Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: count-your-change

Yes, there is a pattern, that pattern is that the head of the household brought ALL of that household into the faith.

No one has adequately refuted the fact that parents do indeed bring their children to Christ. No one has adequately refuted that parents speak for and act for their children.

Scripture makes a point of saying entire households were baptized. Not, and everyone in the household who believed were baptized. No, entire households. It’s that simple. Households mean families and family means children and there is nothing that says that anyone was excluded because of age.


797 posted on 06/14/2012 8:41:20 AM PDT by Jvette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 786 | View Replies ]


To: Jvette

Bless ya, Jvette, but this is a hopeless fight, even by religious forum standards. If a person looks at a baby being baptized as a Christian, with parents and others taking responsibility to raise that child under Christ’s guidance, and they see this all as a bad thing, then they are clueless and faithless to the point that a post or two will not allow them to suddenly see The Light.


798 posted on 06/14/2012 8:52:26 AM PDT by Hegewisch Dupa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 797 | View Replies ]

To: Jvette

The pattern was those baptized had to be at least old enough to be disciples. That would exclude infants and very young children.

Jesus set the pattern. Make disciples, baptize, instruct them in Jesus’ commandments.

The use of the term “household” says nothing of the ages of any children, if present.

“No one has adequately refuted the fact that parents do indeed bring their children to Christ. No one has adequately refuted that parents speak for and act for their children.”

Nor is there any need to. Very young children, too young to be made a disciple, would not be baptized, being holy by virtue of the merit of a believing parent per Paul.

“Households mean families and family means children and there is nothing that says that anyone was excluded because of age.”

Of course there is! The one being baptized had to become a disciple first and be capable of being taught Jesus’ commandments afterward. And that is what Jesus said at Matt. 28.


800 posted on 06/14/2012 9:11:05 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 797 | View Replies ]

To: Jvette
Scripture makes a point of saying entire households were baptized. Not, and everyone in the household who believed were baptized.

Yes, there is a pattern, that pattern is that the head of the household brought ALL of that household into the faith.

Act 16:31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

Act 16:34 And when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house.

Now this is getting a little old...You post false doctrine about the scriptures...I (we) correct you with the scripture itself...And then you pretend that we never posted the scripture...And continue on with your false doctrine and misclaims of what the scripture does and doesn't say...What's up with that???

808 posted on 06/14/2012 12:41:27 PM PDT by Iscool (You mess with me, you mess with the WHOLE trailerpark...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 797 | 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