• Amused
  • Angry
  • Annoyed
  • Awesome
  • Bemused
  • Cool
  • Crazy
  • Crying
  • Depressed
  • Down
  • Embarrassed
  • Enraged
  • Friendly
  • Geeky
  • Grumpy
  • Happy
  • Hungry
  • Innocent
  • Meh
  • Piratey
  • Poorly
  • Sad
  • Secret
  • Shy
  • Sneaky
  • Tired
  • Page 1 of 33 12311 ... LastLast
    Results 1 to 10 of 324

    Christian Theology - Thread: If paedobaptism were taught...

    1. #1
      MennoSota is offline Bronze Member
      Mood:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Sep 2017
      Posts
      7,021
      CH Cash
      29,449
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      24,532
      Level
      43
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      24.24%
      Rep Power
      0

      If paedobaptism were taught...

      ...in the Bible, I would believe it.
      However, attempting to imply infants into the word "household" does not make paedobaptism a truth in scripture. It makes paedobaptism a feeling someone has about the word "household."
      Someone mentioned that they don't let feelings determine their belief, but they let truth determine their belief.
      How does a practice never endorsed in the Bible, but felt to be possible, somehow get taught as truth?

    2. #2
      Lämmchen's Avatar
      Lämmchen is offline God's Lil Lamb
      Administrator
      Supporting Member
      Community Team
      52
      Married
      Gloria In Excelsis Deo
       
      Mood:
      Cool
       
      Join Date
      Jun 2015
      Posts
      20,083
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      215,344
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (399,316 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      238,119
      Level
      98
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      31.54%
      Rep Power
      977
      Jesus told the disciples to go and baptize ALL nations. It's not just about having babies included in households but by Jesus' authority, babies are to be baptized because they too are a part of all nations.

      Acts 2:39 says the promise is for you and your children. That's not a feeling.
      "Christianity does not require more work but more trust." Pr. Jonathan Fisk
      "Bearing fruit does not make you a branch. A branch is a branch because it grows from the vine." Pr. Jonathan Fisk
      "A Christian's life is not defined by what the Christian does. It is defined by Christ and what He has done for us." Pr. Rolf David Preus

    3. Likes Josiah, zecryphon_nomdiv liked this post
    4. #3
      Albion's Avatar
      Albion is offline Expert Member
      Married
      Mood:
      Friendly
       
      Join Date
      Sep 2017
      Posts
      3,520
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      18,100
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      23,282
      Level
      42
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      33.86%
      Rep Power
      691
      Quote Originally Posted by MennoSota View Post
      ...in the Bible, I would believe it.
      However, attempting to imply infants into the word "household" does not make paedobaptism a truth in scripture. It makes paedobaptism a feeling someone has about the word "household."
      That's basically it. However, the possibility of households not including children is so unrealistic that my conclusion is the opposite of yours--and mine, by the way, is also what the church has believed, whether we are speaking of Catholics, Orthodox Christians, or Protestants.

      What's more, there is no other scriptural evidence that weighs against this conclusion. All the talk about there supposedly having to be a profession of faith prior to baptism, etc. etc. is even more speculative or hypothetical than the idea of households with children!

      One more thing. With most Baptists and Anabaptists it seems to be the case that first they reject the idea of sacraments as sacraments, i.e. as something instituted by the Lord for our benefit. So then they posit as true a consequence of that thinking. That is to say, seeing the sacraments as mere ordinances that convey nothing to us from God, they wind up insisting that these are all about our eligibility, our worthiness, to perform them for the Lord.



      .
      Last edited by Albion; 05-22-2019 at 08:39 AM.

    5. Likes Josiah liked this post
    6. #4
      Josiah's Avatar
      Josiah is offline Bronze Member
      Married
      Mood:
      Happy
       
      Join Date
      Jun 2015
      Posts
      8,660
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      121,451
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      88,051
      Level
      70
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      41.6%
      Rep Power
      995
      @MennoSota


      Quote Originally Posted by MennoSota View Post
      ...in the Bible, I would believe it.

      Including those under 13 (and not dogmaticallty forbidding them) is no more taught in the Bible than including blonde haired people or fat people.

      The ministry of baptism has no prohibitions stated in the Bible about age, race, gender, language, skin color, shoe size, weight, IQ, financial status or nationality.

      IF some dude 1500 years after Jesus suddenly, out of the blue, invented a DOGMA that it is heretical, prohibited, banned, forbidden to baptize anyone over 6 feet, 3 inches tall - I'm sure you'd insist, "Where does the Bible state THAT? And how come NO ONE saw that or did that for 1500 years"?




      .
      Last edited by Josiah; 05-22-2019 at 09:41 AM.
      We are justified by works - just not our own.

    7. #5
      Lämmchen's Avatar
      Lämmchen is offline God's Lil Lamb
      Administrator
      Supporting Member
      Community Team
      52
      Married
      Gloria In Excelsis Deo
       
      Mood:
      Cool
       
      Join Date
      Jun 2015
      Posts
      20,083
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      215,344
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (399,316 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      238,119
      Level
      98
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      31.54%
      Rep Power
      977
      Quote Originally Posted by Albion View Post
      That's basically it. However, the possibility of households not including children is so unrealistic that my conclusion is the opposite of yours--and mine, by the way, is also what the church has believed, whether we are speaking of Catholics, Orthodox Christians, or Protestants.

      Now why would tradition for over a thousand year think that households included children for baptism until the 1500s? The answer would lie in how the Israelites/Jews thought of children being a blessing from God. With very few exceptions they had large households and those households included their servants and their children as well. It's not something we in the modern times relate to because we're so worried about being able to afford children (which is probably the number one or number two reason for abortion in the United States) so we don't understand how God's people in the bible viewed children. The family was extremely important to them which is why the need for the Promise to include their children.
      "Christianity does not require more work but more trust." Pr. Jonathan Fisk
      "Bearing fruit does not make you a branch. A branch is a branch because it grows from the vine." Pr. Jonathan Fisk
      "A Christian's life is not defined by what the Christian does. It is defined by Christ and what He has done for us." Pr. Rolf David Preus

    8. #6
      Albion's Avatar
      Albion is offline Expert Member
      Married
      Mood:
      Friendly
       
      Join Date
      Sep 2017
      Posts
      3,520
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      18,100
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      23,282
      Level
      42
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      33.86%
      Rep Power
      691
      Quote Originally Posted by Lämmchen View Post
      Now why would tradition for over a thousand year think that households included children for baptism until the 1500s?
      A very good question.

      With very few exceptions they had large households and those households included their servants and their children as well. It's not something we in the modern times relate to because we're so worried about being able to afford children (which is probably the number one or number two reason for abortion in the United States) so we don't understand how God's people in the bible viewed children. The family was extremely important to them which is why the need for the Promise to include their children.
      Certainly so. You notice that these facts never are entertained by the No Infants! folks. They simply want to say that there is no way to be sure that all the households referred to in Scripture were normal ones. So, in consequence, we are expected to conclude instead that they were not. (?)

    9. #7
      MennoSota is offline Bronze Member
      Mood:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Sep 2017
      Posts
      7,021
      CH Cash
      29,449
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      24,532
      Level
      43
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      24.24%
      Rep Power
      0
      Quote Originally Posted by Albion View Post
      That's basically it. However, the possibility of households not including children is so unrealistic that my conclusion is the opposite of yours--and mine, by the way, is also what the church has believed, whether we are speaking of Catholics, Orthodox Christians, or Protestants.

      What's more, there is no other scriptural evidence that weighs against this conclusion. All the talk about there supposedly having to be a profession of faith prior to baptism, etc. etc. is even more speculative or hypothetical than the idea of households with children!

      One more thing. With most Baptists and Anabaptists it seems to be the case that first they reject the idea of sacraments as sacraments, i.e. as something instituted by the Lord for our benefit. So then they posit as true a consequence of that thinking. That is to say, seeing the sacraments as mere ordinances that convey nothing to us from God, they wind up insisting that these are all about our eligibility, our worthiness, to perform them for the Lord.



      .
      I have a household with cognizant children who no longer need a wet nurse. It's no so hard to imagine now is it?!
      As to sacraments, I see none in the Bible. I see two ordinances, commandments, for the church.
      1) Have the Lord's supper in remembrance of Christ's sacrificial atonement for his children.
      2) Baptize disciples who have come to faith in Christ.
      Last edited by MennoSota; 05-22-2019 at 09:42 AM.

    10. #8
      Albion's Avatar
      Albion is offline Expert Member
      Married
      Mood:
      Friendly
       
      Join Date
      Sep 2017
      Posts
      3,520
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      18,100
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      23,282
      Level
      42
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      33.86%
      Rep Power
      691
      Quote Originally Posted by MennoSota View Post
      I have a household with cognizant children who no longer need a wet nurse. It's no so hard to imagine now is it?!
      I take it that you found them as teenagers under a cabbage leaf, then. Otherwise, they would have been infants and then preschoolers in your household.

    11. #9
      Josiah's Avatar
      Josiah is offline Bronze Member
      Married
      Mood:
      Happy
       
      Join Date
      Jun 2015
      Posts
      8,660
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      121,451
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      88,051
      Level
      70
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      41.6%
      Rep Power
      995
      NO traditional/orthodox Christian is founding a dogma on the "speculation" that everyone in the households in Acts 16:15 and Acts 16:33 were under the age 13, it was that Anabaptist in the late 16th Century who invented a dogma insisting that all of them were over that age.


      The ministry of baptism has no prohibitions stated in the Bible about age, race, gender, language, skin color, shoe size, weight, IQ, financial status, hair length or nationality.

      IF some dude 1500 years after Jesus suddenly, out of the blue, invented a DOGMA that it is heretical, prohibited, banned, forbidden to baptize anyone over 6 feet, 3 inches tall - I'm sure Baptists would insist, "Where does the Bible state THAT? And how come NO ONE saw that or did that for 1500 years"?

      IF some dude, 1900 years after Jesus, suddenly, out of the blue, invented a DOGMA that Black people are excluded from the Commandment,"Thou Shalt Not Kill", I'm sure most Baptists would insist, "Where does the Bible state THAT? And how come not one Christian on Earth ever saw that for 1900 years?
      We are justified by works - just not our own.

    12. #10
      MennoSota is offline Bronze Member
      Mood:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Sep 2017
      Posts
      7,021
      CH Cash
      29,449
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      24,532
      Level
      43
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      24.24%
      Rep Power
      0
      Quote Originally Posted by Josiah View Post
      @MennoSota





      Including those under 13 (and not dogmaticallty forbidding them) is no more taught in the Bible than including blonde haired people or fat people.

      The ministry of baptism has no prohibitions stated in the Bible about age, race, gender, language, skin color, shoe size, weight, IQ, financial status or nationality.

      IF some dude 1500 years after Jesus suddenly, out of the blue, invented a DOGMA that it is heretical, prohibited, banned, forbidden to baptize anyone over 6 feet, 3 inches tall - I'm sure you'd insist, "Where does the Bible state THAT? And how come NO ONE saw that or did that for 1500 years"?




      .
      Where did I set 13 as an age?
      Would you baptize an unrepentant 13 year old? 20 year old? 30 year old? 60 year old? 8 year old?
      Why does your church actually baptize unrepentant people, Josiah? Do you have a biblical reason for baptizing unrepentant people?

    Bookmarks

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •