[Bryan]

Animal sacrifices in the OT were about as good for salvation as I am for underwear modeling.

[Chico]

also, if there was salvation in the OT, then why did Jesus have to die? i mean, if there was a way other than Jesus to heaven, then why did He come? if salvation had an existence in the OT then Christ died for no reason, but to make a different way than before.

chris

[Souldog18CA]

Okay guys, first off I don't believe in "infant baptism" because NOWHERE in Scripture does it say that you are to baptise the infants, and yet NOWHERE in Scripture does it say not to baptize the infants. Infants don't have the knowledge of the understanding of what it means to be saved through Jesus Christ, they don't have that accountability in their lives yet. Where have you found an infant going up on an altar call, or where have you seen someone witnessing to a newborn? The logic doesn't add up. There is an age of accountability that is different for every individual, once we reach that age of the knowledge of the understanding of salvation, we are solely responsible for what we do.

Now to my next point, it is true that circumcision and sacrafice was the sealing of the OT covenant...but SOMEBODY PLEASE tell me where baptism all of a sudden became the God-given parallel between the OT covenant and the NT covenant? The Apostle Paul clearly states in the first 6 chapters of Romans that the sacrafices and the works and the pomp and the circumstance of the Pharisees and Saducees etc. was good but for a season. Now that we have Christ Jesus as our Savior, this logic comes up void. Paul clearly points out that we can not be saved by works, but we are saved by grace through our faith in the ressurection of Jesus Christ:

(Speaking in the context of Abraham's righteousness...) "Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace, but as debt. But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness." -Romans 4:4-5.

Abraham is considered to be one of the pillars of the OT faith, and Paul knew that when he spoke to the Romans about works and faith. The point that Paul is making is that WE CAN NOT GAIN SALVATION BY WHAT WE DO...we just have to recieve God's FREE GIFT of grace and salvation. Works come as evidence of salvation, NOT SALVATION.

Now to my next point, baptism is an OUTWARD ACT of an INNER ACT taking place. Baptism can be likened to a public proclomation of your faith in Jesus, it can be likened to a open public covenant stating to the witnesses; "I am saved by grace through faith and I love the Lord so much that I am going to serve Him whole-heartedly through my actions. I am making a public proclomation to all of you that my old self is going to die today, and I am going to start my new life in Christ. I am now accountable to you all of my actions and I am making a statement of my beliefs." Nowhere in Scripture does it say, "Therefore, having been justified by BAPTISM, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ..." No Way! Jesus did not say, "...Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water, he cannot enter the kingdom of God..." He says, (speaking in the context of salvation with the elder Nicodemus) "...Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God..." (John3:5)

Who am I to say whether or not God wil not take someone who is being held together by two crashed automobiles and clinging to life to heaven or not...I mean, if you are witnessing to this person and they accept Jesus Christ as their Savior, do you quickly run to go get a tub of water and douse them with a make-shift baptism, just so they can get to heaven? I would think not! Our God is a merciful One, He knows our hearts and we as that person need to have faith that we will see that person we just led to the Lord at the gate of heaven.

(phew!)

[Ridley's Own]

Originally posted by Souldog18CA
Okay guys, first off I don't believe in "infant baptism" because NOWHERE in Scripture does it say that you are to baptise the infants, and yet NOWHERE in Scripture does it say not to baptize the infants.

And yet, you're still against, despite no biblical prohibition?

Infants don't have the knowledge of the understanding of what it means to be saved through Jesus Christ, they don't have that accountability in their lives yet.

They didn't when they were being circumsized under the Old Covenant, either, but God still commanded it to be done.

Where have you found an infant going up on an altar call, or where have you seen someone witnessing to a newborn?

Where have I seen 'altar calls' in scripture?

The logic doesn't add up. There is an age of accountability that is different for every individual, once we reach that age of the knowledge of the understanding of salvation, we are solely responsible for what we do.

Where is this in Scripture?

Now to my next point, it is true that circumcision and sacrafice was the sealing of the OT covenant...but SOMEBODY PLEASE tell me where baptism all of a sudden became the God-given parallel between the OT covenant and the NT covenant?

Scripture seems to be a good place to start. But I'm being pithy. This question has already been asked and answered. Go read the rest of the thread.

The Apostle Paul clearly states in the first 6 chapters of Romans that the sacrafices and the works and the pomp and the circumstance of the Pharisees and Saducees etc. was good but for a season. Now that we have Christ Jesus as our Savior, this logic comes up void. Paul clearly points out that we can not be saved by works, but we are saved by grace through our faith in the ressurection of Jesus Christ:

Who said Baptism was a work? The last time I checked, even people who affirm Baptismal Regeneration (as I do) believe that it is something done in faith through the grace of God; ie., that baptism is something God does for us, not the other way around. Don't strawman an argument no one has made.

Now to my next point, baptism is an OUTWARD ACT of an INNER ACT taking place.

You sound like a sacramentalist. Good work!

Baptism can be likened to a public proclomation of your faith in Jesus, it can be likened to a open public covenant stating to the witnesses; "I am saved by grace through faith and I love the Lord so much that I am going to serve Him whole-heartedly through my actions. I am making a public proclomation to all of you that my old self is going to die today, and I am going to start my new life in Christ.

Of course, you do have Scripture to support the 'public proclamation' theory, correct?

Nowhere in Scripture does it say, "Therefore, having been justified by BAPTISM, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ..." No Way! Jesus did not say, "...Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water, he cannot enter the kingdom of God..." He says, (speaking in the context of salvation with the elder Nicodemus) "...Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God..." (John3:5)

Yes... So, baptism has to do with some aspect, as Christ himself is clearly referencing some aspect of water... Moreover, no one claimed that we are justified by Baptism. You're strawmanning an argument no one's made.

Who am I to say whether or not God wil not take someone who is being held together by two crashed automobiles and clinging to life to heaven or not...

Huh?

I mean, if you are witnessing to this person and they accept Jesus Christ as their Savior, do you quickly run to go get a tub of water and douse them with a make-shift baptism, just so they can get to heaven? I would think not!

First, I hate the phrase "accept Jesus Christ as their savior." Its an absurd statement with even worse theology. Second, I would imagine that all communions that affirm Baptismal Regeneration have a special rite for "Baptism in Unusual Circumstances." I know the BCP does.

Our God is a merciful One, He knows our hearts and we as that person need to have faith that we will see that person we just led to the Lord at the gate of heaven.
(phew!)

And who is denying that?

[jime]

just because they were circumcised did not mean that they loved God and were going to heaven. we get baptised as a sign that we are saved and we are going to heaven when we die. i am not saying that an infant will go to hell but that infant has not confessed Jesus as Lord therefore should not be baptised.

[Ridley's Own]

Originally posted by jime
just because they were circumcised did not mean that they loved God and were going to heaven. we get baptised as a sign that we are saved and we are going to heaven when we die. i am not saying that an infant will go to hell but that infant has not confessed Jesus as Lord therefore should not be baptised.

And the Scriptural justification for this is... Where?

[jime]

Jesus commanded the Eleven to: 1) Go and make disciples, 2) Baptize them [the new disciples] and 3) teach them [the new disciples, who get baptized] to obey everything the Eleven were commanded to do, which would include this same three step command. The proper Biblical procedure, if followed, forces us to water baptize disciples. [Jesus' disciple is a Christian (Mt. 12:47-50; Lk. 14:26,33; Acts 11:26). Moreover, one must be able to repent of his sins and place his faith in Jesus for salvation to become Christ's disciple (Acts 20:21; 3:19; 26:20; Gal. 5:24; 2 Pet. 3:9; etc.).]

- http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/infantbaptism.htm


nowhere in scripture is an infant baptized. only disciples are baptized. how can the infant be a disciple?

[Ridley's Own]

Originally posted by jime
Jesus commanded the Eleven to: 1) Go and make disciples, 2) Baptize them [the new disciples] and 3) teach them [the new disciples, who get baptized] to obey everything the Eleven were commanded to do, which would include this same three step command. The proper Biblical procedure, if followed, forces us to water baptize disciples. [Jesus' disciple is a Christian (Mt. 12:47-50; Lk. 14:26,33; Acts 11:26). Moreover, one must be able to repent of his sins and place his faith in Jesus for salvation to become Christ's disciple (Acts 20:21; 3:19; 26:20; Gal. 5:24; 2 Pet. 3:9; etc.).]

- http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/infantbaptism.htm


nowhere in scripture is an infant baptized. only disciples are baptized. how can the infant be a disciple?

The Great Commission is not inteded to be read as a 'how-to' manual to go step by step; exegesis just doesn't allow for it. Secondly, no where in Scripture is infant baptism proscribed; ie, no where doesn an Apostle say "Don't do this."

As to the "only disciples are baptized" comment, that's patently false. In acts we read of an entire household being baptized; you would have to assume that the ENTIRE household converted, a conclusion the text simply doesn't allow for.

[smitty2622]

Souldog18CA: Where have you found an infant going up on an altar call, or where have you seen someone witnessing to a newborn?

Smitty raises his hand I’ve done that and I’ll do it again. I’ve been known to talk to people who don’t speak English also; I’ve had whole conversations with Finnish speaking people. Yea I’m a little nuts makes life interesting. :ktongue:


Peace

[Luke]

Luke is noting the continual lack of any Scriptural support being given by the baptists....

Seriously, guys, I just got finished reading through Souldog's post which was full of assumptions that Scripture doesn't support.

And as far as SOMEONE PLEASE telling you the parallel between circumscision and baptism, find the table that brown07 has posted twice that shows the undenyable link.

[happygrrl]

OK......... I vowed to myself never to post in Theology again but after reading this thread I just have to... this one time.


Ridley's Own: Where have I seen 'altar calls' in scripture?


What about Peter's first (for lack of a better word) sermon in Acts? The one where all the people felt guilty and repented and were baptized in the Holy Spirit? What about Phillip and the Ethiopian? Alter calls are simply a witnessing technique...


Ridley's Own: Where is this in Scripture?

There IS an age of accountability and I can back it up with scripture. It's in the New Testament. I don't have the scripture reference right now... but I will find it.


Ridley's Own: Of course, you do have Scripture to support the 'public proclamation' theory, correct?

I believe that not only is baptism a public declaration but also symbolic of death of our old selves and lives. Otherwise, why would Jesus have gotten baptized? Why would he have done it just before starting his ministry? I doubt very much that he needed to be "born into the family of God" considering He was already God's only begotten Son. He also didn't need to be cleansed of sins like the rest of the people getting baptized. Also, he was circumsized as well as baptized... why would he subject himself to both if they are both the "same thing"?

Paul says, "Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 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." Romans 6:3 NIV

Also,

Colossians 2:11-12,

"In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature [or, the flesh], not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead." NIV

To me, this verse addresses circumcision and baptism as two different things - likening circumcision to something that Christ does to us when we put off our sin nature, and baptism being the burial we undertake as we forsake our lives and live to do God's will - like Jesus did.

[Ridley's Own]

Originally posted by happygrrl
What about Peter's first (for lack of a better word) sermon in Acts? The one where all the people felt guilty and repented and were baptized in the Holy Spirit? What about Phillip and the Ethiopian? Alter calls are simply a witnessing technique...

Except that none of those examples cited were altar calls in the same concept that you are using the term. Short answer is that there is no scriptural justification for people 'walking the aisle' to get saved. Its a made up 'sacrament' by 20th century evangelicals.

There IS an age of accountability and I can back it up with scripture. It's in the New Testament. I don't have the scripture reference right now... but I will find it.

I wait in baited breath.

I believe that not only is baptism a public declaration but also symbolic of death of our old selves and lives. Otherwise, why would Jesus have gotten baptized? Why would he have done it just before starting his ministry? I doubt very much that he needed to be "born into the family of God" considering He was already God's only begotten Son. He also didn't need to be cleansed of sins like the rest of the people getting baptized. Also, he was circumsized as well as baptized... why would he subject himself to both if they are both the "same thing"?

Of course, you're failing to make the distinction betwixt the Baptism of John and the Baptism of Christ. Secondly, I still don't see any Scripture in the above statement. Just an assertion.

Paul says, "Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 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." Romans 6:3 NIV

Which would seem fairly useless if it is just a symbol or proclimation.

Colossians 2:11-12,

":In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature [or, the flesh], not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead." NIV

To me, this verse addresses circumcision and baptism as two different things - likening circumcision to something that Christ does to us when we put off our sin nature, and baptism being the burial we undertake as we forsake our lives and live to do God's will - like Jesus did.

Again, the issue is moot if its only a symbol or proclaimation. If that's all it is, then there is no "putting of our sin nature." Furthermore, even a straight reading of the scripture in question doesn't allow for the explanation you're forcing here.

[BillSPrestonEsq]

1) God is immutable (I am the Lord, I change not Mal 3:6)
2) Circumsicion is the sign of Gods chosen people the Jews (still are his chosen people)
3) Salvation is symbolic of our new life in Christ. (Romans 6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.)
4) People in the OT were saved by faith in God (Hebrews 11)
5) People in the new Testament are svaed by faith (Titus 3:5)
6) The case where Paul was recorded as baptizing the household was the Philipian Jailor I beleive. (acts 16:31 Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved, and thy house)
7) Infant Baptism isnt recorded in scripture.
8) Even after reading the so called proof, nowhere is baptism said to replace circumcission. For one thing that would mean that God had cast off Isreal which according to Romans he has not.
9) Baptism is a symbol of the salvation we receive by grace through faith. Hence, Baptism of someone who has not beleived through faith is meaningless.
10) as in the case of the ethiopian eunuch (sp?), He requested Baptism. Paul also refused to Baptize some.

There thats the problems I see. Im not a Baptist, Im non-denominational, but if you got any questions about this whole ramble fire away. I got scripture for it all.

[Ridley's Own]

Originally posted by BillSPrestonEsq
1) God is immutable (I am the Lord, I change not Mal 3:6)

And since Baptism is the sign and sacrament of God's people, then it would follow that God would not change (being immutable and all) the sign from infants to adults.

2) Circumsicion is the sign of Gods chosen people the Jews (still are his chosen people)

Wrong-o. His chosen is the Church. Christian zionism is an absurd dispy line.

3) Salvation is symbolic of our new life in Christ. (Romans 6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.)

I think you mean 'baptism' is symbolic. But the verse you cited would be meaningless if it was 'just' a symbol. Even so, this position doesn't do anything against paedobaptism.

4) People in the OT were saved by faith in God (Hebrews 11)
5) People in the new Testament are svaed by faith (Titus 3:5)

And how do these pose problems to paedobaptists?

6) The case where Paul was recorded as baptizing the household was the Philipian Jailor I beleive. (acts 16:31 Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved, and thy house)

And?

Infant Baptism isnt recorded in scripture.

Neither is adult-only...

8) Even after reading the so called proof, nowhere is baptism said to replace circumcission. For one thing that would mean that God had cast off Isreal which according to Romans he has not.

I think your reading of Romans needs to be adjusted. If we really are saved by faith, then the OT laws and such would be superceded by the law of Grace. And since Jews (corporately) are refusing the law of Grace, it would seem to me that they actually are cut off from God.

More interestingly, the mere fact that the Temple was destroyed in 70 CE would certainly suggest that God has indeed cut Himself from the Jews.

9) Baptism is a symbol of the salvation we receive by grace through faith. Hence, Baptism of someone who has not beleived through faith is meaningless.

Scripture?

10) as in the case of the ethiopian eunuch (sp?), He requested Baptism. Paul also refused to Baptize some.

Scripture for Paul's refusal to baptize, please. And its relevance to paedobaptism.

There thats the problems I see.

None of which pose any sort of difficulty with paedobaptism.

Im not a Baptist, Im non-denominational, but if you got any questions about this whole ramble fire away. I got scripture for it all.

Baptist in this context is refering to those who reject infant baptism.

[BillSPrestonEsq]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6) The case where Paul was recorded as baptizing the household was the Philipian Jailor I beleive. (acts 16:31 Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved, and thy house)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



And?

They were saved pre baptism.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4) People in the OT were saved by faith in God (Hebrews 11)
5) People in the new Testament are svaed by faith (Titus 3:5)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



And how do these pose problems to paedobaptists?

These were in the thread and obviously counter scripture and I thought needed to be addressed. Thay aren't, but the problems were on this thread so I thought a rebuttal on this thread would be appropriate.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2) Circumsicion is the sign of Gods chosen people the Jews (still are his chosen people)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Wrong-o. His chosen is the Church. Christian zionism is an absurd dispy line.

Wrong-o See Point 1 and following.
"1 ¶ I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
2 God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying,
3 Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.
4 But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.
5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.
7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded
8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear unto this day.
9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them:
10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.
11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.
12 Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?
13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:
14 If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them.
15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?
16 For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches.
17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?
25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes.
29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.
30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:
31 Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.
32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.
33 ¶ O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!
34 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor?
35 Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again?
36 For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen."

Umm I dont think Im off here, unless Romans is wrong. Now this is where it comes to the issues we disagree on. The temple was destroyed 3 times so did God cast off his people and take them back twice and then say nope, never again in your view? God chose them, He cant change, circumcission was his sign to Israel, still is, He doesnt change, Baptism is his sign to Beleivers. (Rom 6:4) Oh and pray for the peace of Jerusalem. Its commanded you know