Posted on 03/07/2015 12:04:48 PM PST by Colofornian
Thank-you and God Bless.
I know that in the Acts of Apostles when whole households were baptized, that meant the little babies also because even they need the forgiveness of their sins.
No, a forgiven baby.
Jesus did called the little to Him.
That is true. Worthy of pondering. They didn't need to be baptized, for one thing, as did his own disciples.
“I read Augustine, and became a Calvinist, because Calvinism is just Augustinianism.”
But it isn’t. http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2014/01/does-st-augustine-agree-with-john.html
http://www.willcoxson.net/faith/augprot.htm
Other Protestants see the lie in the “Calvin was just an Augustinian” too: http://justandsinner.blogspot.com/2009/12/can-calvinists-really-be-concidered.html
I also think it’s interesting that any Protestant - of whatever stripe - would say that it was a Church Father who guided their theology and not “sola scriptura”. That pretty much puts the lie to sola scriptura and means that Protestant would be a horrible hypocrite for ever demanding anyone else rely on sola scriptura.
If it was so widely and clearly understood, then why did it need review by a council of bishops? We know that false teachers were already among the flock during Christ’s ministry on earth and immediately following his death and resurrection.
The entire New Testament testifies to the continuing and current apostasy. The Sanhedrin were the ‘Church Fathers’ of their day and they got it utterly wrong to the point of killing their Messiah. Hence the need for the corrective and clarifying epistles.
The author is practicing eisegesis. He has formulated his position and is bending the scriptures to his false belief. Don’t be a Bible-whisperer. Don’t counsel God. That’s a warning for all of us, even the very elect.
http://biblehub.com/mark/13-22.htm
http://biblehub.com/matthew/24-24.htm
Peter still living at this time warns about heresies introduced.
http://biblehub.com/2_peter/2-1.htm
Here’s Paul’s warnings about the immediacy of heresy in the Christian fold:
http://biblehub.com/galatians/2-4.htm
Here’s John: http://biblehub.com/1_john/4-1.htm
Matthew: http://biblehub.com/matthew/7-15.htm
Here’s Paul again:
http://biblehub.com/acts/13-6.htm
Here Paul notes that there will be false Apostles (Special Witnesses of Jesus Christ): http://biblehub.com/2_corinthians/11-13.htm
So the appeal to human authority is already condemned in the very few years right after the Resurrection of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, Son of the Living God. Corruption and apostasy is the steady state of mankind. Always has been and always will be. A century is a lot of time to do mischief, no?
Imagine taking the electorate of 1915 and showing them the America of 2015. They wouldn’t recognize it. It would be abhorrent to them. It’s the devil’s world and it was in New Testament times as well. Don’t be deceived.
Worse is the weak arguments put forth by Richard Bucher. His degree in theology is little more than a long indoctrination in the doctrines of men, mingled with scripture and all the more accursed for it. He doesn’t deserve the title pastor, because a true pastor wouldn’t lead the sheep astray.
Every abortion then would result in a baby unbaptized and doomed to live forever outside God’s presence. It flies in the face of God is love. He cannot be if he so easily turns his children over to the devil. We don’t blame the victim, but seek justice for him. How can Christ’s Atonement be so easily overcome?
The author and his adherents take the untenable position of the pedophile. Every pedophile imputes the sin to the child/infant. It was an act of will that the baby wanted to be molested. It’s the doctrine of Molech and it is despicable and unsupportable from Holy Scripture.
“I’ll call the award, the “John 3:16 Critique Award”
Tell you what. You both can compete for it...
and of course, the anti-baptists folks like yourself would need to need to prove that no children were living in that household”
I feel no need to compete with Iscool, but I’d be content to co-receive such an award.
I have no need to prove none of the household baptisms involved infants because I’m not the one who is trying to make baptism be something other than what the principles of scripture teach: that baptism with water is done in recognition of conversion, and is an outward ceremony demonstrating the Baptism of the Holy Spirit that makes us one with Christ.
Baptism did not appear out of no where. It was practiced by the Jews for many centuries. It was known to the Gentiles as well. No one needed to explain to Cornelius what baptism meant. He did not need classes. He KNEW - because it was a common practice of the time.
Water Baptism marked a change in life, involving repentance and a commitment to a new way of living. It showed the world that the person had changed inside. It was a public statement of repentance and dedication, which an infant was incapable of doing.
At no time does anyone claim water baptism is a requirement for being saved from sin. It is used as a means of SANCTIFICATION - separating us from the world around us. Since the term “salvation” can refer to both justification and sanctification, it can be true that water baptism is used in salvation - not by justifying us or placing us in Christ, which is done by the Holy Spirit and not man - but by a public proclamation of repentance and dedication. It sets us apart from the world around us.
I’m a Baptist. I obviously value baptism. Indeed, I’d be content to baptize someone minutes after their conversion if they understood what it meant (as everyone did in the time of the Apostles).
But there is no requirement for water baptism in order to be joined to Christ and be placed “in Christ”, which is one of the most common expressions in the New Testament and one of the most important.
“In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession, to the praise of His glory.” - Ephesians 1
“Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest. 4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.” - Ephesians 2
IN HIM. IN CHRIST. What does that mean?
Predestination. Predestination (Gk prooizo) means “to decide beforehand” and applies to God’s purposes comprehended in election. Election is God’s choice “in Christ” of a people (the true church) for himself. Predestination comprehends what will happen to God’s people (all genuine believers in Christ).
(1) God predestines his elect to be: (a) called (Rom. 8:30); (b) justified (Ro 3:24, 8:30); (c) glorified (Ro 8:30); (d) conformed to the likeness of his Son (Ro 8:29); (e) holy and blameless (Eph 1:4); (f) adopted as God’s children (1:5); (g) redeemed (1:7); (h) recipients of an inheritance (1:14); (i) for the praise of his glory (Eph 1:2; 1 Pe 2:9); (j) recipients of the Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13; Gal 3:14); and (k) created to do good works (Eph 2:10).
(2) Predestination, like election, refers to the corporate body of Christ (i.e., the true spiritual church), and comprehends individuals only in association with that body through a living faith in Jesus Christ (Eph 1:5, 7, 13; cf. Ac 2:38-41; 16:31).
Summary. Concerning election and predestination, we might use the analogy of a great ship on its way to heaven. The ship (the church) is chosen by God to be his very own vessel. Christ is the Captain and Pilot of this ship. All who desire to be a part of this elect ship and its Captain can do so through a living faith in Christ, by which they come on board the ship. As long as they are on the ship, in company with the ship’s Captain, they are among the elect. If they choose to abandon the ship and Captain, they cease to be part of the elect. Election is always only in union with the Captain and his ship. Predestination tells us about the ship’s destination and what God has prepared for those remaining on it. God invites everyone to come aboard the elect ship through faith in Jesus Christ. [Life in the Spirit Study Bible, pp. 1854-1855]
To be “in Him” is to be on the ship, to be one of the passengers. It means God is taking you home. It is an act of God, and it is the baptism that JESUS does that places us on board the ship: IN HIM.
” “As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. 12 His winnowing fork is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clear His threshing floor; and He will gather His wheat into the barn, but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.” - Matt 3
All will be baptized, either with the Holy Spirit or with Fire. “He will gather His wheat into the barn” - baptized with the Holy Spirit. “Burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire” describes the fate of all the rest.
Very early on, the prophecies of Peter and Paul came true:
“But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves. 2 Many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of the truth will be maligned; 3 and in their greed they will exploit you with false words; their judgment from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep.”
“27 For I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God. 28 Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. 29 I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; 30 and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them.”
The wolves came, and began to teach that they had a special power, and could control God with their rites, including water baptism. It was and is heresy to believe that something a man does to another will save him from sin and obligate God. If water baptism saved us, then we ought to flood the streets and save all the unconverted! But water baptism only has a role for those who have already believed, and no infant is capable of repenting and believing.
A child’s tantrum isn’t a function of conscious sin, but environment. Change the environment and a child needn’t throw a tantrum. Ours never did. We noted that every tantrum came from one or a combination of four things: tiredness, hunger, sickness or frustration. It’s an opportunity to learn for both child and parent not evidence of a sinful nature.
Paul’s particular mission wasn’t to baptize, but he didn’t preach alone. Others could have baptized. You’re relying on a logical fallacy: argumentum ex silentio.
It’s just as easy to argue that baptism was so widely known to and practiced by Christians that it didn’t need to be mentioned. Jesus Christ was baptized to fulfill all righteousness, something his followers were expected to achieve.
The missing element of every Christian faith is continuing revelation. Hence these arguments ad infinitum.
Acts 16:31 They replied, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved--you and your household."
You need to reread Genesis 1-3. I’d say that less than 1 in 1000 Christians understands the implications of the Fall. Your comments seem to indicate a fundamental misunderstanding. Keep in mind that a sin is a transgression is a missing of the mark.
Don’t dodge free_life’s question. Why not baptize a baby just before it’s born?
You’ve gotten the entire Bible wrong, so you might as well just keep going.
Correct. First comes faith in Jesus Christ, then repentance and then baptism. You’re spot on, here.
Those passages are difficult to understand if water baptism is necessary for salvation.
Back up to verse 13 and 14...
1 Corinthians 13 [...] Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? 14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius,
The people were all baptized, just not by Paul. Paul preached about baptism, but he rarely performed the baptisms. Where's the controvery?
“The people were all baptized, just not by Paul. Paul preached about baptism, but he rarely performed the baptisms. Where’s the controvery?”
If water baptism was required for new life, do you think Paul would leave it to others?
Heck, if it is required for new life, what happens to someone who converts, is not baptized immediately, and then dies?
And if it GIVES new life, then why don’t we forcibly baptize everyone? Just kidnap them, baptize them with water, and save them!
“>> and no infant is capable of repenting and believing.<<
Acts 16:31 They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household.”
Household. In context, I think it is safe to read that as anyone in the household who believes can be saved. However, since there is no indication in scripture that anyone is saved without repenting and believing, it is up to those who contradict the plain teaching of scripture to prove the household contained infants...
We already know Jesus said to make disciples of all nations (all ethnic groups). So, actually, you're the one attempting to form a pool of exclusion where none is.
So, having arrived at that basic understanding, when we look at the multiple "whole household" passages, both sides "presume": It's NOT that one side presumes & the other doesn't, both presume.
Secondly, NO age of anybody -- adult, teen, pre-teen, primary, Kind., pre-school, toddler, infant -- is EVER given in Scripture.
If we take your counsel -- and other credobaptists, then for all we know, nobody under 25 was ever baptized because the Bible is silent on age -- and therefore nobody under 25 should ever be baptized.
At the very least, the "Bible-is-silent "age-based" argument infants applies equally across the board to teens & pre-teens. IoW, those age groups then shouldn't be baptized IF that's an argument to be stuck with.
Finally, most credobaptist groups have created "baby dedications." The Bible is silent on ANY age kid-dedications, let alone baby ones...
We would thereby expect credobaptists to show some consistency and staunchly come out against that...but they don't.
Water Baptism marked a change in life, involving repentance and a commitment to a new way of living.
Repentance is an ONGOING part of life for EVERY Christian.
No Christian repents only once -- as if it's a baptism-related checklist thing.
IoW, it's EXPECTED of EVERY Christian to repent as often as necessary in their life.
Nobody is claiming that this expectation will be any different for anybody. Every person baptized as an infant, a toddler, etc...will have this expectation in their life.
People wield the "repentance" argument as if those baptized will never be expected to repent. (Nothing could be further from the truth)
An adult being baptized doesn't repent once-and-for-all time; and neither anybody younger than that.
Tell us where the "belief" verses are about the rest of his household? (Go ahead, list them for us)
Correction, “little ones”. My brain now on EDT.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.