Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Dr. Eckleburg; wmfights
But it appears that the adult baptizer believes this grace through faith is imparted at baptism because it is a requirement that the person "believes." 1000silverlings said exactly that. He said those who had been baptized as children weren't actually baptized at all. As if those who are among the elect aren't really among the elect if they're not baptized. Which is false. God named His family from the beginning.

lol, um, no. I said it is an act of obedience. Scripture commands us to be baptized. Nowhere does it command us to sprinkle children.

Are you going to tell me that every child that has been "baptized" is elect?

I said we have nations of unbelievers who were "baptized" at birth. Many have never made a confession of faith and never will. I do hold that they were never baptized in the first place though, as they should be old enough to know what it is and partake in it.

791 posted on 03/03/2008 3:27:14 PM PST by 1000 silverlings (Everything that deceives also enchants: Plato)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 689 | View Replies ]


To: 1000 silverlings; wmfights; the_conscience; Gamecock
Are you going to tell me that every child that has been "baptized" is elect?

Nope. Only God knows the names of the elect. But we have His promise that our children are included in the new covenant. Was the promise made to us and our children, or not?

I said we have nations of unbelievers who were "baptized" at birth. Many have never made a confession of faith and never will. I do hold that they were never baptized in the first place though, as they should be old enough to know what it is and partake in it.

And that's where we differ. Cognition is not what makes one saved. That's an answer from Rome -- "Acquiesce to this and then you are saved." Christ's atonement is what has saved us. Which is why children were included in the promise in the first place.

Our love doesn't save us; His love saves us. And His love came first.

Were the children of believers under the old covenant included in the promise? Yes.

Were believers under the old covenant told to recognize their children as members of God's promise by circumcision? Yes.

Likewise, we under the new and better covenant are to bring our children to Him to be recognized as His possession, given to us by God for His safe-keeping.

Here's a great little Q and A from a former Baptist, now baby-splashing Presbyterian who offers an excellent defense of infant baptism which I don't think can be easily refuted...

INFANT BAPTISM

792 posted on 03/03/2008 5:24:53 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 791 | View Replies ]

To: 1000 silverlings; wmfights; the_conscience; Gamecock
Are you going to tell me that every child that has been "baptized" is elect?

Nope. Only God knows the names of the elect. But we have His promise that our children are included in the new covenant. Was the promise made to us and our children, or not?

I said we have nations of unbelievers who were "baptized" at birth. Many have never made a confession of faith and never will. I do hold that they were never baptized in the first place though, as they should be old enough to know what it is and partake in it.

And that's where we differ. Cognition is not what makes one saved. That's an answer from Rome -- "Acquiesce to this and then you are saved." Christ's atonement is what has saved us. Which is why children were included in the promise in the first place.

Our love doesn't save us; His love saves us. And His love came first.

Were the children of believers under the old covenant included in the promise? Yes.

Were believers under the old covenant told to recognize their children as members of God's promise by circumcision? Yes.

Likewise, we under the new and better covenant are to bring our children to Him to be recognized as His possession, given to us by God for His safe-keeping.

Here's a great little Q and A from a former Baptist, now baby-splashing Presbyterian who offers an excellent defense of infant baptism which I don't think can be easily refuted...

INFANT BAPTISM

793 posted on 03/03/2008 5:25:04 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 791 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson