Announcement

Collapse

Ecclesiology 201 Guidelines

Discussion on matters of general mainstream Christian churches. What are the differences between Catholics and protestants? How has the charismatic movement affected the church? Are Southern baptists different from fundamentalist baptists? It is also for discussions about the nature of the church.

This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and theists. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions. Additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Believer's Baptism

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
    Many families who are nominally religious will still have their infants baptized. I think this sort of thing cheapens baptism. It was meant to be a solemn symbol of a new, changed life with Jesus, not just something every kid goes through.
    True ... but your argument would be with the Church under Constantine so it would be kind of hard to follow it up.
    1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
    .
    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
    Scripture before Tradition:
    but that won't prevent others from
    taking it upon themselves to deprive you
    of the right to call yourself Christian.

    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
      What's being put to death is our old nature, not our physical body. The circumcision of the heart by God that Paul speaks about in various places in his epistles is what happens in baptism. No one who believes in baptismal regeneration believes that Paul is saying that the physical body is put to death in baptism. If we did then everyone of us would have changed our mind the second someone brought up the objection you just did.
      what makes you think that doesn't happen when you first belief and ask God to save you? The thief on the cross didn't get baptized. in various places in the bible the people believed and were filled with the Holy Spirit before being baptized.



      I think even if you hold to believer's baptism there's really nothing wrong with infant baptism. If someone gets baptized as an infant and later when he's old enough to decide that he wants to continue living as a Christian I see no reason why the baptism he underwent as a child wouldn't be sufficient. Confessing with your mouth should be enough to confirm that baptism as valid, even if you weren't old enough to accept it at the time. It would basically be like saying "I might not have been old enough to decide for myself when I was an infant that I wanted to get baptized, but I am old enough know, and I agree with my parents' decision to get me baptized."
      It's a matter of conscious obedience. The infant had no choice in the matter, but a believer does. And it is a public confession. Why wouldn't someone want to get baptized once they are saved? Even if they were baptized as a baby?
      Last edited by Sparko; 05-24-2019, 02:01 PM.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by tabibito View Post
        No problem with that idea myself, but re-baptising people (anabaptism) was declared heretical when it first was done during the reformation. People were even executed for doing it (the preferred method was drowning.)
        Which was an awful thing that never should have happened. Although, from a cursory reading it seems that it wasn't simply because they re-baptized people that they were put to death, but also because people believed they we're jeopardizing the societal structure of the time. Which I'm not saying justifies anything about what happened though. Being put to death for their beliefs probably just confirmed to the anabaptists in their mind that they had the truth.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
          Of course, since I believe infants can (and should) be baptized, I am also not fully on board with the second point either. When a parent gets their infant baptized it could be seen as a confession that the parents intend to raise their child as Christian, but the infant itself doesn't confess anything. But when someone who is old enough to decide for themselves get baptized, then it also works as a confession. But when it comes to Christians who have gotten baptized as infants I think confirmation fills that same role for them.
          When we do "baby dedications", we generally make it clear that it's actually the parents we are dedicating, and they are dedicating themselves to the raising of that baby, and, in effect, putting that baby in God's hands.
          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by mossrose View Post
            In every church I've ever attended, that has been referred to as "dedicating" your child. It also includes a call to the church body to support the parents and the child in their Christian walk.
            Yeah, I pretty much just said that, then read this!
            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              what makes you think that doesn't happen when you first belief and ask God to save you? The thief on the cross didn't get baptized. in various places in the bible the people believed and were filled with the Holy Spirit before being baptized.
              Paul claimed that Baptism was the action by which a person crucified the flesh. Rom 6:5-6, that in baptism we are buried with him and raised to new life Rom 6:4, Col 2:12



              It's a matter of obedience. The infant had no choice in the matter, but a believer does. And it is a public confession. Why wouldn't someone want to get baptized once they are saved? Even if they were baptized as a baby?
              Obedience, the cry to God of a cleansed conscience - it is a number of things that pre-suppose the ability to understand and assent.
              1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
              .
              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
              Scripture before Tradition:
              but that won't prevent others from
              taking it upon themselves to deprive you
              of the right to call yourself Christian.

              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                Another discussion got me thinking about this a bit, and it's making increasingly less sense to me.

                As far as I recall, proponents of believer's (i.o.w., adult) baptism believe that baptism is not efficacious for salvation, because that would be salvation by works; it's done because Jesus commanded disciples to be baptized, but it's not a sacrament. On the other hand, you have to have undergone it to become a member of the church. Why? It seems to me that it unnecessarily excludes children from church membership and, since it's not relevant in the context of salvation, a simple affirmation of concurrence with the congregation's beliefs would be sufficient.
                I think there's a fine distinction - and I tried to explain it before - between being "part of the fellowship" and a "voting member". For all intents and purposes, we treat all our people the same, but in order to hold office, or to vote in business meeting, or to be in a position of leadership, you have to be a "member". I have had people be quite involved in serving in Church who were not technically "members".
                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                  Yeah, I pretty much just said that, then read this!
                  Bacon.

                  I win again!


                  Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
                    Which was an awful thing that never should have happened. Although, from a cursory reading it seems that it wasn't simply because they re-baptized people that they were put to death, but also because people believed they we're jeopardizing the societal structure of the time. Which I'm not saying justifies anything about what happened though. Being put to death for their beliefs probably just confirmed to the anabaptists in their mind that they had the truth.
                    The first anabaptists certainly engaged in criminal conduct by our standards - but they aren't the deaths that Bucer (?) complained about.
                    1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                    .
                    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                    Scripture before Tradition:
                    but that won't prevent others from
                    taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                    of the right to call yourself Christian.

                    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                      Many families who are nominally religious will still have their infants baptized. I think this sort of thing cheapens baptism. It was meant to be a solemn symbol of a new, changed life with Jesus, not just something every kid goes through.
                      Yeah, I always got a kick out of the gangsters on TV bringing their babies in for baptism, when they had no intention at all of "raising them in the nurture and admonition of the Lord".
                      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                        Paul claimed that Baptism was the action by which a person crucified the flesh. Rom 6:5-6, that in baptism we are buried with him and raised to new life Rom 6:4, Col 2:12

                        And in 6:5 He says it is symbolic (likeness)

                        For if we have become united with him in the likeness of his death, we will certainly also be united in the likeness of his resurrection (NET)

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                          No problem with that idea myself, but re-baptising people...
                          For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

                          But we are NOT "re-baptizing"! The first time, they just got wet!

                          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                            what makes you think that doesn't happen when you first belief and ask God to save you? The thief on the cross didn't get baptized. in various places in the bible the people believed and were filled with the Holy Spirit before being baptized.
                            I think the Holy Spirit is at work to draw people to God and them to faith even before baptism (otherwise no one would even choose to get baptized in the first place), but that by itself doesn't invalidate what Paul is clearly teaching about baptism. When it comes to the thief on the cross I can see two options that doesn't conflict with infant baptism. One being that he underwent a so called baptism of desire, that is to say the mere fact that he would have desired to undergo a baptism if only he had the opportunity was enough for God to give him the benefit that He normally confers in baptism. The second option being that even if baptism is the normal means through which God circumcises our heart and gives us a new nature, that doesn't preclude God Himself from at times granting people the benefits of baptism through other means. The fact that we are commanded to baptize people for the forgiveness of sins doesn't mean that God Himself is bound to only forgive those who get baptized.




                            Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                            It's a matter of obedience. The infant had no choice in the matter, but a believer does. And it is a public confession. Why wouldn't someone want to get baptized once they are saved? Even if they were baptized as a baby?
                            I was baptized as an infant. Even if I did come to believe in believer's baptism I see no reason why I couldn't just believe that my baptism would be valid simply by me consenting, after the fact, to my parents' decision to get me baptized.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                              And in 6:5 He says it is symbolic (likeness)

                              For if we have become united with him in the likeness of his death, we will certainly also be united in the likeness of his resurrection (NET)
                              likeness isn't symbolic, it is analogous to - not exactly the same as. (there was being buried in a tomb, not water: being bodily dead for 3 days as opposed to not bodily dead at all etc.) And verse 3 shows that we are baptised into his death (rather than being baptised into our own deaths.) Then there is the whole remission of sins thing which occurs in baptism.
                              1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                              .
                              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                              Scripture before Tradition:
                              but that won't prevent others from
                              taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                              of the right to call yourself Christian.

                              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                                For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

                                But we are NOT "re-baptizing"! The first time, they just got wet!

                                I believe there are some denominations which would argue the toss on that, some are agnostic (happily, the Anglican Church) - I will endorse believers' baptism without hesitation.
                                1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                                .
                                ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                                Scripture before Tradition:
                                but that won't prevent others from
                                taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                                of the right to call yourself Christian.

                                ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X