Baptism in Jesus’ name, Trinitarian style.

[Josiah]

Did you know Luther preferred Baptism by immersion

1. Who cares?

2. He never said this is the required mode, he never said that Scripture mandates this.

 

[Josiah]

You cannot make one verse that isn't even about children be your "evidence."

Show us anywhere that Jesus said "Please don't let the little children come to me" or anywhere in the NT where an age limit is set for baptismal candidates or explain how the baptism of entire households on the affirmation of the head of the household, as recorded in Scripture, means that these family members were barred from baptism rather than admitted to it.

If you cannot do any of that, you don't have a case, period.

ALL the prohibitions and limits that Anabaptists put on Scripture are entirely missing in Scripture (and in 1500 years of Christianity). They made them up.

"Who believes and is baptized" excludes infants.

Just underline the words "Except infants" in the verse. Or admit you are wrong, the verse never says that. You do.




.

 

[1689Dave]

You cannot make one verse that doesn't even take up the question we are discussing be your "evidence."

Show us anywhere that Jesus said "Please don't let the little children come to me" or anywhere in the NT where an age limit is set for baptismal candidates or explain how the baptism of entire households on the affirmation of the head of the household, as recorded in Scripture, means that these family members were barred from baptism rather than admitted to it.

If you cannot do any of that, you don't have a case, period.

Any baby that cannot believe but has a parent take them to a Catholic modeled Church for sprinkling will be saved. "The Now Version"

 

[1689Dave]

1. Who cares?

2. He never said this is the required mode, he never said that Scripture mandates this.

But scripture never mentions your method. It does His.

 

[Albion]

ALL the prohibitions and limits that Anabaptists put on Scripture are entirely missing in Scripture (and in 1500 years of Christianity). They made them up.
.

What's more, they aren't exactly certain what it is that they made up!

Some congregations of the Anabaptist following insist that only a believer, i.e. an adult who can understand the meaning of accepting Christ and make an adult confession of faith, becomes eligible for baptism.

Yet others say being a young teen is good enough.

And others will baptize 8 or 9 year olds, claiming that these indeed DO understand the commitment as an adult would. Really? I'm sure that any reasonable person would NOT agree that an 8 year old can, in fact, understand all of this as an adult would. Oh yes, he can say "Jesus loves me" and etc., but that is about it.

And to top that off, most of these congregations permit and even encourage re-baptisms, and perhaps several of them, which has no Scriptural basis whatsoever.

 

[1689Dave]

What's more, they aren't exactly certain what it is that they made up!

Some congregations of the Anabaptist following insist that only a believer, i.e. an adult who can understand the meaning of accepting Christ and make an adult confession of faith, becomes eligible for baptism.

Yet others say being a young teen is good enough.

And others will baptize 8 or 9 year olds, claiming that these indeed DO understand the commitment as an adult would. Really? I'm sure that any reasonable person would NOT agree that an 8 year old can, in fact, understand all of this as an adult would. Oh yes, he can say "Jesus loves me" and etc., but that is about it.

And to top that off, most of these congregations permit and even encourage re-baptisms, and perhaps several of them, which has no Scriptural basis whatsoever.

The Anabaptists just like everyone else under Antichrist's rule only came so far and had some quirks in their understanding.

 

[Albion]

Any baby that cannot believe but has a parent take them to a Catholic modeled Church for sprinkling will be saved. "The Now Version"

I'll take that reply as conceding that you could not give us an answer to even one of the three points I said might tend to prove your case:

1) Show us anywhere that Jesus said "Please don't let the little children come to me" or 2) anywhere in the NT where an age limit is set for baptismal candidates or 3) explain how the baptism of entire households on the affirmation of the head of the household, as recorded in Scripture, means that these family members were barred from baptism rather than admitted to it.

 

[Albion]

The Anabaptists just like everyone else under Antichrist's rule only came so far and had some quirks in their understanding.

Are there any of them that you don't affirm yourself? You seem to promote all the key ones of them in your posts.

 

[1689Dave]

I'll take reply as conceding that you could not give us an answer to even one of the three points I said might tend to prove your case:

No, it shows how infant "baptism" contradicts scripture.

 

[Albion]

No, it shows how infant "baptism" contradicts scripture.

Where does it do that? You give us a Bible passage that doesn't deal with children and baptism and then you came up empty on all the other ways I suggested by which you could prove your case.

 

[1689Dave]

Are there any of them that you don't affirm yourself? You seem to promote all the key ones of them in your posts.

The Anabaptists are also Pelagian in their views. The only group, located in Canada I ever heard mention of is Calvinist.

 

[1689Dave]

Where does it do that? You give us a Bible passage that doesn't deal with children and baptism and then you came up empty on all the other ways I suggested by which you could prove your case.

Prove it to me. Caugh it up.

 

[Albion]

Soooo...disavowing Pelagianism, which almost every Christian denomination does, is the sole way you differ from the Anabaptists?

 

[Albion]

Prove it to me. Caugh it up.

Prove to you that you could answer none of the three points I put to you as possibly tending to prove your argument?? I listed them for you in two different posts, most recently #127, and you gave no answer at all.

And if you cannot do that, you don't have anything but a single Bible passage that doesn't deal with children anyway!

 

[Lamb]

Wow, so there are quite a few tangents in this thread. I thought it was about baptizing in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost? Now we have arguments about immersion or infant baptism...is that because the OP discovered he can't back up his claim?

 

[MoreCoffee]

…” of this sacrament, the act of baptism must be expressed, and the matter and form be united to leave no doubt of the meaning of the ceremony. In addition to the necessary word “baptize”, or its equivalent, it is also obligatory to mention the separate persons of the Holy Trinity.”

The result? The Pope undermined Christ’s intention and the Apostles’ authority and gave it to himself. Practically All of creedal Christendom follows the Catholic formula instead of scripture on the matter.

Uh huh, that darned naughty Pope (which one by the way?) allegedly thwarted Jesus Christ and did some terrible thing by baptising in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, just as the Lord, Jesus Christ commanded in Matthew 28:1`9.

 

[1689Dave]

Uh huh, that darned naughty Pope (which one by the way?) allegedly thwarted Jesus Christ and did some terrible thing by baptising in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, just as the Lord, Jesus Christ commanded in Matthew 28:1`9.

That's right. Did you know the Reformation era Creeds say the Papacy is the Antichrist?

 

[MoreCoffee]

That's right. Did you know the Reformation era Creeds say the Papacy is the Antichrist?

Did you know that the scriptures say that Saint Peter holds the keys of the Kingdom of God?

What is your intention with the remark about reformation confessions and the anti-Christ? Is this something which you approve?

 

[1689Dave]

Did you know that the scriptures say that Saint Peter holds the keys of the Kingdom of God?

What is your intention with the remark about reformation confessions and the anti-Christ? Is this something which you approve?

It means I cannot take anything coming from that source too seriously.

 

[MoreCoffee]

It means I cannot take anything coming from that source too seriously.

Oh, that's okay - I never take the 1689 Baptist confession too seriously either.