“Your post talked about children. Are you saying that Lydia didn’t have children in her household?”
And what does this have to do with proving by scripture that babies are sprinkled by water to receive the Holy Spirit? If there was a baby in the household, there is no reason to think it was baptized, as baptism was something that only occurred after a confession of Christ as Lord and Savior. It was the first act of obedience, but a baby cannot even make the first step. There are no scriptures which justify the idea that we are cleansed of sin by being baptized or sprinkled with water.
You are asking me to comment on babies being baptized which was never recorded in the scripture. How about you address MY scriptures and make a biblical case for child baptism?
Read your bible. Her WHOLE household was baptized.
you say “ it was a first act of obedience......”
REALLY????
please show me one verse in the Bible that says baptism is a first act of obedience?
there’s a reason no one believed this 16th century tradition of men before the 16th century, it’s not Biblical.
was Saul ( Paul ) told to be baptized as a first act of obedience? as Paul himself recounts in Acts 22:16 he was told by Ananias “ and now why do you wait? rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name”
hmmm, kinda sounds like baptismal regeneration. maybe that’s why Christians have believed in baptismal regeneration for 2,000 years.
maybe Paul had it wrong, so let’s see if Peter said to be baptized as a first act of obedience - Acts 2:38 “ repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ FOR THE FORGIVENESS OF YOUR SINS AND YOU WILL RECEIVE THE GIFT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT”
hmm, again kinda sounds like baptismal regeneration and no mention of a first act of obedience.
well, maybe both Peter and Paul didn’t understand what baptism is for, that’s possible correct? let’s see what Philip told the eunuch in Acts 8. after preaching Jesus Christ to him AND BEFORE THE EUNUCH EXPRESSED FAITH IN CHRIST, the eunuch was anxious to be baptized? WHY? how could he have wanted to be obedient when he hadn’t yet expressed faith in Christ? obviously, Philip preached to him the same message Peter did in Acts 2, that he must be baptized for the remission of his sins. after the eunuch said that he believed Jesus Christ is the Son of God, Philip baptized him. NO MENTION OF ANY FIRST ACT OF OBEDIENCE.
three strikes and you are out.
finally, 1 Peter 3:21 says “ Baptism, which corresponds to this, NOW SAVES YOU, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Again, no mention of a first act of obedience.
once the Baptists departed from the historical, orthodox belief in baptismal regeneration, they had to come up with some reason Jesus commanded baptism in Matthew 28:19. they couldn’t come up with any Biblical reason, so they surmised Jesus was concerned about his followers being obedient, so He set up baptism as a test or a first act of obedience. THIS BELIEF IS A 16TH CENTURY TRADITION OF MEN .
if any still doubt baptismal regeneration, the Holy Spirit ( thru Paul ) clearly states in Titus 3:5 “ he saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness , but in virtue of his own mercy, BY THE WASHING OF REGENERATION AND RENEWAL IN THE HOLY SPIRIT”