Water Baptism

[Arsenios]

Do you just hold them under indefinitely so they remain immersed?

The Ethiopian Eunuch took the Christian Faith to Ethopia after Philip baptized him...

Then Christianity took over Ethiopia...

Without the firing of a single shot...

That's how it works...


Arsenios

 

[MennoSota]

See post # 58.


Yes, the Bible gives just as many clear examples of those under the mystical, never-disclosed as of "X" being baptized as it does of Christians posting on the internet, Christians celebrating communion with little plastic glasses of grape juice and little cut up pieces of Weber's White Bread served to women and kids by passing it around the pews, of pastors wearing Ahola shirts and using powerpoint and video clips, and baptism tanks, of churches having websites and youth groups and youth pastors and women's groups and women pastors. When your church forbids all that... and forbids baptizing people with blue eyes, you MIGHT have a tiny point. But your denomination obviously thinks your whole apologetic is silly and they repudiate and don't follow it.





.

Nope, the Bible provides zero examples of infant baptism. Keep your church dogma and tradition if you must. Just don't say it has biblical merit because it doesn't.

 

[MennoSota]

The Ethiopian Eunuch took the Christian Faith to Ethopia after Philip baptized him...

Then Christianity took over Ethiopia...

Without the firing of a single shot...

That's how it works...


Arsenios

Literally nothing about baptism here, other than Phillip baptized the eunich...after God had saved him, which is the position I hold on baptism. The Ethiopian makes my point.

 

[YourTruthGod]

Literally nothing about baptism here, other than Phillip baptized the eunich...after God had saved him, which is the position I hold on baptism. The Ethiopian makes my point.

You said nothing about baptism there.

The eunuch was water baptized.

 

[YourTruthGod]

Nope, the Bible provides zero examples of infant baptism. Keep your church dogma and tradition if you must. Just don't say it has biblical merit because it doesn't.

Wow, pretty good, Menno, for the reformed denominations do infant baptisms. Looks like you reject something from the reformers.

 

[Josiah]

Nope, the Bible provides zero examples of infant baptism.

And zero examples of posting on the internet, and yet what do you do?

Ah, since you repudiate and don't embrace your own apologetic, maybe no one else should accept it either.

Wow, pretty good, Menno, for the reformed denominations do infant baptisms.

Well, the ovewhelming majority of Reformed/Calvinist churches do. But there is a tiny minority of Calvinists who follow the Anabaptists on this point; odd since the Anabaptists invented Anti-Paedobaptism because they were radical synergists and "free will" in theology (NOT because they found any biblical support for this), so these very few Calvinists who buy into the Anabaptist invention are contradicting a key central point of their own doctrine.




.

 

[MennoSota]

And zero examples of posting on the internet, and yet what do you do?

Ah, since you repudiate and don't embrace your own apologetic, maybe no one else should accept it either.








Well, the ovewhelming majority of Reformed/Calvinist churches do. But there is a tiny minority of Calvinists who follow the Anabaptists on this point; odd since the Anabaptists invented Anti-Paedobaptism because they were radical synergists and "free will" in theology (NOT because they found any biblical support for this), so these very few Calvinists who buy into the Anabaptist invention are contradicting a key central point of their own doctrine.




.

What does the Bible say about infant baptism?
I'll help you out, since you have a bad keyboard. The Bible says nothing, zero, zip, nada about infant baptism. Nothing about it being practiced. Nothing about it being a means of salvation (that would throw out grace as the means of salvation). Nothing about anything relating to infants being saved.
Since God has chosen his own from before the foundation of the world, we know that some are born who will be called. We don't have any command to baptize those who are dead in their trespasses and sins. Nothing.
So, why do churches do it?
Tradition created after the Apostles.
Feel good opportunity for parents.
Opportunity to use fear of not baptizing to hold humans under the yolk of a churches power. (Can anyone say "Pharisees".)
That's it. It's entirely man-made. At best it acts as a dedication for the parents to do their job and train up their child in the scriptures. At worst it gives the parents an excuse for doing nothing and believing that infant baptism saves so no more effort needed. The ceremonies have been done. The charms, potions and amulets have been invoked. Now the child is warded against evil spirits.
My goodness, what a horrible scam perpetrated by churches who act like pagans rather than the body of Christ.

 

[YourTruthGod]

And zero examples of posting on the internet, and yet what do you do?

Ah, since you repudiate and don't embrace your own apologetic, maybe no one else should accept it either.








Well, the ovewhelming majority of Reformed/Calvinist churches do. But there is a tiny minority of Calvinists who follow the Anabaptists on this point; odd since the Anabaptists invented Anti-Paedobaptism because they were radical synergists and "free will" in theology (NOT because they found any biblical support for this), so these very few Calvinists who buy into the Anabaptist invention are contradicting a key central point of their own doctrine.




.

No way, for Anabaptists believe in confessing of sins first, which is against infant baptism.

 

[Josiah]

Yes, the Bible gives just as many clear examples of those under the mystical, never-disclosed as of "X" being baptized as it does of Christians posting on the internet, Christians celebrating communion with little plastic glasses of grape juice and little cut up pieces of Weber's White Bread served to women and kids by passing it around the pews, of pastors wearing Ahola shirts and using powerpoint and video clips, and baptism tanks, of churches having websites and youth groups and youth pastors and women's groups and women pastors. When your church forbids all that... and forbids baptizing people with blue eyes, you MIGHT have a tiny point. But your denomination obviously thinks your whole apologetic is silly and they repudiate and don't follow it.



.

What does the Bible say about infant baptism?

We are to baptize. There are no age, race, color, gender, IQ, denomination, or any other prohibitions.

The singular prohibition according to age (Anti-Paedobaptism) is entirely missing in the Bible. Nothing about, "Thou canst NOT administer baptism to any under the magical age of X (and you won't we told what age that is)." Just as there is no verse, "Thou canst NOT administer baptism to one with blue eyes" or "Thou canst NOT administer baptism to one who was born in the USA or Australia" or "Thou canst NOT administer baptism to one with an IQ lower than 135"

The Bible says nothing, zero, zip, nada about infant baptism

Then where is your verse forbidding it?

Nothing about it being practiced.

Well, not in the Bible. Of course, there's also no evidence that it was not or that only those over the age of X were baptized.


And of course, there are no examples of Christians posting on the internet either, but here are you posting on the internet - violating your own apologetic and denouncing your own point.




.

 

[MennoSota]

We are to baptize. There are no age, race, color, gender, IQ, denomination, or any other prohibitions.

The singular prohibition according to age (Anti-Paedobaptism) is entirely missing in the Bible. Nothing about, "Thou canst NOT administer baptism to any under the magical age of X (and you won't we told what age that is)." Just as there is no verse, "Thou canst NOT administer baptism to one with blue eyes" or "Thou canst NOT administer baptism to one who was born in the USA or Australia" or "Thou canst NOT administer baptism to one with an IQ lower than 135"







Then where is your verse forbidding it?






Well, not in the Bible. Of course, there's also no evidence that it was not or that only those over the age of X were baptized.


And of course, there are no examples of Christians posting on the internet either, but here are you posting on the internet - violating your own apologetic and denouncing your own point.




.

We baptize those whom God has chosen to adopt. We don't baptize all humanity. Or, maybe your church doesn't care about that. Perhaps you just grab people and force baptize them.

 

[Josiah]

We baptize those whom God has chosen to adopt.

1. How can you objectively identify whom God has elected? For whom Jesus died?

2. Where is the verse that says, "Thou canst not baptize any for whom you don't have proof that Jesus died for them (since He didn't die for most and probably not you)?" Where is the prohibition verse for this? Is it in the same verse that prohibits proclaiming the Gospel to those for whom Christ did not die?


3. Where is the verse that states, "This person was baptized because he is one of the few for whom Christ died?" How do you know Christ died for everyone in the household of Lydia? Where is the proof of this?




.




.

 

[MennoSota]

1. How can you objectively identify whom God has elected? For whom Jesus died?

2. Where is the verse that says, "Thou canst not baptize any for whom you don't have proof that Jesus died for them (since He didn't die for most and probably not you)?" Where is the prohibition verse for this? Is it in the same verse that prohibits proclaiming the Gospel to those for whom Christ did not die?


3. Where is the verse that states, "This person was baptized because he is one of the few for whom Christ died?" How do you know Christ died for everyone in the household of Lydia? Where is the proof of this?




.




.

We can ask them. We can observe their life and confirm their faith. Isn't that better than just grabbing whomever you will, without their consent, and declaring the infant is adopted by God because the parents are members of the synod?
Is there biblical evidence that unsaved, non-adopted person's were being baptized, just for the fun of it or because they came from the right family?
Josiah, why would you take a dead man and baptize him? Why?

 

[Josiah]

We can ask them.

How does a person KNOW that Christ died FOR THEM?

Please give the verse that states, "Thou canst NOT administer baptism to anyone unless thou FIRST ask them if Jesus died for THEM individually and they prove such."

Is this also true for evangelism, does the verse also say, "Oh, and also thou canst NOT tell them the Gospel without first asking them if they have proof Jesus died for THEM lest thou waste time time on them."

Prove from the Bible that Paul FIRST asked all the members of Stephanas's household if they had proof that Jesus died for THEM (since He didn't for most) and that all were over the age of X. 1 Corinthians 1:16

Prove from the Bible that ALL the members of Lydia's household were documented to be over the age of X and that Jesus had died for THEM (since He didn't die for all, you claim) Acts 16:33

Is there biblical evidence that unsaved person's were being baptized

We have several cases where we know NOTHING about the ones being baptized....where NOTHING is indicated as to their race, age, color, gender, IQ, or whether they are among the few you claim Jesus died for. Yet they were baptized. Acts 16:33 and 1 Corinthians 1:16. Unless you can prove from the Bible that all in those households were over the age of X and had given proof that Jesus died for THEM personally, then you cannot say all the examples are as you claim. I don't have proof that they were under your mysterious age of X but you equally have no evidence that they were.

But your apologetic is absurd. Silly. One you reject and don't follow. Witness you posting on the internet. I suspect if I came to your church on a Sunday morning, probably 90% of what is done has no biblical evidence of having been done in the Bible. Just because there is ZERO evidence of anyone posting on the internet in the Bible does NOT mean it ergo is forbidden. What a silly, absurd apologetic you have! Of course you don't follow it so why should others?

Is there biblical evidence that anyone in the Bible (saved or unsaved, for whom Jesus died or not) who posted anything on the internet? Is there biblical evidence of ANYONE (saved or unsaved, for whom Jesus died or not) attending a youth group meeting or being given communion with little plastic cups with a bit of Welch's Grape Juice in them and little cup up pieces of Weber's White Bread? Is there biblical evidence of ANYONE being baptized in a tank at the front of the church back behind a curtain? Is there evidence of ANYONE (saved or not, for whom Jesus died or probably not) being a woman pastor? Why are you posting on the internet if all are forbidden to do what is not "evidenced in the Bible?"




.

 

[MoreCoffee]

No way, for Anabaptists believe in confessing of sins first, which is against infant baptism.

Anabaptists get so much wrong.

 

[Arsenios]

Literally nothing about baptism here,

Just catechism followed by Baptism into Christ...

other than Phillip baptized the eunich...

So nothing about Baptism except Baptism???

?????????????????????????????????????????

Menno, you are beginning to vorry me!!

after God had saved him,

Where does the Bible say God saved the Ethiopian Eunuch and then had Philip Baptize him???

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

which is the position I hold on baptism.

You have invented it...

The Ethiopian makes my point.

OK Dearest...

Everything will be all better soon...

Just you rest here for awhile...


Arsenios

 

[atpollard]

Anabaptists get so much wrong.

Like praying to Jesus’ Mother to force God to obey ... oh, wait. That was the Roman Catholics.

That’s right. Baptists are those fools that think when Peter said “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins” he actually meant that each person should BOTH “repent” and “be baptized” (a Greek word meaning to immerse). We are just simple peasants with only God’s Holy Word and lacking the wisdom of 1500 years of Roman manmade tradition piled over top of it (like the ex-Roman Catholic monk Luther had) to guide us into the long established errors of a thoroughly politicized and worldly church.

Perhaps God will overlook our ignorance of your ancient fabricated traditions and accept our misguided attempts to just do what God said to do ... “repent and be baptized (each one of you)”. [Act 2:37-39 NASB]

 

[MennoSota]

How does a person KNOW that Christ died FOR THEM?

Please give the verse that states, "Thou canst NOT administer baptism to anyone unless thou FIRST ask them if Jesus died for THEM individually and they prove such."

Is this also true for evangelism, does the verse also say, "Oh, and also thou canst NOT tell them the Gospel without first asking them if they have proof Jesus died for THEM lest thou waste time time on them."

Prove from the Bible that Paul FIRST asked all the members of Stephanas's household if they had proof that Jesus died for THEM (since He didn't for most) and that all were over the age of X. 1 Corinthians 1:16

Prove from the Bible that ALL the members of Lydia's household were documented to be over the age of X and that Jesus had died for THEM (since He didn't die for all, you claim) Acts 16:33







We have several cases where we know NOTHING about the ones being baptized....where NOTHING is indicated as to their race, age, color, gender, IQ, or whether they are among the few you claim Jesus died for. Yet they were baptized. Acts 16:33 and 1 Corinthians 1:16. Unless you can prove from the Bible that all in those households were over the age of X and had given proof that Jesus died for THEM personally, then you cannot say all the examples are as you claim. I don't have proof that they were under your mysterious age of X but you equally have no evidence that they were.

But your apologetic is absurd. Silly. One you reject and don't follow. Witness you posting on the internet. I suspect if I came to your church on a Sunday morning, probably 90% of what is done has no biblical evidence of having been done in the Bible. Just because there is ZERO evidence of anyone posting on the internet in the Bible does NOT mean it ergo is forbidden. What a silly, absurd apologetic you have! Of course you don't follow it so why should others?

Is there biblical evidence that anyone in the Bible (saved or unsaved, for whom Jesus died or not) who posted anything on the internet? Is there biblical evidence of ANYONE (saved or unsaved, for whom Jesus died or not) attending a youth group meeting or being given communion with little plastic cups with a bit of Welch's Grape Juice in them and little cup up pieces of Weber's White Bread? Is there biblical evidence of ANYONE being baptized in a tank at the front of the church back behind a curtain? Is there evidence of ANYONE (saved or not, for whom Jesus died or probably not) being a woman pastor? Why are you posting on the internet if all are forbidden to do what is not "evidenced in the Bible?"




.

2 Peter 1:3-11 His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence, by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire. For this very reason, make every effort to supplement your faith with virtue, and virtue with knowledge, and knowledge with self-control, and self-control with steadfastness, and steadfastness with godliness, and godliness with brotherly affection, and brotherly affection with love. For if these qualities are yours and are increasing, they keep you from being ineffective or unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. For whoever lacks these qualities is so nearsighted that he is blind, having forgotten that he was cleansed from his former sins. Therefore, brothers, be all the more diligent to confirm your calling and election, for if you practice these qualities you will never fall. For in this way there will be richly provided for you an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Josiah, if your church desires to baptize dead men, then do so. As for me, I never see person's, who are dead in their sins, being baptized. I never read of God commanding us to baptize people who are dead in their trespasses and sins, who are not alive with Christ.
Question: Why are you so desiring to baptize dead people?
Question: Since you don't ask the infant for permission, why do you feel you need to ask permission of adults?
Why such inconsistency?
Josiah, God never says we can't snort lines of cocaine. Why don't you do that? It's the same as your silly argument that God doesn't tell us we can't baptize dead people so therefore we can.

 

[MennoSota]

Just catechism followed by Baptism into Christ...



So nothing about Baptism except Baptism???

?????????????????????????????????????????

Menno, you are beginning to vorry me!!



Where does the Bible say God saved the Ethiopian Eunuch and then had Philip Baptize him???

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????



You have invented it...



OK Dearest...

Everything will be all better soon...

Just you rest here for awhile...


Arsenios

Catechism?
All Phillip did was explain Isaiah 53. The Spirit did the rest. After the Ethiopian came to faith, Phillip baptized him.
Phillip was a Baptist, not Eastern Orthodox.

 

[YourTruthGod]

Anabaptists get so much wrong.

Let's discuss it.

 

[YourTruthGod]

Catechism?
All Phillip did was explain Isaiah 53. The Spirit did the rest. After the Ethiopian came to faith, Phillip baptized him.
Phillip was a Baptist, not Eastern Orthodox.

And you picked from here and there whatever tickled your ears.