Posted on 05/17/2006 9:08:53 PM PDT by Full Court
That is just too funny! Some geek with a webpage tries to condemn a well received history book!
I appreciate your post. Would you please provede me with its historical source and documentation. Thank You.
The covenant God established with Abraham (Abram at the time) had nothing to do with whether anyone believed or not. [Genesis 17:10] "This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised." Circumcision was not a "Jewish" thing....they did not appear in scripture until the tribe of Judah came into existence. All the other eleven tribes of Israel circumcised their eight year old sons also. Jacob, later named Israel and the father of Judah and the other "Israelites", was the grandson of Abraham. Verse 11 says it will be a sign of the covenant between God and his people.
Jesus was baptized as an adult and there are no biblical examples of infant baptism. [Proverbs 22:6] Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it. Baptism, as by Christ's example, should be a voluntary endeavor by each of us.
Should of course say....eight "DAY" old sons.
Thanks for that information.
There is evidence throughout scripture that both were practice. Quite frankly, I'm not yet convinced in infant baptism which keeps me on the Reformed Baptist side. However, Dr. E should not lose hope as I promise to research this a bit more when I have the opportunity.
What, Dr. E??? In so short of time do you think to make me a Presbyterian? :O)
LOL.
If it was good enough for Calvin, it's good enough for me. 8~)
The Reformed do not believe in "baptismal regeneration," whether it's in infants or adults.
You're arguing something we don't believe.
Snickers rot your teeth, and then your criticism will really be toothless.
So are you saying baptism regenerates? Does baptism confer salvation?
I thought we were through with this conversation.
It does matter to me what you Catholics believe or practice.
Baptize Babies, Pray to Mary, Pay your way out of Purgatory,
Confess your sins to a sinful man........go for it...
have at it.
Now please end this conversation.
And those are getting very hard to find!
No, we can tell by the fruit a Bible bears if God has blessed it or not.
Luther's Bible was blessed of God.
Tyndales was blessed by God.
The Geneva was blessed by God.
The King James (God's final English translation) was blessed by God.
All other English translation since 1611 are either from a corrupt dead text (Alexandrian) or made by those who wanted to corrupt the correct readings of the King James by pretending to be a King James (NKJ)
None of these has borne any fruit.
John 21:25 " Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down....".
Sort of implies that everything wasn't written down, doesn't it.
2 Tim 2:2 "And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses, entrust to reliable men who will also be qualified to teach others."
Seems like once again, things are dependent on the spoken word, doesn't it.
2 Thess. 2:15 "So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter."
How much more plainly could it possibly be stated that both the written Word (Bible) AND the spoken Word (Sacred Tradition) are both necessary.
"As I said I will stick with the Bible you can stay with man's traditions if you like.
Ah, but these are not MAN's traditions--they are those established by God.
And unfortunately, as shown above, you are the one not "sticking with the Bible".
"I would prefer not discuss this subject with you any further."
My, what an open-minded attitude. I guess you aren't interested in finding out what God's truth actually is.
Nice try, but it's not enough.
Circumcision was a "Jewish" thing since it was required of Jews. Fussing over whether or not it should be called a Jewish thing because the term did not yet exist is silly.
Also, Jesus was baptized by the Baptist. He couldn't be baptized until the Baptist began his ministry. That was when He and the Baptist were both well into adulthood. Do not assume that because Jesus was baptized as an adult that He was indicating everyone must be the same age as He was to be properly baptized. That would be a logical fallacy to say the least.
Also, if you are going to train up a child as a Christian then start with what opens his soul to grace. That's baptism.
So you read only the 1611 KJV?
I ask because almost no one does. Most people who read the KJV actually read a version of it from the second half of the 18th century and it is significantly different than the 1611 edition.
Wouldn't that later edition be one of these as you describe it: "All other English translation since 1611 are either from a corrupt dead text (Alexandrian) or made by those who wanted to corrupt the correct readings of the King James by pretending to be a King James (NKJ)"?
You wrote:
"And before you say anything
does= Doesn't."
Only in your world it does.
"And I did not bother to read your LONG
post because I really don't care what
your sacred traditions say about Baptizing
babies."
Except there were Bible verses in there too. I guess you're throwing out the baby with the baptismal water so to speak?
Look, I realize that you're a Protestant and therefore not really interested in learning about Christianity. You make your own choices and live with them too.
I agree with Dr. E. One is not regenerated by baptism.
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.