Water Baptism

Andrew

Matt 18:15
Joined
Aug 25, 2017
Messages
6,645
Age
40
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
If God must do it through a ceremony then it requires human works to merit salvation. It castrates grace.
The greek word, baptizo, means to immerse or dip fully into. It does not require water. It could be anything. So when scripture uses baptizo, we must look at context and not force water into the term. The context may not mean an immersion into water. When the Spirit of God baptizes us. He immerses us into the body of Christ. It's not into water at all...unless of course Jesus is a big glob of water.
So, water is not the thing that the Spirit immerses us into. The Spirit immerses us into Christ.
Water, however, is a physical element that symbolizes the work of immersion the Spirit has done. Water is not the actual immersion the Spirit has already accomplished (with no assistance needed by humans).
So let's not confuse the two. Let's not attempt to juxtipose the two and thus turn water baptism into a magical ceremony that works to save. Let us recognize the work the Spirit has accomplished beforehand, but we symbolically represent with water. If we don't, then we remove grace and replace it with our own works. May God forbid.
Right, John baptised with Water, Jesus baptises in the Spirit, since Jesus was baptised for remission of all sin, when we are baptised in his name we too are part of Jesus baptism with John and thus because he is Holy WE become Holy... Jesus never said to be baptised by water, he said to be baptised in his Name (covered in HIS name)...
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
55
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
Does not the Bible say that we are Baptized INTO Christ...?

How can that avoid having great Spiritual import?


Arsenios
Galatians 3:23-29 Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith.
But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian, for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.

Two points.
1) We are children of God by faith.
2) We were immersed into Christ.

Please point out where the word "water" is found in this passage.
I agree that we are immersed into Christ.
1 Corinthians 12:12-13 For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.

Any water in the above verse?
What we see is "in one Spirit we were all immersed into one body.

Arsenios, we can keep looking if you wish. What I don't see is water being the magic elixir.
 
Last edited:

pinacled

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
2,862
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Pouring and sprinkling are not how it was done, no such teaching in the Bible. If you want to get particular about it, a person would be baptized and fully immersed while there was flowing water to symbolically wash their sins ‘away.’

However, the Ethiopian, when wanting to be baptized, saw some water, probably well water-drinking water, and not flowing water, because of where they were on the road to Gaza was in the desert. Philip still baptized him in that water.

Acts 8:26 Now an angel of the Lord said to Philip, “Go south to the road–the desert road–that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza.”
Acts 8:36 As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, “Look, here is water. What can stand in the way of my being baptized?”

As for Catholics and other denominations such as the ones Calvinists belong who do infant baptisms, we know this is not scriptural, since baptism in water is for the remission of sins. One must voluntarily want to be saved, confess, and repent of sins; and babies cannot do that.

John the baptizer prepared the way for Jesus. He came preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins (Luke 1:76-80).
We are still to confess that we are sinners, and to repent, to prepare the way for Jesus Christ to live in our heart.

Acts 20:21 I have declared to both Jews and Greeks that they must turn to God in repentance and have faith in our Lord Jesus.
Acts 26:20 First to those in Damascus, then to those in Jerusalem and in all Judea, and to the Gentiles also, I preached that they should repent and turn to God and prove their repentance by their deeds.

The Bible tells us before people were baptized-they repented.

Acts 2:38 Peter replied, “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.
Mark 1:5 The whole Judean countryside and all the people of Jerusalem went out to him. Confessing their sins, they were baptized by him in the Jordan River.
Acts 19:18 Many of those who believed now came and openly confessed what they had done.

Christians are to be water baptized, even after having received the Holy Spirit.

Acts 10:47 Then Peter said, “Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.”

Baptism represents how a believer equates his life with Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection. Our old person is to die to the sins of the world and be buried with Jesus through baptism into death. We are buried with the water, and raised out of the water, raised to live a new life through Jesus.

Picture how baptism looks…the believer comes to make the pledge to God, to die to the sins of the world; so now standing in the water the believer falls back, as if dead; then, the believer goes under the water, buried; then, the believer rises up out of the water, raises up to live a new life.

Romans explain this perfectly.
Romans 6:4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

Water baptism is when the person makes a promise of a good conscience to God in a ceremonial type of way. The person has already made the conscientious acknowledgement to God to stop sinning, but now follows through with obeying God by getting water baptized, by doing the ceremonial act of the promise.

Water baptism is a symbol of what has already happened in one’s heart. See 1 Peter 3:21 and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

Infants cannot make a promise, and children are not not required. The infant’s parents can make a promise for their child, nor can anyone make a promise for anyone else.

The kingdom of heaven already belongs to little children such as the ones brought to Jesus; children taught about God.

Matthew 19:14 Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.” 15When he had placed his hands on them, he went on from there.
Matthew 18:3 And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
John 9:41 Jesus said, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains.

Infant baptism interferes with people knowing and obeying the Truth. Infant baptism confuses non-Christians and those who want to be a Christian.
Many people baptized as an infant do not understand why they do not really know the Lord. Those baptized as infants do not usually walk the path that Jesus teaches. Infant baptism has been confusing millions of people for years. It is more serious of an issue that most even realize.

Nowadays a person privately confesses to Jesus and repents of their sins before Jesus saves them, then, later or at the same time be baptized in water. Jesus can give the Holy Spirit before, during, or after the water baptism, as shown in the scriptures. I believe you can have someone you know help lower you in the water and help you come back up out of the water. I would not join a denomination to have this done, knowing what I know now. I would even baptize myself if I knew no one to baptize me. I would baptize myself in any body of water I had access to, even my bathtub in my home, as has been done in the Bible times. It is a ceremony where you promise to God. It makes a difference like saying things aloud makes a difference sometimes.
Consider who was first to wash their hands as a Levi. Then with discretion look closer with keen eyes who accused the tzadiq(disciples of having unclean hands.

Focus
 

Arsenios

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
3,577
Location
Pacific North West
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Eastern Orthodox
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Galatians 3:23-29 Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith.
But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian, for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.

Two points.
1) We are children of God by faith.
2) We were immersed into Christ.

Please point out where the word "water" is found in this passage.
I agree that we are immersed into Christ.
1 Corinthians 12:12-13 For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.

Any water in the above verse?
What we see is "in one Spirit we were all immersed into one body.

Arsenios, we can keep looking if you wish. What I don't see is water being the magic elixir.

The verb is baptizo - Baptize...

Christ is the "magic elixir"... [I hate that expression...]

και γαρ εν ενι πνευματι ημεις παντες εις εν σωμα εβαπτισθημεν (5681)
For also in one Spirit we all into one body (we) have been baptized

ειτε ιουδαιοι ειτε ελληνες ειτε δουλοι ειτε ελευθεροι και παντες εις εν πνευμα εποτισθημεν (5681)

We are all baptized into one body in one Spirit...

We KNOW that Christ commissioned the Apostles to Baptize all the nations...

The Apostles are all servants of Christ doing what Christ commands...

So what do we find happened historically?

People were baptized in water and in Spirit by the Servants of the Lord...

Acting in obedience to Christ they Baptized the nations...

And we know that they baptized the nations INTO Christ...

Therefore Baptism ENTERS a person INTO Christ BY the Apostles...

Which extends to all those within Apostolic Obedience...


Arsenios
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
55
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
The verb is baptizo - Baptize...

Christ is the "magic elixir"... [I hate that expression...]

και γαρ εν ενι πνευματι ημεις παντες εις εν σωμα εβαπτισθημεν (5681)
For also in one Spirit we all into one body (we) have been baptized

ειτε ιουδαιοι ειτε ελληνες ειτε δουλοι ειτε ελευθεροι και παντες εις εν πνευμα εποτισθημεν (5681)

We are all baptized into one body in one Spirit...

We KNOW that Christ commissioned the Apostles to Baptize all the nations...

The Apostles are all servants of Christ doing what Christ commands...

So what do we find happened historically?

People were baptized in water and in Spirit by the Servants of the Lord...

Acting in obedience to Christ they Baptized the nations...

And we know that they baptized the nations INTO Christ...

Therefore Baptism ENTERS a person INTO Christ BY the Apostles...

Which extends to all those within Apostolic Obedience...


Arsenios
You are doing mental gymnastics with history. However, you still provide no evidence of water in the text. You are forcing.
 

Arsenios

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
3,577
Location
Pacific North West
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Eastern Orthodox
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
You are doing mental gymnastics with history. However, you still provide no evidence of water in the text. You are forcing.

Assertion without evidence...

Quid...
Erat...
Squish...

Bug eaters of the world unite!! :)


Arsenios
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
55
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married

Lamb

God's Lil Lamb
Community Team
Administrator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
33,436
Age
58
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Let's not make this thread go down the wrong direction like the other one I had to close for a cool down. Please? Can't there be a discussion without insults?
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
55
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
Let's not make this thread go down the wrong direction like the other one I had to close for a cool down. Please? Can't there be a discussion without insults?
We certainly can. We can look at the scripture regarding baptism and see where our differences are and whether water is always associated with baptism (immersion) or whether baptism (immersion) is used without water being associated. If we observe we may find that we have biases created that are not supported by the text.
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Josiah said:



1. There is NOTHING in Scripture or for nearly 1600 years about the prohibition of baptism to those under the age of X (whatever age that is).... Anti-Paedobaptism was first invented by some wackedoodle Anabaptists in the late 16th Century.


2. There is NOTHING in Scripture or for nearly 1600 years about the prohibtion of baptism to those who did not first prove their faith in Jesus.... Credobaptism was first invented by some wackedoodle Anabaptists in the late 16th Century.


3. There is NOTHING in Scripture or for nearly 1600 years about the prohibition of baptism by any means other than full immersion under water.... Immersion only was first invented by some wackedoodle Anabaptists in the late 16th Century.


4. There is NOTHING in Scripture or for 1600 years that Baptism accomplishes nothing. An invention of a few wackedoodle Anabaptists in the late 16th Century.


5. There is NOTHING in Scripture or for nearly 2000 years about the prohibtion of baptism by anyone who has not first proven they are among the unnamed few for whom Jesus died.... A Calvinist Baptist invention of recent invention.




Concerning the claim that Baptism was made central to Christianity because it does nothing..... Concerning the baseless claim that the Anabaptist invented dogmas actually predate them....




The Epistle of Barnabas (A.D. 130) “This means that we go down into the water full of sins and foulness, and we come up from the water of baptism bearing fruit in our hearts, fear and hope in Jesus and in the Spirit.”

Shepherd of Hermas (A.D. 140?): "they descend into the water of Baptism dead, and they arise alive.”

St. Justin Martyr (A.D. 160?) "And we, who have approached God through Him, have received not carnal, but spiritual circumcision, which Enoch and those like him observed. And we have received it through baptism, since we were sinners, by God’s mercy; and all men may equally obtain it."

St. Irenaeus (A.D. 190?). "And when we come to refute them [i.e. those heretics], we shall show in its fitting-place, that this class of men have been instigated by Satan to a denial of that baptism which accomplishes the regeneration to God, and thus to a renunciation of the whole [Christian] faith."

St. Irenaeus (A.D. 190?) "“Now, this is what faith does for us, as the elders, the disciples of the apostles, have handed down to us. First of all, it admonishes us to remember that we have received baptism for the remission of sins in the name of God the Father, and in the name of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who became incarnate and died and raised."

St. Clement of Alexandra (A.D. 215?) "The same also takes place in our case, whose exemplar Christ became. Being baptized, we are by such illuminated, we become sons; being made sons, we are made perfect; being made perfect, we are made immortal."

St. Clement of Alexandra (A.D. 215?) "For it is said, “Put on him the best robe,” which was his the moment he obtained baptism. I mean the glory of baptism, the remission of sins, and the communication of the other blessings, which he obtained immediately he had touched the baptismal font."

St. Cyprian (A.D. 255) responding to a man who was asking him the specific question of whether or not the pouring of water in baptism would be valid: "You have asked also, dearest son, what I thought about those who obtain the grace of God while they are weakened by illness – whether or not they are to be reckoned as legitimate Christians who have not been bathed with the saving water, but have rather had it poured over them, such is just as legitimate."


There are countless more. My point here is not the individual things here said, but the unavoidable and universal affirmation that Baptism is not an inert, ineffectual, mere ritual... and nowhere do we see any sense of it as some "outward ritual indicating an inward decision." Universally, baptism is seen as something God uses to accomplish something.




And of course Scripture does not speak of baptism as ineffectual, nothing about "an outward symbol of an inward decision"

I can find no Scriptures that state or indicate that. But there are several, that when taken together, suggest something quite different. Let's look at those (hopefully the program here will bring them up for you to read)...

Acts 22:16

First Peter 3:21

Romans 6:3-4

1 Corinthians 6:11

1 Corinthians 12:13

Galatians 3:26-27

Ephesians 5:25-27

Colossians 2:11-12

Titus 3:5

1 Peter 3:18-22

I admit no ONE verse above is indisputable or perspicuous, but together there is a strong indication. And of course we find nothing that indicates that it is a inert, ineffectual, useless ritual.

We need to also consider that Jesus, the Apostles and the Early Church gave great importance to this! Jesus places it along side of (and seemingly equal to) teaching in the Great Commission, for example. It seems less likely that it would be regarded as so critical if it is an inert, ineffectual ritual that changes and accomplishes nothing at all.



.



You insist upon that I have created prohibition that I never have ever mentioned.



I wonder if you've read your own posts....


So NOW you are claiming you've never posted anything opposed to infant baptism? Never once indicated there first needs to be a profession of faith? Never once said we can only baptize those for whom Jesus died? Never once posted that baptism accomplsihes nothing vis-a-vis justification? Have you not read what you posted? Or have you simply entirely changed your position but want to pretend you were always correct in condemning the Baptist dogma invention?




.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
55
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
I wonder if you've read your own posts....


So NOW you are claiming you've never posted anything opposed to infant baptism? Never once indicated there first needs to be a profession of faith? Never once said we can only baptize those for whom Jesus died? Never once posted that baptism accomplsihes nothing vis-a-vis justification? Have you not read what you posted? Or have you simply entirely changed your position but want to pretend you were always correct in condemning the Baptist dogma invention?




.
I oppose doing something as an ordinance that is not done in scripture. Since there is zero biblical evidence of infants being baptized, it is unwise to baptize infants and declare their salvation to their parents when scripture does not support the declaration. It is no different than someone who claims that a person is saved by repeating the sinners prayer. Such an invocation may be genuine, but it may also send someone blissfully in to hell with no clue of their final destination. It is wise to not speak a word or perform a ceremony that may not do what the guide claims it will do. It is better to abstain until there is evidence that the person is an adopted child of God.
So, let me say that your infant baptism is, at best, a fools paradise and at worst a ticket to damnation for that child.
You would not promote saying the sinners prayer as assurance of salvation. Why then do you insist on an infants baptism as the same thing?
Again, you provide zero biblical support and argue your position from the utter silence of scripture on the matter. Your denomination will be held responsible before God for sending millions of people to hell in a blissful false belief that they are saved. Can you live with that reality or do you wish to speak truth to your members instead?
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Josiah said:





1. There is NOTHING in Scripture
or for nearly 1600 years about the prohibition of baptism to those under the age of X (whatever age that is).... Anti-Paedobaptism was first invented by some wackedoodle Anabaptists in the late 16th Century.


2. There is NOTHING in Scripture or for nearly 1600 years about the prohibtion of baptism to those who did not first prove their faith in Jesus.... Credobaptism was first invented by some wackedoodle Anabaptists in the late 16th Century.


3. There is NOTHING in Scripture or for nearly 1600 years about the prohibition of baptism by any means other than full immersion under water.... Immersion only was first invented by some wackedoodle Anabaptists in the late 16th Century.


4. There is NOTHING in Scripture or for 1600 years that Baptism accomplishes nothing. An invention of a few wackedoodle Anabaptists in the late 16th Century.


5. There is NOTHING in Scripture or for nearly 2000 years about the prohibtion of baptism by anyone who has not first proven they are among the unnamed few for whom Jesus died.... A Calvinist Baptist invention of recent invention.




Concerning the claim that Baptism was made central to Christianity because it does nothing..... Concerning the baseless claim that the Anabaptist invented dogmas actually predate them....




The Epistle of Barnabas (A.D. 130) “This means that we go down into the water full of sins and foulness, and we come up from the water of baptism bearing fruit in our hearts, fear and hope in Jesus and in the Spirit.”

Shepherd of Hermas (A.D. 140?): "they descend into the water of Baptism dead, and they arise alive.”

St. Justin Martyr (A.D. 160?) "And we, who have approached God through Him, have received not carnal, but spiritual circumcision, which Enoch and those like him observed. And we have received it through baptism, since we were sinners, by God’s mercy; and all men may equally obtain it."

St. Irenaeus (A.D. 190?). "And when we come to refute them [i.e. those heretics], we shall show in its fitting-place, that this class of men have been instigated by Satan to a denial of that baptism which accomplishes the regeneration to God, and thus to a renunciation of the whole [Christian] faith."

St. Irenaeus (A.D. 190?) "“Now, this is what faith does for us, as the elders, the disciples of the apostles, have handed down to us. First of all, it admonishes us to remember that we have received baptism for the remission of sins in the name of God the Father, and in the name of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who became incarnate and died and raised."

St. Clement of Alexandra (A.D. 215?) "The same also takes place in our case, whose exemplar Christ became. Being baptized, we are by such illuminated, we become sons; being made sons, we are made perfect; being made perfect, we are made immortal."

St. Clement of Alexandra (A.D. 215?) "For it is said, “Put on him the best robe,” which was his the moment he obtained baptism. I mean the glory of baptism, the remission of sins, and the communication of the other blessings, which he obtained immediately he had touched the baptismal font."

St. Cyprian (A.D. 255) responding to a man who was asking him the specific question of whether or not the pouring of water in baptism would be valid: "You have asked also, dearest son, what I thought about those who obtain the grace of God while they are weakened by illness – whether or not they are to be reckoned as legitimate Christians who have not been bathed with the saving water, but have rather had it poured over them, such is just as legitimate."


There are countless more. My point here is not the individual things here said, but the unavoidable and universal affirmation that Baptism is not an inert, ineffectual, mere ritual... and nowhere do we see any sense of it as some "outward ritual indicating an inward decision." Universally, baptism is seen as something God uses to accomplish something.




And of course Scripture does not speak of baptism as ineffectual, nothing about "an outward symbol of an inward decision"

I can find no Scriptures that state or indicate that. But there are several, that when taken together, suggest something quite different. Let's look at those (hopefully the program here will bring them up for you to read)...

Acts 22:16

First Peter 3:21

Romans 6:3-4

1 Corinthians 6:11

1 Corinthians 12:13

Galatians 3:26-27

Ephesians 5:25-27

Colossians 2:11-12

Titus 3:5

1 Peter 3:18-22

I admit no ONE verse above is indisputable or perspicuous, but together there is a strong indication. And of course we find nothing that indicates that it is a inert, ineffectual, useless ritual.

We need to also consider that Jesus, the Apostles and the Early Church gave great importance to this! Jesus places it along side of (and seemingly equal to) teaching in the Great Commission, for example. It seems less likely that it would be regarded as so critical if it is an inert, ineffectual ritual that changes and accomplishes nothing at all.



.



I oppose doing something as an ordinance that is not done in scripture.


Then you were wrong, you ARE supporting the prohibitions, denials and limitations that the radical synergistic Anabaptists invented in the late 16th Century, which you parrot.


You CLAIM all the folks baptized in the Bible were over the age of X and that this is mandated in Scripture - but you have yet to produce any Scripture that substantiates that. You echo the Anti-Paedobaptism dogma of the Anabaptists.

You CLAIM all the folks baptized in the Bible first professed their faith in Christ and that this is mandated in Scripture - but you have yet to produce any Scripture that substantiates that. You echo the Credobaptism dogma invented by the Anabaptists because of their synergism.

You CLAIM all the folks baptized in the Bbile were fully immersed under water and that this is mandated in Scripture - but you have yet to produce any Scripture that substantiates that. You echo the "immersion" dogma invented by the Anabaptists.

You CLAIM all the folks baptized in the Bible first proved they were among the unnamed few for whom Jesus died and that this is mandated in the Bible - but you have yet to produce any Scripture that substantiates that.


You repeat the profoundly silly apologetic of Anabaptists that we can't do things unless it is exampled in the Bible.... and then you post that on the internet proving you don't accept or follow your own insistence. I image if we attended your church on a Sunday morning, probably 90% plus of what they do is never once modeled as done in the Bible. Your apologetic is SILLY and you neither follow it or accept it. I'd love to see your church celebrate Communion! Let's open our Bibles and find where it was only done occasionally, was given to women and kids, consisted of little plastic cups of Welch's Grape Juice and a bowl of little cut up pieces of Weber's White bread....





.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
55
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
Then you were wrong, you ARE supporting the prohibitions, denials and limitations that the radical synergistic Anabaptists invented in the late 16th Century, which you parrot.


You CLAIM all the folks baptized in the Bible were over the age of X and that this is mandated in Scripture - but you have yet to produce any Scripture that substantiates that. You echo the Anti-Paedobaptism dogma of the Anabaptists.

You CLAIM all the folks baptized in the Bible first professed their faith in Christ and that this is mandated in Scripture - but you have yet to produce any Scripture that substantiates that. You echo the Credobaptism dogma invented by the Anabaptists because of their synergism.

You CLAIM all the folks baptized in the Bbile were fully immersed under water and that this is mandated in Scripture - but you have yet to produce any Scripture that substantiates that. You echo the "immersion" dogma invented by the Anabaptists.

You CLAIM all the folks baptized in the Bible first proved they were among the unnamed few for whom Jesus died and that this is mandated in the Bible - but you have yet to produce any Scripture that substantiates that.


You repeat the profoundly silly apologetic of Anabaptists that we can't do things unless it is exampled in the Bible.... and then you post that on the internet proving you don't accept or follow your own insistence. I image if we attended your church on a Sunday morning, probably 90% plus of what they do is never once modeled as done in the Bible. Your apologetic is SILLY and you neither follow it or accept it. I'd love to see your church celebrate Communion! Let's open our Bibles and find where it was only done occasionally, was given to women and kids, consisted of little plastic cups of Welch's Grape Juice and a bowl of little cut up pieces of Weber's White bread....





.
Josiah, you completely ignored my post. Why is that?
My guess is that you refuse to question your church and have scripture be primary over church polity.
Scripture reveals no infant baptisms ever taking place. This is proven and obvious. Since you ignore scripture, I cannot converse with you. Your circular argument back to tradition in order to avoid the Bible is the tactic I will not play. Such action is childish on your part. Review your behavior as I will ignore you.
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Scripture reveals no infant baptisms ever taking place


Nope. I have listed several baptisms in the Bible and asked you to show that all receivers were over your mandated age of "X" but you have consistently refuse and ignored this. AND WE ALL KNOW WHY.


Now, true, there are no obvious examples of Americans being baptized, no blue-eye females being baptized. But this doesn't seem to matter to you. The Bible says to baptize and teach, where is this prohibition you dogmatically insist upon, this "BUT not if they are under the age of X, that is forbidden!!!" The Bible also says to love, do you insist "But this doesn't mean women because where does it say "And this includes women!" The Bible also commands us to forgive, do you insist, "But this dogmatically excludes those over 6 feet tall because the verse doesn't say it includes those over 6 feet tall! Does every example of forgiveness in the Bible be of one over 6 feet tall?" Your whole apologetic is silly. And CLEARLY you don't accept it or follow it or beieve it.


You CLEARLY and TOTALLY reject your own argument and mandate; it is silly and absurd to insist we can't do things if such is not explicitly and clearly exampled in the Bible. IF you actually believed and accepted your argument, you couldn't post on the internet, could you? You couldn't have youth groups or women pastors, you couldn't use grape juice and levened white bread in communion, you couldn't use powerpoint or electricity in church. But you don't accept your apologetic, you completely reject it. If what you say is something you accept, you'd reject baptisms done in a tank in church because there is not one example of that ever in the Bible. You'd reject a Gentile administering Baptism because there is not one example of that in the Bible. You'd reject baptizing any Asian (Chinese, Korean, etc.) because there is not one example of that anywhere in the Bible. You reject your own apologetic, so why should others accept why you so consistently reject and not employ? If we attended your church on a Sunday morning, I suspect 90% of what we witnessed would never be exampled as done in the Bible. You don't accept your own mandate because it's SILLY and ABSURD. And you know it.


And of course, you can't show that there were none under the age of X baptized in the Bible. I have given you examples of several baptisms - and ask you to prove all were over the age of X - and you HAD o ignore it because, as you and everyone else realize - you can't; your claim is baseless. Even if it mattered, even if you accepted it (which you don't).




mennoSota said:
Since you ignore scripture


I have FULLY and COMPLETELY and LITERALLY accepted every verse you have referenced.


I'm waiting for you to list the Scriptures that state the Anabaptist dogmas you parrot...


"Thou canst NOT baptize any under the age of X (and you won't be told what age that is)."

"Thou canst NOT baptize any unless and untill they hath publicly proven their faith in Jesus."

"Thou canst NOT baptize any unless and until they hath proven they are among the unnamed few for whom Jesus died."

"Thou canst NOT baptize any unless ever cell of that person is entirely covered by water."4


When you quote the Scriptures that state your dogma, we can discuss them. So far, not one of the Scriptures you have offered remotely states what do you, so far every Scripture you have quoted are ones I fully, completely and literally agree with - every single word in them. You won't discuss Scriptures because none of them state what you do; so you just parrot apologetics you yourself OBVIOUSLY reject and the synergistic points of the Anabaptists who invented your views in the late 16th Century.




.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
55
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
I finally figured out why I have such conflict with Josiah's twisted perspective.
I am reading a book by Paul Alexander and Mark Dever entitled, "The Deliberate Church: Building Your Ministry on the Gospel." On page 77 the author describes the Regulative Principle of worship as opposed to the Normative Principle of worship.
Quote:
"Briefly, the Regulative Principle states that everything we do in a corporate worship gathering must be clearly warranted by Scripture. Clear warrant can either take the form of an explicit biblical command, or a good and necessary implication of a biblical text. The Regulative Principle has historically competed with the Normative Principle, crystalized by the Anglican minister, Richard Hooker. Hooker argued, along with Martin Luther before him, that as long as a practice is not biblically forbidden, a church is free to use it to order its corporate life and worship. In short, the Regulative Principle forbids anything not commanded by Scripture, whereas the Normative Principle allows anything not forbidden by Scripture."
Josiah promotes the Normative Principle, while I promote the Regulative Principle. It explains why we disagree.
 

ImaginaryDay2

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Messages
3,982
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Edit: Found your new thread - I'll re-post this
 
Last edited:

atpollard

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2017
Messages
2,578
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
The Bible says to baptize and teach ...
Let us try to be at least a bit precise with scripture. Where does the Bible say this?

“There are no concordance results for "Baptize" AND "and" AND "teach" in the ASV.”
“There are no concordance results for "Baptize" AND "and" AND "teach" in the ESV.”
“There are no concordance results for "Baptize" AND "and" AND "teach" in the KJV.”
“There are no concordance results for "Baptize" AND "and" AND "teach" in the NASB.”
“There are no concordance results for "Baptize" AND "and" AND "teach" in the NIV.”
“There are no concordance results for "Baptize" AND "and" AND "teach" in the NLT.”
“There are no concordance results for "Baptize" AND "and" AND "teach" in the RSV.”
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
55
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
Let us try to be at least a bit precise with scripture. Where does the Bible say this?

“There are no concordance results for "Baptize" AND "and" AND "teach" in the ASV.”
“There are no concordance results for "Baptize" AND "and" AND "teach" in the ESV.”
“There are no concordance results for "Baptize" AND "and" AND "teach" in the KJV.”
“There are no concordance results for "Baptize" AND "and" AND "teach" in the NASB.”
“There are no concordance results for "Baptize" AND "and" AND "teach" in the NIV.”
“There are no concordance results for "Baptize" AND "and" AND "teach" in the NLT.”
“There are no concordance results for "Baptize" AND "and" AND "teach" in the RSV.”
I'm ready for the normative response of "the Bible does not restrict baptizing first so therefore God blesses baptism of anyone regardless of faith claim."
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,311
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Let us try to be at least a bit precise with scripture. Where does the Bible say this?

“There are no concordance results for "Baptize" AND "and" AND "teach" in the ASV.”
“There are no concordance results for "Baptize" AND "and" AND "teach" in the ESV.”
“There are no concordance results for "Baptize" AND "and" AND "teach" in the KJV.”
“There are no concordance results for "Baptize" AND "and" AND "teach" in the NASB.”
“There are no concordance results for "Baptize" AND "and" AND "teach" in the NIV.”
“There are no concordance results for "Baptize" AND "and" AND "teach" in the NLT.”
“There are no concordance results for "Baptize" AND "and" AND "teach" in the RSV.”

It says it in the hand written note on page "one" and "thousand" and "and" and "one" and "hundred" and "and" and "eleven" in the ASV
It says it in the hand written note on page "one" and "thousand" and "and" and "one" and "hundred" and "and" and "eleven" in the ESV
It says it in the hand written note on page "one" and "thousand" and "and" and "one" and "hundred" and "and" and "eleven" in the KJV
It says it in the hand written note on page "one" and "thousand" and "and" and "one" and "hundred" and "and" and "eleven" in the NASB
It says it in the hand written note on page "one" and "thousand" and "and" and "one" and "hundred" and "and" and "fifty-seven" in the NAB
It says it in the hand written note on page "one" and "thousand" and "and" and "one" and "hundred" and "and" and "forty-eight" in the RSV
It says it in the hand written note on page "one" and "thousand" and "and" and "one" and "hundred" and "and" and "eighty-three" in the NRSV
It says it in the hand written note on page "one" and "thousand" and "and" and "one" and "hundred" and "and" and "sixty-four" in the CPDB


:smirk:
 
Top Bottom