[Colofornian]

I don’t read the early church “fathers” much. 254 AD is middle of 3rd century. And whatever decision they made, it’s still unscriptural.

This wasn't a situation where infant baptism wasn't practiced and they "decided" to implement it in 254 A.D.

It was a situation where there WAS NO controversy in the Church about its open practice in the first, second, and third centuries! No controversy at all, and not even raised as an "issue" until mid-3rd century.

And when the 66 existing bishops reviewed it...men who were born within just over a 100 years from when the apostle John died, they simply affirmed its already existing widespread practice!

[imardmd1]

The answer is — no. Show me something a bit earlier, before the Platonists messed up the theology. Better yet, show me where an infant was a willing, rational disciple. And who is called an infant in those days? A newly born? How old?
I’m not going to debate this further with anyone who thinks that babies are held accountable for their original sin, as these bishops must have thought to be at all logical.

[MeneMeneTekelUpharsin]

And when the 66 existing bishops reviewed it...men who were born within just over a 100 years from when the apostle John died, they simply affirmed its already existing widespread practice!

You are a false teacher in a total sort of way.

[MeneMeneTekelUpharsin]

This wasn't a situation where infant baptism wasn't practiced and they "decided" to implement it in 254 A.D.

Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.

[1010RD]

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.