Infant Baptism

[Josiah]

For the folk who object to paedobaptism ... don't have your children baptised if it upsets you and breaks your doctrine. Maybe you can have them dedicated or something. A lot of Baptist and Independent meetings do that.

.... rather than defending this late, rare new tradition of Mr. Thomas Muenzer.... rather than shouting about the Scripture that mandates we withhold Baptism until the receiver attains the age of X (and then persistently proving no such verse exists)?

BUT, while I do respect the advise you are giving (as long as the same parents equally respect my choice here), I DO think we all have to give account of our actions. Sure, I may be met by Jesus saying, "Why did you baptize your child before she reached the age of X? I know I never told you to wait until then, but why didn't you?" But then again, a parent MIGHT be met by Jesus saying, "Why did you forbid this child from receiving baptism when I never remotely told you to wait until she reached the age of X?" Even if we conclude the Scripture is silent on an specific age mandate, perhaps it would be better to embrace it rather than deny it. Perhaps we'd get to heaven and Jesus would say, "Why did you baptize that married person when I never told you to baptized married people!?" After all, Scripture is silent on whether they may be baptized, too. Or college grads..... or Methodist...... or Americans..... or ________.....

But I see your point, Coffee. And for those willing to RESPECT the former tradition going back to 69 AD at the very latest, I'm equally willing to accept this new, rare tradition of Mr. Thomas Muenzer in the 16th Century. Both of having to give account for why we did or did not withhold baptism.




.

 

[Full O Beans]

For the folk who object to paedobaptism ... don't have your children baptised if it upsets you and breaks your doctrine. Maybe you can have them dedicated or something. A lot of Baptist and Independent meetings do that.

The doctrine of baptism does not include babies and very young children. We keep to the instruction of God's word in training our children in the things of God so that when they are able to understand their need for a Savior---which is what all of us must come to in order to be saved---that they will receive salvation through faith. THEIR FAITH! No one can be saved by some person dunking them in water. Baptism in water is for people who have already been saved. In scripture, that is the case IN EVERY INSTANCE.

 

[MoreCoffee]

.... rather than defending this late, rare new tradition of Mr. Thomas Muenzer.... rather than shouting about the Scripture that mandates we withhold Baptism until the receiver attains the age of X (and then persistently proving no such verse exists)?

BUT, while I do respect the advise you are giving (as long as the same parents equally respect my choice here), I DO think we all have to give account of our actions. Sure, I may be met by Jesus saying, "Why did you baptize your child before she reached the age of X? I know I never told you to wait until then, but why didn't you?" But then again, a parent MIGHT be met by Jesus saying, "Why did you forbid this child from receiving baptism when I never remotely told you to wait until she reached the age of X?" Even if we conclude the Scripture is silent on an specific age mandate, perhaps it would be better to embrace it rather than deny it. Perhaps we'd get to heaven and Jesus would say, "Why did you baptize that married person when I never told you to baptized married people!?" After all, Scripture is silent on whether they may be baptized, too. Or college grads..... or Methodist...... or Americans..... or ________.....

But I see your point, Coffee. And for those willing to RESPECT the former tradition going back to 69 AD at the very latest, I'm equally willing to accept this new, rare tradition of Mr. Thomas Muenzer in the 16th Century. Both of having to give account for why we did or did not withhold baptism.

It isn't advice. I advise those who teach this heresy of exclusive credo-baptism to reassess their doctrine and turn away from the heresies that they teach and believe.

I do think, however, that this discussion is unproductive because the advocates of exclusive credo-baptism - specifically Full of Beans, Alithis, and Bill - are set in their doctrine and most unlikely to change their minds. Nor can we produce for them a magic verse that says "go ye and baptise thy infant children ..." so they are not going to listen to our arguments any more than they are willing to listen to the proposition that Mary is the mother of God because she is the mother of Jesus and he is God.

 

[Full O Beans]

You bet we are set into the doctrine of the gospel of Jesus Christ! His word of truth doesn't vary, despite what religion has done to twist and distort its message. The enemy of God is very cunning in his methods of deception...a little truth mixed with a lie, so that those who do not know the word well, or even Jesus, or simply like the comfort of a religious affiliation will swallow it happily...like so much pap.

 

[MoreCoffee]

You bet we are set into the doctrine of the gospel of Jesus Christ! His word of truth doesn't vary, despite what religion has done to twist and distort its message. The enemy of God is very cunning in his methods of deception...a little truth mixed with a lie, so that those who do not know the word well, or even Jesus, or simply like the comfort of a religious affiliation will swallow it happily...like so much pap.

The doctrine you're set into is not the gospel doctrine of baptism. That's been shown many times. The gospel doctrine is that baptism washes away one's sins (Acts 22:16) and that one is united with Christ in baptism (Romans 6:1-14) and that one is saved by baptism (1 Peter 3:21) but you reject all of that.

 

[Josiah]

IMO, part of the "problem" is that the embracers of Mr. Thomas Muenzer's new tradition of withholding baptism from those under the age of X (anti-PAEDObaptism) rarely even TRY to defend their own new tradition. There's a good reason: they have NOTHING to support it, NOTHING that says "but thou mayest NOT permit any under the age of X to receive baptism!" So they change the subject. Notice how the OP has been entirely, wholly, completely IGNORED.

Yes, there is a passionate attempt to divert, hijack the discussion to SOMETHING ELSE. Problem is: all the diversions are also baseless. That Scripture states one must BELIEVE first and only after that be permitted to be baptized (they prove they have NOTHING that so states, no such restriction exists)..... That Scripture states one must first REPENT buckets of tears first and only after that be permitted to be baptized (they then prove they have NOTHING that so states, no such restriction exists..... That Scripture states that one must give CONSENT before we can give anything or do anything but they then prove they have NOTHING that so states, no such restriction exists (and they don't believe or follow this anyway)..... that Scripture states we are not to follow the commands of Scripture but rather the EXAMPLES of Scripture, not permitted to do anything not exampled in Scripture but they can't prove only those over the age of X were baptized in the examples recorded in Scripture (and then state they don't believe or follow this point anyway). All attempts to change the subject to things equally unsubstantiated and often points they don't believe or practice anyway. It would be one thing to say that baptizing, preaching, evangelism, etc. MAY not result in faith and/or salvation, it's a very different matter that THUS it is not permitted and must ergo be withheld and forbidden.





.

 

[Full O Beans]

The doctrine you're set into is not the gospel doctrine of baptism. That's been shown many times. The gospel doctrine is that baptism washes away one's sins (Acts 22:16) and that one is united with Christ in baptism (Romans 6:1-14) and that one is saved by baptism (1 Peter 3:21) but you reject all of that.

Yeah, it is.

The word teaches that baptism doesn't wash our sins away. The BLOOD OF JESUS does that. Baptism doesn't save anyone. It is a FIGURE, a symbol of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ and we do this in identification with Him before the world.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Yeah, it is.

The word teaches that baptism doesn't wash our sins away.

Where's the verse that says that? What book, chapter, and verse says "baptism doesn't wash away sins"? Acts 22:16 says that baptism washes away sins.

The BLOOD OF JESUS does that. Baptism doesn't save anyone.

Where's the verse that says that? What book, chapter, and verse says "baptism doesn't sav anyone"? 1 Peter 3:21 says that baptism saves us.

It is a FIGURE

Where's the verse that says that? What book, chapter, and verse says "baptism is a figure"? Romans 6:1-14 says that baptism unites to Christ in his death and resurrection.

, a symbol of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ and we do this in identification with Him before the world.

 

[Full O Beans]

You need to do more study of the word. The bible doesn't teach that baptism saves. It teaches that because of our salvation we are baptized. "For" meaning because of the washing away of our sins. "For" meaning because we have been forgiven.

 

[Full O Beans]

The bible says that the water of baptism is a figure referring to the waters of the flood.

 

[MoreCoffee]

The bible says that the water of baptism is a figure referring to the waters of the flood.

It doesn't say that. It says the opposite. It says "These were the spirits of those who had not obeyed God when he waited patiently during the days that Noah was building his boat. The few people in the boat---eight in all---were saved by the water, which was a symbol pointing to baptism, which now saves you. It is not the washing off of bodily dirt, but the promise made to God from a good conscience. It saves you through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 3:20-21) The flood is a sign pointing to baptism. Baptism is the reality. You got it the wrong way around.

 

[MoreCoffee]

You need to do more study of the word. The bible doesn't teach that baptism saves.

1 Peter 3:21 explicitly says baptism saves.

It teaches that because of our salvation we are baptized. "For" meaning because of the washing away of our sins. "For" meaning because we have been forgiven.

 

[Full O Beans]

It doesn't say that. It says the opposite. It says "These were the spirits of those who had not obeyed God when he waited patiently during the days that Noah was building his boat. The few people in the boat---eight in all---were saved by the water, which was a symbol pointing to baptism, which now saves you. It is not the washing off of bodily dirt, but the promise made to God from a good conscience. It saves you through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 3:20-21) The flood is a sign pointing to baptism. Baptism is the reality. You got it the wrong way around.

Ask the Holy Spirit to teach you what is true.

 

[Full O Beans]

1 Peter 3:21 explicitly says baptism saves.

It isn't congruent with all scripture about that, so you must seek the real truth that the entire volume of scripture teaches. You cannot build a doctrine on an isolated verse.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Ask the Holy Spirit to teach you what is true.

He has, that is why I oppose the heresies you are preaching in this thread. I urge you to take Acts 22:6, 1 Peter 3:21, and Romans 6:1-14 to heart and stop resisting the teaching of Christ.

 

[MoreCoffee]

It isn't congruent with all scripture about that, so you must seek the real truth that the entire volume of scripture teaches. You cannot build a doctrine on an isolated verse.

Yes, that is correct isolated verses may mislead but Romans 6:1-14, Acts 22:16, 1 Peter 3:21, and John 3:1-5 are not isolated verses. Where's the verse that says "Baptism doesn't save"? You haven't produced it yet.

 

[Full O Beans]

1 Peter 3 teaches us that we are baptized as people who are already saved because we have come to it with a good, already cleansed conscience before God.

 

[MoreCoffee]

1 Peter 3 teaches us that we are baptized as people who are already saved because we have come to it with a good, already cleansed conscience before God.

That is not what it says. You want it to teach that but it does not. Where's the verse that says "baptism does not save"? You haven't come up with one yet.

 

[Full O Beans]

Yes, that is correct isolated verses may mislead but Romans 6:1-14, Acts 22:16, 1 Peter 3:21, and John 3:1-5 are not isolated verses. Where's the verse that says "Baptism doesn't save"? You haven't produced it yet.

[Staff edit], you would know the truth that baptism is only a command for believers to comply with. We are saved already by our faith. Water is the symbol of the earth, and the whole act of baptism symbolizes the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus and so we do this to identify with it. That's one reason alone why it is silly to baptize babies and others who lack that understanding.

 

[MoreCoffee]

[staff edit], you would know the truth that baptism is only a command for believers to comply with. We are saved already by our faith. Water is the symbol of the earth, and the whole act of baptism symbolizes the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus and so we do this to identify with it. That's one reason alone why it is silly to baptize babies and others who lack that understanding.

Pony up the verse that says "baptism doesn't save"? Put your scripture where your mouth is. Or admit that no such verse exists.