Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

At what age should one be baptised?

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

  • #16
    Baptism, as the sign and seal of the Covenant of Grace, should be applied to believers and the children of believers.
    What is thy only comfort in life and death?

    That I with body and soul, both in life and death, am not my own, but belong unto my faithful Saviour Jesus Christ; who, with his precious blood, has fully satisfied for all my sins, and delivered me from all the power of the devil; and so preserves me that without the will of my heavenly Father, not a hair can fall from my head; yea, that all things must be subservient to my salvation, and therefore, by his Holy Spirit, He also assures me of eternal life, and makes me sincerely willing and ready, henceforth, to live unto him.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by SemperReformanda View Post
      Baptism, as the sign and seal of the Covenant of Grace, should be applied to believers and the children of believers.
      Do you have any scriptures for baptizing children of believers? I would like to see where you get that from the Bible.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by SemperReformanda View Post
        Baptism, as the sign and seal of the Covenant of Grace, should be applied to believers and the children of believers.
        Based on what scripture?
        Slug1--out

        ~"In the turmoil of any chaos, all it takes is that whisper that is heard like thunder over all the noise and the chaos seems to go away, focus returns and we are comforted in knowing that God has listened to our cry for help."~

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by 1god4me View Post
          I was looking for some clarification on this subject. It is my understanding that children do not need to be baptised at an early age, and that as adults we need to be. So we can be born again and forgive our sins.
          Baptism in water should occur after salvation. Baptism in Water is not an element of Salvation.

          Comment


          • #20
            Genesis 17 is the giving of the covenant sign to God's chosen people. It applies to those whose faith has been counted as righteousness (Abraham), and the household of that person. As members of this same covenant (the covenant of grace, or life if you will), we are to apply the same pattern through baptism (Col 2:11-12).
            What is thy only comfort in life and death?

            That I with body and soul, both in life and death, am not my own, but belong unto my faithful Saviour Jesus Christ; who, with his precious blood, has fully satisfied for all my sins, and delivered me from all the power of the devil; and so preserves me that without the will of my heavenly Father, not a hair can fall from my head; yea, that all things must be subservient to my salvation, and therefore, by his Holy Spirit, He also assures me of eternal life, and makes me sincerely willing and ready, henceforth, to live unto him.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by SemperReformanda View Post
              Genesis 17 is the giving of the covenant sign to God's chosen people. It applies to those whose faith has been counted as righteousness (Abraham), and the household of that person. As members of this same covenant (the covenant of grace, or life if you will), we are to apply the same pattern through baptism (Col 2:11-12).
              You have not provided any biblical support for baptizing infants. The NT "pattern" for candidates for baptism includes only those “believers” who were mentally mature enough to understand the gospel of Christ and obey that same gospel “from the heart”. An infant does not have the mental maturity to believe or obey. There is not one example in the NT of one infant being baptized because it was never practiced or authorized.
              Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? 17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. 18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. Romans 6:16-18 (KJV)

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Reynolds357 View Post
                Baptism in water should occur after salvation. Baptism in Water is not an element of Salvation.
                Does Mark 16:16 in your Bible read – “he that believeth and is not baptized shall be saved" or does it read like my version – “he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved”?
                He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. Mark 16:16 (KJV)

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by losthorizon View Post
                  You have not provided any biblical support for baptizing infants. The NT "pattern" for candidates for baptism includes only those “believers” who were mentally mature enough to understand the gospel of Christ and obey that same gospel “from the heart”. An infant does not have the mental maturity to believe or obey. There is not one example in the NT of one infant being baptized because it was never practiced or authorized.
                  Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? 17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. 18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. Romans 6:16-18 (KJV)
                  Using your own method, could you please illustrate Biblically why women should be allowed to partake in the Lord's Supper?

                  In the same way you infer from the nature of the Lord's Supper that women can partake, we can also infer from the nature of baptism that it is designed to be applied to the households of believers. The New Testament says clearly that the sign of baptism is a sign and seal of the New Covenant, and a replacement for circumcision:

                  In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. Col 2:11-12
                  The children of believers are holy, in the same sense that the children of Abraham were holy:

                  For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. -1 Cor 7:14
                  Who can restrict baptism from people whom the Covenant Lord has declared holy?
                  What is thy only comfort in life and death?

                  That I with body and soul, both in life and death, am not my own, but belong unto my faithful Saviour Jesus Christ; who, with his precious blood, has fully satisfied for all my sins, and delivered me from all the power of the devil; and so preserves me that without the will of my heavenly Father, not a hair can fall from my head; yea, that all things must be subservient to my salvation, and therefore, by his Holy Spirit, He also assures me of eternal life, and makes me sincerely willing and ready, henceforth, to live unto him.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Reynolds357 View Post
                    Baptism in water should occur after salvation. Baptism in Water is not an element of Salvation.
                    Agreed, I strongly oppose infant baptism on the grounds that it's not only unscriptural, but that that infant cannot make a profession of faith. Baptism (in my view) is for those who make a profession of faith, that profession saves them, then they are baptized (full body immersion only) using the Trinitarian formula to show obedience. Baptism itself has no saving merit, it's something we do out of obedience and to show that we're saved, we don't do it to be saved.
                    USSA-The United Socialist States of America

                    Without Jesus, eternity is a living Hell, literally.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by SemperReformanda View Post
                      The New Testament says clearly that the sign of baptism is a sign and seal of the New Covenant, and a replacement for circumcision:
                      The NT compares circumcision and baptism in a limited way – ie - when the believer (infants do not have the capacity to believe) is baptized (immersed in water), the one baptized is “putting off” the old man of “flesh” as he becomes a new creation in Christ Jesus but there is no support for the practice of baptizing (sprinkling) infants. It is not a practice one will ever find practiced in the NT.
                      In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. Colossians 2:11-12
                      Who can restrict baptism from people whom the Covenant Lord has declared holy?
                      You are grasping here – the passage has nothing to do baptism and certainly does not lend support to a practice that has no part in Holy Writ. Only those with the mental capacity to believe and confess Jesus as Lord are candidates for baptism.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by losthorizon View Post
                        The NT compares circumcision and baptism in a limited way – ie - when the believer (infants do not have the capacity to believe) is baptized (immersed in water), the one baptized is “putting off” the old man of “flesh” as he becomes a new creation in Christ Jesus but there is no support for the practice of baptizing (sprinkling) infants. It is not a practice one will ever find practiced in the NT.
                        The comparison supports what I am saying. I say that baptism is a sign and seal in the same way as circumcision was. It is a sign of God's work in his people. Now, as a response to the "you can't find it in the NT" argument, you have refused to answer my question. Using the same logic, can you find scriptural support for giving the Lord's Supper to women? If you can't, then your argument is void. You infer that women may partake of the Lord's Supper, and I infer that infants of believers should be baptised. You must be consistent.

                        Originally posted by losthorizon View Post
                        You are grasping here – the passage has nothing to do baptism and certainly does not lend support to a practice that has no part in Holy Writ.
                        I wasn't saying that it was about baptism. I was saying that it was about children of believers being holy. Holy means set apart. Holy means part of the covenant. If someone is part of the covenant, they should be baptised.

                        The plain reading is that children of believers are holy. To restrict baptism from holy people is incorrect, and a violation of scripture.

                        Originally posted by losthorizon View Post
                        Only those with the mental capacity to believe and confess Jesus as Lord are candidates for baptism.
                        Here we see theological presuppositions coming through. Given your Arminian view of salvation, you have no ground to stand on when it comes to the salvation of infants or invalids. I reject your idea of salvation, so it is impossible for me to even think about debating baptism on your terms.

                        I'll restate my case: Baptism is a sign and seal of the New Covenant, or the Covenant of Grace, which was made with Adam and Eve, confirmed with Abraham and through the prophets, and effectuated by the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. Baptism is a sign of something that happens to God's people, which comes from Him, and therefore is not designed only to "show the faith" of the one baptised.
                        What is thy only comfort in life and death?

                        That I with body and soul, both in life and death, am not my own, but belong unto my faithful Saviour Jesus Christ; who, with his precious blood, has fully satisfied for all my sins, and delivered me from all the power of the devil; and so preserves me that without the will of my heavenly Father, not a hair can fall from my head; yea, that all things must be subservient to my salvation, and therefore, by his Holy Spirit, He also assures me of eternal life, and makes me sincerely willing and ready, henceforth, to live unto him.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by SemperReformanda View Post
                          You infer that women may partake of the Lord's Supper, and I infer that infants of believers should be baptised. You must be consistent.
                          Your analogy between the Supper and baptism isn't consistent.

                          Jesus did not place no limitations upon who could take part in the bread and wine, all He did was show His disciples how to perform the breaking of bread and the passing of the wine. He gave no direction that only men could take part in the event. Jesus placed no limitations on the Supper.

                          He did place limitations upon those who would be baptized, and that was that they needed to be able to voluntarily repent for their sins. Infants have neither the mental capacity to comprehend "sin" or "repentence," neither do they have the ability to communicate their repentence. Jesus directly stated the limitations of baptism: the ability to repent.
                          To This Day

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by markedward View Post
                            Your analogy between the Supper and baptism isn't consistent.

                            Jesus did not place no limitations upon who could take part in the bread and wine, all He did was show His disciples how to perform the breaking of bread and the passing of the wine. He gave no direction that only men could take part in the event. Jesus placed no limitations on the Supper.
                            That is incorrect. Scripture gives many warnings about who may partake of the LS and who may not. Not so with baptism. Again I assert that the pattern we have for baptism is the pattern of circumcision, which is applied by inference to the believers and their households.

                            Originally posted by markedward View Post
                            He did place limitations upon those who would be baptized, and that was that they needed to be able to voluntarily repent for their sins. Infants have neither the mental capacity to comprehend "sin" or "repentence," neither do they have the ability to communicate their repentence. Jesus directly stated the limitations of baptism: the ability to repent.
                            Then, to be consistent, you cannot baptise either children or invalids. I do not accept that, and neither should you.

                            If anybody would like to deal with my assertion before, then go ahead.
                            What is thy only comfort in life and death?

                            That I with body and soul, both in life and death, am not my own, but belong unto my faithful Saviour Jesus Christ; who, with his precious blood, has fully satisfied for all my sins, and delivered me from all the power of the devil; and so preserves me that without the will of my heavenly Father, not a hair can fall from my head; yea, that all things must be subservient to my salvation, and therefore, by his Holy Spirit, He also assures me of eternal life, and makes me sincerely willing and ready, henceforth, to live unto him.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by SemperReformanda View Post
                              The comparison supports what I am saying. I say that baptism is a sign and seal in the same way as circumcision was. It is a sign of God's work in his people. Now, as a response to the "you can't find it in the NT" argument, you have refused to answer my question. Using the same logic, can you find scriptural support for giving the Lord's Supper to women? If you can't, then your argument is void. You infer that women may partake of the Lord's Supper, and I infer that infants of believers should be baptised. You must be consistent.
                              You continue to grasp in the dark, my friend. Your point is simply a moot point. We need not rely of inferences. The NT plainly teaches that one must believe and confess Jesus as both Lord and Savior – infants do not have the capacity to do this…”He that believes and is baptized shall be saved.”

                              I wasn't saying that it was about baptism. I was saying that it was about children of believers being holy. Holy means set apart. Holy means part of the covenant. If someone is part of the covenant, they should be baptised.
                              Are you sure you weren’t “inferring” – I think you were? Again you miss the mark – infants cannot believe Jesus is the Christ (they do not have the capacity); infants cannot repent of their sins (they are not sinners); infants cannot confess Him before men (not capable); therefore infants are not candidates for baptism and your claim to the contrary is just that – contrary to God’ word and is not valid.
                              Here we see theological presuppositions coming through. Given your Arminian view of salvation, you have no ground to stand on when it comes to the salvation of infants or invalids. I reject your idea of salvation, so it is impossible for me to even think about debating baptism on your terms.
                              Lol – and you have no presuppositions, my friend? Infants are innocent before God – they have committed no sin that separates them from God – they are innocent until they sin. Remember it is our personal sin that separates us from the Eternal and the blood of Christ that washes away those sins. And you are correct - you cannot debate infant baptism from Scripture because infant baptism is missing in action in the NT.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Well, your problems here are greater than just baptism. To deny original sin is to do horrendous damage to the Scriptures, possibly beyond repair. Paul says that all people everywhere are stained by sin. If you don't believe that he actually means that, then the problem is with you.

                                I'm not going to interact with your faulty, unbiblical presuppositions about the doctrine of man in this thread. I've made my case, and hopefully people are able to see the truth of Scripture.
                                What is thy only comfort in life and death?

                                That I with body and soul, both in life and death, am not my own, but belong unto my faithful Saviour Jesus Christ; who, with his precious blood, has fully satisfied for all my sins, and delivered me from all the power of the devil; and so preserves me that without the will of my heavenly Father, not a hair can fall from my head; yea, that all things must be subservient to my salvation, and therefore, by his Holy Spirit, He also assures me of eternal life, and makes me sincerely willing and ready, henceforth, to live unto him.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X