Posted on 04/27/2012 6:36:28 PM PDT by Salvation
nonsense, baptism is clearly ordered in the bible. Your tagline explains a lot of what you don't understand.
Yes I do know that,Christ died,and both thieves still alive which is why they broke thier legs,,dont you read the Bible?
As the original sin is not one personally committed by the baby, he cannot repent of it.
But not because His "confession of belief" was given Him from St. John or demanded of Him from St. John. In fact, His baptism was obviously not a believer baptism as He is the giver rather than the receiver of our faith, so if one wants to pattern the baptism after the baptism of Jesus, one would have to abandon the unbiblical idea of baptism as manifestation of faith already formed.
The baptism of Jesus is the sanctification of the Baptismal basin for of us. He never said "these waters are for adults who profess their faith"; but rather "it becometh us to fulfill all justice". Unless you are prepared to argue, with the Roe v. Wade babykillers, that "all justice" is bypassing babies, you have to admit that the baptismal font is for all men regardless of age.
Who exactly said that. No one did or does. What we do know is that Jesus Christ included Baptism in His plan of salvation and we also know that Jesus loved children and that God is merciful.
Nowhere do we Christians believe that unbaptised children are going to hell. We believe that our merciful God takes care of them
Water is the medium through which the baptism takes place mostly. Why? God knows...
It’s not “protestant” but one group. Our Lutheran brethern believe Christ’s words on baptism
The Ethiopian saays something like “There is some water, why can’t I be baptized right now.”
So in the book of Acts water was used.
I did not say that there is no water in any baptism...I said there was no water in THAT baptism...
Baptism does not mean water and water does not mean baptism...
And here is another salient verse when it comes to baptizing little children...
Act 8:36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
The answer to that question is the answer that apllies to everyone, including little children...Did Philip say that nothing hindered the Eunuch from being baptized??? No he did not...
The Eunuch and babies would be hindered from being baptized for the following reason:
Act 8:37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
You must believe with all your heart that Jesus is the Son of God before you may be baptized...No babies and no way around it...
Exactly...Babies can not repent, ergo; no baptism for babies...
Paul baptizes entire households. Do you think infants were also baptized? Of course they were.
Straight from the Bible.
You are making stuff up again...Have you no shame???
Under your premise, dogs, cats and goats were baptized as well...
Can you show a single verse in the entire bible where a baby was baptized??? Of course not...Are there any households that do not have babies??? Of course...
Is there scripture that shows that one must repent before being baptized??? Absolutely...
Your statement that your position is 'straight from the bible' is false...
Read what??? What book do you have that says babies are in heaven because of baptism??? And don't tell me the Bible, because it's not in there...
Your problem is that we have the instruction book, in our hands...We don't care about your religion's rules...They are meaningless in light of the scriptures...
“the new covenant did not begin until the death of Christ.That having been said, Christ (God) can do anything and to attribute one persons salvation to your opinion is a little questionable..”
Paul stated that Abraham and the prophets of old were saved by their faith. Paul himself lays down the case that the “new covenant” was in operation even before the “new covenant” was said “traditionally” to have been put in operation. The “new covenant” is a transtemporal concept sealed by the blood of Christ. Once his Death and resurrection had occured in our own measured temporal time, its effects sent ripples across time to include the faithful of old, the present and all those who would come in the future.
Sorry, your post is wrong. The Anabaptists date only from the 16th century as a bunch who tried to go once step further than the 1st and 2nd generation reformers (Lutherans and Calvinists/Zwinglists respectively). They do not date back to Apostolic times
No, we Christians (Catholics, Orthodox, Lutherans, Pentecostals, Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodists etc.) do not make up stuff.
We believe in a Triune God, and that Jesus Christ is God. So whatever "you guys" want to believe in, whether Christ is just a prophet second to whatever "prophet" y guys follow, that's this minute cult's problem.
Firstly, no one said or believes that you are not a child of God if you are not baptised. Even the heathen are children of God -- even Canaanites as they were created by Him.
Your salvation is from Christ, the same Christ who said He who believes and is baptized will be saved. (Mk 16:16) , the same who said [U]nless you repent you will all likewise perish. (Lk 13:3), the same who said ,b>[H]e who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. (Jn 6:54) and he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. Matt 24:13
It's not just saying "Lord, Lord", it's not just belief.
"Baptistm now saves.." through God's grace, through the one-time sacrifice of Jesus Christ, the same One who gave us the above commandments. Baptism plays a role in the salvic process as commanded by Christ. For infants who do not receive this, I personally believe that God takes care of the little ones, and the Church holds that God is merciful -- He never commanded for all exceptions, He commanded what we, the ones who grow to reason ought to do in our salvic process.
And “entire households” we baptised as well. Did they include children? Most probably — though I’ll agree with you that it is ambiguous.
“Once his Death and resurrection had occured in our own measured temporal time, its effects sent ripples across time to include the faithful of old, the present and all those who would come in the future.”
Your post reminds me of one gal’s (a physicist) theory on the Shroud of Turin that it was some time-space continuoum big-bang thing that created the energy that imprinted the shroud. (I probably messed that up, but something like that). But almost like a new “creation” event.
And I think that the main event would be the Resurrection - not so much the death of Christ. Obviously it takes both (”by His stripes we are healed” from the Passion), but I imagine the Power comes from the Resurrection. Otherwise he would just be another dead guy.
Well i don’t know about the “physics” part, but when reading that Christ raised the ire of the religious authorities by saying..”Before Abraham was ...I AM!,” it opened up in me the notion that time is an artificial concept...that God always exists in the NOW!
According to The Bible, parents, including Jesus' parents, dedicated their children to God. This was a way of agreeing with The LORD know that their children belonged to Him, and they were dedicating themselves to raising their children as His. All the Jews, including the ones who had Jesus crucified were as babies dedicated to God, so it is plain that dedication did not automatically save them. If they had been truly saved they would not have had Jesus crucified. Jesus would not have told many of them that their father was the devil.
The Bible says that when King David's baby died shortly after he was born that the child was in heaven. If a child dies before the age of accountability it is taken to heaven, by the sheer and utter mercy and grace of The LORD. Somehow He is able to apply Jesus' sin cleansing blood unto a child who dies, because the child is yet without accountability.
Heaven is likely full of children. Just think of all the children, from the beginning of time, who have died in the womb, or of starvation in third world countries, or have been too weak to make it having died early, or have been not wanted by heathen parents and set aside to die, or have been aborted. When Jesus said "for such is the kingdom of heaven", He may well have been referring, at least in part, to how very many children are up there.
Mark 10:14 But when Jesus saw [it], he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.
Mark 10:15 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.
Mark 10:16 And he took them up in his arms, put [his] hands upon them, and blessed them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.