Credobaptists - What about those with disabilities and baptism?

[Lamb]

Credobaptists believe in a believers baptism and are against infants being baptized. What about the people with severe disabilities? They never receive baptism that Jesus told the disciples to go out and baptize all nations?

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

As devil's advocate, I'd say that God recognizes their inability to make a 'choice'. In that state, he freely accepts them as they are and extends his grace to them.
But then it reminds me of the case of Terry Schiavo where there were Pastors protesting about not being able to bring her communion in the hospital. By all accounts she was brain dead. Why try to offer something "symbolic" to one who cannot understand anyway?

 

[atpollard]

Credobaptists believe in a believers baptism and are against infants being baptized. What about the people with severe disabilities? They never receive baptism that Jesus told the disciples to go out and baptize all nations?

Says who?

 

[Josiah]

Credobaptists believe in a believers baptism and are against infants being baptized. What about the people with severe disabilities? They never receive baptism that Jesus told the disciples to go out and baptize all nations?

Well, maybe Jesus MEANT to say, "Go and baptize and teach but NOT those under the age of X (and I won't tell you what age that is) and NOT those with an IQ under X (and I won't tell you what IQ that is) and NOT those who have not yet repented of their sins, chose Me, said the Sinners Prayer, and given adequate witness of their having chosen Me."

 

[Josiah]

I think it's possible to say we cannot DOGMATICALLY state that obedience to His Great Commission ("Go.... Baptize.... Teach.....") means that ALWAYS the receiver will gain every divine blessing (including justification/faith/life). But I find it silly to argue THEREFORE we should withhold it wherever Jesus SHOULD have said to do so (but didn't).

I just can't find all these enormous Divine limitations and prohibitations and all the shouts about what God CANNOT do .... all the "BUT NOT.... those under X, those under the IQ of X, those who have not attained the educational level of X, those who have not chanted the Sinner's Prayer." I just don't see the verses that say, "God CANNOT bless X." "God is rendered impotent by X."

I CAN understand those who say, "We do this - even though we aren't sure anything will result." I have a much, much harder time with those who insist, "We won't do this because God is impotent to bless the recipient." I have a problem too with those - posting on the internet - shouting "We can't do anything unless we see it specifically practiced in the examples of the Bible."

And ironically, those filled with all these prohibitions, all these limitations, all these things God CANNOT do - often come from people who SAY much about the Soverignty of God and that God does whatever He chooses to. I find people who pride themselves on being monergist who turn 180 degrees on ONE topic: Baptism.

 

[atpollard]

Acts 2:38 NASB Peter said to them, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Acts 10:43-47 NASB
43 Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.”
44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message. 45 All the circumcised believers who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. 46 For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered, 47 “Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?”

So what DOES the Bible say about baptism?

 

[Josiah]

Acts 2:38 NASB Peter said to them, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

1. As we all know, the koine Greek word "kai" (and) is the most general connective word there is, it simply and only connects things, it by no means whatsoever mandates or remotely implies order. Not in Greek (nor in English). "I got up this morning and visited the bathroom and made the coffee and pet the bunny and made some toast." That's all 100% true and accurate. The grammar is 100% right. But I didn't do them in that order.

2. You evidently looked around to find an ENGLISH translation that added a comma. It's not in the original.

So what DOES the Bible say about baptism?

Nothing about how there is ONE Baptism and it's dry as a desert, with NO water at all, just the "POURING" (baptism) of the Holy Spirit.

Nothing about "Go.... Baptize..... Teach.... but thou art forbidden to do so to any under the age of X (and you have to guess what age that is)."

Nothing about "Go.... Baptize.... Teach.... but ONLY if said receiver hath FIRST chosen Jesus as their Savior, correctly chanted the Sinner's Prayer and given adequate public testimony of their choice in this matter."

Nothing about "Go.... Baptize.... Teach.... but the baptism part is a total waste of time and water because it can't do nothing (not even wash them cuz it's dry and void of water)."

Oh, we do have this one: "Baptism now saves you" but I know how Anabaptists spin that 180 degrees, no need to repeat that.



- Josiah

 

[Lamb]

Is God's word so ineffective in working faith that the severely disabled are limited from receiving baptism because they cannot make a profession of faith? How does that coincide with Jesus telling disciples to baptize all nations?

 

[atpollard]

Is God's word so ineffective in working faith that the severely disabled are limited from receiving baptism because they cannot make a profession of faith? How does that coincide with Jesus telling disciples to baptize all nations?

You know the disciples that Jesus commanded that to did not baptized ALL nations. There were many nations that had not heard the gospel when the last disciple died. Not only that, but among the nations where they did baptize, like Ancient Greece, not every single person was baptized. I suspect that it has nothing to do with the command to baptize all nations.

We are not saved by God’s written word, it is useful, but ultimately it is the Living Word of God that saves. There are no limits that I am aware of on God’s ability to save.

 

[atpollard]

Acts 2:38 NASB Peter said to them, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Acts 10:43-47 NASB
43 Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.”
44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message. 45 All the circumcised believers who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. 46 For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered, 47 “Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?”

So what DOES the Bible say about baptism?

1. As we all know, the koine Greek word "kai" (and) is the most general connective word there is, it simply and only connects things, it by no means whatsoever mandates or remotely implies order. Not in Greek (nor in English). "I got up this morning and visited the bathroom and made the coffee and pet the bunny and made some toast." That's all 100% true and accurate. The grammar is 100% right. But I didn't do them in that order.

That’s all baptists ask ... that ‘baptized’ and ‘believe’ and ‘repent’ ALL happen together (in any order) just like Scripture requests.

2. You evidently looked around to find an ENGLISH translation that added a comma. It's not in the original.

Naw, NASB is my ‘go to’ translation because it is a bit closer to a literal word for word translation than some others. The comma makes no difference to MY point, which was what things scripture includes with baptism. (repent and believe)



Nothing about how there is ONE Baptism and it's dry as a desert, with NO water at all, just the "POURING" (baptism) of the Holy Spirit.

So are you saying there is no baptism of the Spirit?

Nothing about "Go.... Baptize..... Teach.... but thou art forbidden to do so to any under the age of X (and you have to guess what age that is)."

Good thing I don’t teach that. However scripture does say repent and believe and be baptized all go together, so I don’t tell people to go and do one without the other.

Nothing about "Go.... Baptize.... Teach.... but ONLY if said receiver hath FIRST chosen Jesus as their Savior, correctly chanted the Sinner's Prayer and given adequate public testimony of their choice in this matter."

Then it is a good thing I don’t teach that either.

Nothing about "Go.... Baptize.... Teach.... but the baptism part is a total waste of time and water because it can't do nothing (not even wash them cuz it's dry and void of water)."

Umm. Baptists like total immersion, remember. :shark: If you ever studied the Southern Baptist Faith and Message on Baptism, you would find they view it as anything but a waste of time. They just believe that God saves, with or without the water.

Oh, we do have this one: "Baptism now saves you" but I know how Anabaptists spin that 180 degrees, no need to repeat that.

Ok. If you ever want to talk about it with me, I’ll try to be polite. Just let me know.

- Josiah

Arthur

 

[MennoSota]

Credobaptists believe in a believers baptism and are against infants being baptized. What about the people with severe disabilities? They never receive baptism that Jesus told the disciples to go out and baptize all nations?

You abuse what Jesus said.
If he meant all nation (your interpretation being all people) then you better go around sprinkling every person you pass by.
But, that is not what Jesus meant. We are to go to all nations and share the good news. God will elect his children from all nations. When they become children of God, they can obediently choose baptism. If God elects to save a person who cannot express the faith God gave him by grace, God will not withold his kingdom because they didn't have a baptismal ceremony.

 

[MennoSota]

Is God's word so ineffective in working faith that the severely disabled are limited from receiving baptism because they cannot make a profession of faith? How does that coincide with Jesus telling disciples to baptize all nations?

Baptism is not required for salvation. You add a requirement and thus reject grace.

 

[Josiah]

Baptism is not required for salvation. You add a requirement and thus reject grace.

Teaching is not REQUIRED for salvation either (witness John the Baptist believing before he was even born), God CAN save by pure fiat (and we have a biblical example of that). But do you teach? Does your church forbid any preaching, teaching, evangelism, mission work because if you ADD teaching you reject grace?

Your positions on the subject of the Sacraments is difficult.... you insist God is rendered impotent if any human activity or any means is used (like teaching or preaching or evangelism); when human activity is involved, when any means is involved, you insist God ERGO can't be gracious, so limited is God. I find your whole premise very unbiblical and illogical and shocking in how much it denies the sovereignty and power of God. I don't accept that Jesus commanded us to "GO..... BAPTIZE.... TEACH..." because this makes grace impossible, this renders God impotent to save. I don't agree that Jesus and the Apostles are to be rebuked for their human activity and their use of means and thus rendered God impotent to save, forgive, bless. I just find your whole premise (and the "logic" you use to support it) very unbiblical, illogical and shocking in how it limits God, makes God SO very small and unsoverign.

God will not withold his kingdom because they didn't have a baptismal ceremony.

No one denies that; no one on the planet has ever stated, "NOT being baptized damns."

But just because God CAN save by pure fiat (without any means) does NOT mean that ergo any human activity and the use of any means mandates that God thus is rendered impotent to save. I disagree that we are to rebuke and condemn Jesus and the Apostles because they did things and used means - and thus rendered God impotent to save people, God being so limited. I don't agree that Jesus gave us the Great Commission to "GO.... BAPTIZE..... TEACH....." because this renders God impotent to save since human activity and means are being used.


I'm HOPING our discussions (resulting in your getting out of the hyper-Calvinist websites) is resulting in your re-thinking all this.



- Josiah

 

[MennoSota]

Teaching is not REQUIRED for salvation either (witness John the Baptist believing before he was even born), God CAN save by pure fiat (and we have a biblical example of that). But do you teach? Does your church forbid any preaching, teaching, evangelism, mission work because if you ADD teaching you reject grace?

Your positions on the subject of the Sacraments is difficult.... you insist God is rendered impotent if any human activity or any means is used (like teaching or preaching or evangelism); when human activity is involved, when any means is involved, you insist God ERGO can't be gracious, so limited is God. I find your whole premise very unbiblical and illogical and shocking in how much it denies the sovereignty and power of God. I don't accept that Jesus commanded us to "GO..... BAPTIZE.... TEACH..." because this makes grace impossible, this renders God impotent to save. I don't agree that Jesus and the Apostles are to be rebuked for their human activity and their use of means and thus rendered God impotent to save, forgive, bless. I just find your whole premise (and the "logic" you use to support it) very unbiblical, illogical and shocking in how it limits God, makes God SO very small and unsoverign.






No one denies that; no one on the planet has ever stated, "NOT being baptized damns."

But just because God CAN save by pure fiat (without any means) does NOT mean that ergo any human activity and the use of any means mandates that God thus is rendered impotent to save. I disagree that we are to rebuke and condemn Jesus and the Apostles because they did things and used means - and thus rendered God impotent to save people, God being so limited. I don't agree that Jesus gave us the Great Commission to "GO.... BAPTIZE..... TEACH....." because this renders God impotent to save since human activity and means are being used.


I'm HOPING our discussions (resulting in your getting out of the hyper-Calvinist websites) is resulting in your re-thinking all this.



- Josiah

I never suggest God being impotent. I suggest you are trying to force God to act where He never promised he would act. The problem is not God. The problem is your theology about God.

 

[Josiah]

Credobaptists believe in a believers baptism and are against infants being baptized. What about the people with severe disabilities? They never receive baptism that Jesus told the disciples to go out and baptize all nations?

Credobaptists don't believe that baptism does anything anyway; it's weird because it is SO stressed in the Bible, it is part of the Great Commission ("Go... baptize.... teach") equal to the teaching, and yet.... it's a waste of time, God never uses it for anything and it never accomplishes anything; God can't use it for anything. So, in terms of results or benefit, it doesn't matter who the recipient is. And YET, they forbid children from receiving it since they might not be in any way blessed by it either.

Lamm, I think you are assuming they see some benefit to it. They don't.

 

[MennoSota]

Credobaptists don't believe that baptism does anything anyway; it's weird because it is SO stressed in the Bible, it is part of the Great Commission ("Go... baptize.... teach") equal to the teaching, and yet.... it's a waste of time, God never uses it for anything and it never accomplishes anything; God can't use it for anything. So, in terms of results or benefit, it doesn't matter who the recipient is. And YET, they forbid children from receiving it since they might not be in any way blessed by it either.

Lamm, I think you are assuming they see some benefit to it. They don't.

We baptize believers in obedience to God, not because baptism is a magical means of regeneration.
The order:
1) Go
2 ) Make disciples of all nations
3) Baptizing the disciples in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
Matthew 28
[19]Therefore, go and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.
I don't see:
1) Baptize, which
2) Makes disciples, so you can
3) Go
Which is apparently the Lutheran method...

 

[Josiah]

Credobaptists don't believe that baptism does anything anyway; it's weird because it is SO stressed in the Bible, it is part of the Great Commission ("Go... baptize.... teach") equal to the teaching, and yet.... it's a waste of time, God never uses it for anything and it never accomplishes anything; God can't use it for anything. So, in terms of results or benefit, it doesn't matter who the recipient is. And YET, they forbid children from receiving it since they might not be in any way blessed by it either.

Lamm, I think you are assuming they see some benefit to it. They don't.


.

We baptize believers in obedience to God

Thanks for confirming my point.


And thanks for quoting the Scripture that so obviously does NOT say, "BUT for heaven's sake, NEVER go or baptize or teach any under the age of X (which I don't tell you what age that is)!!!!!" Or, "BUT you are forbidden to go, baptize or teach ANY unless they first have chanted the Sinner's Prayer, did the Altar Call thing, chose Me, and adequately and publicly proven their saving faith in Me! Don't you dare!" "I have commanding these things but they are a waste of time since I can't use them to accomplish anything at all, you really should be better stewards of your time and effort than do things that are a waste of time cuz I can't use them or do a thing with them."



- Josiah




.

 

[Albion]

"Go ye therefore, not teaching all peoples or baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Teaching those you meet to observe what things appeal to them, for it is all just a gesture anyway: and, lo, I am with you in principle, even unto the end of the world. Amen."





(It's one of those modern language translations.)

 

[MennoSota]

Thanks for confirming my point.


And thanks for quoting the Scripture that so obviously does NOT say, "BUT for heaven's sake, NEVER go or baptize or teach any under the age of X (which I don't tell you what age that is)!!!!!" Or, "BUT you are forbidden to go, baptize or teach ANY unless they first have chanted the Sinner's Prayer, did the Altar Call thing, chose Me, and adequately and publicly proven their saving faith in Me! Don't you dare!" "I have commanding these things but they are a waste of time since I can't use them to accomplish anything at all, you really should be better stewards of your time and effort than do things that are a waste of time cuz I can't use them or do a thing with them."



- Josiah




.

When an individual is clearly recognized as redeemed and adopted by God and asks to be baptized, then the body of Christ baptizes them. This is in accordance with the Great Commission and with every experience shared in the New Testament. Not once is someone baptized who is unregenerate and cannot confess their unity with Christ.
You put the cart before the horse, Josiah.

 

[MennoSota]

"Go ye therefore, not teaching all peoples or baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Teaching those you meet to observe what things appeal to them, for it is all just a gesture anyway: and, lo, I am with you in principle, even unto the end of the world. Amen."





(It's one of those modern language translations.)

Sounds like an Anglican translation.