Westminster Confession of Faith. Chapter 28. 1. Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ,a not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church,b but also to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace,c of his ingrafting into Christ,d of regeneration,e of remission of sins,f and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in newness of life:g which sacrament is, by Christâ€™s own appointment, to be continued in his Church until the end of the world.h
3. Dipping of the person into the water is not necessary; but baptism is rightly administered by pouring or sprinkling water upon the person.a
. Not only those that do actually profess faith in and obedience unto Christ,a but also the infants of one or both believing parents are to be baptized.b
7. The sacrament of baptism is but once to be administered to any person
John UK wrote: It is only those who read babies into the texts who will have a problem. Logically, babies are incapable of repentance
John. I wish you would stop complaining about God's laws and precepts. Don't you realise that by rejecting HIS precepts you are rejecting God.
Remember it was GOD who established and ordained that .... 7 And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. 10 This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. 12 And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed.
You see John how GOD does not reject the infant child like you Baptists do. Obviously God is not a Baptist in His theology.
WCF 21/7. As it is of the law of nature that, in general, a due proportion of time be set apart for the worship of God; so, in his Word, by a positive, moral, and perpetual commandment, binding all men in all ages, he hath particularly appointed one day in seven for a Sabbath, to be kept holy unto him:a which, from the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ, was the last day of the week; and, from the resurrection of Christ, was changed into the first day of the week,b which in Scripture is called the Lordâ€™s day,c and is to be continued to the end of the world, as the Christian Sabbath.d
a. Exod 20:8, 10-11; Isa 56:2, 4, 6-7. â€˘ b. Gen 2:2-3; Acts 20:7; 1 Cor 16:1-2. â€˘ c. Rev 1:10. â€˘ d. Exod 20:8, 10 with Mat 5:17-18.
8. This Sabbath is then kept holy unto the Lord, when men, after a due preparing of their hearts, and ordering of their common affairs beforehand, do not only observe an holy rest all the day from their own works, words, and thoughts, about their worldly employments and recreations;a but also are taken up the whole time in the public and private exercises of his worship, and in the duties of necessity and mercy.b
a. Exod 20:8; 16:23, 25-26, 29-30; 31:15-17; Isa 58:13; Neh 13:15-22. â€˘ b. Isa 58:13; Mat 12:1-13.
Duh wrote: And before you start again with your mindless Abrahamic covenant argument stop and think what justification you have to equate circumcision with baptism. Present your arguments from the NT and I will endeavour to prove to you how absurd they are, assuming that you care one iota for the truth, which somehow I doubt.
I have presented ALL the Biblical arguments on the Covenant of Grace which God made everlasting, and how circumcision is the precursor to baptism, and the establishment of these points from the NT. All you did was present malice, hate and contempt. As a Christian I don't want to exhibit that side of Baptist ideology on the threads again.
John UK wrote: So how do Presby churches decide whether or not to baptise a professing new convert?
Biblical paedobaptism is practiced by Presbyterian Churches. Thus establishing our commitment to the whole counsel of God - As God has commanded. Our commitment to the Old Testament and the New is therefore demonstrated and has been since the Lord and His Apostles left us with the Bible doctrines which we apply and obey.
Query wrote: 1. Of which covenant was circumcision a sign? The covenant of grace or law?
Gal 3:17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. 18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise. # Did God break this promise?
Gen 17:7 And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. # Note "God will establish" # Note "Everlasting Covenant" # Did GOD lie about the "everlasting" status of HIS promise/Covenant?
10 This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. # Note "My (GOD's) Covenant therefore OF GRACE ALONE. # Note Command to Keep thus obeyed by God's people alone. # Note Covenant to KEEP is between God the disciple AND THE DISCIPLES CHILDREN.
They who reject the Covenant God made with HIS people - Are not HIS people.
Lurker wrote: The new, better covenant commands the rightoeusness of both the Sinai covenant and the Zion covenant both of which are in the risen Son
Lurker. If you want to ditch the Old Testament, the Word, Law and precepts of God, then so be it. But don't forget what Jesus said about jot and tittle. Yes when Jesus came He changed a few things such as circumcision became baptism and the ceremonial practices were no longer necessary. But Jesus didn't change the spirit and teachings of the Old Testament - Not even so the Baptists could deepen the water and reject the seed fifteen centuries later. In fact you and the Baptist theologians cannot find anything in the Old or the New Testaments - OR the quote "NEW" Covenant which annuls, rescinds or abolishes the Genesis chapter 17 precepts on age and Covenant of Grace doctrine. BTW your "zion covenant"??? - Are you a fan of Bodie and Brock Thoene Christian fiction???
"Everlasting Covenant" Heb 13:20. I wonder if any Baptist out there knows how long "everlasting" means? It doesn't appear to be so in the posts below. Luke 1:72 To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant; 73 The oath which he sware to our father Abraham" Another non-Baptist verse??
Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. 17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ" = God's promise made to "Abraham and his seed." For you Baptists - "seed means children" NOW are you under the same Mediator as Abraham? For you Baptists His Name is Jesus. The Mediator being the same person established by GOD (foreknowledge) when the Covenant was made - The Covenant of Grace made with Abraham which covered Abraham AND covers the people of GOD today. - This Covenant began in Genesis 17 of the Bible. Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." And don't forget:- Romans 15:8 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers"
Josiah B wrote: We leave you reformed to imagine that you're in some fictitious covenant relationship by virtue of a few drops of water being sprinkled on you.
This is from a book called the Bible. You might have heard of it??
Hebrews 10:29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the BLOOD OF THE COVENANT, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
It appears from your post that 'YOU' count the blood of the covenant an unholy thing.
Hebrews 12:24 And to JESUS the MEDIATOR of the new COVENANT and to the BLOOD OF SPRINKLING, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.
Hebrews 13:20 Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our LORD JESUS, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the 'BLOOD' of the 'EVERLASTING COVENANT'
You appear to be of those who pick and choose bits of Scripture and reject others to establish your religious ideology. Why not stick to the WHOLE COUNSEL of GOD.
Is Christ the Mediator of "YOUR" Covenant with God, as HE is with Abraham's??? Or are you NOT in Covenant with God and His Son?
John UK wrote: But they have to come, not be forcibly brought Duh!
Oh No! John. Back to your old free-willing Arminian salvation by works Roman Catholic teachings again!!!!
Alternatively GOD states quote; John 6:44 NO MAN CAN come to me, EXCEPT the FATHER which hath sent me DRAW HIM: and I will raise him up at the last day.
1) NO MAN can come to Jesus. = That's NOBODY John, NOBODY!! Get it?? 2) "Except" GOD does the drawing. = GOD does the saving work - 'NOT' sinners Get it??? "Unless" God does the act of drawing - sinners do not/can not become saved by their own ability, faculty or volition. 3) Jesus will "raise up" - save ONLY those whom GOD drew. God's election.
Is your version of Baptist ideology Arminian based?
Remember John, the Bible and Jesus state that your 'salvation by self' doesn't work. Human effort is not the way we are saved. Try giving the glory to God not to John.
PS. The picture painted by early Christians in the catacombs is baptism by affusion - NOT immersion.
PPS. Your quote, "duh" is the sin of scorn and contempt again John.
Matt 19:14 "HIS grace is extended even to those who are of that age. for since the whole race of Adam is shut up under the sentence of death, all from the least even to the greatest must perish, except those who are rescued by the only Redeemer. To exclude from the grace of redemption those who are of that age would be too cruel; and therefore it is not without reason that we employ this passage as a shield against the Anabaptists. They refuse baptism to infants, because infants are incapable of understanding that mystery which is denoted by it. We, on the other hand, maintain that, since baptism is the pledge and figure of the forgiveness of sins, and likewise of adoption by God, it ought not to be denied to infants, whom God adopts and washes with the blood of his Son. Their objection, that repentance and newness of life are also denoted by it, is easily answered. Infants are renewed by the Spirit of God, according to the capacity of their age, till that power which was concealed within them grows by degrees, fully manifest at the proper time. Again, when they argue that there is no other way in which we are reconciled to God, and become heirs of adoption, than by faith, we admit this as to adults, but, with respect to infants, this passage demonstrates it to be false" (Calvin)
"Matt 19:14 But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven."
In the above situation Jesus did not need to add the phrase "for of such is the Kingdom of God." BUT HE did!!
The children on that day couldn't have been identified by the Disciples as elect or non-elect.
Baptists have an easy solution for them, None of the children get into THEIR church.
Jesus did not bar any of the children access into the Kingdom of God. Baptists stop all children getting into THEIR church. Baptist church must be holier than thou!!
The phrase used by Jesus, "Kingdom of God" is significant in this verse and specifically significant in relation to the children. Jesus did not deny the children - all the way up to heaven and salvation. Baptists contradict Jesus on this and prevent them from reaching THEIR church.
Jesus didn't deny the children the Kingdom of God, because they couldn't confess. - What right do the Baptists have to place this condition on the children when Jesus accepts them unto salvation?
If it is good enough for Jesus, salvation and the Kingdom of God - Then obviously the follower of Jesus would never deny the children - and disobey Christ. But Baptists do!!!!!!!
Darren wrote: So are you telling me that we (christians) have free reign to preach the gospel anywhere in the world with no interference from the devil?
No! I didn't say that! You are having trouble with english? Read my posts below! I stated that Scripture teaches that Satan is only constricted by Rev 20 for a specific action ~ Namely deceiving the nations. This leaves him free to do other things as I have stated already ~ Blind the reprobate, (2Cor 4:4), ~ ie prevent the Word of God being received, appear as an angel of light (2Cor 11:14), And let us not forget everybody's favorite a roaring lion, (1 Peter 5:8) etc. I am sure he also has a finger in the pie of influence over false religion like Roman Catholicism (idolatry), Liberalism (rejection of the authority of Scripture), JW's et al.
As I pointed out below Satan is demonstrated in the Book of Job as a killer and destroyer. Obviously he is curtailed by the Lord in a specific way at present. In fact in Job he couldn't touch Job and family until the Lord allowed it to happen.
Satan exists in the spiritual realm therefore this worlds physical chains, wet or otherwise would have no effect.
Satan according to Rev 20 is bound quote, "that he should deceive the nations no more" This leaves the Church free to preach to the nations without this specific detrimental effect. Of course as you already know Mike "faith" is the gift of God and therefore only the "elect" of God will receive said teaching. This specific hindrance of Satan's work then will not prevail upon the elect to be deceived by him and detrimental to the Holy Spirit's work.
This however does not imply that Satan is restrained from all his activities as we can see from scripture, whereupon he is said to blind the reprobate and appears to deceive as an angel of light. In the book of Job we can see that if God releases him to full effect he can kill and destroy.
In recent times as you have remarked previously yourself, his kind of activities appear to be increasing. This being so the other part of the prophecy, "and after that he must be loosed a little season" ~ may be upon us?
Darren wrote: You still have not answered my question as to the devil being bound for a 1000 years, Rev. 20:8 says after the 1000 years the devil was loosed again to tempt the nations
Yes I did answer your question. Are you having problems with english? As I posted below the 1000 years is allegory for NOW, that is NOW as in this time frame between Jesus first coming to His second coming to judge the world. Satan is bound now! Get it?
Faks wrote: We're here being sifted and tried. Life is a test, not a lottery. Eternal life (in Heaven) is eternal, but its possession is conditional.
That Roman Catholic theory of works based religion is getting in the way of your comprehending the truth Faks.
As for your Arminian FreeWill DIY 'conditional' principle, apparently Christ dares to disagree with you... "All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out" John 6:37.
Clearly HE doesn't preach - "Faks religious hypotheses!!!"
Darren wrote: By the Book tell me What does Revelation 20 verse 1-7 mean when satan is bound for a thousand years
As Jim alludes to the 1000 years is part of the allegory of Rev 20, for example Satan is not really a dragon. Yep absolutely true!
The periodicity of 1000 years used simply holds the meaning of a long period of time.
That period is NOW!
The Bible's promise to the elect is for ETERNAL LIFE - not just 1000 years. Chosen by God from the foundation of the world (Eph 1:4,5) - AND there is no second period (millennium) of GOD doing a "double check" - making sure what HE has elected NOW is the right choice.
ALL that is required for the salvation of the elect is being done NOW by an omniscient omnipotent sovereign GOD with the power of foreknowledge. - SO HE certainly does not need another run at it by this fictitious 1000 year period, put up by the PreMills.
The Reformers - Reformed Church taught and knew AMillennialism which is the true Biblical exposition. Rapture and this future extra time is fairy story stuff.