? (See John 3:5 to go with Titus 3:5)
ALL: If you want to know perhaps the #1 untold distinction of how various Christians treat baptism, it lies in this very question:
Do you see to be baptized into Christ Jesus as an act of God, or as an act of man.
Those who choose the latter will come up with Biblical words -- yet unassociated biblically with baptism...like ...
...ordinance
...tokenism
...symbolism
...signifies
...witness
...an "self-administered" "outward act" on man's part to "demonstrate" -- as if we were mere demonstrators...placard-holders -- what God has previously done in giving us faith...
What these weasel words resist is that in the New Testament being baptized is more clearly id'd as an instrument of conversion -- not magical water...but as Ephesians 5:25-26 says:
...just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing her BY the washing with water through the word...
The Acts' pattern is clear, whether its Pentecost, Paul's conversion, the Ethiopian eunuch, or the Samritans, or the Ephesian dozen in acts 10, or Cornelius, or the Philippian jailer and his family...the pattern is all uniform: baptism is part & parcel of the Gospel and people are power-deniers if they want to de-link baptism to the Holy Spirit as its direct Agent, or de-link baptism to New Life/Salvation, or de-link baptism to empowering of God's Word-in-action, or de-link baptism to forgiveness, or de-link baptism to justification, or de-link baptism from direct adoption into His family.
Those are ALL vertical aspects with full divine authority, full divine power enacted...they are not simply "horizontal" signs .... placards we wave around to show what God did thru OTHER means...
All of these divine actions are DIRECTLY linked to baptism!